Report: Metrolink Most Dangerous Rail System in U.S.

From http://www.ktla.com/landing_topstories/?Report-Metrolink-Most-Dangerous-Rail-Sys=1&blockID=155291&feedID=1198...

KTLA News

December 8, 2008

LOS ANGELES -- By some measures, Metrolink has the dubious distinction of being the most deadly commuter rail system in the country, a Daily News investigation has concluded.

About $1.2 billion generated after the passage of a Nov. 4 sales tax measure will be channeled toward improving Metrolink safety, however.

Metrolink was responsible for nearly two-thirds of the nation's passenger deaths over the past six years, the investigation found. It is the nation's seventh-largest commuter rail system in terms of ridership, but has experienced the third-highest number of fatalities, both on-board and on the ground, over the last decade.

(continued at http://www.ktla.com/landing_topstories/?Report-Metrolink-Most-Dangerous-Rail-Sys=1&blockID=155291&feedID=1198)

Most of the fatalities came from the Chatsworth crash, but a significant number also came from the Glendale grade-crossing crash -- which the railroad was not at fault. Personally, I don't think it's fair to label Metrolink as 'the most dangerous rail system in the U.S.' because of these two incidents. But it makes for compelling 'news', which is why the statement was made.

I don't think its fair to label them the most dangerous but hey do have a high amount of incidents that do get reported in the national media.

jersey_emt wrote:From http://www.ktla.com/landing_topstories/?Report-Metrolink-Most-Dangerous-Rail-Sys=1&blockID=155291&feedID=1198...

KTLA News

December 8, 2008

LOS ANGELES -- By some measures, Metrolink has the dubious distinction of being the most deadly commuter rail system in the country, a Daily News investigation has concluded.

About $1.2 billion generated after the passage of a Nov. 4 sales tax measure will be channeled toward improving Metrolink safety, however.

Metrolink was responsible for nearly two-thirds of the nation's passenger deaths over the past six years, the investigation found. It is the nation's seventh-largest commuter rail system in terms of ridership, but has experienced the third-highest number of fatalities, both on-board and on the ground, over the last decade.

(continued at http://www.ktla.com/landing_topstories/?Report-Metrolink-Most-Dangerous-Rail-Sys=1&blockID=155291&feedID=1198)

Most of the fatalities came from the Chatsworth crash, but a significant number also came from the Glendale grade-crossing crash -- which the railroad was not at fault. Personally, I don't think it's fair to label Metrolink as 'the most dangerous rail system in the U.S.' because of these two incidents. But it makes for compelling 'news', which is why the statement was made.

Why not?

The fact that it might not be their fault does not somehow make the system safer. It just means that they might not be in a position to rectify the situation. However, when you're dead, does it really make a difference to you whose fault it is? Probably not.

In addition, I would posit that the Glendale crash could have been much less damaging if the locomotives were pulling instead of pushing the trains, and if the grade crossing either didn't exist or had some sort of monitoring system/CCTV to alert the conductor ahead of time that the car was on the tracks.

lensovet wrote:In addition, I would posit that the Glendale crash could have been much less damaging if the locomotives were pulling instead of pushing the trains, and if the grade crossing either didn't exist or had some sort of monitoring system/CCTV to alert the conductor ahead of time that the car was on the tracks.

And hopefully the conductor would convey that information, in a timely manner, to the person who really needs to know, the engineer. ;-)

But I digress.

Push-pull operation is used on most commuter railroads in the United States, and we've been down the road of arguing whether it's safe or not. While in that particular instance it may have made a difference in the outcome, overall those who are responsible for making such determinations have determined that push-pull operation is no more or less safe than locomotive-forward operation. You may disagree with that determination; I don't.

As for CCTV or other crossing monitoring technology: is this used anywhere yet? If so, has it been proved to prevent accidents? I would argue that it would be a huge loser: how many grade crossing accidents occur where the vehicle was stopped on the crossing for long enough before the arrival of the train to make a difference? Who's going to monitor these things? Communicate with the train to inform them of the obstruction? Sounds like a huge waste of time and money to me.

