Collision of Metrolink Passenger Train and Union Pacific Railroad Freight Train
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 9 фев 2015
- Collision of Southern California Regional Rail Authority (Metrolink) Passenger Train No. 111 and Union Pacific Railroad Freight Train No. LOF65-12
Chatsworth, California
September 12, 2008
DCA08MR009
Presented at the Public Hearing March 3-4, 2009
This two-dimensional animation displays the preaccident operations of Metrolink passenger train 111 and Union Pacific freight train LOF 65-12, which collided head on in a curve near Chatsworth, California, on September 12, 2008. This accident reconstruction is based on information obtained from the Metrolink Dispatch Center, wayside signal equipment, locomotive video and event recorders, an assessment of the physical damage to the track, and cell phone records. The accident occurred on track owned and maintained by Metrolink, and approximately 6 miles of track are shown in the animation. The accident occurred in daylight conditions; weather and visibility at the time of the accident are not depicted.
long story short don't text while driving even on the rails.
It was the Metrolink Enginner's Fault
because of Chatsworth we now have PTC which is mandatory on all lines. Had PTC been implemented during Chatsworth the Metrolink train would have received a forced emergency application before it SPADed the signal and hit the side of the UP train causing the accident.
Presumably both drivers were killed.
A SPAD, Signal Passed At Danger, as we call it over this side of the pond, caused by the METRO Driver being preoccupied with his texting on his phone.
After more than a few similar tragic events on the railways over this side of the pond, we have a new system, TPWS, (Train Protection and Warning System) that will apply the brakes of any train passing a red signal.
I hope your railroads have now developed an equivalent and are installing it.
The railroads are in the process of installing Positive Train Control (PTC) right now. The government wanted it up and running by the end of 2016 but the RR's had to ask for an extension because the cost is being footed by the RR's alone and they are behind in getting it installed.
Nope the crew of the UP train lived. They had to be extricated by LAFD members, but they survived with injuries.
Nope…cuz FREEDOM!
@@jaredkelly930 Thank God for that.
I was on that scene.
On September 12th, 2008 just before sunset, Metrolink Train 111 collided head on with Union Pacific Freight Train at 4:22 p.m. and 23 seconds just outside of Chatsworth, California. 25 were killed in the collision and 135 were injured the crash collision.
And ever since this day, train crew's are no longer allowed to have their phone's on while the train is in operation.
I still dont trust that, there needs to be something installed that automatically forces a train to stop at a red signal if the driver does not respond
Actually ... there has been such a rule for many years (certainly before 2008). Use of a cell phone was a clear violation.
Already done. PTC.
@@louisvilleslugger3979 Welcome to the UK, where we have this on our trains!
@@scottbuchanan8300 Thats great! I would love to come visit there someday!
With this video, though I am not a rail operator, there is one thing that sticks out like a sore thumb to my thinking. Signal post 4451 is on the approach side of the Chatsworth station. Is it possible that it could happen that an Engineer 'forgets' what signal they have passed, stops at the station, then proceeds, forgetting what the signal was that they just went past?
Would it be prudent to have a 'repeater' or 'slave' signal at the departure end of the platform, reminding the Engineer what the signal is for the section ahead, and that there is a red signal waiting for them? It has been my observation that many railways have the signalling set by distance between signals, and often have a station after a signal head.
Yes it would, most lines that host heavy passenger operations have modified their signal spacing so that a signal is visible from every station. For those that have not, there is a rule called Delay In Block specifically created to prevent crashes like this one. The rule states that if a train stops within a signal block before the next signal is visible, then that train must proceed at restricted speed prepared to stop at the next signal, regardless of what the previous signal was displaying.
@@amtrak706: Yes, we also had that rule at CSX back in the late 90s.
Also that all personal electronic devices had to be OFF while on duty.
KutWrite Makes sense, I think the delay in block rule was either created or at least greatly expanded after the 1996 Silver Spring, MD wreck which took place on CSX territory.
