UlrichAll I've stated is that it might be worthwhile for the investigation to look at everything...including the conductor who tested postive.
What are you asking for? Apparently it was the investigation that looked at the conductor and tested him for drugs. What more do you want?
Ulrich It seems to be a pervasive problem among drivers as well...I frequently see people in their cars and in fast moving traffic talking on their cell phones...text messaging.. and even working on their laptops. It's not just doughnuts and coffee anymore.. that's a given now. I hate to say it...but I think we need a law.
It seems to be a pervasive problem among drivers as well...I frequently see people in their cars and in fast moving traffic talking on their cell phones...text messaging.. and even working on their laptops. It's not just doughnuts and coffee anymore.. that's a given now. I hate to say it...but I think we need a law.
I agree. I've been in two accidents with cell phone drivers. In the first, it was partly my fault for loosing control and going into a sideways skid, but had the other driver not been on his phone, I wouldn't have gotten hit. In the other case, I'd just stopped at a red light when a cell phone driver slid on the wet pavement under the back end of my Jeep.
Over the past few years, I've seen people doing just about everything while driving: talking on the phone, reading, eating, putting on makeup, etc. Anymore, people don't realize that when they're at the wheel, they need to pay attention.
The same is true for the people operating our railroads. When you're controlling that much tonnage and have hundreds of lives in your hands, you need to pay attention to what you're doing, not sending text messages or calling a bunch of kids or letting them in the cab at the controls. It's one thing when a railfan is authorized to be in the cab to observe. It's totally irresponsible and unprofessional to allow them at the controls that should only be touched by professionals.
Also, I refuse to call the teenagers involved "railfans". To me, a railfan observes railroad operations and does not interfere. These kids were repeatedly texting this guy when they knew he was at work as well as going for unauthorized cab rides, working with this guy to sneak into the cab. I realize that they're young, but they are still old enough to know better.
Kevin
http://chatanuga.org/RailPage.html
http://chatanuga.org/WLMR.html
I'm giving the investigation credit...I'm arguing with the folks who seem to think the pothead should be disregarded as not important to the investigation.
I think that anyone who wants to really understand what happened should read the transcript of the text messages. They are rather hard to read because they are cryptic and somewhat redacted. But there are a lot of them, and together, they produce a larger overall picture of what was going on. Maybe it’s just me, but I get a kind of creepy feeling from reading them.
The popular premise put forth as the cause of this wreck has been the general distraction of text messaging. We all know that text messaging can be distracting to another task. But like cell phone use, the distraction of text messaging is twofold. One aspect is the physical manipulation of the device, and the other is the engaging nature of the message. The latter can be a distraction even with a direct conversation with another person in your vehicle. Knowing this, and upon hearing of the incredible number of text messages sent and received by Sanchez, I wondered what the messages were about. How engaging they were they?
Sanchez was planning to let a railfan run the locomotive, and the two had exchanged many text messages planning the event, expressing unusual excitement about the illegal trip and apprehension about their fear of getting caught. This texting had continued over several days, and it is clear that the communication was highly emotional with suspense building as the day planned for the illegal act drew near.
At the moment of the 4:22 PM crash, this railfan-locomotive-running event was to occur only about 3 hours later. Suspense and apprehension were peaking. Sanchez and the railfan were exchanging text messages about it right up until 22 seconds before impact with the UP freight.
Here is the transcript. All of the text messages are shown in pages 18-63, and they cover the dates of 9/5-9/12/2008.
http://www.ntsb.gov/Dockets/Railroad/DCA08MR009/414046.pdf
From the link:
[Engineer to person A]: “I’m gonna do all the radio talkin’...ur gonna run the locomotive & I’m gonna tell u how to do it. “
Bucyrus I think that anyone who wants to really understand what happened should read the transcript of the text messages. They are rather hard to read because they are cryptic and somewhat redacted. But there are a lot of them, and together, they produce a larger overall picture of what was going on. Maybe it’s just me, but I get a kind of creepy feeling from reading them.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Ulrich I'm giving the investigation credit...I'm arguing with the folks who seem to think the pothead should be disregarded as not important to the investigation.
