Commenter/sometime troll Sam, with characteristic grace, asks for a post on the LA rail crash. I think that he wants us to apologize for the misconduct of the train engineer, or something. I guess he expects it’ll turn out that that Bundridge or Schiendelman was texting him just before the crash.
I didn’t have much to say about this. What can you say when the Friday evening commute turns into a grisly massacre?
If pressed, I suppose I’d point out that despite spectacular and telegenic crashes, rail and air travel are by far the safest per passenger mile traveled. They’re safer than the bus and much safer than driving your own car. Here’s an EU study that a quick Google search turned up:
Rail and air travel are the safest modes per distance travelled, followed by bus. The passengers of trains, bus/coach and planes within the EU have the lowest fatality risk per passenger kilometre. For the average passenger trip in the EU, bus travel has a 10 times lower fatality risk than car travel and air travel within the EU has for the average flight distance about the same fatality risk per passenger kilometre as train travel and both are half as risky as travel by coach.
That paragraph is brutally written, so to simplify, driving a mile in a car is as risky as riding 10 miles in a bus, or 20 miles in a train or airplane.
And here’s a USDOT table that compares lots of apples and oranges, but does show that there were 0.398 transit fatalities per 100 million passenger miles traveled, compared to 1.47 for highway driving. I wouldn’t get too wrapped around the axles about precise numbers. Suffice it to say we’re looking at close to an order of magnitude difference in safety.
Unfortunately, I read somewhere that 90% of drivers think they’re above average, and that makes for a lot of people misjudging the relative risks of choosing each mode of transportation. It’d save society a lot in health care costs and lost productivity if people assessed risks more accurately, and society gave them choices that made good decisions easier.
Equally unfortunately, it appears that biking and walking are just behind motorcycles in being more dangerous than cars. I’m not a bike person, but I understand what they’re screaming about. In my example above a motorcyclist could travel 0.05 miles and a pedestrian or cyclist about 0.13 miles at the same risk.
As for Sam’s suggestion to remove the window shade on LINK, meh. Does the deterrent outweigh the distraction of people peering in, tapping on the glass, and taking photos? I don’t know, but I strongly suspect that it’s significant enough either way to expend any energy on.
UPDATE: Yglesias makes the same point, at almost the same time.
If you like trains, it’s your fault those people in LA died. It wasn’t the engineer, it was “rail buffs” (although I prefer “railfan”).
http://metroriderla.com/2008/09/12/metrolink-crash/
This is a horrible situation and one of the people that passed away in this accident was a student from my school down in Claremont, so I appreciate your tone, Martin, and hope all the commenters can follow your lead. That being said, it is immensely tragic that this entire ordeal could have been avoided, not just on the part of the engineer, but also because metrolink had wanted to lay another set of tracks on the area in Chatsworth that is only single-tracked, but it was opposed by NIMBYs in the area, who actually argued, as the article I linked states, that “more train tracks mean more collisions.” I’m in such a state of disbelief I don’t know what to say.
This is the typical, petulant type of post I’ve come to expect on this blog.
At some point, you guys need to rise above the noise and attempt to be better than all the pushing and shoving that goes on in the world.
Count me amongst the readers who thought a post about the unfortunate train crash was germane to this blog. But not this type of discussion.
Martin,
I wanted nothing more than to come here and suggest that maybe Sound Transit should think about ways they can better ensure their train operators will not use cell phones on the job. The fact that there is a law against is not enough, in my opinion. I suggested that if the operator were more visible to the passengers, perhaps this would discourage cell phone use. ST train operators will be former Metro bus drivers, some of whom routinely talk on cell phone while driving the bus. We don’t want them bringing this unsafe habit with them.
Why is it wrong for me to bring this up on a Seattle transit blog?
Sam,
I greatly appreciate your new and improved tone.
Why is it wrong for me to bring this up on a Seattle transit blog?
No, it’s not wrong to bring this up on the blog. There was an accusatory tone in your initial post, which triggered the reaction. As John pointed out, as part-timers our coverage is going to be uneven. Out-of-state I’ll usually mention only if I think I have something intelligent to say. To be honest, I didn’t really think too much about Sound Transit when I saw this story.
Anyway, once you got past the first paragraph, I hope you found the article to be mildly informative.
I’m really not concerned about mass loss of life on ST trains. I am concerned about low-speed collisions along MLK that stop service and cause minor injuries for the passengers, like the SLUT. If you go back a bit, you’ll see me agitating for fences and crossing gates along the route.
Too bad you cannot prosecute the NIMBY’s for murder, but use the Train Wrecking charge against them that they applied to the Glendale Crash Causer.(He is now serving 11 Life Sentences, although they had a case for Murder with Special Circumstances, and did go for the maximum punishment under California Law, which is worse than Life Without Parole).
