Someone pointed this out to me a few days ago, and it has since coincidently appeared on RailChat (http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=01b_1180201792). Someone in a messenger group convo yesterday afternoon said that they thought it was fake but having since looked at a reply on the RailChat thread it certainly seems to be real. Thanks to "craigybagel" for the links.
Image 1: http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=45962
Image 2: http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=45963
Image 1: http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=45962
Image 2: http://www.locophotos.com/PhotoDetails.php?PhotoID=45963
The Fresno Bee newsapaper of
10 March 2007
Full details on the accident
Federal report refutes signal failure, glare as causes of the collision.
By Russell Clemings / The Fresno Bee
03/10/07 05:45:54
Federal investigators late Friday blamed last summer's Madera County
train collision on operator error by the crew of one of the trains.
The report on the collision June 14 on the Burlington Northern Santa Fe
line near Road 26 and Avenue 19, just north of Madera, also said a
breakdown product of cocaine was found in the blood of the train's
conductor.
It said that the conductor's cocaine use "may have contributed to the
cause of the accident." But it went on to say that neither blood nor urine
test results would permit a conclusion about whether the conductor was
impaired.
BNSF spokeswoman Lena Kent said the railroad would be unable to
comment until it had reviewed the report, which the Federal Railroad
Administration released after close of business Friday.
The report placed blame for the accident solely on the crew of a train
traveling south toward Fresno. It discredited crew accounts that a signal
failed or that glare from the sunrise -- the accident happened shortly
before 6 a.m. -- blinded the crew to a signal.
It said that the signals were tested, and no defects were found. A re-
enactment of the accident showed that all signals were clearly visible.
Astronomical records did not suggest that sunlight was a problem.
"Despite claims to the contrary, there is no basis for accepting the
claims of crew members that their signal went clear or their vision was
hampered by the sunrise," the report concluded.
The train, with seven locomotives and 55 cars, braked hard at the last
minute and struck a northbound train with four locomotives and 30 cars.
At impact, the southbound train was traveling at 22 mph, and the
northbound train at 38 mph. They struck head-on.
Five crew members on the two trains were injured, and 24 locomotives
and cars derailed, resulting in more than $5 million in damage.
One of the state's main rail arteries was shut down for days.
The crew members were not identified in the report. Timothy Smith,
chairman of the California State Legislative Board of the Brotherhood of
Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, said he was skeptical of the
report's findings.
"If in fact it is the crew's fault that this accident happened, then why did
it happen?" he said. He said contributing factors such as fatigue should
be addressed.
The report said that both crews had received the required amount of off-
duty time before reporting for work.
The southbound crew had been working for about 9 1/2 hours before the
accident; the northbound crew for about two hours.