Talk:Amagasaki rail crash
|This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:|
|A fact from this article was featured on Wikipedia's Main Page in the On this day... section on April 25, 2007 and April 25, 2013.|
It is not clear what kind of "Automatic Train Protection" system was installed on this line. ATP would have restricted the speed of the train around the sharp curve to a safe speed.
Tabletop 03:11, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Fukuchiyama-line was installed "Automatic Train Stop" system, but it was most primitive protection system that only stops train runing in red signal. New system will be installed in this June...
126.96.36.199 20:45, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Similarities with Waterfall Accident
In the Waterfall train disaster the speed of the train rose and rose and rose approaching a very sharp curve.
It derailled on that curve killing 7 (the train was fairly empty).
The passengers noticed the increase in speed, and while they may have had a telephone to talk to the guard, none did to complain.
The guard ought to have known about the sharp curve. The guard could have applied the brakes, but did not. Guards are entitled to apply the brakes when there are strange noises and things, under the "stop and inspect" rule.
At Waterfall, there is only the Automatic Train Stop system, no ATP.
Tabletop 11:36, 28 Apr 2005 (UTC)
Under the Cause Section...
The following text is poor English, but I don't know what to do about it; I'm not even sure what the exact intent is of the words "congested diagram" and "meet other lines":
Right after the rail crash occurred, some of the mass media were pointing out that the congested diagram of Fukuchiyama Line was an indirect factor. Actually, there was a little time to meet another lines, but the train capacity was not as large as other railways in Japan.
--Tomwhite56 19:59, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- "Diagram" or ダイヤ refers to the timetable, or the coordinated train operation pattern. I believe "there was little time to meet another lines" refers to how the timetables were coordinated so Fukuchiyama Line trains would connect with Tokaido Line trains at Amagasaki Station, but the timetables gave very little margin for delays.
- In any case, you're right that it's piss poor English and requires citation anyway. Ytny (talk) 21:55, 25 April 2007 (UTC)
- I've clarified the explanation of the tight schedule with some information from the official report, and removed the uncited reference to the Hankyū line. Does this help? Achurch 09:21, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
Number of injured
An October 2008 Daily Yomiuri article notes the number of injuries as 562 unlike the wikipedia article.
Also noted in the article, the Public Prosecutor's office has been questioning the JRWest president and searching the offices for materials and evidence. --188.8.131.52 (talk) 10:35, 3 November 2008 (UTC)
Little in Japan
The article fails to mention that the accident train and line were narrow gauge (1067mm), which was likely the ultimate cause of the disaster! In case of Stepenson gauge (1432-1435mm) or russian wide gauge, the track in the bends can be laid with an "Indianapolis oval" type tilt, so that trains can safely negotiate them at high speed.
(The tilting of tracks in bends is not possible on the narrow gauge, because the trainset's center of balance easily goes outside of the 1067mm gap between the two rails. Therefore any train arriving at low speeds would statically tip over, much like the famous tower of Pisa.)
- If you believe so, insert that info yourself. The more info, the best. But don't forget to include a source, otherwise I myself shall remove it. But I gotta tell you that I haven't seen anything like that. I don't know if you're familiarized with the TV show Seconds From Disaster, but that's the documentary where I saw the investigation of this accident. And there, they mentioned nothing about the gauge of the curve. They actually said, if I'm well-remembered and got it right, that the radius of the curve had been reduced years earlier from 600 to 304 degrees (narrowing it). But this radius and the gauge had, in my opinion, few to do with the crash, because, as I saw, the train was 1.5 times faster than the speed limit. The speed limit (70 km/h) had obviously been calculated based on the gauge and the radius. However, the ultimate reason was obviously the fact that the train was going faster than 106 km/h, which is the speed on which, a train going faster than it would derail. That's what happened. He was going at 116 km/h, probably distracted and stressed about the punishments he would receive for having previously committed other 2 mistakes. Neither the speed limit or the line gauge are to blame, but the severity of retraining programs, which led a driver to stress, and eventually to disaster. That's the true reason. -- Sim(ã)o(n) * Wanna talk? See my efforts? 12:22, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
Final report files
Final report in Japanese:
- Index: http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/bunkatsu.html - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9BcRfld
- Cover page: http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/report/RA07-3-1.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9Bf2J2J
- http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/report/RA07-3-1-1.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9Biw3Go
- http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/report/RA07-3-1-2.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9BrEQIA
- http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/report/RA07-3-1-3.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9BypCJC
- http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/report/RA07-3-1-4.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9C4FyPm
- http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/report/RA07-3-1-5.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9CBefmt
- http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/report/RA07-3-1-6.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9CNe43c
- http://jtsb.mlit.go.jp/jtsb/railway/report/RA07-3-1-7.pdf - http://www.webcitation.org/6U9CTihKf