One thing Metrolink did was order stronger Cab Cars, but they will not arrive until next year. Apparently LA missed out on having them built there. Also, by destroying passenger rail in this country, Congress, several U.S. Presidents, various state and local governments did not just eliminate the passenger train as a viable option, we lost this country’s ability to build new rolling stock. Budd and Pullman Standard lasted into the 1980s, but they were a shadow of their former selves, but look how long railcars last when they are not wrecked. The Superliner Is Amtrak uses were built in the late 1970s and early 1980s, and three decades later, are still running. Utah Transit Authority and Metrolink have recently bought used single-level cars from New Jersey Transit. These cars are so old, they were bought by the state of New Jersey on behalf of a railroad that no longer exists(I believe the Erie Lackawanna), from a company that no longer exists. THis was 35 years ago.
Since some or many here don’t like my tone or writing style or something, I’ll tell you what … I am going to try to be more polite and respectful in all my future comments.
Just to toss out a point about Sound Transit.
One reason, yes this is a partial jab, Sound Transit will never cost less per seat than a car is because the funding parties (the city etc) spent an inordinate amount of money to double up trackage from Tacoma to Seattle.
I personally am glad they did it because they get a LOT more separation and control to remove any possibility of this type of incident. I’m surprised personally that any city is attempting to run commuter rail on single track segments in this country, at least surprised for such a huge highly dense area like LA. (not as dense as it could be, but it IS dense)…
Needless to mention now, but they really need to double track and put in some automatic braking systems. Sometimes I would have assumed, as with many systems already, they have these features in place. Likely, the features could have prevented this massacre of persons.
But anyway, on a positive note, Sound Transit is a little more prepared and has a lot more running trackage to work with.
Automatic Train Stop is one of the projects we’re looking for funding for to upgrade Portland to Seattle Amtrak service. It costs a lot – you’re looking at a billion dollar project. The state government should be getting involved here – it’s too bad we can’t put them on the hook next time something like this happens.
Building just between Tacoma and Seattle wouldn’t make sense, as we have state trains using the entire corridor. Build it once, save money, that’s what WSDOT is trying to do. They just need funding.
Martin’s outrage is completely justified. What Sam said is disgusting and incredibly personal. How dare he link us to the unfortunate deaths of those commuters in Los Angeles.
Us at this blog are trying to make the world better, as we see it. We think that mass transit is most cost effective than cars, leads to healthier lifestyles, and is good for climate change. Simply because we like mass transit in no way means that we are responsible for the accident — as Sam’s post implies. If the facts come out the operator was texting on the job, it is still his sole responsibility.
Rail fans did not cause this accident, Sam’s post implied they did.
EvergreenRailfan, I find your post equally distasteful.
These are policy and political decisions. We have very little passenger rail capacity in this country that isn’t on freight tracks. We can educate officials in the future about the safety of double-tracking, but right now it is not the time to point fingers.
brad, your fake outrage is old. We’re not a media outlet, like the Seattle Times. They get paid to cover transportation, we don’t. Yet, we are held to a higher standard simply because we’re niche?
Sam, I hope you’re sincere in your last comment because everyone deserves a second chance. But also realize that it’s not your “style” or word choice, it was how you lodged a disgusting and incredibly distasteful attack against us simply because you don’t agree with us on policies.
I look forward to seeing you at the next meet up. I’m sure it’ll be much harder to make such comments after knowing our faces.
I’m not outraged. I think the insinuation that we’re in some sort of coverup of the story is pretty far off base. I thought it was pretty well covered in the media and didn’t have much intelligent to say.
Someone shopping for offense could determine that Sam was trying to implicate us directly in the crash, but I don’t think that’s what he meant and I therefore dealt with it flippantly.
But Sam wanted a post, and he got one. We’re here to serve.
And I want to add this comment from Ben S. about the comparison to ST:
I need to post a correction regarding this.
This region does not have Automatic Train Stop, only parts of the Transcon line and bits and pieces between LA and Orange, Ca. From Santa Ana to San Diego is ATS territory.
If a train runs a red signal, a penalty brake application is set (80% brake pipe reduction?) and stops the train. This however would not have stopped this incident because the freight train would still be proceeding at 40mph.
If Ben is talking about ST Link, then yes, it does have ATS built into the system. It also has a Dead Man buzzer when no movement has been detected from the operator from throttle or brake or if the operator was to let go of the control handle, the LRV/trainset would coast to a stop without any notice to any of the passengers.
Yes, I was talking about Link. Sounder will get ATS when we get the big corridor project for Cascades.
If it sounded like I was saying that rail fans caused this accident, that was not my intention, nor do I believe that is even possible. I was only repeating a report that said that a rail fan had been texting with the train operator right before the crash. And I was wondering why nobody on this blog was posting about the crash, because I know many of you are fans of rail. I didn’t mean to link the two, or even say that rail fans had anything to do with the crash other than the story I read.
Sam, you’re apologizing and all so I’m not trying to be a dick about things, but please understand why my comment was so heated:
“Seattle rail buff bloggers remain silent over fellow rail buff texters involved in LA rail crash.”
It sounds like you think the store is the italicized part. I know, you probably don’t — but it’s what you wrote. It sounds like you appreciate our (err, my) anger and are explaining what you meant, so thanks for adding more context.
err, “it sounds like you think the story…”
John, thank you for that info.
