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

oh that was bad lol

If the engineer had survived it'd be his livelihood people are talking about. I know what Metrolink is saying, I just think when you're talking abt someone's career you owe it to them to come to a thoughtful, rather than hasty, decision. If the ntsb confirms it was all his fault, fine, then we know 100% that he screwed up.

This is why I would not ever want to be an engineer. I don't want a job where if I make a mistake, other people can die. Even the suicides who jump in front of the train sometimes. It's way too much responsibility and it's not a job everyone is comfortable doing. You need to be someone who can go do that every day and not let it get to you.

Way back in October of '72 there was fatal rear-ender on the IC Electric in Chicago. A few days into the press coverage the media found, concerning the lead train's flagman, "Several instances in his past record of "Failing to Protect the Extra Board." What this means of course that in the guy's 38 years on the IC he missed a phone call to go to work. They tried to make a bit of a hoo-hah out of it.

I was in the South Shore wreck at the Pennsy overhead in '93. I was on the head end, deadheading into Chicago for my assignment. I ended up in the hospital and the press wanted to speak to me. I hid under the covers and refused to speak. My father came to pick me up and we slowly walked out of the E-room pretending that it was my father just coming out from a routine visit. In the parking lot were all the news trucks with their cameras, and the reporters doing their make-up as nothing seemed to be going on. We got in the car, I put my uniform cap on,I rolled down the window and stuck my tongue out at one of them and we sped off.

I have no use for today's media and they way they handle any story.

concordgirl wrote:
They did release the content of one of the text messages, it was in one of the articles about the crash. If I remember correctly the engr said something like, "Ya, I'm just coming up on..." and then mentioned a location on his route.

My understanding of what you are probably referring to is that one of the kids who had been texting supposedly came into contact with a reporter from the local media. This reporter did a piece. There is no reason to believe that we have seen the complete text, nor any other texts which this kid or others may have made and received. This stuff will be the subject of a court order and I'm pretty sure that you're not likely to see any more "interviews" with the texter(s). We'll just have to wait and see.

Mitch wrote: I have no use for today's media and they way they handle any story.

What they're interested in 99.9999 % of the time is not the story, but what will make an attention grabbing "sound bite" that the station can play over and over again to draw viewers into their newscast for ratings. How many times have you seen a news "tease" that's the main event when it's finally air time ? It happens all the time - honest journalism is extremely rare - all smoke and mirrors. Exchange "sound bite" for "headline" for most papers.

IMO, the NTSB ought to request an autopsy on the engineer's remains. That should establish a definitive cause of death and shed light on whether a heart attack, stroke, diabetic coma, or any other health emergency could've contributed to the accident.

3rdrail wrote:

Mitch wrote: I have no use for today's media and they way they handle any story.

What they're interested in 99.9999 % of the time is not the story, but what will make an attention grabbing "sound bite" that the station can play over and over again to draw viewers into their newscast for ratings. How many times have you seen a news "tease" that's the main event when it's finally air time ? It happens all the time - honest journalism is extremely rare - all smoke and mirrors. Exchange "sound bite" for "headline" for most papers.

While I agree with the spirit of what you are saying, I do think the cbs2 story about the text messages was very good journalism. Regardless of what the investigation ultimately reveals, it certainly demands looking into that the engineer may have been text messaging. And given that there was apparent visual evidence of the text message, it was a solid story. (Again, not that it's true beyond doubt, but absolutely worth further investigation.) Had that reporter not found those two kids while doing that story right after the crash, perhaps that angle would have been entirely missed, especially since it seems they did not find a cell phone in the wreckage. No one else had that story. Would the kids or their families have come forward later in an NTSB investigation? Who knows.

concordgirl wrote:If the engineer had survived it'd be his livelihood people are talking about. I know what Metrolink is saying, I just think when you're talking abt someone's career you owe it to them to come to a thoughtful, rather than hasty, decision. If the ntsb confirms it was all his fault, fine, then we know 100% that he screwed up.

