Metrolink Crash in Chatsworth, CA - 9/12/08

But a group of local teenage train enthusiasts who knew the engineer well, doubt that he was to blame.

They called their friend professional and caring and said he helped them learn about trains and being an engineer. They said he would "never" have been reckless or unprofessional or run a red light.

http://cbs2.com/local/Metrolink.Enginee ... 17045.html

My heart goes out to the families of those who died and who are injured from such a horrific event. How did this accident happen way too many news stations are showing this as a head on collision but some think it hit the rear of the freight train. Also the Metrolink engineer was texting while driving the train and apparently ran a red signal, this is evidenced by wrecked switches because the Metrolink engineer wasn't paying attention. Also isn't there supposed to be someone else in the cab with the engineer? Do engineers text alot while on the job? If I'm not mistaken the Metrolink train was on the 2nd busiest railine in the US so there should have been some ATP or an annoying alarm that went off!!??

My favorite part is when the Feds come in and complain about infrastructure when they did nothing to help the situation they would rather spend millions on a pointless trick or treat war than help out AMTRAK which is billions of dollars in debt. If the NEC isn't perfect nothing else rail related will be.

NortheastTrainMan wrote: If I'm not mistaken the Metrolink train was on the 2nd busiest railine in the US so there should have been some ATP or an annoying alarm that went off!!??
.

Alarm? Check, it went off

Regular Metrolink riders said the commuter train often stops to allow a Union Pacific freight train to proceed on its route to downtown Los Angeles but the Metrolink train Friday did not do that -- and tripped an alarm at the Metrolink dispatch center

http://www.upi.com/Top_News/2008/09/14/ ... 221428434/

Re: cell phone use by crew members..............is there an actual FRA rule prohibiting such use by employees while the train is in operation? It seems to me there was some discussion a few months back about this rule on the New York-New Jersey area forums.

Also, as another poster asked above: has anyone heard anything at all about the condition of the Union Pacific crew? Did they survive? Are their injuries serious? And........have they been interviewed? I've seen nothing about this in any of the media coverage.

And also as others are asking: Why do California commuter railroads hire private companies to supply crews? I could understand maybe using Amtrak for this, but private contractors? This is unheard of in the New York metro area. The commuter railroads here hire their own operating employees.

NortheastTrainMan wrote:My heart goes out to the families of those who died and who are injured from such a horrific event. How did this accident happen way too many news stations are showing this as a head on collision but some think it hit the rear of the freight train. Also the Metrolink engineer was texting while driving the train and apparently ran a red signal, this is evidenced by wrecked switches because the Metrolink engineer wasn't paying attention. Also isn't there supposed to be someone else in the cab with the engineer? Do engineers text alot while on the job? If I'm not mistaken the Metrolink train was on the 2nd busiest railine in the US so there should have been some ATP or an annoying alarm that went off!!??

My favorite part is when the Feds come in and complain about infrastructure when they did nothing to help the situation they would rather spend millions on a pointless trick or treat war than help out AMTRAK which is billions of dollars in debt. If the NEC isn't perfect nothing else rail related will be.

There is only usually 1 person in the cab of a locomotive and that is the engineer unless there is a road foreman riding or a student engineer being trained as far as passenger trains go, firemen days are looong gone. Working for a R.R I can tell you that no engineer is suppose to be texting or on a phone at any time while opearating a locomotive unless its an emergency...

Head-end View wrote:Re: cell phone use by crew members..............is there an actual FRA rule prohibiting such use by employees while the train is in operation? It seems to me there was some discussion a few months back about this rule on the New York-New Jersey area forums.

Also, as another poster asked above: has anyone heard anything at all about the condition of the Union Pacific crew? Did they survive? Are their injuries serious? And........have they been interviewed? I've seen nothing about this in any of the media coverage.

And also as others are asking: Why do California commuter railroads hire private companies to supply crews? I could understand maybe using Amtrak for this, but private contractors? This is unheard of in the New York metro area. The commuter railroads here hire their own operating employees.

I am not a west coast person but I will say it is not unusal for a private company to run the commuter railroads... MBTA has MBCR which is a private company operate there commuter rail trains.... Also I know tri rail down in florida has a private company run the trains as well... There are probably numerous other railroads that are ran by private companies as well.. I'm not 100% but I believe the private company that is part of Metrolink is Veolia and here is a paragraph of MBCR's webpage that references Veolia the private company

"Veolia Transportation North America, is the transportation arm of Veolia Environment. Veolia is Europe's largest passenger transportation company with bus, rail, shuttle and other operations in 25 countries. Working directly with municipal and regional transportation authorities, the company provides service in France, Germany, Scandinavia, Australia and the Middle East, operating 24 rail systems, nine of which are commuter rail systems and employing 72,000 employees worldwide. In North America, Veolia is the largest private transportation provider, operating bus, rail and paratransit contracts in 19 States and 2 provinces in Canada, and employing over 13,000 people."