A hypothetical … Let’s say a semi breaks down somewhere along the track, for example, somewhere on MLK while making a turn. The only safeguard in that situation would be the ability of the train operator to see the stalled truck. Am I correct? Or are there some other safety measures in place that would prevent a potential accident? In other words, if the operator didn’t see the broken down truck, would some sort of alarm go off? Would somebody at central control be able to see the truck via cameras and notify the operator?
This is a sincere question. I’m not being a troll.
The line of sight on the ROW is clear enough that it’s possible to see straight on down far enough that if the cameras and sensors don’t catch that there’s a stalled vehicle on the tracks.
In accidents with light rail in this configuration it’s overwhelmingly the fault of the drivers and pedestrians that don’t heed the warnings given by the systems.
I think the line of sight is pretty clear as AJ said, but on a rainy Seattle winter day I’m guessing things could be worse.
All of the crossings are gated, I believe — so if the gate can’t go down I’m hoping ST central command will be able to alter the operator. But I’m not sure about the specifics.
The crossings aren’t gated, but we’ve been testing the overall intersection design with Tacoma Link for years. Not a peep.
Nope. The crossings on MLK are not gated, which is something I’ve been on about for a while now.
I must have gotten your advocacy and reality confused. Sorry for the wrong information.
Why doesn’t ST gate those crossings? Is it purely a money reason?
ST doesn’t gate those crossings because they aren’t running trains at 55mph – and they’ve been testing this partial separation design with Link in Tacoma for ages. Note that even the Seattle streetcar tends to hit parked cars, not cars in traffic. We’re more separated than Portland, too. The fact that you haven’t heard about any accidents in downtown Tacoma should give you an indication that the signage and light system we have works.
I was told that everyone’s favorite, “community activists”, nixed the gates. After all, there are crossing gates in SODO.
I don’t think ST wanted to put gates in a residential neighborhood either. They’re running at 35mph – that’s slow enough that you’ll push a car, and that the sight distance will allow emergency stops to actually work. We’ll have a few accidents – we do even at gated crossings – but not many fatalities. Many fewer fatalities than the passenger miles in a car, of course.
I wouldn’t have gated those intersections. It would make the area look industrial.
Whatever mess prompted this post, I agree that a train safety discussion is timely and useful.
Any time you two vehicles interact, you have the possibility of collision if control (including human control) systems fail. Vehicle interactions happen thousands of times a trip for pedestrians, bikes, buses, and cars, and absolutely never for grade-separated double tracked rail.
We made a budgetary decision to not grade-separate Link in a few south-Seattle areas, at the cost of speed and safety. Sure the route will still be much faster and safer than bus travel (as there are much fewer vehicle interactions), but it does introduce a weak point that could have been avoided. I hope we keep this in mind for ST2, especially in high-traffic areas like Bellevue.
How many accidents has the Interstate MAX had in Portland? They have far more crossings and far more trouble-spots than Link.
I’d guess few, as rail-car intersections are controlled by at least two nearly redundant systems (human judgment and traffic signals). But a major accident is certainly possible – and perhaps inevitable given enough time. It just is less likely each trip with the reduced number of interactions and the nature of these interactions.
Remove the interactions all together and such accidents go from low probability per trip to nearly impossible.
I don’t think it’s the end of the world that there aren’t any crossing arms, especially since they aren’t going to stop someone from plowing through them.
Until it becomes a common occurence in this part of the country, I fail to see the outcry for crossing arms, especially since the amount of time it takes for LRVs to cross is short enough that it would probably create more traffic problems than its worth.
If they were longer vehicles and crossed more lanes in a higher-traffic area, then perhaps it would be something worth considering.
(Until accidents, that is)
You seem to have crossed threads. I was talking about grade separation.
Hey, I’m learning this system!
I’m running at about Web 1.8– I’m getting there!
Good article from the L A Times concerning train operators and cell phones.
“The agency that regulates rail safety in California today proposed an emergency order that would ban the personal use of cellphones while operating a train in response to the Metrolink crash in Chatsworth that killed 25 people and injured 135 passengers.”
“Some railroad operators may have policies prohibiting the personal use of such devices, but they’re widely ignored,” Peevey said. Our order would make it the law, and we’ll go after violators. We owe it to the public.”
Full article here –
http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-traincrash16-2008sep16,0,5233752.story
Are they saying they have company policies prohibiting cell phone use, but it’s not actually against the law to use one while operating a train?
King Country Metro (the agency that will be supplying LINK train operators) has a rule against talking on a cell phone while operating the bus, but some drivers ignore this rule, and noting much happens to those who are reported. I hope Sound Transit takes this issue more seriously.
This is just ridiculous. I’m a big rail supporter, but I still think that Sam was completely justified in saying that we should make sure this kind of thing doesn’t happen on the link, and he was just putting an idea out there about how to ensure that. When he told you to write a post, he wasn’t trying to make you go on the defensive, he was just trying to get you to talk about how that can be prevented in the future. You could’ve easily written the same post without bashing him, and it would’ve been so much more reasonable.
alex, I think you may be reading Sam’s second comment and not his first. His initial comment was… provocative. I mean, he was at the very least being flip and sarcastic which doesn’t always instigate the most rational discussion about safety. Obviously his point was slightly diminished by his initial post.