Yes! You are correct, c-girl. Thank you for saying that. Finally, a little empathy around here!

tarheelman - (There's got to be a good story behind that name !) An autopsy is a given in this case. I'm not familiar with California law, but I'm sure that if an autopsy isn't required under State or Federal law for a sudden death such as was the engineer's, than the State Medical Examiner's office would legally take temporary possession of the body for purposes of an autopsy. I personally am interested to see what a drug screen may show.

expresstrain - Your point is a good one, but good journalism ? My sense is that the reporter kind of fell into this story at a time when this kid was talking, and for whatever reason, wanted to give an interview. Watergate this was not. It is interesting to ponder on the question of whether or not the texting angle would have come out were it not for the kid to bring it up himself. Having said that, I tend to think that it would have, as the very nature of the collision would have investigators looking at possible distracting activities which might have taken the engineer's attention away from where it should have been. It seems highly likely that his phone records would be examined along with blood alcohol concentration, toxicology, perscriptions taken, recent medical history, cab area search for TV's, radios, ipods, etc. etc.

It would seem at this point to suggest that a text messaging episode probably was taking place, but it may very well turn out entirely different than it looks presently. The texting may have been one aspect of causation, entirely the cause, or none of the above.

I too believe it's premature to jump to conclusions about this accident. Though texting seems to be the frontrunner in possible scenarios, how could this engineer have been so distracted - for so long - that he'd ignore warnings from three signals, the last being a stop indication? Why did he fail to call the approach, then the red at CP Topanga?? And then make no effort to stop upon sight of the oncoming UP freight??? Could he have been unconscious or disoriented??

Also, how experienced was he on this rail line?? Is it common for Metrolink 111 and this UP freight to meet in this same location, at the same time, every day??? If yes, then I'd think it's much less likely it was due to negligence or distraction, because he'd be expecting to meet (and stop) for this freight, out of habit.

Distraction, medical condition, suicide, sabotage. Anything's possible at this point.

K

Distraction, medical condition, suicide, sabotage. Anything's possible at this point.

There you go! Good job! Now you're getting this whole accident investigation thing down.

Premature or not, it appears the speculation was at least partially correct. The NTSB has now stated the engineer was texting before the crash. They have NOT said it was the cause of the wreck - yet.

correct
http://tinyurl.com/3z72kv

As for Coroners report its due in a week or so but some test are probably already known to NTSB.
there are simple test to check someone for Heart attacks or strokes, as a certain enzyme is present in blood
same with diabetic problems , I'm sure coroner has tested blood real quick to rule that out.
if there was a smoking gun in medical report the NTSB would have been on it.

The regular meeting of the NTSB Official Junior Investigators will now come to order ....

Well as someone said earlier one of the reasons for a forum is to exchange ideas and yes, speculations. Nobody is trying to do the NTSB's job for them but when you have numerous published reports about texting, it becomes a valid topic of discussion.

I agree we won't know a final official answer until the report is released. That having been said, the teens specifically stated they received a text from that particular engineer one minute prior to the crash. If they are correct - and it seems easy to verify - then yes, it's quite possible the guy was distracted by texting.

Preliminary speculations on a cause can be proved very wrong. They can also be proved correct. The closer the NTSB gets, the more other factors are being ruled out. No, we should not convict the guy on what we are reading in the media. But we also should not belittle valid discussion of texting as a possible - and increasingly likely - cause.

There's a lot that can happen unexpectedly out there, and most engineers prolly have some experience with texting or taking a phone call from a conductor or radio call from a dispatcher while out on the job. That's why I question whether texting was 100% of the cause. In fact I highly doubt that it was. I have a feeling big accidents like this can't happen, in this day and age, without multiple things all going wrong at once. If it were just one or two things that went wrong, there are enough safeguards in place, and most engineers are good enough at what they do, for a disaster to be prevented.

Even if the guy were incapacitated, which was my first thought, I think eventually an alarm would go off and the train would slow down automatically.... isn't there some alarm that goes off in the cab when the train thinks the engineer might be unconscious? I forget how long it takes that to kick in, tho...