Los Angeles: Metrolink and Freight trains don't mix

[marmar]

from the LA Times:



Metrolink train collides with freight cars in Rialto
Five passengers are injured as the eastbound commuter train hits the end of a westbound, 102-car freight train pulling onto a siding. The crash raises new rail safety concerns.

By Steve Hymon, Robert J. Lopez and Jeff Gottlieb
November 21, 2008


For the second time in less than three months, a Metrolink train and a freight train heading in opposite directions collided Thursday morning, raising fresh concerns about the commuter rail line's ability to navigate tracks it shares with other carriers.

The Rialto crash was far less serious than the catastrophic head-on collision in September between a Metrolink train and a Union Pacific train in Chatsworth that killed 25.

Thursday's accident occurred about 11:30 a.m. when an eastbound Metrolink train hit the end of a westbound Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway train that was pulling onto a siding from the main track just west of the Rialto station.

Five passengers aboard the Metrolink train were sent to area hospitals with complaints of pain, said Lt. Joe Cirilo of the Rialto Police Department.

It was unclear who was at fault. .......(more)

The complete piece is at: http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-la-train-crash21-2008nov21,0,4734785.column

[originalpckelly]

1. California = railtarded.

We need time segregation and an electronic signaling system that will automatically stop any train entering into another signaling block. This is how the french do it, and they manage to run fairly high speed services (60-100 mph) along with slower cargo services. Driver discipline and signaling and the elimination of level crossings where possible increases the safety of rail vastly. Rail is the safest form of transportation when done right. The Japanese Shinkansen has had no fatalities in its entire 40 year history of operation. No airline, no busline, and no car manufacturer can claim that kind of safety.

[marmar]

2. I wish we had dedicated high-speed lines....

I've ridden the Eurostar, Thalys, ICE and AVE in Europe....with absolute jealousy. People talk about the Amtrak Acela on the east coast, but it's still an embarassment compared to Euro high speed.

[YOY]

3. Give us funding then.

Kicking on Amtrak for poor performance when the need for more dedicated lines, more trains, and proper high speed rail means money. That money has been denied to us in leiu of Defense departments need for a better destroyers and air superiority fighters to fight Terrorists with box cutters and AK-47s.

It's like starving a dog and then kicking it for being too skinny.

[marmar]

4. I'm not trying to pick on Amtrak, just the US passenger rail system in general.

I know Amtrak's doing the best it can with the resources it has.

[originalpckelly]

6. Yeah, Acela can't even run at full speed, the cars are too large by 4 inches...

and would strike one another when the train tilts.

Passenger rail at 200 mph, to end regional air travel. Regional airlines would be given grants by government to pay for a transition to providing regional rail. All flight attendants and handlers could be retrained. It might be possible to retrain the mechanics to rail, they would be given grants to return to school and given guaranteed placement in one of the new rail carriers. Pilots would have to have their contracts bought out by government if close to retirement.

We need regional passenger rail, and ultimately ultrahighspeed trans-continental rail, because of the inherent bandwidth limitations of the airways. Train do not require the same kind of buffer distances that airplanes do, so train lines can built right next to each other, whereas airplanes must have thousands of feet of separation. While the skies are open enough in flight, airports have limited capacity because of this buffering problem. Not only that, but airports usually need to be placed away from cities because of the noisiness of air travel. High speed trains may be noisy up close, but they are on the ground and can have sound fencing placed to eliminate the noise. Inherently, the noise of an HST does not travel as far as an airplane.

Fuel costs for trains that run on electricity, as almost all HSTs require, are far more controllable. As we've seen oil prices fluctuate greatly and can threaten the existence of air travel or it's affordability quite easily.

[YOY]

8. More than strike each other...they'd rip each other apart all the way down the line.

It would be like a can opener ripping the roof off the entirety of both trains from the corner.

[Puzzler]

5. However, there are a few differences...

... most of the French system is double-tracked. Also, US (and Canadian) freight trains, on average, are much longer and heavier than their European counterparts (up to 10 times heavier in many cases). Relatively light and rapid accelerating commuter trains do not ideally mix that well with ultra-heavy freights... particularly on rail systems with a fair amount of single trackage.

[originalpckelly]

7. Yeah, that's the problem here...

but that costs a lot more than a better signaling system. If the train had been forced to stop, this never would have happened.

We also need to stop the bs of mile long trains. There are a thousand things we could do to improve our system. It's just that no one seems to give a damn.