Jim

how many grade crossing accidents occur where the vehicle was stopped on the crossing for long enough before the arrival of the train to make a difference? Who's going to monitor these things? Communicate with the train to inform them of the obstruction? Sounds like a huge waste of time and money to me.

I agree 100 percent.

Erie-Lackawanna wrote:

lensovet wrote:In addition, I would posit that the Glendale crash could have been much less damaging if the locomotives were pulling instead of pushing the trains, and if the grade crossing either didn't exist or had some sort of monitoring system/CCTV to alert the conductor ahead of time that the car was on the tracks.

And hopefully the conductor would convey that information, in a timely manner, to the person who really needs to know, the engineer.

But I digress.

Push-pull operation is used on most commuter railroads in the United States, and we've been down the road of arguing whether it's safe or not. While in that particular instance it may have made a difference in the outcome, overall those who are responsible for making such determinations have determined that push-pull operation is no more or less safe than locomotive-forward operation. You may disagree with that determination; I don't.

As for CCTV or other crossing monitoring technology: is this used anywhere yet? If so, has it been proved to prevent accidents? I would argue that it would be a huge loser: how many grade crossing accidents occur where the vehicle was stopped on the crossing for long enough before the arrival of the train to make a difference? Who's going to monitor these things? Communicate with the train to inform them of the obstruction? Sounds like a huge waste of time and money to me.

Jim

I'm trying to recall from what was published at the time, but did the Glendale collision even occur at a grade crossing? I seem to remember reading that the guy had driven the pickup some distance down the track before changing his mind and leaving it there. Certainly an exhaustive investigation following the crash concluded that being in push mode is not inherently more dangerous than in pull.

ExCon90

of course it did. the guy drove a pickup onto the crossing and just left it there.

According to FRA Accident Report HQ-08-2005, the point of impact was 155 feet east (timetable east) of the Chevy Chase Blvd. grade crossing, smack-dab on top of the east switch (in Track 2) of the first crossover east of the grade crossing (he drove east from the grade crossing and possibly got hung up when he reached the crossover). In any case, my point was that any device intended to warn approaching trains of the presence of a vehicle on the crossing would have been irrelevant if a vehicle were somewhere other than on the crossing, and thus would not have prevented this collision.

ExCon90

I think the real problem isn't push-pull operation but that California drivers are stupid. How the hell did this guy wind up ON THE TRACKS AWAY FROM A GRADE CROSSING?! How often do you hear about this happening in any other state? People competent enough to get a driver's license should be intelligent enough to tell the difference between a railroad right of way and a road, as well as tell the difference between a railroad crossing and a normal intersection.

He had, if I recall, actually driven on to the railroad intentionally, in what was originally intended as a suicide atempt, but then changed his mind. So it wasn't a case of a stupid mistake. Instead, it was a case of, well, I'm not sure what you'd call it, honestly.

I hate to say it...but I must agree, almost everytime a Metrolink train crashes someone dies or is badly hurt I can't even remember the last time such things have taken place on any other U.S. rail system (except for the Metra Derailment in Chicago of '05)

In the Placentia Collision of 2002, 2 were killed and 22 were SERIOUSLY injured
Glendale collision of 2005 , 11 killed and 40 critically injured
Sept of 2008, 26 Killed and 81 seriously injured
....as horrendous as it sounds the facts are there...does anyone know of any other US rail systems that have had wrecks within the past 10 years that has killed or left people nearly disabled. I just pray that the worst is behind us.

I think the real problem isn't push-pull operation but that California drivers are stupid.

