I ride the Metrolink train here in Los Angeles every work day, and I’ve been commuting that way for about six and a half years. In that time, I believe there have been three accidents major enough to cause fatalities on the train itself (including last week’s tragedy), although I haven’t been on any of those trains myself.
For those who aren’t aware, last Friday’s incident involved a head-on collision between a Metrolink commuter train and a freight train. The Metrolink train’s locomotive was shoved back into the first passenger car, causing the majority of the 25 fatalities.
Since that time, some of us who are regulars have noticed an interesting trend. No matter how crowded our regular, rush hour trains are as a whole, the front car of each train is only about half as full as it used to be. And I’ve actually had people tell me that they think it’s a bad idea to sit in the front (or even the rear, in case you get rear-ended) car now. People are apparently flocking to the middle of the train for safety.
I don’t know if this phenomenon could be considered analogous to people being afraid to fly after 9/11, but I have to tell you that the idea of altering where I sit on the train because I might be somehow more susceptible to injury is…well, strange. First of all, serious train accidents are very, very rare. Second, who’s to say where the most injuries would occur in such an event? I mean, the whole train could derail, and maybe only the middle cars are the ones that fall over, right?
Anyway, I’m just curious to see how you think you might react if you imagine you were a Metrolink commuter when this accident occurred. Would you change where you sat? Would you stop riding the train altogether? Would you be phased at all? If you fly frequently, do you become hesitant after a major plane crash?
The only accidents with public transport in Northern Ireland have for the most part been with buses. None of this rolling down a hill business that British holiday makers suffer regularly, just a car smashing into the front of the bus, leaving them must worse off. Even after reading these, I don’t bother with my seat belt on the express bus and I would never drive without my seatbelt, or that of my passengers undone.
While we haven’t had any accidents that major in my memory, we’ve had some pretty bad ones in the spring – like, a whole bunch all at once. There was a collision on the line that I ride on, and I may very well have been on that very train. A block from where I live, a fire started on the inside of the train. (Autolycus was even there to witness it.)
It has not slowed down my ridership one bit. I understand that these things are very rare, and usually not fatal.
Relatives of mine were involved in a a crash many years ago on the London Underground, where a train ran into the rear of theirs. They were in the rear carriage, and although unhurt had some pretty horrific experiences. I still feel a twinge of nervousness getting into the end of a train, but quickly overcome it.
In the OP’s case, I’d expect to see things even out fast. As the timid move to the centre of the train, the less concerned will spot the emptiness of the end carriages. There’s also the possibility of confirmation bias - perhaps the train has stopped at several stations where the platform entrance is somewhere near the middle, but you never noticed this effect until now?
If you want to tackle head-on the almost-irrational nature of an urge to go to the middle, ask yourself which carriage a suicide bomber is most likely to position themselves in…
I could die slipping on a bar of soap in the shower, or stepping off the curb into the street into the path of an oncoming truck. I try my best not to, but, y’know, shit happens. I need to get to work, and the train takes me there. Accidents are VERY few and far between. I’ll take the odds.
ETA - I’d possibly sit in the middle as much as possible, but I am also a big fan of people not being near me on the train, so i might stick to the ends.
The Chicago area has their own commuter rail line called Metra, and they have fatal accidents now and then. The ones that stick most in mind are one where a truck carrying huge metal coils crossed the tracks when a train was coming, and the collision also sent one of those coils crushing through the first train car, IIRC killing some people, and another where I think they determined that the engineer failed to reduce speed when signaled, resulting in a derailment and a few deaths. That’s not to mention the more comparatively minor accidents when they hit cars that go around the crossing gates or hit people who are on the tracks.
Meanwhile, I’ve been riding Metra for over a decade, every day to and from work, and haven’t even been on a train that’s hit a person, much less one of the big accidents. However, after seeing the photo of the Metra train car that had the metal coil rip it open, I will admit to not liking to ride in the first car. (In this incident, the train’s engine was at the rear of the train, pushing the train along. The engineer sits in the first car in a little cabin. The trains on the system don’t turn around, but push downtown and pull going outbound.) That’s not really an issue in the morning, as the first half of the train is usually packed by everyone who wants to rush for the doors and the exit to the train station. In the evening, the train is arranged the “usual” way so the front is an engine, and I usually sit in the first or second passenger car.
I can see doing so if there is a real statistical effect. If the whole train derails, then it may be pretty random which cars are most effective. Similarly if there’s a bomb on the train, or if an earthquake opens up the track and rips the train apart, or if the train magically turns into cheese. All those affect all cars equally, so they shouldn’t change anything. But a head on (or rear end) collision pretty much only screws the people in the first and last cars, so there’s an incentive not to sit there.
