Collision Between Two Amtrak Trains in Oakland?

[transit54]

Just came across this online:

http://www.ktvu.com/news/29469799/detail.html

Apparently one train collided rolled into the rear of another near the Oakland station. Allegedly they are both Amtrak trains. Anyone have any additional details?

 

[DET63]

From the story linked in the OP:

The two trains were out of Bakersfield and Los Angeles, according to witnesses on the scene.
It appears the trains remain on the tracks. A witness told KTVU it looked like the impact happened at a low speed.

The train from L.A. would have been #14, the n/b CS, which was due into Oakland at 9:32 p.m. and out at 9:42. The train from Bakersfield would have been a San Joaquin service.

From the San Jose Mercury News:

KTVU said one of the trains was bound for Bakersfield, and the other was coming from Los Angeles. One of the trains was stopped at the station when it was struck by the second train in what initially was described as a "fender-bender."

The latter report appears to be in error. The train was most likely #717, which was scheduled to arrive from Bakersfield at 9:55 p.m. Train #718 is the last departure for Bakersfield, and is scheduled to leave at 5:50 p.m. Unless it was running way late . . .

 

[Michael061282]

ignore the reporting in the video from KTVU, both the Anchorman and the on scene reporter know absolutely nothing and that is painfully obvious in the report. Gotta wonder how soon until there's an job opening in crew base there. Head on collisions, especially in stations should NEVER happen.. especially at 15-20 MPH.

 

[jis]

ignore the reporting in the video from KTVU, both the Anchorman and the on scene reporter know absolutely nothing and that is painfully obvious in the report. Gotta wonder how soon until there's an job opening in crew base there. Head on collisions, especially in stations should NEVER happen.. especially at 15-20 MPH.

Brake failure? Asleep at the controls? We'll have to wait and see what comes out of the investigation, and then whether we have a 15 page inane discussion about it. <_<

 

[Trogdor]

ignore the reporting in the video from KTVU, both the Anchorman and the on scene reporter know absolutely nothing and that is painfully obvious in the report. Gotta wonder how soon until there's an job opening in crew base there. Head on collisions, especially in stations should NEVER happen.. especially at 15-20 MPH.

Brake failure? Asleep at the controls? We'll have to wait and see what comes out of the investigation, and then whether we have a 15 page inane discussion about it. <_<

Not enough fairy dust in the magic sensors.

 

[Shanghai]

I'm about to depart for the Amtrak San Francisco Ferry Station for

an Ambus to Oakland, Jack London Square to take the Coast Starlight

to Los Angeles. I hope all is working now. If I find out more info,

I will post a message.

 

[jis]

According to a rail knowledgeable person who is at the scene and is posting on trainorders....

14 was standing at the platform when 717 came in at under 20 mph and collided with it head on.

Speculation is that it might have involved a dispatcher error in lining the switch to the inside track which was occupied by 14, which would display a restricting signal to 717, But the proximate cause possibly is the engineer of 717 not following the restricting protocol which basically says that one must be able to stop before hitting something. This is of course assuming that the signal s/he faced was actually showing restricting indication, which is yet to be established.

The lead unit of 14 was P42 47 and of 717 was CDTX 2004. CDTX 1002 derailed its front truck. The P42s stayed put.

Here is a picture which can be seen only as a thumbnail by those that are not members of trainorders:

Picture of collision at OKJ.

 

[me_little_me]

News claims that Amtrak official said the engineer went through a red signal.

 

[jis]

News claims that Amtrak official said the engineer went through a red signal.

Well, a restricting signal under many circumstances looks pretty red, and trains are allowed to pass those at restricting speed if so instructed. But restricting speed means one has to be at such speed as to be able to stop short of any obstruction on the track. However, it is yet to be established exactly what aspect was displayed and whether the engineer in question interpreted the aspect correctly or not. So I am a bit surprised that Amtrak officials are so eager to provide their opinion on the matter.

For example on the approach to Penn Station from LI in a typical rush hour in the morning. Many many trains routinely pass red signals at restricting speed and head into NYP nose to tail within visual range of each other, but at restricting speed. Sort of like flying VFR. The responsibility is then of the engineer to be able to stop short of any obstruction, and it works fine if rules are followed.

