BNSF accident 6/14/06 Kismet, CA

Shop deals on ebay
shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
CCC1007

CCC1007

Customer Service Agent
Joined
Jan 2, 2015
Messages
1,846
Yes, that's been dubbed a "cornfield meet" by a lot of folks. Trouble is that Kismet, CA is nowhere near any cornfields. The opposing train is obviously the culprit in this situation, having run a red signal. Did you notice one of the crew members bailing out about 5 second before impact.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I did, and was hoping a certain person on this forum would see this and look at the report.
 
A few things that if one looks at this video in detail..

1. One thing you'll notice is that the Throttle Jockey of the opposing train jumps from the cab.. He should have "rode it out" which would have resulted in much less personal injury..

2. The signal for the train that the video is from had some type of clear signal.. Not sure what BNSF's signals are, but NORAC signal rules would be "Medium Clear". That signal dropped to a "Stop" either when the train ran the Stop Signal, or the dispatcher saw the Stop Signal Violation. Not sure which is more likely but most likely the circuits dropped the signal at the occurrence of the Stop Signal Violation.

I can guarantee that the Conductor of the Stop Signal Violation train is fired.. He was found in violation of Rule G as it's commonly known.. They found Coke in his system.. The engineer is most likely out of work as well.. Ran a Stop Signal and jumped ship trying to not get hurt..

I know that at NS you run a Stop Signal you're out of service for 1 year and even then you're not guaranteed to return.. That's up to a Union Trial... NS doesn't want you back if you run a Stop Signal.
 
Speaking of NS, the report in the first post says that the third unit of the train we have the pov of was from NS, so I would think that BNSF had to return it to NS after getting it roadworthy again.
 
A few puzzlers from the report/video:

1) Why no mention of the train #2 cab camera in the report? Did train #1 have a cab camera? Were cab cameras (recording audio, no less) common in 2006? Did BNSF require them?

2) The sketch in the report appears at odds with the text in the report. For example, the report text states in two places that three of the seven locomotives on train # 1 derailed, while the sketch seems to this ignorant reader to show that five of the seven lead units of train #1 derailed. Were some of the locomotives in the middle of the consist somewhere? Perhaps units 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 were locomotives, 2 and 4 were the tank cars mentioned in the report, and the other two locomotives were somewhere else? Are we assumed to know that a unit owner with a trailing X indicates a non-powered car?

3) The crew of train #2 describe having a conversation about whether or not to jump in the seconds before impact, but the cab camera, which appears to be recording cab sounds, doesn't have that conversation. (Or the usual "oh carp" or words to that effect that end most cockpit voice recordings.)

4) Why the jumps in the cab video? The most interesting time, it seems, when train #2 rounded the corner and train #1 first came into sight, is cut from the video.

5) A previous commenter states that jumping is considered bad performance, I guess, but the crew of train #2 certainly seemed to think it was a reasonable choice, stating that they only didn't jump because their train was going too fast.

6) Interestingly, the three crew members who ejected sustained only minor injuries; the most seriously injured crew member, requiring lengthy hospitalization, was the engineer of train #2, who decided to ride it out. Of course, at 40 mph, he was faced with a different set of choices than the crew of train #1 at 20 mph.

Just musing,

Ainamkartma
 
ainamkartma said:
A few puzzlers from the report/video:

1) Why no mention of the train #2 cab camera in the report? Did train #1 have a cab camera? Were cab cameras (recording audio, no less) common in 2006? Did BNSF require them?

2) The sketch in the report appears at odds with the text in the report. For example, the report text states in two places that three of the seven locomotives on train # 1 derailed, while the sketch seems to this ignorant reader to show that five of the seven lead units of train #1 derailed. Were some of the locomotives in the middle of the consist somewhere? Perhaps units 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 were locomotives, 2 and 4 were the tank cars mentioned in the report, and the other two locomotives were somewhere else? Are we assumed to know that a unit owner with a trailing X indicates a non-powered car?

3) The crew of train #2 describe having a conversation about whether or not to jump in the seconds before impact, but the cab camera, which appears to be recording cab sounds, doesn't have that conversation. (Or the usual "oh carp" or words to that effect that end most cockpit voice recordings.)

4) Why the jumps in the cab video? The most interesting time, it seems, when train #2 rounded the corner and train #1 first came into sight, is cut from the video.

5) A previous commenter states that jumping is considered bad performance, I guess, but the crew of train #2 certainly seemed to think it was a reasonable choice, stating that they only didn't jump because their train was going too fast.

6) Interestingly, the three crew members who ejected sustained only minor injuries; the most seriously injured crew member, requiring lengthy hospitalization, was the engineer of train #2, who decided to ride it out. Of course, at 40 mph, he was faced with a different set of choices than the crew of train #1 at 20 mph.

Just musing,

Ainamkartma
Click to expand...
Well I can clear up some of the confusion about the initials, which are called reporting marks. Reporting marks are 2-4 letters that correspond with the owner of the car. Any reporting marks that end in 'x' indicate that the owner is not a railroad, such as DODX.
 
ainamkartma said:
A few puzzlers from the report/video:

1) Why no mention of the train #2 cab camera in the report? Did train #1 have a cab camera? Were cab cameras (recording audio, no less) common in 2006? Did BNSF require them?

2) The sketch in the report appears at odds with the text in the report. For example, the report text states in two places that three of the seven locomotives on train # 1 derailed, while the sketch seems to this ignorant reader to show that five of the seven lead units of train #1 derailed. Were some of the locomotives in the middle of the consist somewhere? Perhaps units 1, 3, 5, 6, and 7 were locomotives, 2 and 4 were the tank cars mentioned in the report, and the other two locomotives were somewhere else? Are we assumed to know that a unit owner with a trailing X indicates a non-powered car?

3) The crew of train #2 describe having a conversation about whether or not to jump in the seconds before impact, but the cab camera, which appears to be recording cab sounds, doesn't have that conversation. (Or the usual "oh carp" or words to that effect that end most cockpit voice recordings.)

4) Why the jumps in the cab video? The most interesting time, it seems, when train #2 rounded the corner and train #1 first came into sight, is cut from the video.

5) A previous commenter states that jumping is considered bad performance, I guess, but the crew of train #2 certainly seemed to think it was a reasonable choice, stating that they only didn't jump because their train was going too fast.

6) Interestingly, the three crew members who ejected sustained only minor injuries; the most seriously injured crew member, requiring lengthy hospitalization, was the engineer of train #2, who decided to ride it out. Of course, at 40 mph, he was faced with a different set of choices than the crew of train #1 at 20 mph.

Just musing,

Ainamkartma
Click to expand...
As for #3.. That's because Outward Facing Camera's don't record in cab audio..

#4... You want to sit there for 15-20 minutes watching them go along?? Not many people do who aren't rail fans..

#5.. If I was presented with such a situation I would actually hustle towards trailing units.
 

Latest posts

Back
Top