Talk:2008 Chatsworth train collision

Just spotted this off Wikinews: Witnesses: Doomed train had green light. Sources listed include LA Times, KCBS and IronWood Tech. I had heard rumors to this effect, but haven't had a chance to research them yet. Slambo (Speak) 18:49, 7 October 2008 (UTC)

Tests by the NTSB showed that the starting signals located 5000 feet (1524m) away are too far away to distinguish their color reliably. So a red could look like a green!? This would be a good reason to have an extra signal at the departure end of the Chatsworth platform that would be unambiguously showing Red or Yellow. These signals are approach lit, so it makes it difficult for non-railway observers to check what the signals look like. Tabletop (talk) 12:14, 26 March 2010 (UTC)

Presumably once the train gets close enough (what does NTSB say) the true colour of the signals become apparent. PaperBarking (talk) 06:06, 13 May 2010 (UTC) ^[1]

The following link discusses the reliability of the eye to perceive distant coloured lights correctly. This would reconcile the signal showing red, and the witnesses identifying it as green. The NTSB does not appear to recommend any changes to reconcile this contradiction, which has a "Asking for Trouble" quality. ^[2] Tabletop (talk) 02:40, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

A map of the turnout/switch/points is Here. The box outlining the switch is a bit low - the small white rectangle on the left hand side of the track would be the switch-machine/points-motor which changes the switch from normal (straight) to reverse (curved). The cross-hair is on the opposite side of the track to the switch-machine. Tabletop (talk) 05:41, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Does anyone have a picture (or description) of the two signal(s) at the end of the double track?

Were these signals LED or incandescent?

Similarly with the previous signals on the double track be? Tabletop (talk) 04:17, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I found this. – Zntrip 04:35, 20 October 2008 (UTC) Just at this point of time I have yet to load the right add-in to view this item. Tabletop (talk) 05:44, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

I also posted a photo request at Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Los_Angeles#Request_for_photo_of_railroad_signal_in_Chatsworth but no help so far. I saw a posting on a railfan board that these were 3-lamp Safetran colored light signals. Dhaluza (talk) 08:21, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

"3-lamp" presumably means not a "searchlight"!

LED or incandescent - as yet unanswered.

See North American railroad signals for some sample signals.

Tabletop (talk) 11:18, 20 October 2008 (UTC)

Is Chatsworth station on a crossing loop, in which case there is single line on both sides?

Or is Chatsworth station at the end of the double line? Tabletop (talk) 00:41, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Can we include this accident in crossing loop#Accidents at crossing loops? Tabletop (talk) 00:42, 3 January 2009 (UTC)

Chatswood has a long crossing loop with an intermediate signal in each direction. Thus could also be regarded as a section of bi-directional double line. Tabletop (talk) 02:44, 14 May 2010 (UTC)

I have reinstated my edit. Will reference the map on the article talk page, but the truth of my statement was self evident. If interlocking trap points had been in place no collision would have occurred. We would be talking of a derailment.--Wickifrank (talk) 13:49, 24 February 2009 (UTC)

Though there would have been a derailment through the catchpoints, and the freight train may still have collided with this wreckage albeit at slower speed. Tabletop (talk) 22:42, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Has anyone else noted this LA Times article: Experts say sequence of signals may have contributed to Metrolink crash, by Robert Lopez and Rich Connell, Los Angeles Times? Summary extracts as follows:

“Several hundred yards and a few seconds before arriving at the Chatsworth station, Metrolink engineer Robert M. Sanchez passed a critical solid yellow signal that should have warned him to stop at the next light about a mile after the depot, according to federal safety investigators.

Placing the yellow light before a station, experts say, creates an opportunity for distractions for engineers -- who must bring the train to a halt, communicate with conductors and focus on passengers getting on or off. This is especially critical in places like the Chatsworth station, where the signal after the depot is near a point where the main line merges with another track.

Signal locations have been determined largely by factors such as curves, double track switches and the stopping and movement requirements of longer, heavier freight carriers that share track with Metrolink trains, according to the commuter service.

But ideally, key warning signals -- or, at the very least, reminder signs -- should be positioned right after the depot at stations such as Chatsworth, according to the experts.

So-called approach lights -- yellow warnings of a stop signal ahead -- should never be placed before stations such as Chatsworth, said Ron Kaminkow, a veteran engineer and official with Railroad Workers United, a coalition of eight rail employee unions. A 1996 head-on collision in Maryland was blamed largely on distractions caused by a station stop that a commuter train made after it passed an approach signal, records show. Federal investigators concluded that the engineer forgot about the warning, sped away from the station and then was unable to stop at a junction where an approaching Amtrak train had the right of way.