The driver should have seen the Stop signal and points set against him at CP Topanga, even if he had forgotten about the Approach signal.
British trains use a DRA (Driver Reminder Appliance) in this situation. After stopping at the station, driver activates the DRA, the train can't be moved in this state. The driver must deactivate the DRA in order to move the train, thus "reminding" them of the potential for the next signal to be red.
What kind of switch machine did the metrolink train trailed?
What kind of horn is that?
Full hearing link?
Last Text: "Sorry, can't make it... I'll be dead"
What about controllers/dispatchers? Wasn't train positions in general be visible to them back then?
Didn’t the metro-link train engineer send the message?
sapper - not new :P Aussie trains have physical signal stops .. little moving bits of metal that flip up on a red STOP and it immediatly physically flips a SPADding trains brake valve with no driver input at all.
Signals WERE set so that the signals were max speed stopping distance away from a potential crash.
Sydney almost have had NO accidents.
Now the 'highly intelligent' railway designers over here are going to shorten the distance between trains without taking speed / weight into consideration, AND puting the reliance on drivers reaction.
ie the driver who goes "oh er ive got er two seconds to press the stop before um" CRASH!!
I've been using trains for 40 years. This year I will not be trusting them to carry me and more as soon as the new design goes in.
If anyone knows, I'm curious about this: At that last red signal, the Metrolink would have had to cross a switch already set for the on coming Union Pacific train to enter the siding. So how does that not cause a derailleur or at the very least and auto emergency breaking?
The turnouts (switches or "points") are designed to permit trains running in the opposite direction to the turnout to 'run through' a diversion turnout setting without causing a derailment.
As for an alarm system initiating emergency braking. That's a good point. Unfortunately, unlike European railways where train movements are (for the most part) strictly controlled, were a train to pass a stop signal, an automated emergency braking application (which cannot be over-ridden by the engineer) would be initiated, North American railways are not as automated.
I suspect ownership of the rail infrastructure has a lot to do with it. In Europe, most railway infrastructure is owned by national governments where road safety takes precedence over cost factors. In North America, most rail infrastructure is owned by the railroad companies themselves, where the bottom line (profit) take precedence over road safety - not that NA RR companies are 'unsafe,' they're as safe as the regulations governing them compel them to be safe.
They're unlikely to spend money to improve safety (by employing automated train control systems) if the regulations don't require it.
Excellent post!
Another factor is that in Europe, especially in the UK, the Unions are very quick to take action should a dangerous situation arise.
Whilst the are times when the UK's transport unions can be a pain in the arse, they have, by and large, contributed greatly to improving safety.
Unions are why US rail doesn't have automated safety systems like that. They fight automation of train systems as ultimately the whole system could be automated and they'd all be out of jobs.
Even without going to full blown automation, there are a lot of systems that can be installed to help the Loco Driver do his/her job safely and over here in the UK the Unions assist that process.
Absolutely like even just an itinerary schedule to already have a plan as to what other trains are using the same track and when to expect to stop and let them pass . I can't believe they're just flying blind and relying ENTIRELY on signals a system developed in the1800's !
Good morning to all from SE Louisiana 27 Apr 22.
Dude, couldn't they retrofit trains with GPS's linked to BIG lights inside the cabin that correspond to the upcoming signal, and say the distance to the upcoming signal below on a screen?
It's called cab signals
Are these seriously the best graphics the NTSB could find? It looks like something you'd find on a classic vintage video game!
This was 2008 son........ vids were at a lower resolution back then....
and it never needs to be super high detail.... all you need is basic information, anything else is a waste...
The final report of this incident is a very interesting read: www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/RAR1001.pdf
Amazing that the engineer was planning on letting a "railfan" run the train later that day, and had already let one do so earlier in the week.
Is there no PZB or Indusi System in the USA that automatically forces a train to stop at a red signal if the driver does not respond?
