It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Amtrak train derails onto I-5 near Lacey

page: 6
39
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 01:35 AM
link   

edit on 21-12-2017 by bloodymarvelous because: (no reason given)




posted on Dec, 21 2017 @ 01:40 PM
link   
That story seems to mirror what other stories are saying. That curve was meant to be taken at 30 mph, but for some reason the train had not slowed down from 80 mph.

I'm not sure if I quite buy into that story, but it's at least plausible. Seems the conductor survived, though severely injured. Probably he'll be able to tell the complete story when he recovers.

Failing to slow down for a 30 mph curve just seems like a colossal screw up. Hard for me to imagine anybody would be that careless.



posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 03:08 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous

update www.dailymail.co.uk...

engineer said 'we are going too fast" 6 seconds before the crash.....also the curve was a known risk but was too expensive to cut from the plans

sounds like that is why the mayor commented that it was just a matter of time...boy was he right......, too expensive...hmmm..and how much are the lawsuits going to cost Amtrak


edit on 23-12-2017 by research100 because: dang spelling and added a sentence



posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 07:45 PM
link   
I think the mayor was talking about people getting onto the tracks and getting run over. Which is a problem that can, and does happen with rail lines.

But failing to slow down for a 30 mph curve is just..... how could anyone be that incompetent?

It doesn't cost 400 million dollars to put up a "30 mph curve up ahead" sign to let the conductor know it's time to start letting off of the accelerator.

Do you think maybe someone knocked the sign over? (And AMTRAK hadn't thought to have any redundant warning systems in place, like maybe something triggered by GPS?)

Having a hard time wrapping my head around this.
edit on 23-12-2017 by bloodymarvelous because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 23 2017 @ 11:56 PM
link   
a reply to: bloodymarvelous


No I think research100 is right. It was decided not to change that turn due to costs and time. The mayor only said that he meant people getting on the tracks after the accident, but before that first speed run he had stated that the tracks were unsafe.

As to the GPS system, well that's the big debate right now. The PTC (Positive Train Control: Wiki Page) wasn't implemented in this rail line, and as of before the derailment, it didn't look like it was going to happen. This event should have been prevented, and hopefully PTC will become a Congressional issue worth voting on this year.



posted on Dec, 28 2017 @ 10:29 PM
link   
Or maybe a sign was removed by someone who wants PTC implemented?

There's no reason a human operator should have found it difficult to see the 30 mph curve coming and slow down appropriately. Especially if there had been test runs prior.

Just think how messed up that is? When you're driving a car, would you fail to see and slow down for a 30 mph curve on the highway? Trains do need more time to slow down, but the same principle should apply







 
39
<< 3  4  5   >>

log in

join