erikem Falcon48: rjemery: I find it frustrating that there is yet to appear no diagram to scale showing the location of the Chatsworth collision, signal towers, switches, station, etc. With all due respect, before you write something like this, why don;t you look to see what information is available? Note that rjemery's post was dated September 16, 2008. At the time wrote the post, there was very little info available. FWIW, I was taken aback when reading his post some hours ago, until I looked at the adte of the post. - Erik
Falcon48: rjemery: I find it frustrating that there is yet to appear no diagram to scale showing the location of the Chatsworth collision, signal towers, switches, station, etc. With all due respect, before you write something like this, why don;t you look to see what information is available?
rjemery: I find it frustrating that there is yet to appear no diagram to scale showing the location of the Chatsworth collision, signal towers, switches, station, etc.
I find it frustrating that there is yet to appear no diagram to scale showing the location of the Chatsworth collision, signal towers, switches, station, etc.
With all due respect, before you write something like this, why don;t you look to see what information is available?
Note that rjemery's post was dated September 16, 2008. At the time wrote the post, there was very little info available.
FWIW, I was taken aback when reading his post some hours ago, until I looked at the adte of the post.
- Erik
ERIK: I was the Poster who brought this thread back up. I did so as noted, I thought it would be inappropriate to start another Thread when all the information that was available was posted in the Thread from 2010. I simply thought it was of interest that the awards had been made and essentially blame established(?). As Noted on page 4 and my Post.
From that Post on this thread:
At the risk of having raised a ZOMBIE, I thought it might be appropriate to put a final note on this 2008 Chatsworth, California Metrolink/UPRR Crash.
THe TRAINS Newswire for July 15,2010 carries the following Item:
"Judge disburses $200 million to victims of Metrolink crash"
Falcon48 rjemery: I find it frustrating that there is yet to appear no diagram to scale showing the location of the Chatsworth collision, signal towers, switches, station, etc. With all due respect, before you write something like this, why don;t you look to see what information is available?
Report was approved and issued by NTSB on 21 January 2010.
http://www.ntsb.gov/doclib/reports/2010/RAR1001.pdf
rjemery I find it frustrating that there is yet to appear no diagram to scale showing the location of the Chatsworth collision, signal towers, switches, station, etc. There is also no information given on what safety and signal equipment was implemented trackside or in the respective locomotive cabs. No information yet on what kind of CTC was in operation and what alarms were sounded when the Metrolink train passed a red and drove through the points onto the single track porition of the line. No photo of the signal tower the Metrolink train apparently passed on a stop/red. It would be interesting to know what kind of signal it is, how many heads are displayed and how many lamps are in each head. All of the above should have become available by this time. Instead, it seems it is being kept under wraps. One shouldn't have to wait a year or more to learn any of these facts now.
There is also no information given on what safety and signal equipment was implemented trackside or in the respective locomotive cabs.
No information yet on what kind of CTC was in operation and what alarms were sounded when the Metrolink train passed a red and drove through the points onto the single track porition of the line.
No photo of the signal tower the Metrolink train apparently passed on a stop/red. It would be interesting to know what kind of signal it is, how many heads are displayed and how many lamps are in each head.
All of the above should have become available by this time. Instead, it seems it is being kept under wraps. One shouldn't have to wait a year or more to learn any of these facts now.
http://dms.ntsb.gov/pubdms/search/hitlist.cfm?docketID=46548&CFID=44122&CFTOKEN=81846384
FTA: "...LOS ANGELES — A Los Angeles County Superior Court judge yesterday divided up $200 million from Veolia Transportation to 122 victims of a 2008 crash between two trains, the Los Angeles Times has reported. The dollar value stems from a 1997 law that caps damages in rail accidents, and the judge said the money is inadequate to offset the suffering and death that resulted from the accident..."