The outcome would not have been any different...but since the whole point of the investigation is to ultimately prevent further incidents then it becomes important.
To use another example..lets say that an airplane crashes and that subsequent investigation discovers that the pilot was in error. And oh by the way..a nondetonated bomb was found on board. Should the bomb be excluded from any investigation? Your argument states YES...as the plane crashed due to pilot error and not the bomb.
Bucyrus UlrichAll I've stated is that it might be worthwhile for the investigation to look at everything...including the conductor who tested postive. What are you asking for? Apparently it was the investigation that looked at the conductor and tested him for drugs. What more do you want?
not asking for anything.. just arguing a point..
chatanugaAlso, I refuse to call the teenagers involved "railfans". To me, a railfan observes railroad operations and does not interfere. These kids were repeatedly texting this guy when they knew he was at work as well as going for unauthorized cab rides, working with this guy to sneak into the cab. I realize that they're young, but they are still old enough to know better.
Thank you, Kevin, for recognizing that not all teen railfans are like that! I'm a teen railfan (although I would not call myself a foamer), and I definitely have a whole lot of respect for the industry and the men and women who are part of it. I try not to block platforms when railfanning or cause any worry to the train crews, and there's no way I'd conspire with even a member of the train crew to operate a train! But I don't know if the general public will recognise that...
Ulrich Bucyrus UlrichAll I've stated is that it might be worthwhile for the investigation to look at everything...including the conductor who tested postive. What are you asking for? Apparently it was the investigation that looked at the conductor and tested him for drugs. What more do you want? not asking for anything.. just arguing a point..
I think you are clouding the issue. In an earlier post on page 1, you said:
“If he [the engineer] were interested in his job he would have been interested in following the rules, and he would have been interested in noticing signals on his route. And the UP conductor would also have shown some interest in follwoing the safety rules of his employer. I've stated nothing unfair here...these dodos are responsible for what happened. Period. "
(My emphasis added)
On this page, you said:
“I'm giving the investigation credit...I'm arguing with the folks who seem to think the pothead should be disregarded as not important to the investigation.”
Nobody has said that the investigation should have disregarded the conductor or the result of his drug test. Nobody said that was not important. But you began your argument by claiming that the engineer and the conductor were responsible for the wreck. That is the point on which I disagree with you.
You're right...the conductor is not responsible for the accident...although he is still a dodo for testing postive.
Ulrich You're right...the conductor is not responsible for the accident...although he is still a dodo for testing postive.
OK, I guess we got that issue put to bed. Read the text messages.
Murphy Siding I don't know if we're talking about the same creepy feeling, but reading the transcripts made me think of Peter Graves, as the pilot in the movie Airplane! "Bobby- do you like gladiator movies?"
I don't know if we're talking about the same creepy feeling, but reading the transcripts made me think of Peter Graves, as the pilot in the movie Airplane! "Bobby- do you like gladiator movies?"
I think you are correct regarding Sanchez's motivation, and I'll be interested to see if the final report deals with the topic.
Good point Mr Cummings, and I don't mean to sound heartless or heavy handed. I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not...
That would be my take on it. I think there were issues.
If a rail employee admits his addiction, then yes, the railroads will send that person to rehab (for both drugs and alcohol). They can return to work when they successfully complete the program. Now if they get caught pissing hot again, then yes, they will be subject to termination.
I suspect the airlines may have similar setups.
UlrichGood point Mr Cummings, and I don't mean to sound heartless or heavy handed. I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not...
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
It is one thing to test positive in a random drug test...it is another thing to test positive after an accident killing 25 people and injuring 100 more. I also read that the UP conductor repeatedly used his phone on duty also. (As did railroad engineers and conductors around North America before this accident) I missed the Conductor's interview, and I see the Docket has now been taken down....I wanted to see if he was calling signals also per Metrolink rules. UP crews were good at it when the order first came out after the Glendale accident, but are complacent now.
You can see where this is all heading from this afternoon's statements:
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/03/ntsb-chair-blas.html
"Kathryn O'Leary Higgins noted that at least four serious violations of safety regulations have been exposed in the examination of the Sept. 12 head-on collision between a commuter train and a Union Pacific freight train: on-duty cellphone use, a failure to confirm signal colors, unauthorized ride-alongs and marijuana use by a train crew member."
