Reply to comment

Printer-friendly versionSend by email

By Alan Kandel

Due to my past work in the field of railway signaling, I have a deep appreciation for most anything railway signaling related. Signaling is – and has long been – a crucial part of the railway-operating environment. It is with safety in mind that the governance of train movement through railway signaling capability even came about. In fact, the railroad is where the term “Safety First” originated.

But it wasn’t until a disastrous head-on collision between a then Burlington Northern and a Union Pacific freight train outside the town of Kelso, Washington in November 1993, whereby all five train crew members onboard both trains were killed in this mishap, that I began to pay particularly close attention to these occurrences with the hope that I would one day learn of news that substantive, constructive and corrective progress had been made guaranteeing that the most preventable of all transportation-centered collisions – train-to-train collisions – would be a thing of the past. Unfortunately, that hasn’t happened yet.

It was in reference to my reading an account of this tragedy that I submitted to the editor of Railway Age magazine, in letter format, a written response detailing my reaction to that crash. That letter in its entirety was published in the September 1994 Railway Age. Here is an excerpt:

“It shouldn’t take a catastrophic event before corrective measures are taken. Yet, it always seems to be the case.

“Hopefully, through research and a willingness to become part of the solution, true crash-avoidance technology can one day be realized on a universal basis. The cost of not having at the very least some type of minimal ‘anti-collision’ system in place is far too great for any transportation mode to be without!”

No one should have to lose his or her life or become injured and/or disabled this way.

Much more close to home and sometime thereafter, on June 14, 2006 two Burlington Northern Santa Fe freight trains collided in the early morning hours just outside the city of Madera in California’s Central Valley. Although there were no fatalities, “All crew members from both trains sustained non life-threatening injuries; one required an extended hospital stay,” according to a Federal Railroad Administration released FRA Factual Railroad Accident Report. “The probable cause is the failure of Train #1 to comply with automatic block or interlocking signal displaying a stop indication.”

Jump ahead two years and the unthinkable happens once again although this time the outcome was far, far worse.

On the fateful day of September 12, 2008, Metrolink train #111 (northbound) and Union Pacific freight train #8485 East (southbound) crashed head-on just north of the Chatsworth, California Station after Metrolink engineer Robert Sanchez allegedly moved the train he was operating past a restrictive red (stop) signal and rounded a bend where disaster struck. Twenty-five people in all died, including Sanchez, and another 130-some people sustained injuries of varying severity. It was one of the worst train-to-train collisions in the history of train operations in the United States.

As a result of this accident, a bill introduced by U.S. Senators Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein and passed by both Houses of Congress and signed into law by President George W. Bush, mandated that no later than December 31, 2015, all railroads engaged in interstate commerce whereby hazardous cargo is carried and should such cargo being transported be compromised as a result of a train-on-train collision and whereby as a result of said collision poisonous vapors are released into the atmosphere and could present an inhalation hazard, a Positive Train Control system incorporating a collision-avoidance component, must be present and in effect to significantly reduce the possibility that this type of event could occur. Similarly, this mandate applies as well to freight railroads on which passenger trains are operated.

In this regard Lisa Caruso at Bloomberg Businessweek wrote, “Some railroads say that the necessary technology won’t be available in time to meet that deadline.”

“California Democratic senators Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer last week wrote to Joseph Szabo, head of the Federal Railroad Administration, saying they are ‘deeply concerned that falling behind’ on deploying the new systems ‘could prompt attempts to extend the 2015 deadline,’” Caruso continued.

Too high a price to pay?

“The Federal Railroad Administration estimated in 2010 it would cost railroads $13.2 billion over 20 years to install and maintain the systems. When the agency last year proposed changes to the rule that would exempt as much as 14,000 miles of track, it said railroads would save as much as $1 billion over 20 years,” Caruso added.

Meanwhile, “According to the U.S. Department of Transportation, some 40% of railroad accidents are caused by human error,” wrote Brett Emison. “Starting in 1990, to mitigate these human error accidents, the [National Transportation Safety Board] put a new system called ‘Positive Train Control’ or PTC on its Most Wanted List of Transportation Safety Improvements. Positive Train Control is a system that will automatically apply the brakes on trains that are about to collide or enter the wrong track, and includes train separation or collision avoidance; line speed enforcement; temporary speed restrictions; and rail worker wayside safety. The system was designed to reduce the number of human errors that lead to train collisions and derailments that cause injuries, deaths and hazmat spills.”

It’s not clear at this time whether a proposal being put forth by the U.S. House transportation committee to have the effective date of PTC implementation pushed back by five years to December 31, 2020, will gain traction.

To use a railroad metaphor, this nation can ill afford to have the ball drop on implementation of this crucial technology.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Alan Kandel is a concerned California resident advocating for new, improved and expanded freight (and passenger) rail service. He is a retired railroad signalman previously employed by the Union Pacific Railroad in Fremont, California.