FTA:"...“The list of woes, financial needs, and emotional devastation is simply inexplicable,” wrote Judge Peter Lichtman....He described a “Sophie’s choice,” referencing a movie in which a Holocaust victim is forced to choose which of her two children is to die.."
FTA:"...California’s Congressional delegation has appealed to Veolia to voluntarily pay more, while a bill in Congress would lift the 1997 cap. Neither has succeeded thus far..."
As an outsider one has to wonder if this is the final chapter in this event, or is it the start of a whole new round of legal challenges?
BigJim wrote: Hm. Only four seconds notice before the collision? I doubt I would have had time to blink, look again, realize what was about to happen, say "Oh, oh!!" and watch my life flash before me and still have enough time to recover and yank the brake valve. Still, once he saw what was about to happen, that had to have been a long and terrible four seconds.Actually, you would be surprised at how many decisions the mind can make in four seconds. I was in an almost somewhat similar situation requiring super fast thinking and got stopped before passing a red board that had dropped in my face. The speed at which the mind can think and react is really amazing...along with the stopping power of the passenger car braking system!!!
Hm. Only four seconds notice before the collision? I doubt I would have had time to blink, look again, realize what was about to happen, say "Oh, oh!!" and watch my life flash before me and still have enough time to recover and yank the brake valve. Still, once he saw what was about to happen, that had to have been a long and terrible four seconds.
Actually, you would be surprised at how many decisions the mind can make in four seconds. I was in an almost somewhat similar situation requiring super fast thinking and got stopped before passing a red board that had dropped in my face. The speed at which the mind can think and react is really amazing...along with the stopping power of the passenger car braking system!!!
Just watched this thing in psychology. Your brain actually takes things in faster so it appears everything is going slower. Thats why in situations of extreme stress you can make "quick" decisions.
Mechanical Department "No no that's fine shove that 20 pound set all around the yard... those shoes aren't hell and a half to change..."
The Missabe Road: Safety First
.
The NTSB said he had text messaged during his shift....not that he was texting during the accident. You believe everything you see on TV? I believe they were going to map out what text messages were sent and where the train was at that time, etc. Since they asked for a month's worth, they will also be able to track down any other folks and interview them as to his state of mind.
>>>ABC said this am that the engineer WAS TEXTING at the time of the accident so, IT aint no fault but his..NOT the signals not anything but an inattentive engineer...
The engineer told the conductor he had two hours of sleep at home during his break on the fateful day, and that is was the conductor told the NTSB investigator (in the ICU)
My train videos - http://www.youtube.com/user/karldotcom
Hi Jack,
I'm a Truck Driver, and in 2004, our hours of service, rules were changed, No more "split shifting", when we go on duty, we have 14 hours, on duty from the time we start, lunches, breaks and such do not extend our 14 hours, even if they are legally allowed to be logged "OFF DUTY" Start at 2:00 am, you are legal until 4:00 pm. We are allowed 2 more hours ON DUTY time than the RR's, but we are also required to have 10 hours off duty minimum between shifts. DOT, finally realised that 8 hours "OFF DUTY" does not equate to 8 hours of SLEEP.
Commercial Drivers are also limited to 70 hours MAX, in 8 consecquetive days (YES, I KNOW that log books are not always kept ACCURATELY, that is what the laws say) I have read/heard of some rails working extreme numbers of hours, by returning to duty as soon as possible, and never showing that magic number of 12 hours on duty, which would require more than the 8 hours minimally required between shifts. I am not sure what the Maximum is that could legally be worked, but I have heard of Rails working in excess of 100 hours/week.
I am not very familiar with the hours of service regulations governing Commercial Pilots, but I have heard stories, from that industry too, that are more than a little unsettling. The Transportation industry in general, no matter where a worker fits into it, is generally a rough job on the body, and the Family Life, with Fatigue a Major issue industry wide.
Doug
May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails
More details today:
The engineer was on the 4th (or 5th) day of a week of split shifts. He clocked in at 5:54 AM and worked the morning commute until 9:26 AM. Then he was off until 2 PM, during which break he was able to take a 2 hour nap.
