Passenger Trains > NTSB: Sanchez sent text msg 22 secs before crash

Today's official NTSB release confirms the All_Aboard post of 29SEP, that Engineer Sanchez sent a text message less than a minute prior to the collision.

NTSB's release says that according to preliminary data, he last received a text message 80 seconds prior to impact, and he sent one 22 seconds prior. By that time, he and 24 other people were doomed.

-GP


************************************************************

NTSB ADVISORY

************************************************************



National Transportation Safety Board
Washington, DC 20594
October 1, 2008

************************************************************

UPDATE: NTSB'S INVESTIGATION OF THE METROLINK, UNION PACIFIC
ACCIDENT IN CALIFORNIA

************************************************************

The following is an update of the NTSB's investigation of
the September 12, 2008 accident in Chatsworth, California
involving a Metrolink commuter train and a Union Pacific
freight train. As a result of the head-on collision, there
were 25 fatalities and numerous injuries.


Information regarding the Metrolink engineer's cell phone
activity on the day of the accident was obtained from his
service provider under subpoena from the NTSB. As part of
the ongoing investigation, this information is being used to
determine the timing of cell phone activity, which includes
text messaging to and from the engineer's cell number, in
relation to the engineer's duty hours and train operations.

Although the precise timing and correlation of these events
is still underway at the Safety Board's Recorder Laboratory,
preliminary information is being released regarding the
approximate cell phone activity during the engineer's duty
hours on the day of the accident.


On the day of the accident, the Metrolink engineer was on
duty for two periods of time. The engineer was responsible
for the operation of a train from 6:44 am until 8:53 am.
During this period of time, the engineer's cell phone
received 21 text messages and sent 24 text messages.


He was then off duty until 2:00 pm. The engineer was
responsible for the operation of Metrolink train 111 from
3:03 pm until the time of the accident. During this time
period, the engineer's cell phone received 7 text messages
and sent 5 text messages. According to the time on the cell
phone provider's records, the last text message received by
the engineer's phone before the accident was at 4:21:03 pm,
and the last text message sent from the engineer's cell
phone was 4:22:01 pm.


A preliminary estimate for the time of the accident,
according to the Union Pacific train's onboard recorders, is
4:22:23 pm. The Safety Board's Recorder Laboratory is
continuing to correlate times recorded for use of the
Metrolink engineer's cell phone, train recorder data, and
signal system data to a common time base.


"I am pleased with the progress of this major investigation
to date," Acting NTSB Chairman Mark V. Rosenker said today.
"We are continuing to pursue many avenues of inquiry to
find what caused this accident and what can be done to
prevent such a tragedy in the future."


-30-

NTSB Media Contact:

Terry N. Williams
(202) 314-6100
williat@ntsb.gov

Feel free to flame away at me, but holy christ, this guy was texting CONSTANTLY while operating a train with hundreds of passengers on-board. Talk about being irresponsible and unsafe. In a short two hour period in the morning, he read and sent **45** text messages....FORTY FIVE while operating a train with passengers. And then in his first hour of work in the afternoon before the crash, he read and sent 12 text messages. This is about as irresponsible as someone in that position can get.

I'm sorry if I'm offending any engineers out there who routinely text while operating a train, but this is so dangerous and goes against common sense it's unbelievable. I hope this doesn't happen any more (regardless of the new law/company policy) as so many people these days are addicted to their phones and PDA's. I'm one of 'em, but I don't do it while driving or while being responsible for the lives of so many people. This guy was an arrogant jerk. I don't care how nice he was---this was one of the most unsafe and reckless things that someone in his position can do. It doesn't matter to me if the texting was the cause of the wreck or not. This guy was downright unsafe and should not have held that extremely responsible position. That's my rant, and I'm sorry to offend those who think I'm wrong, but damn....I mean DAMN....what a jerk.

smitty195 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Feel free to flame away at me, but holy christ,
> this guy was texting CONSTANTLY while operating a
> train with hundreds of passengers on-board. Talk
> about being irresponsible and unsafe. In a short
> two hour period in the morning, he read and sent
> **45** text messages....FORTY FIVE while operating
> a train with passengers. And then in his first
> hour of work in the afternoon before the crash, he
> read and sent 12 text messages. This is about as
> irresponsible as someone in that position can get.

I completely agree, and Sanchez is not the only engineer in the country who was doing things like that. It was a matter of time, sadly.

Hopefully this sends a message to people who are doing things at the controls other than what they are supposed to be doing.

My cell phone is almost always on when I'm driving, but people who call know that I might not be able to answer, and I never use it when I'm on the road. I've seen so many bad drivers on the road on their phone. One went under the back of my Jeep last March at a red light because he was talking on his phone. It's bad enough when people do this sort of thing in their cars, but when you're at the controls of a locomotive, with all that tonage behind you and so many lives in your hands, you need to be doing what you're paid to do.

As one stand up comedian once said about cell phone drivers, if you're doing something that involves your hands and your feet, your brain should probably be in on it too.

Kevin
http://chatanuga.org/RailPage.html
http://chatanuga.org/WLMR.html

From another forum:

Let's do the math. 43MPH is 61.6 Feet per second. Multiply that by 22 and you have him sending the text 1355 ft before impact. What was the official distance given from CP Topanga to the crash site? On Google Earth and came up with about 2100 ft. If all of this is correct, he sent the message after blowing the signal.

If anything. This new information from the NTSB indicates that he was awake and alert, 22 seconds before the collision.

Chatanuga Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> My cell phone is almost always on when I'm
> driving, but people who call know that I might not
> be able to answer, and I never use it when I'm on
> the road. I've seen so many bad drivers on the
> road on their phone. One went under the back of
> my Jeep last March at a red light because he was
> talking on his phone. It's bad enough when people
> do this sort of thing in their cars, but when
> you're at the controls of a locomotive, with all
> that tonage behind you and so many lives in your
> hands, you need to be doing what you're paid to
> do.

This really is the key, isn't it?

I've heard stories about managers trying to trap railroaders into violating cell phone rules by calling their numbers and listening for a ring tone. But the serious issue is not whether the phone is on, it's whether the call is taken when it shouldn't be.

It is not the technology itself, but the irresponsible use of it, that causes problems.

Chatanuga Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> As one stand up comedian once said about cell
> phone drivers, if you're doing something that
> involves your hands and your feet, your brain
> should probably be in on it too.

"The freeway has become the world's biggest phone booth ...." lyric from a song by a band long since forgotten but it sticks in my head because it's so true. Now the phone has found it's way into every minute of our lives no matter what we're (supposed to be) doing.
Complacency.


TCS - i feel so connected ... but i'm not ...

This is pretty damning information but not yet conclusive. As I posted awhile back in this thread,

http://www.trainorders.com/discussion/read.php?1,1763846,1764422#msg-1764422

the NTSB needs to make an accurate second-by-second timeline, which according to this news release, they are still building.

But as Santi said above, 22 seconds before impact puts the train 1,300 to 1,400 feet from the point of impact, which is 400 to 500 feet past the CP Topanga signal (IIRC, it was about 1,800' from the signal to the POI). There COULD still be other factors behind this aside from plain distraction/inattention, like a medical situation that put Sanchez in a semi-conscious (drunk-like) state. Again, it's too early to tell and this is too complicated to "arm-chair".

Nonetheless, I find it alarming that an on-duty engineer would spend so much time doing something like sending text messages. If there is that much of a casual regard for vigilance, it makes me wonder what else goes on in the cabs these days that is considered "normal". I can't imagine being put in charge of so many people and so much equipment then engaging in such distracting activities like that. Seems unconscionable to me.

As many have said, its not the technology that is the problem, its the usage and the culture that breeds such complacency.

trainjunkie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> But as Santi said above, 22 seconds before impact
> puts the train 1,300 to 1,400 feet from the point
> of impact, which is 400 to 500 feet past the CP
> Topanga signal (IIRC, it was about 1,800' from the
> signal to the POI).

============================================

OK, then.

Pushing a button to send the message might not take that much attention.

But where was the train when he was COMPOSING the message; thinking about what he was going to say, and then tapping the keys on his cellphone to input it?

I agree that it is totally irresponsible for and engineer to be texting while behind the controls of a train. I personally have never done that, however I am a newer engineer and need to pay strict attention. There tends to be a complacency that takes over after several years of working for the railroad and that's when things like this seem to happen. The solution to this is never get to comfortable and always respect the train. Texting while running is not having respect for the train.
As a disclaimer I understand there is a lot to come of this investigation, but based on what the NTSB has found this engineer seemed to have a habit of texting while on duty.

What may never be known is what happened after those 22 seconds.
Fact (ooh, there's a thought!): He never braked before impact. Find out why and you've solved the case. Until you have that FACT all else is subjective.


TCS - the jerkoff attorney in today's paper on the other hand ...

I can't begin to count the number of times my Verizon phone was unable to send a text due to a dead spot (despite what their commercials claim). The phone keeps trying to resend on its own until a good connection is reached. That isn't to say that happened in this instance, but the cell phone data doesn't necessarily provide a rock solid timeline.

NJTMatt Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> There tends to be a complacency
> that takes over after several years of working for
> the railroad and that's when things like this seem
> to happen.

A saying comes to mind that I was taught when first learning about firearms: "Familiarity breeds contempt". As soon as you slack off, you're going to kill yourself or someone else when doing something as simple as cleaning your weapon.

I agree that the time of sending the text is only one part of the picture. Where was his mind at, what was he thinking, was he fumbling like I did the one time I actually tried texting, did he drop his phone and have to reach over and pick it up? Etc. etc. etc.

It would seem from the initial report that he had a real problem with texting. It may very well have been his only interaction with "friends", and it could have taken on a life of its own. Driving the train? Second nature - "I can drive and text at the same time. I've been doing it for years." To some of these kids, he was a foamer's hero of sorts. He was their in, and they were his....I don't know, his self esteem maybe? Self esteem is important, and that texting may have been the outlet he needed to stay motivated on a daily basis after the suicide of his partner and the reclusiveness that he appeared to live in.

All just pondered thoughts, but it is pretty easy to see how he could have made a stupid decision dozens of times every day, with one in particular costing 26 people their lives.

-Dave

GenePoon Wrote:

> OK, then.
>
> Pushing a button to send the message might not
> take that much attention.
>
> But where was the train when he was COMPOSING the
> message; thinking about what he was going to say,
> and then tapping the keys on his cellphone to
> input it?

What happened after those 22 seconds? He could have been typing up a new text for His rail buddies. That's Craziness, more concerned about a FICKLE text message than your customers!

I think the volume of texts he sent during the morning shift is actually more damning than the specific timing of the one he potentially sent right before the crash. It shows a pattern of unsafe behavior.

Absolutely correct. Something still doesn't seem right here to simply pin this on distraction from texting. According to the NTSB summary issued awhile back, there was a 4 second window prior to impact that the trains would have seen each other. The UP crew used only 2 of those seconds before they big-holed their train. Sanchez never reacted yet this would have been well after he sent this last text message and should have otherwise been paying attention.

Did he continue to be distracted by something? Composing a new message perhaps? Semi-conscious state for some medical reason? Who knows? This NTSB press release answers nothing except that he was at the very least semi-conscious when he passed the CP Topanga signal. More FACTS are needed.

TopcoatSmith Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> What may never be known is what happened after
> those 22 seconds.

Wouldn't they be able to do blood tests in the autopsy to determine if his blood sugar was way off or he had a heart attack?

smitty195 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>This guy was an arrogant jerk. I don't care how nice he was---this
> was one of the most unsafe and reckless things
> that someone in his position can do, but damn....I mean
> DAMN....what a jerk.

Have a little respect for the dead. You've no clue if the guy was a jerk or not. From all accounts, he was a very nice guy. And if allowed to speak today, I'm sure he'd be the first to say how sorry he was for his actions. No need to call him or anyone else a jerk. You made your point...keep it civil, and have a little respect. We all make mistakes, and this one is truly sad and immense indeed. My heart goes out to all of them...all those who died, lost family, or had to deal with the accident. And especially to the engineer...

GenePoon Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> trainjunkie Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
>
> > But as Santi said above, 22 seconds before
> impact
> > puts the train 1,300 to 1,400 feet from the
> point
> > of impact, which is 400 to 500 feet past the CP
> > Topanga signal (IIRC, it was about 1,800' from
> the
> > signal to the POI).
>
> ============================================
>
> OK, then.
>
> Pushing a button to send the message might not
> take that much attention.
>
> But where was the train when he was COMPOSING the
> message; thinking about what he was going to say,
> and then tapping the keys on his cellphone to
> input it?

and how much time did this take ?