After 8 months, the deadly Amtrak crash is still a mystery — but here are 2 theories

One of the scariest things about the Amtrak crash that killed eight people in May 2015 is that its cause is still mostly a mystery.

As Matthew Shaer reports in a thorough, long article for the New York Times Magazine, when Amtrak 188 derailed in Philadelphia on May 12, the engineer, Brandon Bostian, had no alcohol or drugs in his system; he wasn't looking at his phone; and he was, by all accounts, totally devoted to his job.

Shaer, after talking to rail officials, comes up with two theories to explain why Bostian lost control of the train, entering a dangerous curve at 106 miles per hour:

1. The train's locomotive was hit by a rock. This wasn't an uncommon occurrence on this stretch of track, and happened to other trains that night. Bostian could have hit his head ducking to avoid it, causing him to briefly lose his bearings while the train was accelerating. Bostian had an injury to his forehead, and the train had a dent in its windshield that could have been caused by a projectile.
2. Bostian confused Frankford Junction, the sharp curve where the train derailed, with the curve before it, the way a driver might become confused on a dark highway. He was on his second trip of the day and, due to mechanical problems on his earlier trip, had almost no break between the two.

The article, which is worth reading in full, suggests other contributing factors but concludes that the ultimate cause of the crash is still uncertain. A report expected later today from the National Transportation Safety Board might offer more definitive answers.

Go deeper:

• The Amtrak crash was totally preventable through a technology known as positive train control, now in place on most of the Northeast Corridor.
• A survivor argues that Amtrak's response to the passengers was disastrous.

Will you support Vox’s explanatory journalism?

Most news outlets make their money through advertising or subscriptions. But when it comes to what we’re trying to do at Vox, there are a couple of big issues with relying on ads and subscriptions to keep the lights on:

First, advertising dollars go up and down with the economy. We often only know a few months out what our advertising revenue will be, which makes it hard to plan ahead.

Second, we’re not in the subscriptions business. Vox is here to help everyone understand the complex issues shaping the world — not just the people who can afford to pay for a subscription. We believe that’s an important part of building a more equal society. And we can’t do that if we have a paywall.

So even though advertising is still our biggest source of revenue, we also seek grants and reader support. (And no matter how our work is funded, we have strict guidelines on editorial independence.)

If you also believe that everyone deserves access to trusted high-quality information, will you make a gift to Vox today? Any amount helps.

One-Time Monthly Annual

$5/month

$10/month

$25/month

$50/month

Other

$

Yes, I'll give $5/month

Yes, I'll give $5/month

We accept credit card, Apple Pay, and Google Pay. You can also contribute via