Two perspectives:
1) I work with industries that handle hazardous materials. In general, we constantly seek to evolve and improve the technologies for safely handling those materials. However, it is recognized that, when advancements are made, it is not always feasible to integrate those advancements into existing facilities... at least, not immediately. However, emphasis is placed on (and sometimes mandates require) integrating those advanced technologies into new facilities and significant modifications to existing facilities. Over $180 million were spent on this new/extended rail line. Why was it not required that the PTC system be in service before the first commercial run? It is unconscionable that it was not.
2) I was recently at a customer site, riding in a sedan to reach a remote portion of the facility. En route, we received several alarms sounding in the vehicle. The driver explained that the vehicle was equipped with a GPS-based system that alerted him whenever he exceeded the posted speed limit, and he had crept 1 or 2 mph above the limit. The speed limit varied depending upon the conditions of the area, and the monitor kept track of the appropriate speed limit at which to sound the alarm. All motor vehicles on the site were so equipped. My client felt the financial investment was warranted to help protect the 1 or 2 occupants of each vehicle against the potential consequences of a 15 mph collision. But, AMTRAK appears to have been less interested in protecting a train, configured to carry hundreds of passengers, from an 80 mph derailment.
AMTRAK's new CEO, Richard Anderson, tweeted:
"On behalf of everyone at Amtrak, we are deeply saddened by all that has happened today. We will do everything in our power to support our passengers and crew and their families.”
It's a shame that doing "everything in our power" previously did not include ensuring that current safety technology had been fully implemented on a new rail service.