Discussion

I may be the only person here who don't necessarily agree with the notion that 2 engineers in the cab of train would have prevented this accident or prevent future accidents from happening. My reason for this believe is simple: 2 persons in a vehicle doesn't alway prevent accidents. Accidents are sometimes caused becaused two within the same vehicle is more focused on their conversation than the safety of others. Who is to say that another person in the cab would not be a distraction rather than benefit? Even if they put two engineers in the cab, other safety measures need to be put in place that in case human negligence comes into play.

just my 2 cents! @ 7:04 PM PDT, Sep 18, 2008

We can provide basic safety features, we do have the proven technology BUT the RxR refuses to spend the money. double track does not mean no more head on traffic. Head to head traffic safely occurs every hour of every day. In my experience as a mentor when human errors occur there are usually other factors involved: lack of training, inexperience, fatigue, stress. I have never ever met a locomotive engineer who had a blatant disregard for the rules. We bend and break rules every day, usually to get their trains over the road on schedule as safely as we know how.

locomotive engineer @ 2:22 PM PDT, Sep 18, 2008

I am surprised to hear that there is no safety system installed to apply emergency brakes on the train in case the engineer ignores the red signal. Russia uses the system on ALL railroads. With this system it is impossible to run one train into the rear of the other, even if you want to do it.These safety systems are used in third world countries for many years, and we, with all our technological superiority, cannot provide such a basic safety feature on the railroad!? Shame on us!

Henry @ 9:37 AM PDT, Sep 18, 2008

Safety always happens AFTER THE FACT. 20-20 hindsight. Since the Titanic floundered, few lives have been lost for lack of lifeboats, but accidents still happen to this day. Airliners are safe today BECAUSE of prior accidents. Let's hope this wreck will not go down in vain and we learn from this and move forward.

Iconoclasher @ 2:34 AM PDT, Sep 18, 2008

Is it cheaper if we just put camera systems on trains and railroads so that they can see each other when something might get wrong.

Richie Aunchareonpornpat @ 8:07 PM PDT, Sep 17, 2008

Hope they sue the hell out of the MTA and fire all of the incompetent Sr. officals who are to blame for this.

Seadog @ 12:14 PM PDT, Sep 17, 2008

The SCRRA (Mertolink) needs to seriously look at train control systems and more importantly, double tracking where the right-of-way will allow it. Double track = two lanes or no head on traffic.

Safety Joe @ 12:11 PM PDT, Sep 17, 2008

I am angered at the low priority that Metrolink has given to safety. One of the issues that came up from the last big accident in 2005 was the issue of the engine being in the back of the train. Just curious.. What if the engine was at the back and the carriages in the front during this head-on accident with the freight train? Wouldnt there have been a lot more casualties? Intuitively, it sounds to me like there would be a lot more casualties in all carriages, not just the one carriage next to the engine as was the case this time.

Jude @ 11:43 AM PDT, Sep 17, 2008

We are allooking at the accident; many are pointing fingers. The real culprit is outsourcing. The Metrolink people are criminally negligent. They outscorce an importan job such as engineer. A civil servant would be vetted; her or shis hours would be regulated. This is not the case with the Metrolink and hence terrible accidents happen. Cause and effect.

Rodolfo Acuna @ 10:47 AM PDT, Sep 17, 2008

I was saddened to see that the conductor also breached protocol, and had the conductor followed protocol, lives might have been saved. Reminds me of the breaches in protocol which got people killed on the Staten Island Ferry in New York recently. We need automatic safety measures.

Rich @ 9:50 AM PDT, Sep 17, 2008

Next