How do they know it was 2 hours? Where was he sleeping? At home? In some hotel in LA?
He returned at 2 PM and worked until the accident. His shift was due to end at 9 PM.
9 PM to 6 AM between shifts is, indeed, 9 hours, more then the legally required 8 hours between shifts. But he has to travel to and from his home, about a one hour commute each way. That leaves 7 hours. And when does he eat and wash?
Even when I was young and active, such a schedule would have had me very sleepy by the end of the week.
Jack
edblysard wrote: Let's see if I have this straight...After 25 plus deaths, millions of dollars of damage, all the pain and suffering these people have gone through, you are "frustrated" that the NTSB and other agencies haven't given you enough information and photographs to play "what if" with?So what would make you happy, a few photos of the engineers corpse, burned and crushed...maybe a few close-ups of the crash post in the Metro locomotive bent backwards...maybe a photo of all the body bags stacked up in the morgue, so you can have a real accurate body count?What do you need all the info for?So you can recreate the wreck with your model trains, and maybe solve the "mystery" of what happened before the NTSB does? Here is a clue...the Metro Link engineer ran a red signal...people died...isn't that enough to amuse you and relieve your frustration? Here is another clue...I would bet the NTSB, the FRA, Metrolink and UP, along with the engineers widow and kids, and all the survivors, right about now could really care less if you are frustrated. Here is what is really frustrating...the bodies haven't even been released, are barely cold, and a bunch of morbid people start whining that they haven't been given all the details they feel they are entitled to, simply to satisfy their curiosity and "frustration". Not trying to pick on you personally, but folks need to find another hobby besides trying to second guess the "why" behind people's deaths.... rjemery wrote: I find it frustrating that there is yet to appear no diagram to scale showing the location of the Chatsworth collision, signal towers, switches, station, etc.There is also no information given on what safety and signal equipment was implemented trackside or in the respective locomotive cabs.No information yet on what kind of CTC was in operation and what alarms were sounded when the Metrolink train passed a red and drove through the points onto the single track porition of the line. No photo of the signal tower the Metrolink train apparently passed on a stop/red. It would be interesting to know what kind of signal it is, how many heads are displayed and how many lamps are in each head.All of the above should have become available by this time. Instead, it seems it is being kept under wraps. One shouldn't have to wait a year or more to learn any of these facts now.
Let's see if I have this straight...
After 25 plus deaths, millions of dollars of damage, all the pain and suffering these people have gone through, you are "frustrated" that the NTSB and other agencies haven't given you enough information and photographs to play "what if" with?
So what would make you happy, a few photos of the engineers corpse, burned and crushed...maybe a few close-ups of the crash post in the Metro locomotive bent backwards...maybe a photo of all the body bags stacked up in the morgue, so you can have a real accurate body count?
What do you need all the info for?
So you can recreate the wreck with your model trains, and maybe solve the "mystery" of what happened before the NTSB does?
Here is a clue...the Metro Link engineer ran a red signal...people died...isn't that enough to amuse you and relieve your frustration?
Here is another clue...I would bet the NTSB, the FRA, Metrolink and UP, along with the engineers widow and kids, and all the survivors, right about now could really care less if you are frustrated.
Here is what is really frustrating...the bodies haven't even been released, are barely cold, and a bunch of morbid people start whining that they haven't been given all the details they feel they are entitled to, simply to satisfy their curiosity and "frustration".
Not trying to pick on you personally, but folks need to find another hobby besides trying to second guess the "why" behind people's deaths....
rjemery wrote: I find it frustrating that there is yet to appear no diagram to scale showing the location of the Chatsworth collision, signal towers, switches, station, etc.There is also no information given on what safety and signal equipment was implemented trackside or in the respective locomotive cabs.No information yet on what kind of CTC was in operation and what alarms were sounded when the Metrolink train passed a red and drove through the points onto the single track porition of the line. No photo of the signal tower the Metrolink train apparently passed on a stop/red. It would be interesting to know what kind of signal it is, how many heads are displayed and how many lamps are in each head.All of the above should have become available by this time. Instead, it seems it is being kept under wraps. One shouldn't have to wait a year or more to learn any of these facts now.
