I conclude that the transit locomotive has an in-cab device that warns the engineer if the crossing protection fails to activate at any time during the approach and passage over the crossing. In this case, the crossing protection did fail to activate, so engineer is guilty of failing to respond to the warning given by the in-cab device.
EuclidI conclude that the transit locomotive has an in-cab device that warns the engineer if the crossing protection fails to activate at any time during the approach and passage over the crossing. In this case, the crossing protection did fail to activate, so engineer is guilty of failing to respond to the warning given by the in-cab device.
I am not aware of any such equipment on Light Rail cars. Remember, these trains operate in the middle of Howard Street through Downtown Baltimore in the manner that streetcars did in an age gone by. There are frequent train vs. vehicle incidents in this street operation.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Euclid I conclude that the transit locomotive has an in-cab device that warns the engineer if the crossing protection fails to activate at any time during the approach and passage over the crossing. In this case, the crossing protection did fail to activate, so engineer is guilty of failing to respond to the warning given by the in-cab device.
I don't think we're there yet.
https://railroads.dot.gov/program-areas/train-control/intelligent-grade-crossings
https://www.aar.org/campaigns/ptc/
Note that the AAR piece specifically excludes track or equipment failures...
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
May have missed it. Was this crossing just light rail or on section used by night freight trains ?
blue streak 1 May have missed it. Was this crossing just light rail or on section used by night freight trains ?
I don't think there's been freight on there for 20+ years now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
blue streak 1May have missed it. Was this crossing just light rail or on section used by night freight trains ?
The location is on the former Baltimore & Annapolis RR that was a Interurban style electric operation between its named points that stopped its passenger operations in the early 1950's. It maintained a very small freight operation until the 1970's when that was abandoned. Light rail has been the only thing on the line since the origination of the Baltimore Light Rail in the 1990's.
Also a great way to boost a political career.
zugmannAlso a great way to boost a political career.
Ann Colt Leitess - State's Attorney for Anne Arundel County
EuclidEven if the signals had those tiny porthole lamps, it seems that they would not be a practical solution of preventing collisions caused activation failure. I doubt that they are actually intended to do that. If they were, they would be much more robust and conspicuous.
This is why some railroads are adding another indicator (as simple as a turn signal) to indicate that at least the lights are working.
You'd be surprised how visible those portholes (and the LEDs that are replacing them) actually are.
EuclidSo I am starting to think the criminal charge is not based on any logical proof of negligence by the engineer. I now suspect that this vindictive, hasty criminal charge is driven only by the spontaneous emotion surrounding the death of the victim and not on any evidence that the engineer had the ability to prevent the collision.
As Balt implies, this looks to be the motivation for the charges. The case can now get lost in the court system and quietly go away, unless there is a true basis for the case.
We haven't been treated to any information regarding previous failures at that crossing, or just how visible the crossing is to oncoming trains.
Which leads back to my earlier suggestion that the engineer simply wasn't paying attention. If the driver in question simply drove across the tracks at speed (whatever is appropriate for that section of road), the engineer likely would have had few options other than backing off the throttle if he realized the protection was not working.
Recall an incident in Michigan several years ago where five teens died when their car was hit by an Amtrak train at speed. Video from a nearby business showed the car racing toward the crossing. I don't recall that activation of crossing protection was a factor in that incident, but the engineer had virtually zero ability to sense the approach of the teen's vehicle.
BaltACD zugmann Also a great way to boost a political career. Ann Colt Leitess - State's Attorney for Anne Arundel County
zugmann Also a great way to boost a political career.
Oh, I think there is obviously a political agenda behind this. When was the last time that a train engineer was prosecuted for not yielding to a motorist at a grade crossing?
Euclid BaltACD zugmann Also a great way to boost a political career. Ann Colt Leitess - State's Attorney for Anne Arundel County Oh, I think there is obviously a political agenda behind this. When was the last time that a train engineer was prosecuted for not yielding to a motorist at a grade crossing?
BaltACD zugmann Also a great way to boost a political career. Ann Colt Leitess - State's Attorney for Anne Arundel County Oh, I think there is obviously a political agenda behind this. When was the last time that a train engineer was prosecuted for not yielding to a motorist at a grade crossing?
You are conflating Train with Light Rail. They both operate on rails, that is their only likeness. To my knowledge, Light Rail motormen are not required to have at FRA issued Engineers card. To my knowledge Light Rail motormen must possess a valid drivers license.
Engineers on RAILROAD trains are not required to have a valid drivers license, just their valid FRA Engineers Card.
Zug and Jeff can explain in more detail.
BaltACDTo my knowledge, Light Rail motormen are not required to have at FRA issued Engineers card. To my knowledge Light Rail motormen must possess a valid drivers license.
Light rails are under FTA (Fed. Transit Admin.), and not FRA, as far as I know. What they need to operate a LRV? I haven't a clue.
BaltACDEngineers on RAILROAD trains are not required to have a valid drivers license, just their valid FRA Engineers Card.
I found mine in a CrackerJack Box!
"So, to instantly charge the engineer with felony manslaughter, with no time spent for an investigation or explanation of his negligence, seems way over the top. It seems spiteful".