Of course, right now is probably the safest time ever to sit in the first car, what with heightened safety awareness due to the recent crash.
If the trains really are crowded at commute time, I’d bet that within a few weeks, people will be going to whichever car has more room.
Nope. Even with the metrolink accidents (which I don’t ride) and the Orange Line accidents (which I do ride), I’d still rather take public transport whenever possible.
A good point, but I just wanted to clarify that this is definitely not the case here. Metrolink does not gate off their boarding areas, so you can, at most stations, board from anywhere at all – you aren’t herded through a single point. Also, I’ve been riding this train for years, and this is a time when it has always been full to the point where you’re lucky to find any open seat at all in the front car, which happens to be closest to the stairwell where most people get to the platform. It is very, VERY noticeable when the car is suddenly half-empty.
Yes, I would start boarding the 2nd train. To me it makes as much sense as buckling my safety belt. I’m thinking it might be a good idea to stick a freight car in the first slot and use it for for mail or spare parts or whatever. Hell they could pull a refrigerator car and sell food on the trains.
Would you sit in the back seat of a car if you were the only passenger?
In Sydney about nine years ago, we had a train accident in which a commuter train (Electric Multiple Unit - so no loco) ran up the back of a stationary train. This other train was the transcontinental Indian-Pacific, which is a passenger train, but had a double-deck motor-car carrying wagon at the rear. The decks of this sliced deeply into the first car of the commuter train and killed a few people. In the days or weeks that followed, you could stand on a platform and see the sun shining through the windows of the first and last cars of commuter trains but blotted out by a crush of people in the middle ones. But it didn’t last.
Folks could also wear crash helmets when they drive their car. Better still, we could just stay home. It’s a trade-off of convenience versus risk: for mine, I’d gladly take the front of a train if it meant I had peace and quiet away from the madding crowd, and I’d do so the day after a high profile collision.
I remember the Glendale crash caused by the suicide attempt, but what was the third?
I’ve never worked and lived in a place where I could use a train specifically to get between home and work, but if I did, an accident wouldn’t change my habits over the long term. Traffic is too taxing of my patience and driving is too much of a bore. It isn’t so bad if it’s just ten miles on the 405, because you can usually find an alternate surface route, but if you live farther out along the rail lines, finding good surface streets is just too complicated, if not impossible.
No but I’d wear a seatbelt. Princess Diana was in the rear seat and died. The only person who lived was in the front seat wearing a seatbelt.
People measure risk by probability and that is not how to measure it. You have to weigh the consequences with the probability.
Example 1: if I risk cutting myself with a sharp tool versus putting on leather gloves I may choose to forgo the gloves for a short period of time. The worst that could happen is a couple of stitches and I have the added benefit of intentionally being extra careful. I weigh the time saved and the added feel of the tool versus a minor injury.
Example 2: If I risk flying over water I greatly reduce my chances of survival in an engine failure versus saving 20 minutes of flying time. A couple of years ago I had a conversation with the mechanic that redid my motor and he chided me a little for not taking a more direct route over Lake Michigan. He is by far the finest mechanic I’ve ever met and uses the best parts available. But the year he said that 2 people died in the lake I would have flown over. 2 years later I was going back to the same event and lost the impulse coupling on the left mag. It changed the timing so much that the plugs loaded up before I figured out it was the mag and switched to the other one. Had this happened over the lake I would have been in serious trouble. Luckily it happened on run-up. All that failed was a spring. I keep it in my flight bag as a reminder.
I remember there being reports that the conductor of the Metrolink train may have saved some lives because he either saw the other train coming or was warned by the engineer, and he ran through the car yelling at people to brace themselves just before they were hit.
I don’t have any cites for that – it’s just what I recall hearing.
It might change my habits if it appeared to be likely to repeat itself - for example, if it was caused by some design flaw in the vehicles, some pattern of institutional neglect or incompetence in the maintenance or operation, etc.
I took an intro to Psychology class a while back that cited a statistic where they compared the change in the number of people flying in October 2001 compared to 2000 to the difference in the number of people killed in auto accidents in the same period, and found that the increase in auto deaths was greater than the loss of life on 9/11, thus suggesting that driving was still more dangerous, statistically, than flying was.
That said, if I need to get somewhere by plane, such as visiting my family for the only vacation I get during the year halfway across the country, a plane crash is not likely to deter me from doing that. As for not sitting in the front car of a train after an accident, I dunno.