YOU SAID IT BUDDY ! and thank you...ABC said this am that the engineer WAS TEXTING at the time of the accident so, IT aint no fault but his..NOT the signals not anything but an inattentive engineer...
http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2008-09/42434650.pdf
Los Angeles Times is linking the California Public Utilities Commission presentation on what happened last week....prior to their vote to ban all cell phone use on railroads within CA, except for emergencies and only if the train is stopped.
Also, FYI.....On this podcast of KFI AM 640 in Los Angeles, the father of one of the "teen railfan text messagers" calls in and talks with the hosts about how the KCBS interview came about....it is in the second half.....
http://a1135.g.akamai.net/f/1135/18227/1h/cchannel.download.akamai.com/18227/podcast/LOSANGELES-CA/KFI-AM/JK0917083P.mp3
Tyrell said that trains on the track would normally be traveling 55 mph to 79 mph. (quoted in LA Times - The speed limit was 40 mph....the closest 79 mph trackage is in Burbank 16 miles away)
http://freeinternetpress.com/story.php?sid=18319
--------
Metrolink said earlier Sunday that a dispatcher tried to warn the engineer of the commuter train that he was about to collide with a freight train but the call came too late. The dispatcher reached the conductor in the rear of the train, but by then it had already crashed into the oncoming Union Pacific, Metrolink officials said.
However, the NTSB contradicted Metrolink's report. Higgins said that the dispatcher noticed something was wrong, but before he could contact the train, the conductor - who survived - called in to report the wreck.
"There were no visual or aural alerts for the dispatcher," she said, adding that the precise sequence of events were still being worked out. (This might have been someone else in Metrolink releasing this faulty information....once again, another reason to clamp down on any info and just let the NTSB give the statements)
http://www.kcra.com/news/17470812/detail.html
----------------
-- From The Times' Esmeralda Bermudez: "Metrolink officials said an engineer on the Metrolink train that collided with a freight train ignored a signal telling him to stop. Had the engineer stopped, the accident would not have occurred, said Metrolink spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell." (I am not sure from this quote if it is the LA Times writer that made this statement or what...it isnt on the original site, which has been edited)
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-traincrash14-2008sep14,0,3660884.story
---------------------------------
Tyrrell denied a CBS2 news report that said the engineer had sent a text message to a group of teen train aficionados just before the fatal collision. The teens told the station they had set up a memorial site for the engineer at YouTube.
http://www.dailynews.com/news/ci_10456091
--------------------------------------
I think the one that made me upset the most was, while hearing LAFD just say they were still in rescue mode (rather than recovery mode)
Dr. Marc Eckstein, the fire department's medical director, also said early Saturday at least two more people are still trapped inside a passenger car but he isn't sure whether they are alive.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/news/ap/us_news/2008/Sep/13/commuter_train__freight_collide_in_los_angeles.html
Metrolink spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell said Saturday morning. "There is absolutely zero hope that anybody's alive in that train." "The train compartment has been completely checked for passengers The next step is to remove the locomotive and check underneath the locomotive where we believe there are more victims. No one can survive crushed under a locomotive
(This quote has been purged from the original Daily News article, but if you search this text it comes up in Google news cached...)
The problem is, that Metrolink was putting out these statements and they immediately were picked up worldwide, nearly with minutes via the wires.
Fast - That's the function of the "alerter", also mentioned in these threads.
The alerter tracks how long it's been since the engineer has performed any of several specified functions (throttle adjustment, brake, someone help me out here...)
