Oxnard Metrolink crash

But, he did have a cell phone, he called his family as he left the scene.

Correct....and this is going to help in pinning down the time he left the truck too.

I have never used them but I have the phone numbers for NS and CSX in my wallet. I also carry a Amtrak registered photographer card that has an emergency number. I have them as I railfan a lot in the area.  Hope I never use them....but 911 still works for folks that don't have them.

California is a santuary state.

I don’t know, but I imagine using a retired locomotive as control cab would be somewhat cheaper than buying a passenger car with a control cab built in.  Maybe it’s just my imagination, but it seems like EVERY time an engineer gets hurt or killed in a commuter train crash, it’s never with the locomotive leading, always the cab car.  AND, no matter how safe these new cars are purported to be, putting another fifty feet of heavy steel between the passengers and the point of impact can’t be a bad thing.

How'd they do it back in the day? They turned the train and/or the power if needed. Takes time, and time is money.

 

Just wait til all the money is paid out to the injured and tell me how many locomotives that would have paid for

Agree 100% with that in england and europe.I think we should do the same.At least on rail road crossing that have alot trains.I think the truck driver going to jail.I don,t know how any years his gonna get in prison thou.He better pray that the locomotive enginer does not die.Sick of this stuff like this happening!!!

Like I said.....safety is a priority UNTIL it cost money. No one is going to volunteer to do any of it. Why are the RR's going to PTC? Because it was mandated... not because they wanted to.

From LA Times

"Sanchez-Ramirez's Ford F-450 was hauling a trailer when, according to his lawyer, he mistakenly turned and drove onto the tracks and became stuck. Sanchez-Ramirez was in the area for work and thought he was turning onto 5th Street," 

 

 

  Even if you are to drunk to fish you should be able to tell the difference between a four lane highway and a railroad. He turned onto the railroad, drove eighty feet, and became stuck.

  The truck driver is "in a heap of trouble"

  Metrolink seems to have done everything they could to prevent this wreck. It is unknown at this time how long the driver had been out of the truck before the train hit it.

  The distance the train traveled after the wreck indicates it was well below sixty miles per hour.

  It is truly amazing how well the passenger cars held up and how few people were hurt(30) in this situation.

Douglas

If you go to Google Earth and look at the crash site it was pretty hard to get a F-450 through the area and onto the tracks. UP, which owns the tracks, had gates parallel to Rice Ave and very close to both sides of the track making the opening the truck driver drove through very narrow......I doubt I could get a truck and trailer through that opening.

 

I'll not try and figure out the 'why' but I'd hate to have taken the lawyers job.

 

The DA held off pressing charges Thursday pending the outcome of the Engineers health. The engineer had two very bad days and they feared he may pass.......and the DA said that would mean very different charges.

 

The truck drivers son was on TV telling it was all just a mistake......doing what he needed to do.....but looking at the area.....HOW could someone maneuver heavy duty truck and trailer through a tiny opening??

Lots of coverage on this in the LA Times with an separate article on how structural design improvements to the cars helped reduce injuries.

Of interest to me was that the engine was pushing and not pulling the cars -- if I read that right. With the engineer in the front of the forward car. Also that there is concern about this practice.

 

Aside from the cost, does it make any physical sense to have "cow catcher" feature on the front of modern engines that would push the vehicle off the track and reduce the chance of a derailment? Or are there other factors that make this unrealistic?

The plow blade or pilot on the front of a locomotive would ordinarily accomplish the same thing as would a "cow catcher" on an old steam locomotive.

I'm not sure why this feature has not been added to cab control cars such as the Metrolink car that struck the truck but, suspect it has to do with the weight of the pilot and the structural framework of the cab control car. 

In terms of always leading with a locomotive, I'd say the costs associated with having to turn the entire train after completion of every run as well environmental and health concerns relating to diesel exhaust in the terminus station downtown would rule that out.  Most commuter agency's position the locomotive so that passengers will not have to walk past it when getting on or off their train at a downtown station.

Curt

That's why I suggested using a retired locomotive that was not running as a cab car.  heck, it doesn't even need to have a prime mover in it. The MU cables should already all be there.  All you need is a power cord from the train to power the headlight, radio, air conditioning etc. for the engineer.  I believe the Long Island RR did exactly this for years with old ALCO FAs or some such thing.

Bob:

 

I can recollect seeing photos of Long Island trains with an FA on either end exactly as you mention. 

 

As with my earlier comment relating to cost; I suspect using a de-engined locomotive would be considered in the same light as would turning the consist.  This would amount to a non-revenue piece of equipment that be purchased or retained on a roster and maintained. 

 

I realize the public will say "safety - no matter what it costs" but, most transit agency's are already strapped for funds and adding a non-revenue piece of equipment to every trainset would place an even greater strain on already tight budgets.  Too, given how relatively infrequent commuter train collisions are with vehicles, I would question the cost / benefit of the extra equipment.

 

Curt

The LIRR had quite a few FAs for use in push-pull service in the late 60s-70s. I don't think that was the main reason for their use however. With new mu equipment arriving on the property the P-54s and etc for diesel use were worn out. By putting the FA on one end to provide power for heating/AC while using a regular diesel on the other end for power they could make use of this much newer equipment in nonelectric territory. They all did have a diesel engine in them.

The attached was taken in 1971.

Scotie

 

Push-Pull has been in use since the late 1950's, first pioneered by the Chicago & NorthWestern.

 

All of the lines in and out of Chicago use it (except for the Metra Electric and the South Shore which are interurban lines) in higher density surroundings than the Metrolink collision happened.  Plus many of these lines are double or triple track.  That's not to say grade crossing accidents don't happen here, but considering the density of train, vehicular and pedestrian traffic, the safety record is pretty good.

 

Probably the worst Chicago commuter collision that happened was on the old IC line (now Metra Electric) in 1972 and didn't even involve a grade crossing.  A set of new Highliner bi-level MU's ran into a set of the older, heavyweight MU's at the 27st station.  44 dead, 350 injured.

 

 

Rusty

On August 26, 1988 a westbound five car LIRR train with FA #606 leading hit a stuck lowboy with a construction machine at a grade crossing in Huntington.  Below is a photo from Newsday showing the wreck.  As you can see having the FA in front did not prevent the cars from jack-knifing.

 

 

Stuart

 

 

And notice the FA wound up in a similar orientation as the cab car in the Metrolink wreck: On its side, facing backwards.

 

Rusty

In the mid-nineties. Amtrak took some retired F-40s, pulled the prime movers, cut doors  in the sides and made them into cab-baggage cars (cabbage cars) for push pull service. Don't know if any are still in use.

This mornings LA local news still lists the engineer as in "grave condition."

They did indeed.  I believe most, if not all were used in and out of Chicago on regional trains.  I believe Amtrak also runs at least some of their Michigan service trains with a powered engine on both ends to avoid having to turn a locomotive.

 

I suspect the reason Amtrak modified the F40PH units into control cabs had more to do with their availability and the unavailability of genuine passenger car control cabs.  To my knowledge, the only control cabs Amtrak has had in the past were the original Metroliners on the Northeast Corridor.  I may be mistaken but, I believe those could be operated from either end of a train set.

 

Curt

Amtrak uses old de-motored F40's as control cabs on the push-pull "Cascades" trains between Portland-Seattle-Eugene. These Talgo trains have rather small lightweight cars.

 

From the LA Times:

  The Metrolink train was traveling 56 mph when it hit the truck, well below the 79-mph speed limit, Sumwalt said. A 31-year-old student engineer was operating the train at the time of the crash, he said.

  The engineer has 42 years of experience and is ranked No. 1 on the Metrolink seniority list, said Robert Sumwalt, a National Transportation Safety Board member.

 

Officials with the National Transportation Safety Board said preliminary information from the train’s data recorder shows its horn sounded 12 seconds before impact and that the throttle was moved into the idle position 11 seconds before the crash. The train’s emergency brakes were applied eight seconds before it hit the truck, they said.

The Metrolink train was traveling 56 mph when it hit the truck, well below the 79-mph speed limit,

The big question now is how did the driver of the truck mistake a railroad track for a major highway? Driver distraction. Sleep deprivation. Substance abuse.

