Los Angeles commuter train crash

Clemuel wrote:...
Trivia question: Where is the LIRR's only crossing with a gate attendant today?

Clem

I sould not answer since I guess I am a ringer ...but "What is Borden Ave?"

Paul I sincerly hope none of your friends were involved. My prayers to those who were.
You said the Pilots were designe to break away? What is the thinking behind that design? I would think it would make a bad situation worse

I second that on Borden Ave in LIC. I thought there was another one down there also? Is it true that the LIRR used to give those jobs to those who seriously injured in other crafts who lost limbs and so forth? Someone told me switch tenders also?

Thank you to all for the concerns about the health and wellfare of our brother and sister railroaders. I like the rest of you have to wait for the list to come out to see if there are any names I recognise.
The normal way things operate at Metrolink is trains depart LAUPT locomotive lead. Trains arrive LAUPT cab car lead.
Map below is borrowed from another forum

Train 1 is out bound from LAUPT, Train 2 is inbound and the one that struck the jeep.

Yes, Borden Avenue in Long Island City is the last crossing with a gateman. This is a Track Department position that is usually bid by a senior man. It used to pay a significant amount of overtime.

There was a time when it would be one of the few rosters that a lame Track employee could be qualified for, as it encounted minimal physical ability. Thus, injured and crippled men before the days of the Federal Employees' Liability Act (railroad workers are not covered by Workmans' Comp or Social Security) would look to the gate jobs for continued employment.

An attendant is kept at Borden Avenue crossing because it is heavily traveled by large trucks and because switching moves often come very close to the crossing without fouling it.

It's also a bone thrown to the City of New York for the half million dollars they pay the LIRR annually for station upkeep at LIC and Hunterspoint Avenue.

Clem

Actually, similar incidents have occurred on the LI. A notorious one was Unqua Road, which was just west of the Mall between Massapequa Park - Amityville prior to the tracks being elevated. I wondered how much hollering and yelling there was when they elevated the Babylon, and look how much safer it is now. I hope I see them take out the crossings on the Mainline west of Divide in my lifetime with the third track project, but as someone pointed out, if some idiot is determined to do something on the tracks they'll find a way.

I'm glad they caught the coward responsible, and I hope the injured recover soon...

The reason the accident was so bad is b/c the train that struck the Jeep was travelling cab car first. Those BBD Bi-level cab cars are apparently very light.

Also, look at the body design. It looks as if it was made to push something underneath the car, which it turn lift it off its trucks.

They've had other accidents like this, but those trains were traveling loco first.

I'm not sure how the C3s weigh in comparison to the BBD bi-levels, but I'm sure the DE/DMs could just plow something like a jeep out of the way and just continue along. Hell, even a semi would have a had time causing a derailment like that to a train traveling loco first on LI.

Unfortunately, there are still the MUs and the trains that travel cab car first. I don't know if they'd be able to stay of the tracks or if they'd get lifted up like what happened in this derailment.

<i>The reason the accident was so bad is b/c the train that struck the Jeep was travelling cab car first.</i>

Push mode is inherintly unstable. It's simple dynamics.

<i> Those BBD Bi-level cab cars are apparently very light.</i>

No they're not.

<i>Also, look at the body design. It looks as if it was made to push something underneath the car, which it turn lift it off its trucks.</i>

But since the FRA regulations don't address grade crossing accident performance, it's still legal.

<i>They've had other accidents like this, but those trains were traveling loco first.</i>

No. They've had at least 2 other flips like this in push mode. The BBD bilevels, and the Superliners, are both amazingly easy to flip over, and push mode itself makes things want to flip.

<i>I'm not sure how the C3s weigh in comparison to the BBD bi-levels,</i>

It doesn't matter. Comet cars (lighter than either BBD or C3s) have struck objects in push mode and not derailed.

<i> but I'm sure the DE/DMs could just plow something like a jeep out of the way and just continue along.</i>

Why? All you need is the engine block to wedge under the front truck and lift it off the rails and it's game over. It has nothing to do with equipment weight - get something under the lead truck, you get a derailment. Ontop of which, the tipsy nature of these cars means they flip. Very bad.

<i> Hell, even a semi would have a had time causing a derailment like that to a train traveling loco first on LI.</i>

Anything traveling loco first is going to be hard to derail. TGVs have hit extremely heavy loads and stayed on track.