This accident not only sped development of positive train control deployment, it might bankrupt/dissolve Metrolink in the process, and probably ding Union Pacific to some extent also.
My train videos - http://www.youtube.com/user/karldotcom
TrainManTy chatanuga Also, I refuse to call the teenagers involved "railfans". To me, a railfan observes railroad operations and does not interfere. These kids were repeatedly texting this guy when they knew he was at work as well as going for unauthorized cab rides, working with this guy to sneak into the cab. I realize that they're young, but they are still old enough to know better. Thank you, Kevin, for recognizing that not all teen railfans are like that! I'm a teen railfan (although I would not call myself a foamer), and I definitely have a whole lot of respect for the industry and the men and women who are part of it. I try not to block platforms when railfanning or cause any worry to the train crews, and there's no way I'd conspire with even a member of the train crew to operate a train! But I don't know if the general public will recognise that...
chatanuga Also, I refuse to call the teenagers involved "railfans". To me, a railfan observes railroad operations and does not interfere. These kids were repeatedly texting this guy when they knew he was at work as well as going for unauthorized cab rides, working with this guy to sneak into the cab. I realize that they're young, but they are still old enough to know better.
No problem, although I was referring to railfans in general, not just teenagers. Everytime I've read the articles on this crash and it's mentioned that the kids were "railfans", I cringe because it paints a bad image of all of us.
Ulrich I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not...
I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not...
Why?
And I thought I was the only one getting a creepy feeling. The ones you quoted especially gave me that feeling, and it wasn't just the illegal activity they were planning. I'm not a parent, but those messages give me an impression that there was more to it.
It's my understanding that the teens were the ones to bring to light the cell phone conversations.
Would the NTSB have ever known if the teens kept slient? As a general rule would the NTSB look for cell phone records if no phone was found at the site? Would this accident have been blamed on fatique or something else? I also wonder if the teens regret that they revealed the cell phone factor?
p.s. I too was getting a creepy feeling.
I couldn't get the link for the text messages to work, but from what was quoted it seems to add a bit different light to the story. I saw something on the news and had to check to see if we were discussing this subject here.
zardoz Ulrich I'm a little surprised, however, to hear that the UP conductor was in rehab. And I wonder if the same would be extended to an airline pilot. I really hope not... Why?
I fly alot and would hope that they are held to a higher standard. I just don't buy into everythng being "just a mistake" .
trainfan1221 I couldn't get the link for the text messages to work, but from what was quoted it seems to add a bit different light to the story. I saw something on the news and had to check to see if we were discussing this subject here.
The transcript link appears to have been taken down. I could not find it again, but maybe somebody else can. I saved the PDF, but I don’t know how to post it here, or if that would even be permissible. Here is the identification from sheet 1 of 67.
By Doug Brazy
UlrichHe was texting while he was supposed to be doing his job...how does that make him a railfan? And I too would say the industry is doing pretty good IF...
He was texting while he was supposed to be doing his job...how does that make him a railfan? And I too would say the industry is doing pretty good IF...
He texted with railfans about train activity. It does not necessarily make him a railfan but does make it likely that he was one.
Again, I ask why would two incidents 21 years apart, involving three people pique your interest?
"No soup for you!" - Yev Kassem (from Seinfeld)
I dunno..they just do.
Ulrich I dunno..they just do.
How sensitive are the drug tests? For instance, if someone went to a concert(Haven't been to one in years-I guess this might still be happening) didn't partake in pot smoking but was surrounded by the smoke of those who were. The concert goer is drug tested. Would the test be positive for drug use?
Jay
Murphy Siding Ulrich I dunno..they just do. Compare that to the 148 milion, billion, zillion times during that 21 years when railroaders did their jobs without a hitch, and the importance of those 2 times starts to diminish.
Sure...however thats a matter of perspective. If you lost a child, husband, or wife on that Amtrak train 21 years ago you might think otherwise. Likewise drunk driving isn't a serious problem until it's your kid..
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.