I am going to guess that the mods don't want this to become a privatization thread, but let's be clear.....private companies (as apposed to Amtrak) gained the legal ability to run commuter operation only recently, 1994 if I remember correctly. It is still an experiment.

Mitch wrote:Who are these "outside contractors?" What happened to railroad employment? Who's doing what to whom?

Merely my opinion but I think things ran a whole lot better when one railroad employeed the train guys and anyone wanting service over the line contracted with the railroad. One book of rules, one known level of performance and discipline, one extra board, one superintendent, 2 trainmasters. End of story

On The Milwaukee of the '70s we all stood to work suburban, Amtrak, freight, etc. Kids, I think things are a bit out of whack...

The '96 NJT and MARC accidents had trains crewed by the railroad owners (NJT and CSX respectively), but both engineers failed to obey red signals. However, I still agree that railroad owners should be contracted to crew trains, but for these cash-strapped transit agencies sometimes third-party contracting is more financially attractive. Also, it can sometimes be difficult (and expensive) for commuter railroads who run over lines owned by different companies to manage so many contracts instead of just having one external contractor. Chicago's Metra system seems to pull it off quite well though. MARC in the Baltimore-Washington Metro is also operated by more than one contractor--CSX and Amtrak (although the MTA is currently looking at other options).

Veolia operates Metrolink and the Boston MBTA (both past-contractors with Amtrak), and through its Herzog subsidary operates San Jose's Altamont Commuter Express, San Diego's Coaster , South Florida's Tri-Rail, and Dallas' Trinity Railway Express.

According to general rules at NJT, no eletronic devices are to be used while on duty unless it pertains to out jobs such as radios. To expand on that NJT made a special instruction that all engineers are to keep their cell phones off and in their bags while running. I used to think that was a bit over board in the case we had to use them in an emergency. Now I think the rule has some merit by eliminating the temptations of cell phones which in return could result in death. I personally have examined my own behavior at work since this crash and will make changes. It only takes a second to make a fatal mistake.

I'm on the East coast and am unfamiliar with the track and signal layout. Does anyone have a drawing they can post on this site? As I see it the only way this collision could have occurred is if the commuter train violated a Red signal holding him for the apposing train to reverse on to the siding. The commuter train must have passed the red and hit the freight before he got to the siding switch.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/bottlen ... board.html

Ron Roberts, the chairman of the board of directors for Metrolink, just read me this statement that he attributed to the Metrolink board:

"Metrolink staff has recently made comments regarding the possible cause of the September 12th, 2008, tragedy in Chatsworth. The National Transportation Safety Board has characterized these comments as premature and has ordered Metrolink to withhold further comments at this time pending investigation and we agree."

I'm a bit puzzled by a poster above who says too many news stations are saying it was head on but some think it was a rear end collision. Photos show UP power involved with cars derailed behind it. All news reports and responders who I have seen quoted say it was head on. To suggest otherwise seems preposterous.

As for the FRA, they will expect compliance with the railroad's rules even if a specific rule is not mandated in the CFR. If the railroad says no cell phones (which most do in one wording or another) then the Feds expect that rule to be complied with and enforced on that property.

I watched a History Channel thing on the Transcontinental Railroad and it had much to do with rail safety. It seemed that every single advancement that was made was done so after horrible wrecks where people died. That just seems to be the way it is. For a long time cars didn't have seatbelts. It took a lot of deaths to convince us that they had to be required.

Every day people drive on streets that won't automatically stop your car if you run a red light. No matter how many accidents there are people will continue to drive. Why do we expect, no, demand this kind of advanced safety system from rail?

Don't get me wrong. I would LOVE to see PTC installed on every single track in the world. I would love to see every single line grade separated and double tracked. I would pop massive boners for that. But the money isn't there. We don't vote for rail initiatives that properly fund mass transit nor do we vote for representatives who are pro-rail, generally. Hopefully that will change after this accident.

But to sit on our high horses and condemn the railroads, Metrolink, whoever, as some are doing, is pretty much bull. I know there's only one goddamn track in that area. I've ridden through that exact area on Metrolink and Amtrak. I know that freight trains are lurking about, ready to strike. But I still boarded that train. And many others will as well.

Here's my meager contribution.

Way back on page 2 someone mentioned how did the rear of the passenger train end up a good distance from the first coach? I can't recall if that's what the pictures showed -- and having read through 8 pages I no longer have time to go back and look -- but if they did the answer is probably recoil action and a failed coupling. It has happened before, usually when freights collide.

Also, I too wonder about the UP crew. Did they slow down enough to be able to jump? Or did they have to lie flat on the cab floor and pray for a good result??

Investigators have not yet interviewed the four surviving crew members from the trains, citing their injuries, but plan to in the coming days.

The dispatcher in the control room did not know the train had ran the red light, Ms. Higgins said, but right about the time of the accident he noticed an abnormality with the signals. Just as he prepared to contact the train, she said, the conductor on the Metrolink train called him and reported the accident

contradicting earlier reports

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/09/15/us/15crash.html?hp