I’m calling BS on the concept that he ‘missed’ a red light while text messaging.
First off, it’s not like the red lights at your everyday intersection.
It’s a series of red lights alongside the track.
SECOND, and most important, it’s not like the engineer turns the steering wheel to go off on a siding, while waiting for the other car to pass.
There are ‘switches’ in the tracks that reroute the train onto the siding. The only way you can get back on the main track is that the switches on that end change. This usually only happens after the other train passes, elsewise it would come head on at your on the siding.
Someone had to monkey with the lights and track switches for this to happen.
I know nothing of how the systems work, but I have to agree with you that there must be more to this than a simple matter of missing a signal. I find it hard to believe that any system today would permit two trains going in opposite directions to on the same piece of track at the same time.
Let’s lay the blame on the dead man who can not defend himself instead of bureaucrats higher up that have careers to protect.
“There are ‘switches’ in the tracks that reroute the train onto the siding. The only way you can get back on the main track is that the switches on that end change. This usually only happens after the other train passes, elsewise it would come head on at your on the siding.
Someone had to monkey with the lights and track switches for this to happen.”
Nonsense. You simply don’t know what you’re talking about.
The signal system in on CTC (Centralized Traffic Control) single track can’t display clear signals for opposing movements. When a train enters from one end of the single track, it will “knock down” all the other opposing signals.
If the passenger train got by a Stop Signal at a passing siding, it would “run through” the switch in the reverse position without derailing (would break the switch, though), and keep going.
If the reports that the engineman of the Metrolink train was busy sending a text message (and not paying attention to the signals ahead), he might well have passed the distant signal displaying “Approach”, continued by the next signal displaying “Stop”, run through the switch, and ended up on the single track in front of the oncoming freight.
This is how the Gunpow wreck on Amtrak happened in 1987. A Conrail light engine move missed a Stop Signal, ran out in front of oncoming Amtrak train #94 (approaching at 125+mph), and the wreck that followed killed 17 people and led to national legislation requiring federal “certification” of locomotive engineers. I’ve got my “certificate” in my pocket right now.
- John
Have to disagree. The engineer was stopped between signals and if he couldn't see the next signal he was required to proceed at "restricted speed" which in short is a speed that he could stop within one half the field of vision. If he entered the block on "color" which he undoubtedly did then he was required by rule to proceed at the restricted speed requirement. The engineer forgot where he was and what he was doing...easy but I would assume even easier to do while texting. Really doubt if anyone tampered with anything.
“Someone had to monkey with the lights and track switches for this to happen.”
Management always and immediately blame “pilot error” for accidents where the pilot cannot talk back.
It’s the least costly outcome for management. Truth is irrelevant.
The final story will be “multiple errors” and such, predictably.