No "instant charge". The accident was over a year ago. I would have to think that during that time there was a clear investigation.
google street view:
https://earth.google.com/web/search/maple+road,+linthicum+heights,+md/@39.2053405,-76.65332532,42.76557541a,0d,60y,236.99064208h,88.11804621t,0r/data=CigiJgokCd2hgjQTQz5AEaNIUfDEQT5AGVmQuTJFWVTAIRrDpFMVWlTAIhoKFm54ak5xNXlTUjNGeEtVYm9kcGFuckEQAg
I see fixed signals on either side of the crossing. Do they have any "linkage" to the crossing protection? (that is, in the event of a crossing apparatus failure, would that drop the signals to a more restrictive indication?)
The crossing flashers seem to be mounted high up, cannot see if they have those small white "side lights" as ground-mounted flashers would have.
If this were "heavy rail" (REAL railroad), the union would be on top of this right away. But not so sure about transit-related union representation.
matthewsaggie "So, to instantly charge the engineer with felony manslaughter, with no time spent for an investigation or explanation of his negligence, seems way over the top. It seems spiteful". No "instant charge". The accident was over a year ago. I would have to think that during that time there was a clear investigation.
According to Operation Lifesaver, the law requires motorists to look both ways and to be prepared to yield to trains at all grade crossings (including LRT), no matter whether they are passive; or crossings equipped with automatic protection such as bells, flashing lights, and gates. Therefore, if the automatic protection failed to activate, and road vehicle driver was struck by a train, it was nevertheless the driver’s fault for not yielding to the train. So I must conclude that this Maryland grade crossing collision had to have been the victim’s fault. Obviously, if he was struck by the train, he did not yield to it.
OldEnginemanThe crossing flashers seem to be mounted high up, cannot see if they have those small white "side lights" as ground-mounted flashers would have.
There are "ground level" flashers on both sides of the track. All of them have the side lights. AFAIK, all such signal heads are the same in that respect, no matter the manufacturer.
It might be worth noting, however, that because of the angle of the mounting of the heads, some of those "portholes" would not be visible to an oncoming train. This is because the main light is aimed at oncoming vehicle traffic.
I don't know what the intended purpose of the convex mirrors is - ie, are they to provide visibility of trains for motorists, or vice versa.
This post/sale on EBay has some nice illustrations: https://www.ebay.com/itm/175351501794
I have nothing to do with the vendor - this is just for illustration. Note that there are "portholes" on both sides of the fixture. Western Cullen Hayes is a well-known purveyor of such equipment.
There appears to be a white light on the green signal box.
I do not see a connection to commercial power, but it may be fed some other way. There are a lot of solar panels as well.
rdamonThere appears to be a white light on the green signal box. I do not see a connection to commercial power, but it may be fed some other way. There are a lot of solar panels as well.
Many crossing boxes have a light seen through a "port hole" that indicates that the crossing has power. Also note the battery box adjacent to the signal box. It may or may not be active.
Can't really see enough of the poles to determine if a feed is running down the pole.
There is also something running down the ROW between the tracks. An on-the-ground version of a code line? Could be power there, just as there was on lineside poles at one time.
One can discern that the crossing warning lights are at a angle to the tracks. Where the port to view if the lights are flashing may not be easily viewable by an operator on either track.
I wonder why they installed the mirrors.
tree68 There is also something running down the ROW between the tracks. An on-the-ground version of a code line? Could be power there, just as there was on lineside poles at one time.
My first thought was a negative feeder, but could well be something else.
Advances in power electronics have come to the point where the crossing signals could easily be powered from the 600VDC overhead, with the configuration being a galvanically isolated DC/DC converter keeping a battery charged, though the crossing was mst likely built before the appropriate DC/DC converters were available.
rdamonI wonder why they installed the mirrors.
The road crossing IS NOT perpendicular to the tracks - it crosses the tracks at what I would estimate at a 15 degree angle. If one considers the tracks run in a N-S direction the road is crossing the tracks at about a WSW to ENE direction. That I can find, we have no idea of the direction either of the vehicles involved were moving at the time of the incident.
BaltACD That I can find, we have no idea of the direction either of the vehicles involved were moving at the time of the incident.
The car and the train both ended up north of the crossing, based on news images and satellite images.
Without knowing the victim's intended route, including where he was coming from, it's hard to know which way he may have been travelling. The school is near downtown Baltimore and there appear to be several routes he could have taken to get there.
tree68 BaltACD That I can find, we have no idea of the direction either of the vehicles involved were moving at the time of the incident. The car and the train both ended up north of the crossing, based on news images and satellite images. Without knowing the victim's intended route, including where he was coming from, it's hard to know which way he may have been travelling. The school is near downtown Baltimore and there appear to be several routes he could have taken to get there.
From that we can deduce that the Light Rail train was headed geographically North. IF and I repeat IF, the vehicle was headed nominally Eastward over the crossing the driver would have been contending with the morning Sun being low on the horizon into his face at the time of the incident. The light rail train would have had the Sun coming from his right front. The auto driver likely would not have been able to see anything from the mirrors at the crossing as he would have been looking into the sun.
If the automotive vehicle was headed Westward, he should have had direct visual contact with the Northward light rail.
According to the news, the signals were not activated when the driver approached. A lot of people rely on the signals and thus do not look for trains.
Euclid According to the news, the signals were not activated when the driver approached. A lot of people rely on the signals and thus do not look for trains.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.