"The physical and mental tasks associated with stopping the train at [the] station provided the primary source of interference," the NTSB concluded in its investigation of the crash. These "attention-demanding tasks" included reducing the throttle, applying the brakes and positioning the train properly in the station, investigators found.

After that accident, the rail company that operated the commuter train and signal system, CSX Transportation, added reminder signs before and at the station where the crash occurred. Safety experts note that research shows human error is reduced when an uninterrupted sequence of warnings or events precedes a crucial task -- such as stopping a train at a red light to let another train pass. The normal sequence of railroad signal lights is intended to alert and remind the engineer and crew of the potential danger ahead, said USC professor Najmedin Meshkati, who studies human behavior related to safety. A station stop between signals increases chances of mistakes, he said."

Should any of this be added (yet) to the article?

Martinevans123 (talk) 17:06, 15 April 2009 (UTC)

The expert is quite right in saying that the Approach (yellow) signal should be located between the platform and the starting (red) signal, just in case the driver forgets. However, GoogleMap or whatever, seems to show that the track between the platform and the starting signal is dead straight (though it does not show any hills and dales) which may mean that the driver could perhaps see the red starting signal from the platform. Witnesses (at the platform) seem to say that they could indeed see the starting signal. Tabletop (talk) 01:39, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

One might also add that the starting signal had no overlap, which is a safety margin. If the approach signal had been on the north side of the platform, and made into a stop signal showing red, so that two signals in a row showed red, then that would have greatly reduced the chance of an accident. Tabletop (talk) 01:42, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Maybe the approach signal was installed where it is long ago and the station platform build later, without any thought given to relocation of that signal on the better side of the station?

The suggestion in the article seems to be that the first signal, before the station, was sited that far back to accommodate the longer stopping distances of the larger freight trains which also use the track. In my experience Googlemaps cannot be relied upon to show locations with a greater accuracy than 150 metres or even more. There were also questions about the comparative brightness (as well as the colour) of the second signal. Martinevans123 (talk) 07:10, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

If the braking distance from the better (and shorter) position of the approach signal is now too short, then a second "preliminary approach" signal with adequate braking distance could be provided. Tabletop (talk) 00:15, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

At Stroud Road, the red starting signal cannot be seen round a curve, so a repeater signal is installed at the end of the platform. Tabletop (talk) 09:29, 16 December 2009 (UTC)

Should provide link to article to the far more famous 1887 Chatsworth, IL train wreck that killed 85. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1887_Great_Chatsworth_train_wreck

bobroberts248 (talk) 08:08, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

Agree. Have added note at start of article. Martinevans123 (talk) 12:53, 16 April 2009 (UTC)

I added this to the article, but someone else took it out. I won't edit war. But I would like to hear other people's opinions on it being in the article or not. How does someone with a prison record get hired for such an important government job?

Sanchez had a prison record - six years prior to the crash, he had spent 90 days in jail for shoplifting. See: Feds to interview railroad brakeman and conductor in Metrolink crash, Los Angeles Daily News, September 30, 2008. Metrolink 111 engineer led solitary life marred by tragedy, Los Angeles Times, September 17, 2008</ref>

Grundle2600 (talk) 23:36, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

Regardless, I don't see how it has anything to do with the crash. If this was a bus accident and he was a bus driver that was convicted of a DUI I think that should be mentioned. But shoplifting and operating a train are two different things entirely. We haven't mentioned other things about his personal life that has nothing to do with the accident, so why should we mention his criminal record? – Zntrip 23:51, 25 April 2009 (UTC)

I just thought that people with prison records weren't supposed to be hired for important government jobs. Grundle2600 (talk) 15:46, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Both sources also say he had received a traffic citation for speeding. Perhaps that's more relevant to his job. Grundle2600 (talk) 15:47, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

Traffic citations for speeding have no impact on a locomotive engineer's job. DUI does; see comments below. Highspeed (talk) 16:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

I agree that this conviction has nothing to do with the crash. It may be an indicator for some deeper psychological issues, or not; but such a conclusion shouldn't be implied in an encyclopedic entry. In regards to your indignation that someone convicted of a misdemeanor could have been trusted with such a responsibility, I don't see the connection. The shoplifting conviction came after he had been hired by Amtrak in 1998. If an employee is convicted of a misdemeanor, their employer might not even find out, and I doubt it would automatically disqualify you. In the U.S., locomotive engineers are only required to report convictions of DUI's to their employer. When Amtrak lost the contract to operate the Metrolink system in 2005, any Amtrak employee who wanted to go to the new provider (Connex) was automatically hired. And Connex was not going to look beyond an engineer's railroad safety record because they were short of engineers willing to stay with the new operator of the Metrolink operation. Highspeed (talk) 16:03, 26 April 2009 (UTC)

OK. Thanks for explaining that. You people have convinced me that it's not relevant. Thanks. Grundle2600 (talk) 01:46, 27 April 2009 (UTC)

In 2003, a US federal agency gathered hundreds of pages or research and warnings about the hazards of drivers using mobile phones, but withheld the in part because of fear of angering congress, reports said yesterday. (22 July 2009).

The former head of the National Highway Traffic Safety to the New York Times he was urged not to publish the findings to avoid antagonising members of congress, who warned the agency against lobbying states. He said transit officials had told him he could lose billions in funding if congress thought that the agency had crossed the line into lobbying.

Critics said the failure of the Transportation Department to pursue the role of driving distractions in car crashes has resulted in traffic deaths and allowed the habit of multitasking while driving to grow.

The research findings were obtained by the Centre for Auto Safety and Public Citizen through Freedom of Information. They showed that mobile phone usage by drivers in the US increased from 4 percent in 2000 to 6 percent in 2002. The research said that driver distraction contributed to 25 percent of police-reported traffic crashes.

Presumably what applies to car drivers also applies to train drivers. See The Australian newspaper, 22 July 2009, p9.

Tabletop (talk) 03:34, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

Can you give us a source on this??? Thanks! Highspeed (talk) 04:54, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

See above. Do you want more of the quote quoted? Tabletop (talk) 02:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

Well this has been well publicized recently, see ABC, MSNBC, CBC, etc. However, the study was conducted by the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration with regards to operating automobiles, so I don't see how this is relevant to this particular article or even trains in general. – Zntrip 05:37, 22 July 2009 (UTC)

The train driver in this accident was communicating on his mobile phone and quite easily could have been distracted from the the task of observing the signals. The newspaper article is all about getting distracted and is extremely relevant. Tabletop (talk) 02:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

A recent airplane crash was partly caused by the pilots talking too much about non flying matters, especially while trying to land. Tabletop (talk) 02:55, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

I see how there is a connection, but to make an assumption based on a study conducted with automobiles would constitute original research. – Zntrip 03:07, 23 July 2009 (UTC)

This might be made into a list.

• Pilots overshoot airport by 240km. Tabletop (talk) 05:59, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

It could be, although most accidents involving human error are caused by distraction, if not incompetence. – Zntrip 08:13, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

The list would be for all forms of transport, since the number of documented examples is possibly small, and examples from one mode may lend light on examples in other modes. Tabletop (talk) 09:07, 24 October 2009 (UTC)

I've just nominated two of the article's three images - File:Chatsworth train collision 20080913-022716.jpg and File:Chatsworth Train Collision 20080913-022324.jpg - for deletion on Commons as copyright violations. Several images from the NTSB report may be useful as replacements. As a report by an office of the US federal government, the images inside are in the public domain. Pi.1415926535 (talk) 22:29, 6 November 2012 (UTC)

I took the images you removed because of a supposed copyright violation. When I upgraded my gallery software, the CC-BY-SA license link at the bottom of the pages was inadvertently removed. I've restored the license link. You can feel free to continue using the images if you want. Note that the URL of the gallery has changed: https://www.wiggenhorn.org/gallery/v/craig/lapasadena/traincollision/. Thanks! dcraig (talk) 22:41, 29 July 2013 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2008 Chatsworth train collision. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080919150946/http://blogs.usatoday.com:80/ondeadline/2008/09/calif-temporari.html to http://blogs.usatoday.com/ondeadline/2008/09/calif-temporari.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 08:03, 25 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on 2008 Chatsworth train collision. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/20090114214627/http://www.philly.com:80/inquirer/world_us/20080916_Crash_called_preventable.html to http://www.philly.com/inquirer/world_us/20080916_Crash_called_preventable.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 05:40, 24 February 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 4 external links on 2008 Chatsworth train collision. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110520022554/http://www.pe.com/ap_news/California/CA_Train_Collision_Cause_358681C.shtml to http://www.pe.com/ap_news/California/CA_Train_Collision_Cause_358681C.shtml
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110520093358/http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10499850 to http://www.mercurynews.com/ci_10499850
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110520094350/http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_10641133 to http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_10641133
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110520093234/http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_10477154 to http://www.mercurynews.com/news/ci_10477154

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

N An editor has determined that the edit contains an error somewhere. Please follow the instructions below and mark the |checked= to true

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 22:34, 1 March 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2008 Chatsworth train collision. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.labusinessjournal.com/article.asp?aID=759699502.7805576.1681407.5054153.8224803.833&aID2=129330
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://cbs2.com/local/Metrolink.Engineer.Deadly.2.817045.html

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 20:02, 19 April 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on 2008 Chatsworth train collision. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919211602/http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=5819947 to http://www.abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=5819947
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919045107/http://www.knx1070.com:80/METROLINK-ENGINEER-REPORTED-TO-BE-TEXTING-BEFORE-C/2959296 to http://www.knx1070.com/METROLINK-ENGINEER-REPORTED-TO-BE-TEXTING-BEFORE-C/2959296

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:21, 19 September 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 25 external links on 2008 Chatsworth train collision. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080917222324/http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_10459251 to http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_10459251
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.thestandard.com/news/2008/09/15/feds-hope-conductor-can-shed-light-deadly-crash
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080922095443/http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/sep/21/talk-of-rails-future-follows-deadly-crash/ to http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/sep/21/talk-of-rails-future-follows-deadly-crash/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_10520015
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/front/la-me-rescue14-2008sep14%2C0%2C7989801.story
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.laindependent.com/default.asp?sourceid=&smenu=1&twindow=&mad=&sdetail=4134&wpage=1&skeyword=&sidate=&ccat=&ccatm=&restate=&restatus=&reoption=&retype=&repmin=&repmax=&rebed=&rebath=&subname=&pform=&sc=1014&hn=laindependent&he=.com
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-schools16-2008sep16%2C0%2C7050274.story
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-train_tuesep16%2C0%2C3604846.story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120211122908/http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_10503991 to http://www.contracostatimes.com/california/ci_10503991
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-traincrash13-2008sep13%2C0%2C2874450.story
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-traincrash14-2008sep14%2C0%2C3660884.story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080916084836/http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/sep/14/Na1fcTrainCrash14/ to http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/sep/14/Na1fcTrainCrash14/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-traincrash14-2008sep14%2C0%2C3660884.story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080916101218/http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20080913-1204-ca-traincollision.html to http://www.signonsandiego.com/news/state/20080913-1204-ca-traincollision.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080920031231/http://www.ocregister.com/articles/metrolink-tyrrell-today-2157752-facts-early to http://www.ocregister.com/articles/metrolink-tyrrell-today-2157752-facts-early
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-tyrrell16-2008sep16%2C0%2C3466670%2Cfull.story
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oe-morrison18-2008sep18%2C0%2C3736930.column
• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.ktla.com/pages/content_landing_page/?Metrolink-Engineer-May-Have-Sent-Text-Me=1&blockID=56225&feedID=1198
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/news/local/la-me-crash2-2008oct02%2C0%2C4888640.story
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.latimes.com/technology/la-me-arnold25-2008sep25%2C1%2C3722911.story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081028210416/http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/PubAffairs/EmergencyOrder26.pdf to http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/PubAffairs/EmergencyOrder26.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.foxnews.com/story/0%2C2933%2C504127%2C00.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080919165519/http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/sep/16/tragedy-of-metrolink-train-111-looking-ahead-to/ to http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2008/sep/16/tragedy-of-metrolink-train-111-looking-ahead-to/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.dailybulletin.com/ci_10572215
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.newsday.com/news/local/suffolk/ny-lilirr0917b%2C0%2C3408000.story
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090923202205/http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/sep/13/solemn-ceremony-dedicates-simi-valley-memorial/ to http://www.venturacountystar.com/news/2009/sep/13/solemn-ceremony-dedicates-simi-valley-memorial/
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.knx1070.com/METROLINK-ENGINEER-REPORTED-TO-BE-TEXTING-BEFORE-C/2959296

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:45, 18 June 2017 (UTC)

Should the reference to "lawyers" in the lede be changed to ambulance chasers? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 47.137.184.131 (talk) 06:11, 28 January 2021 (UTC)

This edit request to Chatsworth train crash has been answered. Set the |answered= parameter to no to reactivate your request.

I believe that this page should instead redirect to Chatsworth train accident, which disambiguates two similarly named train accidents. That would make this redirect consist with the redirect for Chatsworth train collision. Also, it's probably worth considering removing protection here since it's been about 13 years since this was protected, and this doesn't seem to be particularly contentious, looking at this now. Upjav (talk) 20:35, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

 Note: I have unprotected. Please update as appropriate. — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 21:58, 1 November 2021 (UTC)

Thank you! Upjav (talk) 00:00, 2 November 2021 (UTC)