Metrolink's fatalities high compared to other commuter railroads

The following is the number of fatalities on major commuter rail systems in the U.S. from all causes --- auto collisions, pedestrians hit, yard accidents, derailments, suicides, etc., from 1999 through June 30, 2008, as reported on the Federal Railroad Administration's online database:

New Jersey Transit -- 79
Metra (Chicago area) -- 59
Metrolink -- 47
Caltrain (Bay Area) -- 41
MBTA (Boston area) -- 40
Long Island RR -- 39
Metro North (NY to Conn.) -- 21
SEPTA (Philly area) -- 18
Tri-County (South Florida) -- 14
Marc (Maryland) -- 6

At this point, authorities have confirmed 25 dead in the Metrolink crash Friday. The Corona Police Department on Friday also confirmed that a woman had been killed after her car was struck by a Metrolink train less than an hour after the crash in the San Fernando Valley. In early September, a man walking along the tracks was killed by a Metrolink train in Northridge. Officials ruled that death a suicide. That brings Metrolink's total to 74.

For some perspective, New Jersey Transit trains traveled more than 4.7 million miles in 2007, as measured by the federal database. Metrolink traveled more than 1.2 million miles last year, according to the database. New Jersey Transit also carries more than five times the number of passengers than Metrolink.

It is important to note that the above numbers do not include accidents that have happened on the other railroads since June 30. There also may have been other accidents on Metrolink since the end of June that are not included.

-- Steve Hymon

Comments

[J in Pasadena]

Easily the deadliest commuter rail system per mile/per rider in the United States. Folks, these are just the Metrolink statistics. A close examination of MTA yields similar results. The design-build of L.A. rail systems is horrendous -- the consistent application of bad decisions prioritizing financial considerations over safety concerns.

[Damien Goodmon]

John,

As Steve somewhat alludes to in the post, when he compares Metrolink to Metra, there's the raw numbers of deaths and there's the accident frequency.

There are how many million car trips a day?

There are a total of what less than 100 Metrolink trips per day?

How can you compare them on the raw numbers. You can only compare the accident rates, in which case Metrolink and MTA's light rail system are so much deadlier than cars.

[John Starr]

Responding generally to other blogs concerning the train crash in Chatsworth:

Yes, of course: it is well within current technological capability to build a fully grade-separated, access-limited, bi-directional right-of-way for any public transportation route and mode you care to specify, up to and including the proposed LA-SF high-speed rail line. In that respect, a transitway is no different from a freeway. It might even cost somewhat less to build per mile than a freeway along the same route, and it would undoubtedly be less disruptive and more efficient in the long run. (But you don't want it in YOUR back yard, do you?)

Less dramatic but still costly, it is immediately feasible to install a train control system superior to what Metrolink seems to be using now (which is evidently not much different from what the major mainline freight carriers use, and not much more or less effective: pretty good, but not perfect). Pilot projects using advanced feedback systems are already in use, I understand, here and there in the Northeast and Midwest. Yet the potential public benefit of such improvements is only briefly spotlighted by incidents like last Friday's Chatsworth crash or the one six years ago in Placentia. On the other hand, the public COST never seems acceptable, no matter what form it might take.

There is usually some general outcry when we are abruptly confronted with stark images of Everyman's vulnerability to sudden death or mutilation. But ask people, a couple of months from now when the uproar has died down, to foot the enormous tax bill for such infrastructure improvements, and what response do you expect from the electorate? Despite ever-increasing fuel costs, most people can't or won't switch to public transportation, even occasionally. Consequently, most people can't foresee any immediate benefit to themselves, whereas they are enormously sensitive to anything that might reduce their disposable income. Never mind what might be helpful ten years from now; you can't afford to pay for it NOW, right? ("No new taxes! Reduce spending, instead!")

A certain amount of tunnel-vision is involved here. How many traffic deaths were there last week in LA County alone? They didn't all occur at a single time and place, so they didn't make the front page and the six o'clock news. Consequently they didn't trigger a wave of public concern over the growing inadequacies of our roadway infrastructure or the inherent dangers of private automotive transportation, even though the death rate per passenger-mile is much higher than that of any public mode. Anyway, we accept that element of personal risk, rationalizing that we have no realistic alternative. Yes?

We COULD have safer transportation systems. Would YOU use them? What would YOU be willing to sacrifice to bring them about?

[Darrel Woodward]

About the above comment,there is nothing wrong with the design of Metrolink,sharing the tracks with freight trains,when you get to realality,It still comes down to human error.This person Ron who made theabove comment sounds like an other self appointed expert that does not have any knowledge of how railroad signaling systems work,The only thing those people have that does work is a BIG MOUTH THAT FLAPS ALL OF THE TIME.

[spokker]

It's difficult to include the Glendale incident, where a man deliberately derailed the train. How can you put the blame for that incident on Metrolink?

Why are you including incidents where people try to beat the train and lose, such as the Corona incident? How can you include suicides? That doesn't make any sense. That people throw themselves in front of a train line doesn't make that line any more dangerous. It's just annoying as hell to the commuters.

[Ron]

I'm sorry, but this isn't about a signal failure or human error - its about seriously reckless flaws in the way the Metrolink lines are constructed.

The fact that a commuter train and a freight line can share one track at such a dangerous blind spot or that a psychotic individual can drive out onto the train tracks far from a road barricade are signs of high-level engineering flaws in the entire Metrolink design.

The metrolink death toll is so close to NJT - a transit network that spans and entire state and has to contend with centuries-old infrastructure, blizzards, washouts and ice storms. We have none of these conditions and yet Metrolink fails so miserably to keep its passengers safe.

We here in SoCal need to really ask Metrolink why exactly our regional rail network can have such unsafe conditions where others don't.

[Damien Newton]

Steve, do you have the information on whether or not these fatalities include suicides? I remember from my time in NJ that we seemed to have a person choose suicide by walking in front of a train a couple of times per year.