METROLINK DERAILMENT

[John Bredin]

This was brought up in one of the articles, and it was one of my immediate thoughts. This train was in push mode. Gotta wonder if there would have been a derailment at all if it was loco-first. Something about the weight and momentum of the loco pushing from behind is disconcerting.

Most Amtrak vs Vehicle accidents don't result in injuries or deaths onboard because they are loco-front.

As far as I know, every diesel-powered* Metra train bound for Chicago runs cab-car first in push mode, so the engine is away from the station for ventilation reasons. God knows Metra has lots of grade-crossing incidents but they rarely cause derailments, certainly not spectacular/catastrophic ones like the Metrolink incident.

*The Electric Line trains as EMUs are always cab-forward but not in push mode.

 

[user 1215]

From Google street view, the truck would have turned right onto the tracks where the silver tanker truck is.

At 5:30 in the morning, who know what who was thinking. There was a bit on CNN where they said that the gate crossings may have failed. From a different streetview than you depicted, the business right there on the corner has a solid brick/cinder wall. On the track side, it's only brick pylons with chainlink in between. If the whole fence was chain link, then there's a better probability that any driver could see an oncoming train.

 

[user 1215]

On Facebook and various other rail forums people have posted multiple examples where similar derailments happened in pull mode. The derailment is caused by parts of the crushed vehicle getting under the train and tossing it off the track. This can happen to almost anything. The locomotives while heavy, are not that immune to having a small piece of metal lifting their wheels off the track and onto dust.

Not saying it can't or doesn't happen. Just saying that when you have a heavy mass pushing a lighter mass, the probability of a derailment is greater, in my own opinion. I've seen where Amtrak locos have slammed into 18-wheelers and have only suffered front end damage without derailing. Or some derailments, but still upright.

 

[Ryan]

From Google street view, the truck would have turned right onto the tracks where the silver tanker truck is.

At 5:30 in the morning, who know what who was thinking. There was a bit on CNN where they said that the gate crossings may have failed. From a different streetview than you depicted, the business right there on the corner has a solid brick/cinder wall. On the track side, it's only brick pylons with chainlink in between. If the whole fence was chain link, then there's a better probability that any driver could see an oncoming train.

Reports are that the idiot turned down the tracks and was trying to drive on them before the train entered the picture, so visibility and the crossing gates aren't really relevant.

 

[spacecadet]

On Facebook and various other rail forums people have posted multiple examples where similar derailments happened in pull mode. The derailment is caused by parts of the crushed vehicle getting under the train and tossing it off the track.

I don't think that quite takes all the physics into account. I wish I could find it now (I'm sure it's still online, just don't remember how I found it) but I remember reading a study/test results a little while ago of the wheel loading on push/pull trains that were being considered for a particular line in the 1980's (it doesn't matter which line for the purposes of the physics). There's significantly more side to side wheel loading in push configuration, especially through turnouts, where speeds on the line needed to be reduced for trains in push configuration.

I have to believe that increased side loading would be even greater in a derailment where there's no longer even any track to keep the cars going straight. And in a derailment like this one, where something gets stuck under the front of the train, the first car is going to want to slow down suddenly while the locomotive in the rear just keeps pushing forward. That's going to force all the cars off to the side.

 

[Ryan]

By definition, if there's not track the train's going on the ground.

 

[jis]

I don't think that quite takes all the physics into account. I wish I could find it now (I'm sure it's still online, just don't remember how I found it) but I remember reading a study/test results a little while ago of the wheel loading on push/pull trains that were being considered for a particular line in the 1980's (it doesn't matter which line for the purposes of the physics). There's significantly more side to side wheel loading in push configuration, especially through turnouts, where speeds on the line needed to be reduced for trains in push configuration.

I would certainly like to see the analysis, since so far except for using the word Physics several times you have not presented any Physics of anything.
Me being a Physicist by training (I did a Masters in Nuclear Physics before switching over to Computer Science partly as a result of massive amount of computer driven mathematical modeling work I did as part of my masters thesis), I would love to see the actual Physics of it.

On the NEC where trains run in push mode at upto 125mph there are no special push mode restrictions on any switches on the main line tracks that I am aware of.

I have to believe that increased side loading would be even greater in a derailment where there's no longer even any track to keep the cars going straight. And in a derailment like this one, where something gets stuck under the front of the train, the first car is going to want to slow down suddenly while the locomotive in the rear just keeps pushing forward. That's going to force all the cars off to the side.

Side loading when there is no track? What exactly are you smoking dude? When there is no track, essentially all bets are off. And a locomotive that is under brake application is not pushing anything anymore than a car under brake application.
When the control connectivity from the control cab and air continuity in the brakes is lost due to train parting, how long do you suppose the engine continues to push? This is yet another myth that has been debunked many times before. Remember, the engineer was already applying brakes. Why do you believe that he'd be applying brakes and at the same time the locomotive would be in power pushing? A locomotive weighs about twice a car or a bit more, so in powered off mode it is no worse than two trailer cars and a bit. Seems like a bit of cognitive dissonance there, don;t you think?

 

[user 1215]

Even when the brakes are applied, force, in the form of momentum continues at a certain rate of deceleration. The side loads caused the track to break apart, which caused the derailment.

And there are high speed turnouts (switches), and they are tuned to very precise measurements. Most of the time, the through track can be made at speed, but I doubt ('cause I don't know) if any of the divergent switches on the NEC are rated to 125 MPH or higher.

P=mv. Momentum is equal to mass x velocity. All coaches and the engine are moving at the same rate. Suddenly, the train hits an obstruction. The lighter weight of the coaches mean that their momemtum (less mass x same velocity) would decelerate much faster than the locomotive (more mass x same velocity). If the coaches can't go anywhere because track is now missing, the heavy loco just keeps pushing anyway until the opposing forces (brakes, coaches, air drag, etc) stop it.

 

[jis]

How are we so certain that the side load caused anything to happen and there was no involvement of the broken parts of the vehicle taking the track apart. That is also what precisely happened in the accident on MNRR last week where there was no derailment, in spite of all the alleged "side load" being present presumably, but the third rail got pulled apart by the vehicle getting entangled in it.

The highest speed turnouts are 80mph on the NEC AFAIK. But I could be wrong.

On various HSR lines in Europe, including in Sweden there are 125mph diverging switches over which trains like the X-2000 operate in push mode.

The point to remember is that the loco is at most equivalent to two or three coaches in mass. So if instead of the loco there were three more cars it would have the same effect. Unless you claim that somehow the last three cars of the train would decelerate slower than the rest of the train for some reason (and then explain the reason), I don't follow your analysis at all.

 

[Bob Dylan]

I'm no scientist as the various Republican Presidential aspirants like to say, so I'll take the word of someone who is!

True what jis said!

 

[BCL]

I have a feeling the conductor was in the cab with the engineer. This often seems to happen in push mode of the cab is modern and large. It could also be usual press confusion.

On Metrolink, the Conductor is normally in the passenger part of the consist. He may pay a "visit" to the cab but, not often that I observe on my daily Metrolink commute on the Ventura County line. I'm sure you know that the media generally doesn't know the difference between engineer and conductor.

I've ridden on Capitol Corridor when I was in the lead car in push mode. I needed to clear a mistake with how my ticket was lifted, but before I got to one of the conductors, she ducked into the cab and stayed there for several minutes. The California cars often have the door open and the only thing warning people to stay out are flags set up on the seats.

Of course when pulling, how do you get in there from the inside?

 

[CHamilton]

Driver in Oxnard Metrolink crash had DUI, tracks reopened

 

[Blackwolf]

It looks like the engineer of the Metrolink train is not doing very well at all. He has suffered two cardiac arrests just this afternoon, but was successfully revived due to being in the ICU when those cardiac events occured. There are no reports on just what type of injuries he has, but the arrests don't make for a good prognosis. Hopefully he makes it through.

 

[TinCan782]

Driver in Oxnard Metrolink crash had DUI, tracks reopened

1998

 

[DesertRat]

According to Google news, the driver did have a DUI in 1998, and a traffic ticket in 2007. Hardly recent offenses. His lawyer claims he wasn't as far away from the site as news reported, and had attempted to contact people about the incident. We'll see, I guess.

Prayers for the poor engineer.

 

[user 1215]

I'm no scientist as the various Republican Presidential aspirants like to say, so I'll take the word of someone who is!

True what jis said!

Well, I'm just a dumb airplane engineer. What do I know?
I saw three coaches lying on their side in three places. They cannot be treated as a single mass. They certainly didn't land exactly in the same consist vector.

Maybe it makes more sense to say the cab was being pushed by the mass of an engine and three coaches, the next was being pushed by the mass of an engine and two coaches, etc.

I may be dumb but I ain't stupid.

 

[Blackwolf]

Some information about the operating crew aboard the Metrolink train. There were two engineers in the control cab, a student who was the train's operator and an instructor who was monitoring his performance.

These would both be Amtrak employees working under contract to Metrolink, would they not?

Also Thursday, the NTSB said that a 31-year-old student engineer was at the controls at the time of the crash. With him in the cab at the time was a 62-year-old engineer with 42 years' experience, the most senior employee in all of Metrolink.

Investigators revealed that the train was traveling 64 mph when the crew saw the truck. They sounded the horn 12 seconds before the crash, when they were about 1,100 feet from the truck. They applied the emergency brakes eight seconds before the crash, when they were about 750 feet from the truck.

The train was traveling 56 mph at the moment of impact.

 

[jis]

Quite a bit of detail in this article.

Seems to me, it might be a good idea to add two bright red arms that drop down across the railroad tracks when the road gates are open, so that people don't mistakenly turn onto railroad tracks. This might be a much cheaper solution to this problem than other more fancy ones. This is not the first time that someone has turned onto a railroad track at a railroad crossing due to loss of situational awareness.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

That could still reach a hundred thousand dollars per crossing. How about we just make driving licenses a lot harder to obtain and a lot easier to lose? Can't get much cheaper than that.

 

[jis]

That could still reach a hundred thousand dollars per crossing. How about we just make driving licenses a lot harder to obtain and a lot easier to lose? Can't get much cheaper than that.

That could cost a lot in time and money, since it will be a separate battle in each state as driver's license seems to be a state issue.
A very cheap first step could be placing bright double yellow lines along the threshold of the road surface across grade crossings. Something to clearly demarcate that one is not supposed to cross that threshold.

I am curious to see what NTSB concludes regarding the human factors issues.

 

[Bob Dylan]

I like jis' ideas ( as usual) about this subject! Its too easy to get in a vehicle and drive off in a fog, with or without a license, whether substance induced or just natural stipidity!

Blindly following a GPS, and especially driving ON Railroad tracks, is Darwinism in action! Unfortunately far to often innocent persons, including train crews and passengers, are injured or killed by the morons that do this!

Life in prison with no parole might be an appropriate sentence for those that pull these kind of things when injuries and death are involved!

Releasing the non- violent, first offense druggies would open up beds for these dangers to society that are more deserving of tough justice!

No pity for these people, just for those whom they traumatize, injure and kill with their carelessness!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

It seems as though most of the harm to train crew and passengers comes from commercial vehicles, even when it's simply a modified pickup truck. We can talk about life without parole if that makes us feel better but in many cases the driver is already maimed or dead by the time the crash is over so new punishments may need to be focused on the corporate owners and dispatchers of commercial vehicles in order to be truly effective. I think it would help to set these fines as a minimum percentage of the total value of the company so that even very large corporations would have an strong incentive to improve the safety of their operations by keeping schedules reasonable and weeding out careless drivers.

 

[Bob Dylan]

True that also Chris!

I was speaking of brain dead Car,SUV and Pickup Drivers that pull these moronic things and walk away planning to sue the Railroad for their trauma!

 

[Eric S]

The suggestions that Jis made to more clearly mark the side of the street as it crosses the railroad tracks sounds like a good idea. Obviously we can discuss and debate how to mark it (paint/thermoplastic tape, like other lane markings; gates; other ideas), but it could prove helpful. Wonder if it's ever been considered/suggested.

I am also in complete agreement that drivers, both commercial and otherwise, need to be held to much higher standards. Getting a driver's license ought to require passing a rigorous test, and I think there should be tests when licenses are renewed as well. And, holding companies accountable for the actions of their drivers should also be common practice.

Although it doesn't seem to have been a problem in this Metrolink situation, many other train-car/truck crashes have involved drivers who drove around gates or somehow otherwise failed to obey crossing signals. Camera enforcement should be standard at many crossings. (Of course, too many drivers have a sense of entitlement that they should be allowed to break traffic laws with impunity, so camera enforcement of speed limits and red lights is illegal in many places.)

 

[TinCan782]

That could still reach a hundred thousand dollars per crossing. How about we just make driving licenses a lot harder to obtain and a lot easier to lose? Can't get much cheaper than that.

That could cost a lot in time and money, since it will be a separate battle in each state as driver's license seems to be a state issue.
A very cheap first step could be placing bright double yellow lines along the threshold of the road surface across grade crossings. Something to clearly demarcate that one is not supposed to cross that threshold.

I am curious to see what NTSB concludes regarding the human factors issues.

In Chatsworth, California on Lassen Street just south of the Amtrak/Metrolink Station, there are yellow reflective raised pavement markers (aka "Botts Dots") that delineate the edges of the pavement at the grade crossing...both the right shoulder and the left by the center divider and include the space between the two tracks. Quite easily seen, at least at night. The street at this crossing is 2 lanes each direction with a center divider across the grade crossing. The rail line is two tracks at this point.