Perhaps they are, but more likely many of the grade crossing accidents were caused by a general lack of familiarity with trains, and the dynamics/dangers of passenger trains specifically, among Los Angeles drivers. Most of the posters here are from the East Coast, and people there have always lived with passenger trains and other forms of rail transit, so they know how fast and dangerous the trains can be at grade crossings. Until a little more than a decade ago, most people in car-centric LA had never even seen a passenger train, or associated them with the toy train in Disneyland or some slow moving freight they may have seen somewhere downtown. So you have people who think they can "beat the train" to the crossing, and this, coupled with the (false) sense of invincibility that cars impart to some drivers, leads to disaster.

I think is interesting that no one has taken note that the three major Metrolink accidents all have one common thread...willfull stupidity.

Placentia 2002: BNSF crew misses approach signal, sees stop signal too late and collides with Metrolink train.

Glendale 2005: A person parked vehicle intentionally on tracks. (attempted "suidice by train")The shear random chance of two Metrolink trains having a scheduled meet at the site of the accident made the accident far worse than it otherwise might have been.

Chatsworth 2008: What can we say that the NTSB hasn't already said? An accident that appears to have been caused by a willfull and lethal disregard for safety by one individual.

I think that there are two areas of safety that are not being discussed here. One, grade crossing safety/grade crossing seperation. Two, "suicide by train."

One area that Metrolink's operation seem to have had a lot of trouble is with grade crossing accidents. This is not as simple an issue as some might want to think. Metrolink crosses a large number of very congested streets. This very congestion contributes to the over all accident toll. So many posters seem to want to believe that all grade crossing accidents are caused by people wanting to "beat the train." I am a life long Californian, and honestly I just don't see that happening at most grade crossings. What is far more common is for cars to get "trapped" in the grade crossing in heavy traffic. A lot of effort has been taken to redesign grade crossings so as to make this less likely. One area that has recieved a lot of attention is to better coordinate grade crossing signals with nearby highway traffic lights. Another is to better educate drivers of the danger of stopping on the tracks for any reason. (improved signage is a big part of this)

Another issue is the shear number of crossings at grade that Metrolink makes every day. (again often very congested grade crossings) Metrolink is a relatively young system, and while a lot of time, money, effort has been made to replace grade crossings with over/underpasses, this work is an expensive undertaking that requires a huge amount of coordination with various government agencies. Building an overpass is not a small expense, and any project requiring public funds often takes much, much longer than any reasonable person might expect.

The area of "suicide by train" is a far more difficult one, and one that will for the most part be out of any rail operators ability to control.

As for the Placentia, and Chatsworth accidents, while the immediate causes are clear, I have to believe that a close look at the corperate culture of Metrolink, and all the other rail operators that Metrolink operates with needs to be looked at carefully. Why would the people sitting in cab act this way? After all the people at the controls are the ones at greatest risk if something goes wrong. What is happening to the people in the seat to cause them to just not give a crap anymore?

I think if you address that issue, you might find the root cause of why Metrolink has so many accidents.

I noted on RAILNEWS.NET today that y'all are now taking delivery of new, more crash-worthy coaches for Metrolink. My question is, in the Chatsworth tragedy, hadn't those Bombardier coaches in use that day already had their designed safety features "approved" by the FRA in advance of actual construction? If so, what are the specific design differences on these new cars that render them superior to the safety designs incorporated in the Bombardiers?

Here in Florida, Bombardiers are plentiful on Tri-Rail between Miami and West Palm Beach. Should we be greatly concerned with our safety?

Well from what I know, if Metrolink's stock did not meet the FRA's standards, then it would not be allowed to intermix with freight traffic or Amtrak service. There would have to be time separation between FRA compliant and non-compliant stock, or a separate right of way would have been built.

The "CEM" coaches are apparently safer in that they have spring loaded couplers and special 'crush zones' designed to crumple in the event of a crash, adsorbing impact force.

Now, I wouldn't really worry to much with the Bombardier Bi-levels, they are themselves still pretty crash-worthy. However, it seems that the stairwells in the cab-coaches are a weak-point. The cars do tend to crumple there. Still, despite the accidents, I have continued happily ride Metrolink whenever I can.