Join the discussion on the following article:
Metrolink commuter train derails after collision with truck
Looking at the pictures from CNN and the fact that the locomotive did not derail, leads me to believe that this was a “push-pull” operation. It is disappointing that the driver of the truck fled the scene but was captured.
Look at Yahoo they have some pict. of the accident .
I wonder when the recommendations for passenger restraints in rail cars will come out of the NTSB/FRA negotiations, and how it will fare in congressional hearings, not the best place to do serious business. Two fatal accidents on Metro North and close calls elsewhere might yet bring the “amusement ride” restraints to Commuter rail cars as well as Amtrak’s.
The train was in push mode with cab car hitting the truck.
The truck driver is an obvious choice for a Darwin Award.
Ed Burns, can you explain why you think it is disappointing that the driver of the truck, which caused the wreck, not an accident, who fled the scene, was later caught some miles from scene?
Might not have even derailed if this happened in pull mode.
Once again a train in push mode has derailed. Mr. Mc Fadden may well be correct! Following the Spuyten Duyvill derailment, I asked the editor to do an article on the safety of push-pull trains, specifically, how long the locomotive continues to shove after the cab car goes into emergency. Though I offered to do an “interview” with anyone who they would suggest would know the details, and write a column on such, and was even told at one point that my question COULD be put in as an “Ask Trains” question, no further communication has been had. Again, TRAINS, please have someone address the safety issues of a locomotive, frequently twice as heavy as the cars it is pushing, propelling a train in push mode.
From what I’ve read, the engineer had already idled the locomotive and was slowing the train due to the truck fouling the track. I think this was just a case of the lead cab car not being heavy enough to stay on the rails. When it hit the truck, the front appears to have been lifted and shifted to the left. Once it did, the momentum of the heavy locomotive at the back just caused the rest to accordion as the front of the cab car started digging into the ground. If the heavier locomotive was on the front, there’s a good chance it wouldn’t have been lifted off the rails.
The trucker needs to go back to truck driving school when he gets out of jail. Amazing the damage one rum-dum can do.
it seems to me that the coupler sheraed off, getting under the wheels, lifting the lead truck off the track, taking the lead car off the track to the left, spinning it arround, and pushing the second car to the right. it seems that the reason for the wreck could simply be that the coupler sheared off of the cab car.
The couplers are designed to shear off.
The vehicle combination involved was under 26000lbs. As such does not need a commercially rated driver. Just the license you need to drive any automobile. No driving school needed.
Also the person operating the rubber tyre vehicle was able to walk away and was speaking to police. So he has failed to collect a Darwin.
‘Under CDL’ trucks, gvw under 26,000 lbs, do require more than a standard license, just not much. You tipically need a Chauffeurs license, which is a few more questions about trucks not on the standard operators lic.
We have one nimrod representative that would use this as a reason to accelerate PTC (railroad’s fault) and a nimrod senator that would ask for yet another government sponsored study on grade crossings (railroad’s fault). Hello politicians…unfortunately sometimes people are just stupid.
Press and other media people have got to realize that stating “a train hit a truck at a grade crossing” is politically incorrect. They need to state “a truck was obstructing a railroad right-of-way in the path of an oncoming train”.