Railroads are in the process of installing this technology (around 30% done by now) but it's been a long drawn out battle. For years there had been talk of requiring the railroads to install it, but they didn't want to spend the money so they lobbied hard against it. But they new the regulations were coming sooner or later. This accident finally gave the railroad administration the ammo they needed to enforce it and the railroads were given until the end of 2015. That deadline came and went and now its been pushed back to the end of 2018.
At least he can say he died from texting
distracted driving. They were both texting while driving.
All 3 Locomotive and both train Metrolink 855 Union Pacific 8485,8491 damage beyond repair and scrapped
In laymen terms..was he supposed to stop at th at red signal before the curve? Its seems he totally missed it!!
Yes stop at the red
This is the chatsworth disaster
I was there right after this happened in case my CERT team was called out (it wasn't). About all I could do is let a couple frantic family members use my mobile phone since many people didn't have them in 2008. Don't know how it turned out for them. Another informative video is by a plaintiff's law firm: ruclips.net/video/Tt0VNqp8EgY/видео.html
Thanks for that other link. That had a lot more interesting information.
Positive train control and fra regulations updates followed this incident this is why you never text and drive
So first flashing 🟡 that means slow right Next solid 🟡 that would mean next signal 🚦 is the solid Red 🟥 so they should of stopped before the curve union Pacific would of Gone to the siding and Metrolink would of continued if they Saw the signal lights. Is that how the was supposed to work? If I understand the video correctly. This could of been avoided if they watched the signals instead of texting. I remember this it was a terrible crash.
seconds from disaster did a episode on this one! they told a complete version of what happened! it said the driver of the metro link fell asleep! before the collision!
Did they? I don't remember that episode.
Upon further searching, you've confused the Numb3rs episode "Thirty-Six Hours" with the Chatsworth disaster. Two weeks after the episode was filmed, the Chatsworth crash occurred. The episode was revised to include episodic events that occurred after the end of the story arc.
Good point rather it's a car, bus, train, or plane don't Text and operate machinery u might miss a 🛑 signal 🚦
Didn't the metro has cab signals?
Mad Hatter not sure but if he did he’d probably ignore those too
All this because the Metrolink engineer was texting a foamer.
This is why railroads don't hire foamers.
BTW I just heard the 911 call... UNBELIEVABLE.. "
"So sir your in a train? yes Where did it crash?"
I don't know - just near the tunnel umm we just left Chatsworth station.
"Sir Im gonna need an intersection"
I'm in a train I just left Chatsworth station
This happens in Sydney as well.
"000 what is the nature of the call?"
"I am at Central station, someones just collapsed and ~"
"Central station you say Sir? what is the address please."
"I'm at the S T A T I O N called Central"
"Sorry but I nees a intersection or crossroad"
It's a dratted computer they are using. Why cannot the computer allow major landmarks to be entered in.. ?!?!?!
ie "Sydney Harbout bridge" (Bet you don'/t know what road it is ???)
or what about ..
"I'm in the Blue mountains reporting a bush fire."
"Sir what is your nearest street."
"Um in the Blue Mountains??"
well, I dont know a whole lot about Australia but the Blue mountains is a rather large area.
Taking 1-2 mins to determine an exact location is better than giving a broad location and having 1st responders run around like headless chickens for 10-15 mins. In moments of uncertainty it is better to take maybe a few more seconds and create clarity, instead of more chaos. It is deliberate.
@@peterf.229 yep :) with no cross roads, and mostly, no formal paths.
The best you can do is give a GPS if you have one.
Best the Emergency services could have done in BOTH cases is immediately pass the call to a LOCAL emergency station, who would know exactly where the person was describing.
@Jo Ubi respect your reply, however most people know that the station name and they are in shock, and cannot see any details.
What I think would be best is Internet Maps can find stations and the emergency service and train companys website should have a lookup.
BUT I had to report a passenger on a train, I gave the carriage numberplate to Sydney Trains and they asked me so was it an Oscar carriage? what time did the train leave? how would I know what type of carriage it was and it doesn't matter..
They should have been able to lookup the carriage numberplate, and find what train / destinations it was on, and times.