If a certain time passes without any action by the engineer, a buzzer buzzes and a light flashes. If the engineer doesn't hit a reset switch in an appropriate amount of time, a service application of the brakes will automatically be made.
If the engineer is performing a lot of actions (ie switching), the alerter may not sound for quite a while.
If they are out on the road, essentially cruising, the alerter will be going off with some regularity.
I'm sure I'm missing some details here, but this should help your picture of what's going on.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
csxengineer98 wrote:dead man peddles are a thing of the past..they no longer exist on new power and have just been phased out of all old power.. the new alerter systems are much better and cant be jammed with a flag stick..csx engineer
dead man peddles are a thing of the past..they no longer exist on new power and have just been phased out of all old power.. the new alerter systems are much better and cant be jammed with a flag stick..
csx engineer
Sorry if this has been discussed already, but i just don't get one thing: If there are no dead man pedals on the locomotives anymore, and there are one-man crews operating those trains, then what happens if the engineer gets a.. heart attack for example? Falls asleep? Or something else that might prevent him from putting the train in emergency by himself?
Why not make a new dead mans pedal, which is active? I mean, you would have to press the pedal for let's say.. 30 seconds and then let go for 5 seconds, and then again 30 + 5 + 30 + 5..? And if you would fail to do so it would first alert you, and if there's no response in 10 seconds, then the train would go automatically in emergency. How would you fool a system like that by putting a brick on it?
I don't understand your energetic concern for all these details. Especially at such an early stage of the game and especially because it means so little to the general public that there is no great reason for it to appear in the mass media so quickly. Keeping things underwraps? I have heard more revealed about this accident more quickly and sooner than virtually anyother accidentI have ever read about. And a lot more freely flung speculation, too.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
karldotcom wrote: (Also, the Metrolink spokeswoman who resigned made a number wrong of statements in her press conferences early on....besides the "Our engineer ignored the red signal" statement that got her in hot water)
(Also, the Metrolink spokeswoman who resigned made a number wrong of statements in her press conferences early on....besides the "Our engineer ignored the red signal" statement that got her in hot water)
Do you have a link or more information to support this statement? By the way, your sentence itself seems erroneous. The actual quote by the Metrolink spokesperson was:
"We believe it was our engineer who failed to stop at the signal," said Metrolink spokeswoman Denise Tyrrell.
This statement does not say the engineer ignored the red signal, only saying that he failed to stop for it--which has been supported by all emerging evidence so far. A subtle difference for sure, but one that is most significant in this context. What wrong statements do you know of? I have tried digging through all the articles but can't really find anything more than this quote by her and one or two other statements. Jamie
CLICK HERE FOR THE CSX DIXIE LINE BLOG
The NTSB has held 3 nightly briefings in LA detailing their investigation. They were on cnn.com 2 nights, and local radio stations live.
Today NTSB just said "HUMAN CAUSED"...that everything else was ruled out.
http://topics.latimes.com/local/organizations/metrolink
This links all the LA Times stories....there are quite a number of them.
rjemery wrote > I have been searching the LA Times website for just such a diagram. While I have found some maps, the one of which you write I was not able to locate.
Jack >> It was in the Monday morning edition, 15 Sept 2008; on page A15, with a big story continued from the front page. I have it in front of me.rjemery >> It remains to be seen what the black box recorders on the locomotives will reveal. One key question is at what speed was the Metrolink train traveling through the approach signal(s) before it blew through the stop signal?
Jack > I heard on a news broadcast that Train 111 accelerated to 54 MPH upon leaving the Station. As it approached the switch controlling the siding, power reduction and braking slowed it to 42 MPH. This speed did not change until the collision. The UP train was at track speed and did not slow until going into emergancy 2 - 3 seconds before impact.
