Trains.com

Metrolink accident and derailment in Oxnard, Ca Febuary 24, 2015

15456 views
129 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Sunday, March 1, 2015 10:28 AM

Thumbs UpThumbs Up NICE JOB !  KP    Bow   Fortituous Catch! Surprise

   

 

 


 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Sunday, March 1, 2015 10:11 AM

erikem

Hmmm, interesting idea and it makes sense. 

I agree - and it wouldn't take an special measures (beyond the equipment itself) to do so.  One set of gates goes down, the other goes up. All the circuitry is already in place - just a couple more relays. 

I would opine that the gates should somehow appear different, at least from the road side.  Maybe black and yellow vs red and white.  That way motorists would (hopefully) see them as different from crossing gates.  

They should also not contain any lights, except possibly facing oncoming trains as an indication that the gate is down.

A down side of this is crossing failures.  Currently, if crossing warning equipment fails, the worst that can happen to a train (other than hitting a vehicle) is having to stop and flag.  This option would completely block the crossing.

I should note that this should not be a universal installation.  It should be reserved for those places that have a history of people turning on to the tracks, which is going to be chiefly where there are parallel roads.  Your run-of-the-mill 90 degree road crossing shouldn't need it.  Anyone who turns onto the tracks there probably meant to.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • 4,612 posts
Posted by M636C on Sunday, March 1, 2015 3:59 AM

ORNHOO

In situations like this (Rail line parallel to busy road, intersection with cross street protected by crossing arms) I wonder if it would be useful to install crossing arms across the rail line. These would be triggered by the same track circuitry as the existing crossing gates, but work in the opposite direction (Road gate closes=Rail gate opens...train passes through...Road gate opens=Rail gate closes).

 

A number of British "Level Crossings" had gates which swung through 90 degrees, closing across the road for passage of a train and closing off the tracks when open for road traffic. In Britain the railways are generally fenced off for safety, and this feature of the crossing gates continued this idea.

On lesser used lines, these were manually operated, but on main lines they were power operated, but generally in a location where the gate operator could observe the road traffic. A heavy wood and steel gate is not as forgiving as a boom intended to break off on impact.

On the other hand, perhaps motorists would think twice about trying to beat a gate which could write off their vehicle, independent of the effect of any approaching train.

On double track lines there would have been four gates, each swinging through 90 degrees, but on single track lines, one gate each side would suffice.

The gates were painted white with a red circle in the centre with rai crossing markings.

A modern day equivalent could be a boom that swung through 90 degrees in a horizontal plane. Even this might discourage motorists from crossing at the last minute since the boom always remains at the closed height, greatly reducing the opportunity to avoid the boom. If four booms were used closing off the tracks in both directions and both lanes of the road (as appropriate) the chances of entering the crossing at the wrong time would be reduced.

There might be more boom impact incidents initially, but as people became familiar with the new arrangements, safety should be increased.

M636C

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Saturday, February 28, 2015 11:22 AM

Hmmm, interesting idea and it makes sense.

  • Member since
    November 2014
  • 250 posts
Posted by ORNHOO on Saturday, February 28, 2015 1:45 AM

In situations like this (Rail line parallel to busy road, intersection with cross street protected by crossing arms) I wonder if it would be useful to install crossing arms across the rail line. These would be triggered by the same track circuitry as the existing crossing gates, but work in the opposite direction (Road gate closes=Rail gate opens...train passes through...Road gate opens=Rail gate closes).

  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Saturday, February 28, 2015 12:01 AM

Speaking of the Devil

Concerning the Tuesday, February 24, 2015 train wreck that is the subject of this thread, the cab car that collided with the truck at 79 M.P.H. was Metrolink No. 645.  The locomotive pushing was Metrolink 870.

A little over a week earlier, on Sunday, February 15, 2015, both the SAME 870 (leading this time) and 645 (trailing) passed the State College Blvd. grade crossing (near Disneyland and where the California Angels play) in Anaheim on Metrolink’s Los Angeles-Oceanside line.

A heavy telephoto of the above train at the Anaheim stop, by Anaheim Stadium:  The overhead bridge is the north-south 57 Freeway.

K.P. was at the Anaheim grade crossing photographing the site of ANOTHER grade crossing collision that took place there over 49 years earlier.  How ironic that the train that I photographed (power and cab car) was involved in the Oxnard disaster of this thread just 9 days later!

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    December 2005
  • From: Cardiff, CA
  • 2,930 posts
Posted by erikem on Friday, February 27, 2015 11:18 PM

Buxtehude

Reuters reports that the driver was released from custody last night and was not charged with any crime.  The reason?  He hired a smart lawyer...

 

I'd wonder if it was his company had hired the "smart lawyer" as the company would likely be the deep pockets in the likely lawsuits.

