2 minutes ago, Yagoda said:

Yeah its a discussion forum, that doesnt mean one cant try to stop it from becoming an even more egregious idiot forum where folks just spew pontifications with no basis therefore and then start flame wars when called out.

Like you just did.

2 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

Agreed

Just now, richard_smith237 said:

Agreed - but the key question is whether that was actually the cause of the incident.

Did the driver genuinely miss warning signals because of impairment?

And, if I’m not mistaken, there were reportedly two people in the locomotive cab - the driver and the engineer.

If so, did both fail to observe the warnings? Or were the warning signals - red lights, red flags, or radio instructions - perhaps never properly issued, displayed, or received in the first place?

That distinction matters, because there is a major difference between an operator ignoring clear stop warnings and a wider systems failure in which the warning procedures themselves were inadequately executed.

I wasn't there but is seems like the blame can be passed around as you expressed previously. The bus shouldn't have been on the tracks and the train driver shouldn't have been a meth addict. If there was another person in the cab, he is also to blame. We all make terrible mistakes but driving a train high in meth ( remember that song ? ) is next level.

1 minute ago, atpeace said:

I wasn't there but is seems like the blame can be passed around as you expressed previously. The bus shouldn't have been on the tracks and the train driver shouldn't have been a meth addict. If there was another person in the cab, he is also to blame. We all make terrible mistakes but driving a train high in meth ( remember that song ? ) is next level.

Ive read that the driver failed a drug urine test but not seen any article the drug was meth.

Do you have a link to said article ?

3 minutes ago, atpeace said:

You stated a mile - drama queen -:)

My mile was taken from a US (probably) dissertation on signalling and control of level crossings. https://practical.engineering/blog/2023/12/29/how-railroad-crossings-work

Perhaps with your superior knowledge of train dynamics you can - with you education - tell us the stopping distance of a laden Thai goods train.

There are train drivers in the US who have hit a vehicle on crossings who have to have therapy for something akin to PTSD for being in a collision the outcome of which they were powerless to avoid.

Nobody has said yet if the bus driver survived. With all this attention on the train driver I suspect not. Otherwise rightly so he would be the scapegoat.

6 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

18 minutes ago, richard_smith237 said:

There is potentially a causal link here. If the train driver tested positive for methamphetamine and cannabis and was heavily impaired at the time, it is entirely possible that this contributed to a failure to observe or respond correctly to earlier warning measures - such as red signal lights, red flags from signalmen further up the track, or radio instructions to stop.

I disagree with this as there would be no red signals informing the driver that a bus was stopped on the crossing.

Again.

Train drivers can see just as far as the rest of us, but the stopping distance of a fully laden freight train can be upwards of a mile. That means if a train driver can see something on the tracks ahead, it’s often already too late.

He had no chance of stopping; drugs or not.

The causal link - is the train driver potentially missing the warning signals further up the track.

Your statement highlights the very reason 'warning signals' further up the track are required and are a part of SOP.

It has been reported that lights, signalmen, and radio messages are used as SOP to stop the train until the junctions are cleared - i.e. the Signal man at Junction A, radio's up the track to Signal Man at Junction B at the Junction A remains unclear - Signal Man B - waves the red flag - and the red lights along the track are turned on.

So - I do agree with you - the driver had no chance of stopping 'drugs or not' IF he was only relying on eyesight up the track alone - but that is not the procedure.

2 minutes ago, Ralf001 said:

Ive read that the driver failed a drug urine test but not seen any article the drug was meth.

Do you have a link to said article ?

The State Railway of Thailand (SRT) and metropolitan police confirmed that initial urine tests found methamphetamine and cannabis (marijuana) in his system. www.channelnewsasia.com. I can't get the link to the article to paste.

3 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

Nobody has said yet if the bus driver survived. With all this attention on the train driver I suspect not. Otherwise rightly so he would be the scapegoat.

The bus driver survived - widely reported - also arrested.

5 minutes ago, atpeace said:

The State Railway of Thailand (SRT) and metropolitan police confirmed that initial urine tests found methamphetamine and cannabis (marijuana) in his system. www.channelnewsasia.com. I can't get the link to the article to paste.

Nice, thanks.

4 minutes ago, VocalNeal said:

My mile was taken from a US (probably) dissertation on signalling and control of level crossings. https://practical.engineering/blog/2023/12/29/how-railroad-crossings-work

Perhaps with your superior knowledge of train dynamics you can - with you education - tell us the stopping distance of a laden Thai goods train.