 There was plenty of room to turn onto the tracks but how was this mistake made?

Douglas

There was a TV interview with a Cal-Train spokes person following the car / train crash that occurred the day before the Metro-Link crash.  He said that Cal-Train averages one crash per month between a vehicle and a train at a grade crossing.  This means to me that crashes between trains and vehicles at crossings are common.  Cal-Train operates commuter trains between San Francisco and San Jose in the SF Bay Area a distance of about 60 miles. So far I only know of the Feb. accident that was mentioned in another post. All Cal-Train trains are push-pull with a diesel at one end.     

 

He also said that Cal-Train trains hit pedestrians 2 to 3 times per month on average.  He said that most of these instances turned out to be suicides.  A few of the pedestrian accidents are inattentive people walking on the tracks.

 

An average of 47 people per year commit suicide by jumping from the Golden Gate Bridge.  Therefore, a train hitting people a couple of times per month does not seem to be far fetched.  Both statistics are very sad.  

 

Joe

 

 

Ironically, the old-style English "level crossing" barriers were more idiot-proof. They completely obstructed the tracks when opened to road traffic.

 

The English system shown above seems to be an excellent upgrade in heavy commuter zones.  I especially like the way it swings across the road and would tend to push any car on the track back.  It could also be wired to set a red signal if it couldn't be fully closed by being blocked by a car or something else.  I suppose that the English have solved the snow problem with these gates closing.    

 

It does have more moving parts than the typical drop arm.  This would make it more expensive to build and maintain.  

 

Joe

There are a lot of really stupid people in the country and a lot of them drive. Put a big angled blade on the front of the trains to knock the stupids off the track, hopefully, not derailing the train. Leave the wreck remains sitting there for a week or two for people to see.  We keep engineering and building things to compensate for stupid people- build them so the innocent victims survive. I have no sympathy for stupidity.

BUT, if you read the story, the LIRR train hit something three times as big and heavy as the Metrolink train did, and there were NO serious injuries. 

The engineer passed away this morning.

Very sad......Prayers to all involved.

Been watching KTLA this AM.....no mention of it.

Bet we see charges from DA now.

 Reports say there was a senior engineer and a younger engineer on board when the wreck happened. The younger engineer was at the controls.

 Do we know which one is deceased?

The big question now is how did the driver of the truck mistake a railroad track for a major highway? Driver distraction. Sleep deprivation. Substance abuse.

 

 

Douglas

Well it just happened so the media probably hasn't been informed yet. Glenn (the senior engineer) was #1 on the seniority roster. There were quite a few engineers that left BNSF years ago when Metrolink started up, so I know several of them and see them from time to time at the Depot in San Bernardino.

Yes.  The Engineer succumbed to his injuries.

 

He was Glenn Steele, who started as a Fireman on the Santa Fe at San Bernardino.  He was junior to me in seniority, but we worked together hostling engines at the roundhouse when we were low on the seniority roster.  As more men were hired, we were able to move on to switch engines, locals, and the extra board.  After we were promoted to Engineer, we were both forced assigned to Los Angeles on switch engines and road switchers for the better part of that year, and for half of the next and for a couple of months in the third.

 

He was always in a good mood, enjoyed playing drums in his garage, and I cannot recall ever hearing a complaint about anything or a bad word about anybody from him.  A decade later, he was my Fireman on passenger trains now and then, and was just as pleasant to work with.  He did not gripe.

 

He was a rock-solid railroader, and had an interest other than employment in trains.

 

When Amtrak hired its own operating crews in the 1980's, he left the Santa Fe and went with Amtrak.  Later, when Metrolink hired its own crews, he left Amtrak and went with Metrolink.  From time to time thereafter, we encountered each other on the railroad, and he always had an enthusiastic attitude about life.

 

This is a very sad ending to a good life.  We never know what's ahead for ourselves or those around us.  I would never have imagined that Glenn would be killed in a wreck.  May we all honor his memory by working at being nice when we could be grumpy.

 May we all honor his memory by working at being nice when we could be grumpy.

 

Ok will try,,, Nice post.

Thank you Tom......a nice bio

Thank you for the information and comments about his life. 

Douglas