Why did AMTRAK 188 train derail BEFORE REACHING THAT CURVE?

maybe they can measure the Doppler-Shift and see if he was really going a hundred.

.

ALERT

here is a wide view of the scene that shows the curve very clearly !!!!
.

[link to i.imgur.com]

.

Has even one passenger mentioned the curve ? No.

Train never made the curve. Always went straight. Question is -why?

Derailer?

Why was a safety conscious engineer going over twice the speed limit into a curve?

Was it faulty brakes?

Neighbors report the whistle blew. Why????

The emergency brake was applied. To no avail.

Now compare that photo to the night photo, and you'll be able to tell which train is which:

[link to wsav.images.worldnow.com]

well, i'm not sure how these "derailers" work.

but it looks like the Engine flew off on a tangent
right at the spot he should have if he was actually going 100 mph.

but i still think it was a Bomb.

.

Yeah cause that train car looked like it exploded

Another important photo:

[link to multimedia.pol.dk]

Well, that photo makes it clear that the train left the track as it entered that curve. One can almost draw a perfectly straight line back from where the train left the tracks to the straight section of rail preceding the curve. This should leave no doubt that excessive speed was the culprit.

I would say that the most logical causes for the excessive speeding are:

1. Locomotive operator nodded off, awoke, was disoriented, but by the time he realized he was fast approaching a speed restriction, it was too late.

2. Malfunction of operator controls with only possible override the use of emergency brake.

3. Criminal intent on part of locomotive operator.

Thanks. One of the interviewed passengers said he thought the train was moving slower than 50 mph.

It would be helpful if someone who knows the damage difference between the two speeds gave their opinion.

I have no idea what the difference might look like.

An amtrak employee headed to work and riding in the last car was seriously injured and is filing suit.

Don't you think he knew the track and whether the train was going too fast or not?

Reeeally interested to hear his statement of events.

It hit something

Or it exploded

Am curious about whether this may be a "copy cat" of sorts to the alps thing. Maybe engineer didn't expect to survive?

Passenger car exploded due to being ripped open by a stationary catenary pole (the leftovers of which can clearly be seen near the track in some of the photos).

A simple derailer would make the train leave the track no matter how fast it was moving.

The fact that the train 1) derailed directly into a mess of oil tankers followed immediately by 2) an explosion on the second car makes this almost certainly a terrorist act.

That's BEFORE you factor in the audio signal (train giving short series of horn blasts just before explosion) and visual signal (CSX engine sitting there with lights on).

CSX train engine mysteriously disappeared, gone, out of the equation. Why?

well, this evidence certainly overshadows my "Bomb Theory",
but i'm still sticking with the Bomb.

.

I know that's the story they're going with, and we also know that's BS. No offense. Passenger cars don't "explode" upon hidding cat poles.

o.k. so the Car hit a pole while it was flying through the air after it was Bombed.



sheesh.

.

Bomb would have been specifically placed on the first passenger car (directly behind Amtrak engine) so that the bomb would be safer. If engine struck something too hard, it might have destroyed the bomb fuse before it could be detonated. The bomb would be somewhat better protected on car #2. But the guy pushed the button just a microsecond too fast, and #2 melted to the ground only about 1 traincar length shy of where it would have done the most damage (plowing into a mess of oil tankers).

If anyone tries to tell you the passenger car "exploded" from hitting the cat poles, just point out all the other cat poles reduced to matchsticks after the cars hit them.

In train-vs.-cat pole, train wins.

Oh screw those damn tanker cars !!!! enough already !!!

.

If there was an audio recording of the train passing a fixed point, yes, it is possible to determine exactly how fast it was going.

Also, you can see here that there wasn't a cat pole for #2 to hit--the one that allegedly "destroyed" #2 is actually embedded in car #3:

[link to cdn.thedailybeast.com]

gosh. i had no idea i was so brilliant :)

.

In fact if it hadn't been for #2 being blown up when it was, the Amtrak engine might easily have been pushed way, way into the tankers. Instead, the explosion severed the engine from the rest of the cars, leaving the engine to stop relatively sooner than it would have had it had the weight of everyone else behind it.

Ironically, the explosion saved the tankers.

well, thank heaven for small miracles.

well, you were ingesting the lights could be used to measure the speed through the doppler shift which is not really feasible. the frequency would be affected so little it would be hard to measure, but with sound not so, sound waves move much slower

it was annoying of you to even mention the lights.

.

Well--if the tankers had blown, we'd be looking at 200+ dead instead of 8.

Think people are curious about them, why they were there? Were they just sitting there, empty or were they being transported somewhere? The fact that no one on MSM is mentioning them seems to make folks even more curious about them.

The tanker cars were the most likely target of this operation if in fact it was sabotage.