There are train drivers in the US who have hit a vehicle on crossings who have to have therapy for something akin to PTSD for being in a collision the outcome of which they were powerless to avoid.

Nobody has said yet if the bus driver survived. With all this attention on the train driver I suspect not. Otherwise rightly so he would be the scapegoat.

Just common sense dude. Trains move very slowly through Bangkok for good reason. You are comparing the stopping speed of a train going through Iowa corn fields. When you are a meth addict and smoking weed while driving a train, I think you might get some attention. Might be wrong :)

Troll post removed.

@it is what it is quote taken out of context to attack news article again. Final warninG Rule 17.News articles are collected from recognised sources and may be consolidated or rewritten with AI assistance. Respectful discussion of the article content is welcome. Disrespectful comments about the articles, the use of AI, or the news team (e.g. “clickbait,” “slow news day,” mocking grammar, or AI taunts) are not permitted. Posts breaching this rule will be removed, and posting suspension or account closure may result.

1 hour ago, atpeace said:

Just common sense dude. Trains move very slowly through Bangkok for good reason. You are comparing the stopping speed of a train going through Iowa corn fields. When you are a meth addict and smoking weed while driving a train, I think you might get some attention. Might be wrong :)

How fast was the train moving in your estimation?

http://railsigintl.com/tools/BDist/

https://www.johannes-strommer.com/en/calculators/stopping-distance-acceleration-speed/

17 hours ago, Georgealbert said:

Investigators said journalists would not be allowed onboard due to limited space and safety concerns.

Lame excuse. Then do a live stream or hold a proper press conference. And what safety concerns?

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The causal link - is the train driver potentially missing the warning signals further up the track

That's why modern train networks have magnetic sensors, alarms in the driver cabin and automatic emergency braking systems. At least an alarm system should be mandatory as it's not very difficult or expensive to implement

1 minute ago, CLW said:

2 hours ago, richard_smith237 said:

The causal link - is the train driver potentially missing the warning signals further up the track

That's why modern train networks have magnetic sensors, alarms in the driver cabin and automatic emergency braking systems. At least an alarm system should be mandatory as it's not very difficult or expensive to implement

I think most countries claiming to operate with modern transport sensors and infrastructure would not still be routing freight trains across multiple same-level crossings through the centre of a major city - let alone through one of the most congested capitals in the world.

This is not merely a case of systemic failure during a single incident. A perfectly valid question is why, in a rapidly developing 21st-century Bangkok, heavy freight traffic is still being routed directly through the urban core at all, interfering with road traffic in such a disruptive manner - even before addressing the issue of safety.

11 hours ago, atpeace said:

I wasn't there but is seems like the blame can be passed around as you expressed previously. The bus shouldn't have been on the tracks and the train driver shouldn't have been a meth addict. If there was another person in the cab, he is also to blame. We all make terrible mistakes but driving a train high in meth ( remember that song ? ) is next level.

And, maybe we can add that the freight train should not have been there, at that time, in the first place. Freight trains were only legally allowed to go through that intersection between the hours of 9pm and 5am. Since the accident, this has now been adjusted to 10pm to 4am--I think reflecting how very busy that intersection is well into the late evening.

16 hours ago, TedG said:

How fast was the train moving in your estimation?

http://railsigintl.com/tools/BDist/

https://www.johannes-strommer.com/en/calculators/stopping-distance-acceleration-speed/

I think it impacted at 35 kph. If that was the case, he didn't break much if at all :) Trains rarely go over 40 kph during in the morning.

On 5/20/2026 at 5:06 AM, atpeace said:

Just common sense dude. Trains move very slowly through Bangkok for good reason. You are comparing the stopping speed of a train going through Iowa corn fields. When you are a meth addict and smoking weed while driving a train, I think you might get some attention. Might be wrong :)

No where does it mention that the train driver was smoking weed or meth "while" driving the train. Also, not sure about meth, but marijuana can show up on a drug test 30 days after a person uses the substance. So, it is possible that he smoked a joint one night up to 29 days prior to this accident hardly making him "under the influence."

16 hours ago, Issan girl said:

No where does it mention that the train driver was smoking weed or meth "while" driving the train. Also, not sure about meth, but marijuana can show up on a drug test 30 days after a person uses the substance. So, it is possible that he smoked a joint one night up to 29 days prior to this accident hardly making him "under the influence."

Lots of things are possible :) But meth was in his system and he admitted to being a meth user. DO you think it is a good idea to have meth in your system and be the driver of a train? Most meth users are casual weekend parties :)