Hey, all you insurance boys! Are you paying attention to this shit? How much do you lose when this happens?
This is why we MUST have the PTC computer controlled ATCS and no human allowed to override the computer.
Humans will blow through red signals.
The computer will not
Incredible that a nation placing men on the moon 40 years earlier have developed and use better safety systems today.
4:52 Message Received: “I would like that too. We already need to meet 796. That would be best.”
The Metrolink train should’ve derailed going against that switch am I right?!? I thought that’s what usually happens when a train goes against the switch
No, not necessarily. The wheel flanges can push the switch points out of the way. I don't know US practice but on some lines this is a design feature at crossing loops.
The problem with loops is the two rails are closing each end so yeah the train can push the points around.
There is a design called a derailer point - bacically one rail has a point blade that derails the train if it is open, but then the low power electric signal would have to somehow push the derailer closed which is still VERY heavy.
Australia uses kilometres of pipes of compressed air to move the points along entire parts of the line, and unfortunately, I think America has a lot of very long lines and could not do that.
No, he just split that switch. Something like a "slap and stay" switch.
G'day,
Yay Team..!
So, the "Miracle of Modern Telecommunications", in the form of Mobile Phone Short Message Servicing, has succeeded in defeating the 1950's Vintage Electro-Mechanically-switched Visual-Signals with Radio-Communications...; because the "Engineer" (Train-Driver) was "too busy" playing around with their Mobile Phone to have been bothered to call out their passage past a Yellow Signal, let alone stop theTrain in observance of the subsequently ignored Red Signal at the Control-Point.
Change is not always Progress.
;-p
Ciao !
yep checck out y reply.. :(
This is why PTC should have been mandated so many years ago. It's sad that people had to die for the railroads to implement it.
Dhidd they deids ¿ ¿ ¿
train operators shouldn't be allowed to have phones in the cabs
They aren't, that's an offense that can see you fired.
the fact that this happens after 9/11 makes it more scary
This was 7 years later, and not even on 9/11 either.
@@NoahDoane I mean the day this happened on 9/12
When you're a government agency with millions and millions invested in cutting edge technology and you upload your video in 240p. Really NTSB? Really?
Its a 2008 crash. Likely the video was originally in standard def.
Check out the USCSB RUclips channel. US Chemical Safety Board. They post the most incredible state of the art 3D animated recreations of postmortem accident investigations you’ve ever seen, and they’re incredibly entertaining too!
Hundreds of people binge watch and subscribe to notifications and rush to view new CSB videos, I’m dead serious.
@@Syclone0044: Aye, the USCSB make amazing videos, which appeal to so many people. I was actually binge-watching their investigation videos (so well made, I must repeat!) and was wondering whether the NTSB had a channel.
As an Operation Lifesaver presenter, I have ridden in the locomotive through this area several times.
Sad that the engineers could not see each others trains and stop or sufficiently slow before collision.
If one were to look, I bet each train could have been seen by the other in the distance.No excuse for the Metrolink engineer gayllowing himself to be distracted by the boys and failing to see the signals.
Only visible to each other for 5 seconds before impact.
cple1 Incorrect. One can see the train to the west and west train could have seen the east train. But could not discern which track the east train was on. Sad that no one bothered to look. But understandable.
Inexcuseable thathe Metrolink engineer gayllowed himself to be distracted and failed to obey the signals.
Robert Gift it's what was said in the video. If I remember right this was on a curve and the UP train was coming out from under an over pass.
cple1 I know the route. Sad that each engineer did not notice the other's train moving north. Such would indicate thathey would collide. They collided athe northeast curve north of CP Topanga.
Northwest of Denver, Colorado, freight trains collided under US36. Neither could see the other until they met on a curve under the highway.
Had either been further ahead, they would have been in an open area where they could have seen one another.
Anthony Smith _"allowing himself...!"_
My understanding is that the Metrolink engineer was homosexual. He gayllowed himself to be distracted byoung boy train enthusiasts.
No excuse for failing to read and understand his signals.