<i>Unfortunately, there are still the MUs and the trains that travel cab car first. I don't know if they'd be able to stay of the tracks or if they'd get lifted up like what happened in this derailment.</i>

MUs might, but I wouldn't hold any hope for the C3 cars, period. We'll know eventually, and it'll likely be very messy. I'm not aware of any derailments that have really flipped M-1s over, they've got a lower COG than a bilevel because all of that electric equipment under the floor. That helps a lot - it's like trying to flip a car vs an SUV. SUVs flip so easy because they're top heavy, cars don't flip so easy because they're not.

Makes sense. As for my info about previous derailments and car weight, I was going by people on subchat.

And I just got a bit of truely amazing news from subchat. Someone there told me that BOTH engineers SURVIVED! One however was severly injured. I think that was the engineer of the train the hit the jeep. If it was, then that's amazing that he survived, b/c his entire cab is completely obliterated, along with the rest of the car back to the doors.

Conductor on train 100 who passed away was Tom Ormiston. I did know him from my time at Metrolink. The engineer who is in the hospital is Bruce Gray and his name does not ring a bell to me.
Here is a link to a very nice eulogy to Tom. Very accurate and to the pont.
http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?1,85919

A ralroader friend from back east emailed me asking my opinion on the BBA cars Metrolink uses. I clipped and paisted my responce to is question.

Doug:
They are unsafe in either mode of operation. They have never been crash tested at Pueblo. The very first collision the Metrolink dumped the cab car off the track. Pilots are designed to break away. I never have nor will I ever ride the head end of a Metrolink cab car again after an incident that I had first hand when a cab car struck debris and lifted off it's air bags on the pilot truck, at 70 mph 1000 feet before the bridge over the Santa Anna river on the UP main, just west of Pedley, Ca.
P

With the serious consequences of cab-car vs. motor vehicle collisions, maybe all commuter railroads should consider going back to the old style of operation: having the locomotive always on the head-end pulling the train. Of course that would mean having to turn the locos in a wye at the end of every line, but it might be worth it in the long run. Some of us remember when LIRR used to do that.

Chicago area railroads have been running bi-level push-pulls for many years, but I don't ever remember seeing a grade-crossing accident there causing a major wreck like the one this week. And they have LOTS of crossings in the western suburbs! Are their bi-level cab-cars built differently than Metrolink's?

You wouldn't necessarily have to have a train derail first to have this kind of a wreck. Middleton's "North Shore" book described an accident on the North Shore Line in which a motorist ran around crossing gates and was struck by a northbound ( from Chicago to Milwaukee) four or five car interurban train travelling at 70 MPH. The train didn't initially derail, but the impact made the cars sway so much that the tops sideswiped a southbound freight and then both trains derailed killing a number of people. I think that the best thing that can be said about the Metrolink incident is that it is extremely unfortunate and tragic, but given all of the circumstances involved, particularly the intentional presence of the Jeep on the tracks, it was probably unavoidable.

Unfortunately, there are still the MUs and the trains that travel cab car first. I don't know if they'd be able to stay of the tracks or if they'd get lifted up like what happened in this derailment.

I remember back in the 1960s (early 1970s?) that late at night a car tried to beat a train (obviously an MU) across a grade crossing just after the track from Floral Park to Stewart Manor gets to ground level. I do not recall the train derailing, though I do remember that the car was essentially ground up underneath the front of the train.

They identified the (fill in any euphemism for "stupid" you wish) driver by the only identifieable piece - the license plate.

Such a terrible thing to happen. My condolences to the family of the crew memeber who died in the crash as well as all the other passengers who perished in that accident. It's amazing what one idiot can do. This is a danger that we face everyday on our jobs, and is why I hate it when we pass the Covert Ave/ NHP road crossing. and we fly by there at MAS many times. I never did like the cab car design, or even less the MU's because they don't have that added bulk that a diesel has in the front. Of course, it doesn't matter what your in if it derails. I do believe that accident investigations that the FRA does is what determines what and how trains should be built. Thismight be a reason for why the M-7's were built with thicker walls, as well as better crash protection at the front end of each car. I really wish that the public would have a better understanding of the dangers of driving around lowered gates.