Western Railroad Discussion > KTLA Live streaming video on Oxnard Metrolink crash

http://ktla.com/on-air/live-streaming/

Here's an image from one crossing down (obviously, I could not get any closer). Best wishes to everyone involved!

---

Hopefully this brings push/pull operations back into the conversation. Trains hitting anything is a bad day. When they leader doesn't have the weight of a locomotive, physics seems to take over.

So far it sounds like no one was killed which is great.

Joe

The news is now saying the utility truck's driver had fled the scene, and was subsequently found. I certainly agree with Joe on the subject of the push/pull method of operation. But with the big companies money ahead of safety mentality, there will probably never be a solution.


V

SLOCONDR



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/24/15 08:10 by SLOCONDR.

joeygooganelli Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hopefully this brings push/pull operations back
> into the conversation. Trains hitting anything is
> a bad day. When they leader doesn't have the
> weight of a locomotive, physics seems to take
> over.
>
> So far it sounds like no one was killed which is
> great.
>
> Joe


More likely, grade crossing separation!

The Rotem cab car held up very well in the collision. See the seventh photo from this article:
http://www.latimes.com/local/lanow/la-me-ln-california-trail-derails-30-injured-20150224-story.html

Posted from iPhone



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 02/24/15 09:00 by jmf1910.

Had the locomotive hit the truck and trailer and the truck's gas tank (which exploded) and the locomotive's fuel had exploded, the wreck could have been far worse. The Rotem cars held up well!

SLOCONDR Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The news is now saying the utility truck's driver
> had fled the scene, and was subsequently found. I
> certainly agree with Joe on the subject of the
> push/pull method of operation. But with the big
> companies money ahead of safety mentality, there
> will probably never be a solution.
>
>
> V
>
> SLOCONDR

Metrolink (SCRRA) is a government agency.

TomPlatten Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ) and the
> locomotive's fuel had exploded,


Diesel doesn't explode, but it does burn.

ToadHaul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> SLOCONDR Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > The news is now saying the utility truck's
> driver
> > had fled the scene, and was subsequently found.
> I
> > certainly agree with Joe on the subject of the
> > push/pull method of operation. But with the big
> > companies money ahead of safety mentality,
> there
> > will probably never be a solution.
> >
> >
> > V
> >
> > SLOCONDR
>
> Metrolink (SCRRA) is a government agency.


Really. Didn't know that.

V

SLOCONDR

BelltuckyFoamductor Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> TomPlatten Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ) and the
> > locomotive's fuel had exploded,
>
>
> Diesel doesn't explode, but it does burn.

Half right half wrong. While a tank of diesel fuel will not explode, if that same tank of diesel is put into a violent situation whereby the diesel gets sprayed, becomes airborne and atomizes, that will indeed explode. That is what happened in a train crash in Spain or Europe some where maybe 10-15 years ago. Investigators could not figure out where the explosion came from. It took a lab simulation of the cars involved to see the diesel sprayed out. Simple spark then created an explosion.

TomPlatten Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Rotem cars held up well!

But I'll bet it was a he!! of a ride inside them while they bounced along the ROW on their sides.

Anybody think that maybe seat belts should be required on trains, kinda like they're required on a plane?

Railfool03 Wrote:

> But I'll bet it was a he!! of a ride inside them
> while they bounced along the ROW on their sides.
>
> Anybody think that maybe seat belts should be
> required on trains, kinda like they're required on
> a plane?


Never happen! Too many, and too frequent of stops. Passengers would not use them if they were there...just say'n.

KC - more govt regs not needed

Metrolink #870 back on 05/15/2012 during a Part 239 drill in Fullerton.

JMW
http://waidephoto.smugmug.com/Trains

---

GRNDMND Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Railfool03 Wrote:
>
> > But I'll bet it was a he!! of a ride inside
> them
> > while they bounced along the ROW on their sides.
>
> >
> > Anybody think that maybe seat belts should be
> > required on trains, kinda like they're required
> on
> > a plane?
>
>
> Never happen! Too many, and too frequent of stops.
> Passengers would not use them if they were
> there...just say'n.
>
> KC - more govt regs not needed

That's what they said about cars in the 1950's - and look at what happens today. It's a change of mindset. Give people the option, particularly on long distance and commuter trains and after a couple of incidents where seat belts saved lived, watch what happens. Also, from a liability perspective, good luck at suing Metrolink if they offered seat belts, but you chose not to use them and then were involved in an incident where you were injured.

Some gov't regs are good for people...like driving on the right hand side of the road. This isn't exactly taking guns away or mandating health insurance.