Another issue: crew fatigue. The Metrolink engineer was on a 11.5 hour split shift. He had worked 3 or 4 hours and then had time off in the middle of the day, when the Metrolink Ventura line largely shuts down. He is said to have had a 1.5 hour nap. Where? In conditions conducive to rest? Fatigue is also suspected of playing a part in the BNSF-Metrolink in Orange County a couple of years ago. The freight crew that was blamed then had been on duty a lot in the days leading up to the crash.
I will speculate a bit, based on the LA Times map. The Metrolink station is on the east side of a north-south stretch of track, and accessed from the main line. A siding of about 2.5 miles lies to the west of the main. This siding extends from just after De Soto Ave. to near Nashville St., about one mile north of the station. Just after the north siding switch the curve to the west begins, leading to the tunnel under Topanga Blvd.
Of the 4 signals visible to Train 111 between De Soto Ave. and the collision site, 3 are south of the station, with the 3rd being just before the station. From the 1st signal to the 3rd (and the station) is about 1.5 miles. The 4th is at the switch controlling the north end of the siding, one mile north of the station. So from the station to the collision site there is only one signal. Suppose that the engineer's schedule left him logy and tired. In the station, he is distracted by a text message. Even if he reads it and replies while standing in the station, his tiredness and the distraction might cause him to momentarily forget the signal aspect he has just passed on approaching the station. If operating correctly this signal should have been yellow. Forgetting this, instead of accelerating modestly and approaching the 4th signal slowly and stopping before it, he goes to track speed and blows through the 4th signal and the switch.
Maybe he missed the signal. Maybe he saw it way too late and froze on the controls as he blew the switch. It doesn't really matter. Once he reached the switch at 42 MPH, the collision was inevitable. I doubt that either train could have stopped in time, so short was the distance.
AntonioFP45 wrote:Regarding the earlier comment that the engineer would have been fired had he run through the red signal and stopped in time.If it's an engineer's 1st infraction and he has a clean record, would not the engineer be suspended, or demoted and have to attend retraining............not fired? Isn't that a Union/Management contract agreement?
Regarding the earlier comment that the engineer would have been fired had he run through the red signal and stopped in time.
If it's an engineer's 1st infraction and he has a clean record, would not the engineer be suspended, or demoted and have to attend retraining............not fired? Isn't that a Union/Management contract agreement?
"I like my Pullman Standards & Budds in Stainless Steel flavors, thank you!"
joesap1 wrote:I don't know of any "dead man controls" on locomotives. Most new units have an alerter that beeps every few minutes and will cause the engine to go into emergency if the alerter is not reset.This may turn out to be another case of an engineer zoning out due to fatigue or other factors. It is easy to doze or zone out, I've done it more than once.
I don't know of any "dead man controls" on locomotives. Most new units have an alerter that beeps every few minutes and will cause the engine to go into emergency if the alerter is not reset.
This may turn out to be another case of an engineer zoning out due to fatigue or other factors. It is easy to doze or zone out, I've done it more than once.
Randy Stahl wrote: Since I do not have the event recorder download I cannot and will not pass judgement . In my mind there is still a possibility that there was a mechanical or airbrake malfunction . One rule for investigating incidents as far as I'm concerned is is giving the crew the benfit of doubt until it has been proven beyong a shadow of doubt that all systems were functioning properly. To everyone who has never operated a locomotive for a living you need to sit back , shut your mouths and let the experts handle this one , contrary to your opinions we do know what we are doing .
Since I do not have the event recorder download I cannot and will not pass judgement . In my mind there is still a possibility that there was a mechanical or airbrake malfunction . One rule for investigating incidents as far as I'm concerned is is giving the crew the benfit of doubt until it has been proven beyong a shadow of doubt that all systems were functioning properly.