  • Member since
    July 2010
  • From: Louisiana
  • 2,310 posts
Posted by Paul of Covington on Friday, February 27, 2015 10:36 PM

   If I may add a little more conjecture to the conjecturing going on ....

   It has been suggested that the driver may have been lost or confused in the dark when he turned onto the track.    I have come upon many intersections that are not easy to make out in the dark.   They are poorly lit, and you have headlights of other cars and bright lights in adjacent parking lots or brightly lit signs that make it hard to see the road.    Maybe a few bright streetlights might be helpful at this crossing.

_____________ 

  "A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Friday, February 27, 2015 3:42 PM

The driver apparently made a mistake and drove onto the tracks when he intended to turn onto a cross street.  He will  probably get a ticket for traffic violation.  He won't go to prison.  I assume that these news sources would have shouted it from the mountaintop if he were found to be drunk.  Thus he was not. 

He became stalled on the tracks and did exactly what Operation Lifesaver tells drivers to do.  They tell drivers to make no attempt to extricate your stalled vehicle.  Just leave it where it is and run for safety.  In this case, I think the driver even did make some attempt to extricate the vehicle and get it into the clear.  The driver did contact the police about the situation exactly as he was supposed to do.  

The distance from the crossing where the driver was found is a major RED HERRING.  The driver did exaclty what he was supposed to do. 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Friday, February 27, 2015 6:35 AM

English is not the drivers first language.  I read in one of the articles, he has trouble communicating in English.  He called his son to act as a interperter with his initial dealings with the police.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    March 2002
  • 9,265 posts
Posted by edblysard on Friday, February 27, 2015 5:34 AM

So you are suggesting that he is a bad person because he is excersizing his constitutional right to hire an attorney, and a "smart" one at that?

So he sould only be allowed to hire a dumb attorney, or he shouldn't have the right in the first place?

On ABC last night, on of the spokesmen for the PD stated the driver made first contact with them,not the other way around, he went looking for a cop.

What if he was doing what OLS teaches, abandon the car, walk in the direction of the train and call 911?

 

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    November 2011
  • 18 posts
Posted by Buxtehude on Friday, February 27, 2015 1:23 AM

Reuters reports that the driver was released from custody last night and was not charged with any crime.  The reason?  He hired a smart lawyer, and the Ventura Prosecutor's Office wanted to wait until the entire "complex" investigation finished before they acted one way or the other.  He was found many blocks away, talking on his cell phone, and it's acknowledged that he drove 80 feet down the tracks, but he is now free to go wherever he wishes.  I'm sure the folks who were injured can appreciate the careful concern of Ventura County.

It was also discovered that the signal equipment was working correctly, the train blew his horn 12 seconds before contact, and pulled his emergency brake 8 second before impact.

 

 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:59 PM

petitnj
I know the investigators mean well, but here we have a poor driver, lost in the dark on an unfamiliar road, who has no idea where he is. What is there to learn?

Barriers at the side of the road (a la guardrails) are obviously out - the trains still have to get through.  

Is there some visual or physical clue (aside from the total lack of road and the existence of railroad tracks) that could be introduced so those people who are blindly following their GPS, or are simply unfamiliar with the area, as this driver apparently was, would be made aware of their mistake before they're stuck on the rails?

That's really kind of a rhetorical question.  If such a reminder could be introduced, people would either ignore it or otherwise not heed it.

I'm not even sure that the crossing occupation sensor suggested in another thread would have made a difference, unless the vehicle was in the crossing before the train left the Oxnard station and started accelerating.  Sounds like it was already up to speed by the time it hit the curve.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    October 2001
  • From: US
  • 591 posts
Posted by petitnj on Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:48 PM

I know the investigators mean well, but here we have a poor driver, lost in the dark on an unfamiliar road, who has no idea where he is. What is there to learn? They will discover that trucks and trains don't mix. Hopefully, all of MetroRail's data is intact; otherwise, the prosecution will claim a cover up and put a bad driver back on the road. Drunk driving should end your driving career -- permanently. 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:47 PM

Blindfold

zardoz

What's up with all these derailments lately? It sure seems like the cars are causing so many problems. Since when did road vehicles become so dangerous to trains?

Perhaps the front end of locomotives and cabcars need a different design so these vehicles do not become involved with the train's running gear. The plow-shaped pilot used to be sufficient to deflect a struck object. I wonder what has changed lately; or is it just coincidence?

 

How do you up-armor a Jordan Spreader?

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:30 PM

I'm sure the accident details are available somewhere - and as Mike says, that information would be telling.

If all of the incidents share a common thread it would point to a singular shortcoming in the crossing, one that could likely be dealt with through some engineering process.

If, on the other hand, they're all different (to take the polar opposite situation), then that grade separation project (for which the price tag has likely doubled by now) is due.  It sounded like they had major plans for the entire area.

