• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

NTSB: SUV driver's unexplained actions caused fatal 2015 Metro-North crash

FrankCanada97

Roughly the size of a baaaaaarge
valhalla17-e1475170496816.jpg


nytimes.com/2017/07/25/nyregion/woman-who-drove-across-tracks-at-fault-in-fatal-metro-north-crash-investigators-find.html?&referer=&referer=
The driver of a sport utility vehicle that was hit by a Metro-North Railroad train caused the accident that killed her and five train passengers when she drove onto the tracks in Westchester County two years ago, the National Transportation Safety Board said on Tuesday.

But the board said it could not answer a key question: why the woman drove forward — into the path of the train after a crossing arm came down on her vehicle — rather than back up.

Still, the severity of the accident was exacerbated by the track itself. The electrified third rail was constructed in such a way that the crash caused it to rip away and tear through train.
...
...
...
The board recommended extensive study of such tracks at rail crossings nationwide to determine if they are safe.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority, which operates Metro-North, said it would comply with the safety board’s recommendation. “Our hearts go out to the families and individuals who were affected by the tragic and unprecedented accident,” Aaron Donovan, a spokesman for the authority, said. “We appreciate the thorough investigation performed by the National Transportation Safety Board, which found that no action or inaction on the part of Metro-North Railroad contributed to the cause of the accident.”

The fiery crash at the height of the evening rush on February 3, 2015, killed the driver of the S.U.V., Ellen Brody, 49, and five people aboard the train, which was traveling north through Westchester County when it barreled into Ms. Brody’s S.U.V. at a rail crossing north of the Valhalla station.

The extensive investigation focused on several factors, including signals at the crossing, the train engineer and Ms. Brody’s actions. While the safety board laid responsibility on Ms. Brody, who according to a witness exited her car to inspect it after the crossing arm came down, got back inside and suddenly drove forward, investigators could not determine why.

“Unfortunately for those looking for answers, sometimes we cannot absolutely explain human behavior, especially when we don’t have that person to talk to,’’ Robert L. Sumwalt, the acting chairman of the National Transportation Safety Board, said during the board hearing in Washington to determine the cause.

Investigators had invested a significant amount of time trying to figure out “the mind-set of the driver,” Michael Hiller, a rail safety investigator, said at the hearing. Investigators interviewed the driver’s husband, Alan Brody, about issues like her sleep habits and her state of mind. Fatigue and stress were ruled out as factors. In addition, Ms. Brody had no drugs or alcohol in her system at the time of the crash and, according to phone records, was not using her cellphone. It could not be determined whether she was listening to music as the train approached and sounded its horn, investigators said, because the car was destroyed in the crash.
...
...
...
Mr. Brody, who filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against Metro-North last year, was dismayed by the board’s conclusion. The findings, he said, overlooked several factors, including the fact that the signs painted on road pavement warning drivers that a railroad crossing was ahead were likely obscured by cars traveling above and what he believes are flaws in signal systems at the crossing.
...
...
...
The crash was the deadliest in the history of Metro-North and while trains hit cars with some regularity across the country, the death toll is usually limited to the occupants of the vehicle that is hit. And though questions were raised about whether the system of crossing signals, known as a pre-emption system, played a role in the Metro-North crash, the transportation safety board concluded that the signals were not to blame.

Ultimately, investigators zeroed in on the third rail as an exacerbating issue. It did not break apart in the collision as might have been expected. Instead it remained intact and pierced the body of the train in several places, trapping some of the more than 650 passengers aboard.

One of the chief questions became, “Why did the third rail penetrate the rail cars during the accident, without breaking away?” said Dr. Xiaohu Liu, a transportation safety board analyst at the hearing. “Metro north’s current third rail system may increase the severity of damages and injuries when accidents occur at or near grade crossing.”

Despite the board’s conclusion, its inability to understand Ms. Brody’s actions left members dissatisfied. “We are all really troubled with why this happened,” Christopher A. Hart, a member of the transportation board said. “Because without knowing why this happened, we are less able to figure out what to do to keep it from happening.”

1dT2gUA.png


0x2AmnK.png


Full NTSB report can be found here:
https://ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/RAR1701.pdf

What normally would result in a single fatality, ended up with five due to the third rail not breaking apart and intruding the train car.
 

Glix

Member
Mr. Brody, who filed a wrongful-death lawsuit against Metro-North last year, was dismayed by the board's conclusion. The findings, he said, overlooked several factors, including the fact that the signs painted on road pavement warning drivers that a railroad crossing was ahead were likely obscured by cars traveling above and what he believes are flaws in signal systems at the crossing.
...

I feel awful that he lost his wife, but, come on man. They arm was down and she drove onto the tracks. Thats on her.

From what I read in the report, it appears that she was unaware that she was on the tracks at all. There was no sense of urgency in her actions when she got out of the car.

From the OP it sounds like she wasnt on the tracks when she got out, and then when she got back in she drove past the arm and onto the tracks?
 

sangreal

Member
Of course her husband is suing Metro North for the accident she caused which killed a number of people

Also this article is a month old
 

Instro

Member
Wouldn't the assumption be that she wanted to kill herself? I mean based on the explanation, she wasn't on the tracks, then drove on to them right in front of the train.
 

Jenov

Member
But the board said it could not answer a key question: why the woman drove forward — into the path of the train after a crossing arm came down on her vehicle — rather than back up

I bet it's because she didn't want to hurt her car/break the crossing arm behind her. It's deceiving how fast those trains are going, especially when so close and head on, so she probably thought she could go forward and beat the train instead of having to back up.
 

sangreal

Member
...
From the OP it sounds like she wasnt on the tracks when she got out, and then when she got back in she drove past the arm and onto the tracks?

The arm came down on her car. She got out to check the damage and then drove forward onto the tracks
 
We need a episode of Law & Order to explain this to me. I need to visually see it because I can't fathom why at all. The arm came down for a reason... Did she not look to see if a train was coming?
 
The arm came down on her car. She got out to check the damage and then drove forward onto the tracks

Still her fault. You don't stop under the arm or on the tracks. Even in bumper to bumper traffic no one is suicidal enough to stop on the track. For this very reason. The car approaching the track waits until there is enough room past the track to cross it.

Her car never should have been there and that's on her. Getting out to check damage is astounding. There's a train coming....
 

sangreal

Member
Still her fault. You don't stop under the arm or on the tracks. Even in bumper to bumper traffic no one is suicidal enough to stop on the track. For this very reason. The car approaching the track waits until there is enough room past the track to cross it.

Her car never should have been there and that's on her. Getting out to check damage is astounding. There's a train coming....

Right, I was replying to the other half of that post

"There was no one behind me, so I backed up to make sure she had room. I thought she would back up too," he said, "but she got out of her car, walked back, and was touching the gate. What struck me was how calm she was — she didn't seem to be panicking, or in a hurry at all, even though the gate was down. She wasn't in a hurry at all, but she had to have known that a train was coming."

...

He said Brody's car was not quite on the tracks, and that had she not moved, the train probably wouldn't have struck the SUV at all, or at most would have clipped the bumper.

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news...ribes-horrific-train-crash-valhalla/22872865/

Her actions are inexplicable
 

FrankCanada97

Roughly the size of a baaaaaarge
Wouldn't the assumption be that she wanted to kill herself? I mean based on the explanation, she wasn't on the tracks, then drove on to them right in front of the train.

Why would she get out of the car to check out the gate in that case? She was on her way to a business meeting and it didn't seem like she was under any undue stress.

ibaQpcz.png


This is what the report says of her actions:

0x2AmnK.png
 

Stinkles

Clothed, sober, cooperative
Occam's Razor: She meant to go back.


I feel sad for her husband but it's completely her fault.
 
Top Bottom