 

[jacorbett70]

This MSNBC story has another picture of the crash. In the comments section, someone suggested that San Joaquin service ought to be replaced with a mini-van service because there were only eight passengers on that particular train at the time of the crash. That person was unaware of the number of passengers carried for the bulk of the San Joaquin route.

http://on.msnbc.com/pcfEAJ

 

[George Harris]

This MSNBC story has another picture of the crash. In the comments section, someone suggested that San Joaquin service ought to be replaced with a mini-van service because there were only eight passengers on that particular train at the time of the crash. That person was unaware of the number of passengers carried for the bulk of the San Joaquin route.

http://on.msnbc.com/pcfEAJ

As a fairly regular rider of 717, I can say that most of the passengers had gotten off at Emeryville. The passenger count starts dropping with Stockton where several buses take passengers to Sacramento and other points.

Most likely the 717 engineer was expecting to find the switch lined for the crossover. Instead it was simply at stop. This would not be a signal that could be passed at red under stop and proceed, as it would be an absolute signal, not an advance signal.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

And there are still two and a half months to go in 2011. :wacko:

Amtrak's Service Alerts:

1) For Cap. Corridor Service (Posted 10/13/11 7:34 AM PT)

Amtrak has set-up alternate bus transportation between Oakland and Emeryville, CA for the first two Capitol Corridor frequencies, this morning, Thursday, October 13, following last night's low speed collision between two Amtrak trains at the Oakland station.
Train #518, scheduled to depart Oakland at 4:30 a.m. and train #520, scheduled to depart Oakland at 5:40 a.m. will utilize alternate bus transportation between Oakland and Emeryville where passenger will be able to board available Capitol Corridor equipment for their travel to points leading to Sacramento.

Crews continue to remove damaged equipment involved in last night's incident, and will determine if further service adjustments will become necessary for the remainder of the morning commute.

2) Amtrak Service (posted 10/13/11 3:00 AM PT)

All rail service into and out of Amtrak's Oakland, California station remains temporarily suspended following a low speed collision inside the station.
At approximately 10:00 pm PST Wednesday, two trains, (Amtrak's San Joaquin- Bakersfield to Oakland and the Coast Starlight- Los Angeles to Seattle), were involved in a low speed collision inside the Oakland Station, resulting in the lead engines from each train losing contact with the rail.

There are 17 confirmed minor, non- life threatening injuries to passengers and crew.

There is no immediate estimate for restoration of service at this time.

Amtrak and the owner of the tracks, Union Pacific Freight Railroad will be working with federal officials to conduct a complete investigation of this evening’s incident.

And one more thing:

Amtrak regrets any inconvenience.

 

[jis]

This MSNBC story has another picture of the crash. In the comments section, someone suggested that San Joaquin service ought to be replaced with a mini-van service because there were only eight passengers on that particular train at the time of the crash. That person was unaware of the number of passengers carried for the bulk of the San Joaquin route.

http://on.msnbc.com/pcfEAJ

As a fairly regular rider of 717, I can say that most of the passengers had gotten off at Emeryville. The passenger count starts dropping with Stockton where several buses take passengers to Sacramento and other points.

Most likely the 717 engineer was expecting to find the switch lined for the crossover. Instead it was simply at stop. This would not be a signal that could be passed at red under stop and proceed, as it would be an absolute signal, not an advance signal.

That's what I was thinking after I posted my last message. It would be a home signal, so no stop and proceed. It would require paperwork with the dispatcher before it could be passed. So it is quite plausible that for some reason the engineer missed it, due to loss of situational awareness for some reason or the other.

Ummm.... on further researching I find a hogger who says: "As RV009 posted above, you could also get a restricting to move from MT2 -> station track on the inside while it is occupied by another train. This is so you can fit two Capitols on the station track OR have one train follow another during busy meets."

So I guess 717 could legitimately have gotten a flashing red and could legitimately have passed the signal at restricting speed. Oh well...

In that case 717 did not pass a red signal, but it was certainly traveling too fast for restricting speed.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

In the comments section, someone suggested that San Joaquin service ought to be replaced with a mini-van service because there were only eight passengers on that particular train at the time of the crash.