As for fog - I'm not sure about Oxnard, but a little further  up the coast fog is a way of life.  We called it "Vandenfog" at Vandenberg AFB.

I'm thinking the crossing is basically an accident waiting to happen, with plenty of possibilities for drivers to make mistakes.  Short of grade separation, I suspect there is no one (or few) solution.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Thursday, February 26, 2015 1:52 PM

blue streak 1
6 accidents in 7 years at this crossing.  Something needs changing. If vehicles are turnings too soon K rails would mostly stop that.  But there definitely needs other changes as well.

I'm finding that statement hard to agree with. Looking at the street view https://goo.gl/maps/3ZXjl confirms my recollection that this area is very flat with few visual obstructions. If the driver is turning right, how could he miss hitting the crossing gate and the beefy light bar mast? Right turn from the left lane?

Left unsaid by the generalizations about "six / twelve / many accidents have happened there" are other critical details such as driver impairment or fog. No reports of the latter but the former remains to be determined.

IMO since the driver has a valid CDL he probably has at least average driving skills; agricultural communities here are known for being 'demolition derbies' featuring unlicensed drivers and poorly maintained vehicles.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Thursday, February 26, 2015 10:15 AM
From the article, my emphasis in red:
“The location of the crash spotlighted a massive, costly backlog of overpass projects intended to separate rail and street traffic. The crossing near 5th and Rice, on a straight stretch of track where trains travel at top speeds, has a history of deadly accidents and is ranked among the state's two dozen most dangerous.
Federal Railroad Administration records show that since 1976, the crossing had 13 major accidents before Tuesday's crash, 11 of which involved vehicles that either stalled in the crossing or had become trapped by the gates.
Darren Kettle, executive director of the Ventura County Transportation Commission, said a $30-million to $35-million grade separation project has been proposed for the Rice Avenue crossing for 15 to 20 years.”
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Thursday, February 26, 2015 8:50 AM

BaltACD

 
A very telling fact if true.  6 accidents in 7 years at this crossing.  Something needs changing. If vehicles are turnings too soon K rails would mostly stop that.  But there definitely needs other changes as well.
Maybe the FHWA needs changing some standards for this type of crossing.
 
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:25 PM

BaltACD

Balt, I would check my keyboard if I were you. I do know what you had in your mind. Big Smile

Johnny

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:20 PM
Electroliner 1935,
You make very good points.  Say the truck had its right front tire against the inside of the right rail.  If that were the case, I assume that the left front tire would have been outside of the left rail.  Now say the first impulse of the driver was to drive off the tracks to the right.  The right tire would not have climbed the inside of the right rail with the tire right against the rail. 
At that point, the driver might have panicked and thought it was impossible to get off the track.  If he would have changed is plan to drive off the left side, and cut his wheels hard to the left, the right front wheel would have had a much better chance of climbing the left rail.  But the driver may not have thought about the fact that getting off to the left would work when getting off to the right did not. 
I think the driver tried to get the truck off of the track, but failed.  He found that the truck was indeed STUCK on the track.  They say that the train was in sight at that point.  Let’s see the locomotive video.  The truck had its lights on high beam.  Let’s see if the video shows the truck jerking and bouncing as the driver struggled to get it to climb over the rail. 
  • Member since
    September 2010
  • 2,515 posts
Posted by Electroliner 1935 on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 9:04 PM

To drive off a track, one has to cut the tires hard to the side or the rails will just cause them to slide along the rail. They won't climb up unless they face them at almost a right angle.  It is not intuitly obvious to someone to do that. So perhaps he tried to move to the side and the tirse just slid along the rails and he felt he was trapped (stuck) and so chose to evacuate the truck for his safety. 

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 8:49 PM
Quote from the article:
 
“Why was that truck there? And once it was there, why did it not move?” he said.
Investigators, he said, “want to learn anything that we can from his perspective to help explain how that vehicle ended up driving down that railroad track.”
Oxnard police initially said Sanchez-Ramirez was attempting to turn his 2005 Ford F-450 onto 5th Street at Rice Avenue when he instead pulled onto the railroad tracks and became stuck. The truck was pulling a trailer carrying welding tools and other equipment.
At a news conference Wednesday, the driver’s attorney, Ron Bamieh, said his client did his utmost to move his truck from the path of the oncoming train. "That’s all this was ... an accident," he said.
Sanchez-Ramirez, his attorney said, called his son after the crash so that he could explain to police in English what his father was doing and how he ended up at the crash site.
Bamieh said Wednesday the truck "could go forward on the tracks, but it couldn't get off the tracks."
Sanchez-Ramirez hit his high beams, his lawyer said, and even tried to push his truck out of the way.
"He was then forced to flee to save his own life," Bamieh said.
Bamieh said Sanchez-Ramirez had a flip phone -- with no digital maps. He was relying on a printed-out online map and was in the area Tuesday morning only to find the route he would take for a meeting on Wednesday for his job, his attorney said.
--------------------------------------------------
It seems odd the way the officials are releasing the information.  Why the big mystery about the reason the driver drove the truck onto the tracks?  The police say he mistook the tracks for a parallel road he was intending to turn onto.  That same thing has happen before at that crossing, causing another train collision. Driving onto the tracks by mistake sure seems like the most plausible explanation.  Here is an idea.  Why not ask the driver why he drove on the tracks? 
The investigators act like there was some big conspiracy to wreck the train because they insist that the truck was not STUCK on the tracks.  It may not have been stuck from moving forward or backward.  But might it have been STUCK in terms of its ability to move off the track sideways? The official insistence that the truck was not stuck suggests that the driver should have simply moved out of the way.  
You could easily drive a truck like that over the tracks without any crossing.  But after entering the tracks parallel to them, getting the truck to climb the rail lengthwise to move off the track could present problems.  With the truck in a heap several hundred feet from the point of impact, how do the investigators know that the truck could have been simply driven off of the track?    
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 8:10 PM

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 4:35 PM

Sam, are you sure that the driver comprehends English?Smile

Johnny

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 4:31 PM

MikeF90

Per the above nbclosangeles post, the truck driver's lawyer stated that "He does not know how or why the truck he was driving stopped on the tracks ..."

Hmmm. I would have noticed, say within one car length, the SEVERELY ROUGH RIDE from being on railroad ties spaced two feet apart.  Maybe not in a 1968 Cadillac El Dorado, but certainly in a Ford F-450.  Any experienced railroad tie drivers care to comment?

 

Or, MikeF90;

You might have had a situation line the one pictured on this link (?) @ http://www.wctrib.com/content/train-stops-brainerd-moments-it-would-have-hit-truck

 Maybe, The BNSF engineer in Brainerd,MN was going slow enoght to stop for the truck on his tracks(?)   Or then you have one like the one here in Wichita this day when the BNSF train clipped a truck on the tracks(?)  See @ http://www.knssradio.com/Train-Clips-Semi-Truck-in-S-Wichita/21014172

Could it also be part of the problem that "Driver Training", and an ability to      read, and understand signs in English has gone away,,lately?  Huh?

 

 

 


 

  • Member since
    August 2005
  • From: At the Crossroads of the West
  • 11,013 posts
Posted by Deggesty on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 4:30 PM

I am not sure if having one such ride qualifies me as a railroad tie driver, but one midnight when I left work I was in a fog dense enough for me to miss a right-hand turn that I knew I had to make to get home. Knowing that the street I was on merged with another street that was at a right angle to the one I should have turned on to, I kept going until I thought I had reached the point at which I was to make a sharp right turn. However, I soon knew, from the bump-bump-bump that I was on the railroad that pararelled the street I thought I was turning on. Had I kept on, I would have reached the street I had missed. However, I thought better of that, and backed up until I was on pavement--and made it home safely from there.

 

Do I miss spel Czech! After posting, I saw a spelling error--and found several more when I came back to correct that one.

Johnny

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:51 PM

Per the above nbclosangeles post, the truck driver's lawyer stated that "He does not know how or why the truck he was driving stopped on the tracks ..."

Hmmm. I would have noticed, say within one car length, the SEVERELY ROUGH RIDE from being on railroad ties spaced two feet apart.  Maybe not in a 1968 Cadillac El Dorado, but certainly in a Ford F-450.  Any experienced railroad tie drivers care to comment?

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:33 PM

zardoz
What's up with all these derailments lately? It sure seems like the cars are causing so many problems. Since when did road vehicles become so dangerous to trains?

Back in the 60's, a car hauler with a load of Ford Econoline vans all prettied up for "Wynn's Frictionproofing" took a wrong turn and high centered on a crossing in Milford, MI.  Of course, a train came along and hit it (I have no idea of the time frame, all I recall is the aftermath).

Nowadays, that probably would have made the news cycle.

Back then, it probably didn't rate a column inch or two in the Detroit Free Press, or Detroit News.

Of course, there was no explosion or other devestation.  Just a bunch of red and yellow vans scattered around.

That crossing (Liberty Street) has been closed for years, although there is talk of putting a pedestrian tunnel there.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    August 2010
  • From: Henrico, VA
  • 8,955 posts
Posted by Firelock76 on Wednesday, February 25, 2015 3:13 PM

I'm not so sure anything's changed, except we're in what's been called a "24 Hour News Cycle" nowadays. Local incidents and accidents that may have gone unreported by the national media as recently as 25 years ago now get covered as they've got to fill all that air time with SOMETHING.

Throw the internet into the mix and then there's even more coverage.

Considering that it's no mystery why an incident that used to be strictly local now goes national.

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy