Posted on 09/13/2008 6:49:23 PM PDT by BenLurkin
CHATSWORTH, Calif. (CBS) ― Metrolink officials Saturday put the blame squarely on the engineer of the train for the deadly crash that has claimed at least 25 lives. They say he ran a red light.
But a group of local teens, train enthusiasts, who know the engineer well doubt that he was to blame.
They called their friend professional and caring and said he helped them learn about trains and being an engineer. To a man, they said he would "never" have been reckless or unprofessional or run a red light.
But one minute before the deadliest crash in Metrolink history, one teen -- Nick Williams -- said he received a text message on his cell phone from the engineer, whom the teens identified as Robert Sanchez.
Williams' received text was brief, "Just two lines", reported KCAL 9 and CBS 2 reporter Kristine Lazar, exclusively.
The text apparently told Williams and his friends where Sanchez would be meeting another passenger train.
The teens posted a tribute to their friend on YouTube.
A Metrolink spokeswoman earlier stated that the train's engineer, who has not officially been named, ran a red signal.
Another one of the teens, Evan Morrison, told Lazar that Sanchez " was not the kind of guy who would run a red light."
None of them believe he was at fault.
Saturday, Sanchez's teen friends all went to the crash site. Mark Speer, choking back tears said, "this is absolutely devastating."
Denise Tyrell, a spokesperson for Metrolink commented on the report that Sanchez might have been texting immediately before the crash.
She said, "I can't believe someone could be texting while driving a train."
Was the signal at CP the one that would have been RED?
“The commute, assuming he had reached 40mph was in error as we have discussed. Because he couldn’t see the next signal and had stopped between signals (the one entering the station and the one beyond) he was required by rule to proceed not exceeding 20mph prepared to stop short of the next signal. This he didn’t do. “
Which brings up the point, Why? He’s experienced, and I doubt that ‘texting’ has anything to do with what happened.
Something else went wrong, seriously wrong.
Or am I way off base?
“He ignored or forgot about the one before he ran. “
So that final text message may have had nothing to do with the accident?
If he ignored the lights before he left the station, something more than just ‘texting’ was involved.
Yes. CP stands for: Control Point
You have been so helpful. The clues were the high speed exit from the terminal, and ignoring the red signals.
The man had too much experience to make this kind of mistake.
I wasn’t buying suicide, but leaned towards equipment malfunction, or equipment sabotage.
But, nagging at the back of my head was the first reports of him ‘texting’ a teenager, and that he had a ‘group’ of boys he communicated with. Which could be harmless, or could indicate the man needed some medium to be in ‘touch’ with ‘boys’.
“Gay, old boyfriend had HIV, committed suicide, was txtng a teenage boy, lived in 9 different states, serves some time, and I’m betting lots of other troubles... “
http://www.latimes.com/media/acrobat/2008-09/42434650.pdf
The above link will take you to a PowerPoint presentation created by the California PUC regarding the collision between westbound Metrolink train 111 and UP's eastbound Leesdale Local. WARNING: Picture #10 is graphic and may be upsetting.
Much thanks.
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:
“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.”
Standard line during an investigation. I will be waiting for the final report. That should be a good read. I would like to see this as a show on NatGeo Critical Incident or Seconds from Disaster.
Don’t we now know the cause and what to do to prevent a similar mishap? No text phoning while operating a locomotive seems to be the obvious solution.
Yes, the problem is enforcing the rule. There just isn’t a way to check to make sure a engineer isn’t texting. No way sneak up on him with the ground that he has.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.