I wonder if there truly would have been less damage to a mini-van and those 8 inside, after it was hit by a train going 25MPH ??? :wacko:

 

[jmbgeg]

Just came across this online:

http://www.ktvu.com/news/29469799/detail.html

Apparently one train collided rolled into the rear of another near the Oakland station. Allegedly they are both Amtrak trains. Anyone have any additional details?

From Atrak website:

Amtrak Service Remains Suspended At Oakland Station Following Earlier Low Speed Collision

October 13, 2011

3:00 a.m.(PT)

All rail service into and out of Amtrak's Oakland, California station remains temporarily suspended following a low speed collision inside the station.

At approximately 10:00 pm PST Wednesday, two trains, (Amtrak's San Joaquin- Bakersfield to Oakland and the Coast Starlight- Los Angeles to Seattle), were involved in a low speed collision inside the Oakland Station, resulting in the lead engines from each train losing contact with the rail.

There are 17 confirmed minor, non- life threatening injuries to passengers and crew.

There is no immediate estimate for restoration of service at this time.

Amtrak and the owner of the tracks, Union Pacific Freight Railroad will be working with federal officials to conduct a complete investigation of this evening’s incident.

 

[jis]

According to tweets, service has been restored this morning, though not as early as they had hoped.

It has now apparently been established with certainty that a SPAD (Signal passed At Danger) was involved.

 

[George Harris]

From the pictures on the local TV last night and this morning, it appears to have been the railroad equivalent of a fender bender. I would suspect that on final analysis the collision speed would be under 15 mph and probably in the 8 to 10 mph range. The old rule on hump yard was to keep impact speed to 4 mph or less. Even 4 mph gives you a pretty good bang and a small cloud of dust shaken off the cars. If thee guy had realized that he was going the wrong way and dumped the air about 5 seconds earlier, there would have probably been nothing more than a trainset with flat wheels and an engineer with some unplanned no-pay vacation.

 

[jis]

Yep. Instead we have an unplanned no pay vacation and a bunch of insurance claims and a mess to clean up. It is surprising that the engine of 717 actually derailed its front truck though.

 

[lthanlon]

This was not a "collision." It's bad enough the media don't know the difference between an engineer and a conductor, but this one's a no-brainer. Page 58 of the 2011 Associated Press Stylebook:

collide, collision
Two objects must be in motion before they can
collide.
A moving train cannot
collide
with a stopped train.

 

[jis]

This was not a "collision." It's bad enough the media don't know the difference between an engineer and a conductor, but this one's a no-brainer. Page 58 of the 2011 Associated Press Stylebook:

collide, collision
Two objects must be in motion before they can
collide.
A moving train cannot
collide
with a stopped train.

They should be in motion relative to which frame of reference?

 

[PRR 60]

This was not a "collision." It's bad enough the media don't know the difference between an engineer and a conductor, but this one's a no-brainer. Page 58 of the 2011 Associated Press Stylebook:

collide, collision
Two objects must be in motion before they can
collide.
A moving train cannot
collide
with a stopped train.

Not according to Merriam-Webster:

Collide: to come together with solid or direct impact.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collide

 

[tp49]

KTVU wouldn't have even had to roll out of their parking lot to cover the story. The station at JLS is across the street from the KTVU studio.

 

[sechs]

From the video that I've seen, it looks like the CS was parked at its usual location at OKJ, with the engines just at the parking garage.

The San Joaquin must have blown the signal at CP North Jack London, which is right at Webster. It came to a stop still blocking the street.

 

[lthanlon]

They should be in motion relative to which frame of reference?

Galactic plane relative to the Lesser Magellanic Cloud.

 

[lthanlon]

This was not a "collision." It's bad enough the media don't know the difference between an engineer and a conductor, but this one's a no-brainer. Page 58 of the 2011 Associated Press Stylebook:

collide, collision
Two objects must be in motion before they can
collide.
A moving train cannot
collide
with a stopped train.

Not according to Merriam-Webster:

Collide: to come together with solid or direct impact.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/collide

Well, not according to the AP. :giggle: