LAist: Train Engineer Apparently Sent Txt Msg Before Crash

boogaloo

Thu, 02 Oct 2008 15:17:08 -0800

My final entry: with the timeline data released today by the ntsb, the unbelievable appears to be true - engineer sanchez was texting right up to the time of the crash - most likely he never braked because he was starring at his cell phone creating another text message instead of watching the tracks, plus he ran the turnout without even noticing. The knx suicide theory is crap - sanchez had called ahead to moorpark to order a roast beef sandwich. Take-away message: texting can kill you as well as those around you.

boogaloo

Tue, 23 Sep 2008 05:42:30 -0800

And there you have it - it's a money issue. I bet the co-pilot option would be more expensive than the automated safety-stop option, but not sure. Pretty clear it has to be one or the other unless the government takes the usual option which is to do nothing for fear of raising taxes.

savvysearch

Sun, 21 Sep 2008 01:54:02 -0800

My question is why aren't there two conductors in the front cab? If a plane requires it, so should a train.

boogaloo

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 20:38:20 -0800

One last point, sorry. If engineer Sanchez was fully conscious during that last 1.25 miles, why did he not react to the serious jolt he would have felt when he blew through the turnout that was switched in the opposite direction from his path? He could have applied the brake at that time if he was conscious. That jolt surely would have overtaken any preoccupation with sending a 4-word text message!! It is looking more and more to me like something was wrong in that cab. The jury is still out.

boogaloo

Thu, 18 Sep 2008 20:33:25 -0800

Ok guys, unless my college physics fails me - the train should have averaged 35mph over the 1.25 mile run - this takes 2.14 minutes. A 1.99 time difference would have led to the one minute differential between the time stamp on the texting and the crash. This means a transmission lag DURING PEAK HOURS of only .15 minutes would have allowed engineer Rob Sanchez to have texted the four words while stationary at the Chatsworth station. The real question is why did he not respond to the red light which he could see down the tracks from the station itself. It still does not add up, but i doubt the texting had anything to do with it - bad idea but not a cause. The reason is unknown.

thecoloured

Mon, 15 Sep 2008 09:10:37 -0800

"And that's why you don't text on your phone while operating a locamotive." Arrested Development anyone?

makfan

Mon, 15 Sep 2008 00:45:01 -0800

What a tragedy. I ride Caltrain in the SF Bay Area regularly. This is a commuter rail service very similar to Metrolink, although it doesn't serve nearly as many destinations. I am reserving any judgment until we have all the facts. The text could have been sent during the station stop just prior to the collision. You can be sure all the phone records will be checked. The NTSB produces very detailed reports of significant incidents.

LA MapNerd

Sun, 14 Sep 2008 17:19:40 -0800

Well, sure, it's possible. A lot of things are possible. I'm just saving my outrage for something a bit more definite than 'possible.' (And the report is that the text was received a minute before the crash. Hard to tell from that precisely when it was sent. You are aware that there's frequently some time lag between the time a text is sent and the time it's received, yes?)

vega

Sun, 14 Sep 2008 16:22:09 -0800

I've seen bus drivers texting while driving.. I've already notified Metro. I agree we should reserve judgment, but it's not outside the realm of possibility - the text was sent a minute before the crash, and Metrolink said the train was traveling 40 mph. At that speed, it takes about a minute and a half to cover a mile and a qtr.. it's definitely possible that the engineer was texting while the train was moving.

LA MapNerd

Sun, 14 Sep 2008 09:32:52 -0800

The train had just left the Chatsworth Metrolink passenger station when the crash happened - the crash site is only about a mile and a quarter from the station. So it's not really safe to assume the engineer was "texting while driving a train." He may very well have been texting while sitting stopped at the Chatsworth station. Personally, I think I'll reserve any outraged denunciations and angry moralizing until we have some actual facts, and not go leaping to as-yet unwarranted conclusions on the basis of unconfirmed media reports and insupportable assumptions.

Emoney

Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:54:54 -0800

Even if it turns out that there was an issues with the stop light... Why was he texting while driving a train???? It's one thing to risk your own life, but it's another to be so careless with 200+ people who entrust their safety and well being in your hands. I can not think of anything more selfish than taking the life of another person, intended or not.

vega

Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:49:05 -0800

Maybe the engineer was texting, and therefore not paying attention to the red light.

Public Relations

Sat, 13 Sep 2008 23:02:15 -0800

If they repeatedly tested the light and there were other problems with it - or any concerns expressed by other Engineers who passed it - that could be the basis for their conclusion. Unfortunately, the Engineer will never be able to give his side of the story