To everyone who has never operated a locomotive for a living you need to sit back , shut your mouths and let the experts handle this one , contrary to your opinions we do know what we are doing .
http://www.railwayage.com/breaking_news.shtml
NTSB reports the signal system was working as intended. UP train applied brakes. Metrolink train did not apply brakes.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
wabash1 wrote: rjemery wrote: Kevin C. Smith wrote:Still, if he was trying to do both at the same time (which, I admit, is yet to be established), I think that answers the riddle how to do both at once-he couldn't.On my cell phone, text messaging is a two handed operation. Where was the dead man's control located? Was it hand or foot operated? There was no need for the engineer to keep his hand on the throttle once the desired speed was reached? He didn't need to keep his hands on anything to keep the train moving?It is for those reasons that I do not accept the text messaging theory. Even if he had a cell phone on him, perhaps he did text message when the train was stopped at the Chatsworth station, but unlikely afterwards when the train was in motion.If he was text messaging and took his hands off the controls, it would have had to been the most reckless action of all time by any engineer anywhere. Which is why I assign a very low probability to this explanation as an outcome. Let me put it to you this way.... There is NO DEADMAN PEADLE OR THAT TYPE DEVISE ON TRAINS and again THERE IS NO DEADMAN PEADLE.... now you can set the throttle in notch 5 and make a sandwhich i can text on my phone 1 handed and still run a engine. its real simple and the train keeps going while it happens. there is times i get up out of the seat go around the controll stand and get a bottle of water and just streach. it like getting out of your car and walking around only you dont go as far.the conclusions you come up with is for someone who has never been in a engine also as far as running thru a switch you can get the same senario and same feeling yourself to feel what its like to run thru a switch just driving your car or truck, and even a bycicle. here is how its done get in car and drive over a leaf. did you feel that??? then why would the engineer. we feel jointed rail more so than a run thru switch. the man lost focus on running his train and paid dearly. and that im sorry for and the other victims of this tradgedy. but in no way should you deem it nessesary that you deserve or demand to have more information than what is out there, and trust me after the fatality accidents ive been in you are the least of these people concerns. just be happy with what has been afforded to you.
rjemery wrote: Kevin C. Smith wrote:Still, if he was trying to do both at the same time (which, I admit, is yet to be established), I think that answers the riddle how to do both at once-he couldn't.On my cell phone, text messaging is a two handed operation. Where was the dead man's control located? Was it hand or foot operated? There was no need for the engineer to keep his hand on the throttle once the desired speed was reached? He didn't need to keep his hands on anything to keep the train moving?It is for those reasons that I do not accept the text messaging theory. Even if he had a cell phone on him, perhaps he did text message when the train was stopped at the Chatsworth station, but unlikely afterwards when the train was in motion.If he was text messaging and took his hands off the controls, it would have had to been the most reckless action of all time by any engineer anywhere. Which is why I assign a very low probability to this explanation as an outcome.
Kevin C. Smith wrote:Still, if he was trying to do both at the same time (which, I admit, is yet to be established), I think that answers the riddle how to do both at once-he couldn't.
Let me put it to you this way.... There is NO DEADMAN PEADLE OR THAT TYPE DEVISE ON TRAINS and again THERE IS NO DEADMAN PEADLE.... now you can set the throttle in notch 5 and make a sandwhich i can text on my phone 1 handed and still run a engine. its real simple and the train keeps going while it happens. there is times i get up out of the seat go around the controll stand and get a bottle of water and just streach. it like getting out of your car and walking around only you dont go as far.the conclusions you come up with is for someone who has never been in a engine also as far as running thru a switch you can get the same senario and same feeling yourself to feel what its like to run thru a switch just driving your car or truck, and even a bycicle. here is how its done get in car and drive over a leaf. did you feel that??? then why would the engineer. we feel jointed rail more so than a run thru switch. the man lost focus on running his train and paid dearly. and that im sorry for and the other victims of this tradgedy. but in no way should you deem it nessesary that you deserve or demand to have more information than what is out there, and trust me after the fatality accidents ive been in you are the least of these people concerns. just be happy with what has been afforded to you.
Wabash , I am hoping you don't make a practice of running through switches .
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.