York1At a quieted crossing, there is a concrete curb that does not allow a car to cross over to the left side. Could something like that work here?
A potential issue with 'aprons' on either side of the crossing will be the assumption of implied risk. Any scheister will capitalize on the idea that any emergency paving or apron structure was 'there to be used' or that the railroad 'understood the public danger' in providing or agreeing to maintain it. In the present case all an apron would have done would be to let the car get a few feet further out before high-centering, although it might allow easier recovery 'back up' onto pavement in some cases (which might be the 'thing' to design for in aprons if states decided to adopt them).
I am going to make a prediction here. The driver has an iPhone, probably with iOS version 13.3 or higher. He or she also had the phone running something high-drain for a while (and GPS on many iPhones is high-drain) probably in some kind of thermally-insulated protective case.
The iPhone GPS localization is notably sensitive to temperature-induced jitter (the clock temperature compensation is wildly inadequate to purpose). You can see this if you pull up navigation and watch the current-location spot wander around, or you compare the 'Find my iPhone' indicated address with where the phone actually is (this is well established as a problem when attempting to find an identified stolen device).
Meanwhile, in defiance of all accepted reason regarding haptics on safety-critical devices, crApple chose to implement a shifting display scale near the end of a trip or at certain critical areas, where the display 'helpfully' changes scale without warning at a progressively higher rate "to show closer detail". This is kewl as hell for millennials but makes it impossible to gauge real-world distance to turns unless you keep watching the display -- perhaps the greatest driving no-no there is even if it weren't now illegal in most places.
The point has been made before that automobile nav systems need to have exaggerated recognition and notification for upcoming railroad crossings; this can now be extended into awareness near or actually in those crossings. Perhaps even a warning 'do not turn on tracks' should be canned in to be made both in the screen and voice turn-by-turn prompting.
Will you just buy an android already? Your constant off-topic apple bashing gets so old and twisting this thread into yet another rant about them is super cringey.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Euclid Lithonia Operator SD60MAC9500 Lithonia Operator How do we know the train was not in emergency? Lack of squealing noise and brake smoke? If he was not in emergency, maybe that's because the train had been contacted (police to dispatcher to engineer) and told the car was no longer occupied. And the engineer determined that the impact speed would be low. Penalty application was at 1:09 in the video when the engine was about a 1/3 of the way into the crossing. Watch the cab don't pay attention to any thing else in the video. You'll see the cab light up red. Which is a feature on newer GE's when a penalty brake application is initiated the cab lights illuminate in red, not to sure about EMD's having this cab light feature. My understanding was that a "penalty application" was something that happens if an engine runs a red signal, or in other similar situations. I don't understand what triggered a penalty application in this case. Maybe radar facing forward from the cab? Am I not correct that a penalty application is a full service application (not "emergency" application) which happens to be made by the engine's safety system, not the engineer? I don't understand that either. I don't understand how a penalty application would fit into this scenario. Before reaching the crossing, the train appeared to be slowing down over the last 500-800 feet at least. I assume that was due to engineer initiated braking.
Lithonia Operator SD60MAC9500 Lithonia Operator How do we know the train was not in emergency? Lack of squealing noise and brake smoke? If he was not in emergency, maybe that's because the train had been contacted (police to dispatcher to engineer) and told the car was no longer occupied. And the engineer determined that the impact speed would be low. Penalty application was at 1:09 in the video when the engine was about a 1/3 of the way into the crossing. Watch the cab don't pay attention to any thing else in the video. You'll see the cab light up red. Which is a feature on newer GE's when a penalty brake application is initiated the cab lights illuminate in red, not to sure about EMD's having this cab light feature. My understanding was that a "penalty application" was something that happens if an engine runs a red signal, or in other similar situations. I don't understand what triggered a penalty application in this case. Maybe radar facing forward from the cab? Am I not correct that a penalty application is a full service application (not "emergency" application) which happens to be made by the engine's safety system, not the engineer?
SD60MAC9500 Lithonia Operator How do we know the train was not in emergency? Lack of squealing noise and brake smoke? If he was not in emergency, maybe that's because the train had been contacted (police to dispatcher to engineer) and told the car was no longer occupied. And the engineer determined that the impact speed would be low. Penalty application was at 1:09 in the video when the engine was about a 1/3 of the way into the crossing. Watch the cab don't pay attention to any thing else in the video. You'll see the cab light up red. Which is a feature on newer GE's when a penalty brake application is initiated the cab lights illuminate in red, not to sure about EMD's having this cab light feature.
Lithonia Operator How do we know the train was not in emergency? Lack of squealing noise and brake smoke? If he was not in emergency, maybe that's because the train had been contacted (police to dispatcher to engineer) and told the car was no longer occupied. And the engineer determined that the impact speed would be low.
How do we know the train was not in emergency? Lack of squealing noise and brake smoke?
If he was not in emergency, maybe that's because the train had been contacted (police to dispatcher to engineer) and told the car was no longer occupied. And the engineer determined that the impact speed would be low.
Penalty application was at 1:09 in the video when the engine was about a 1/3 of the way into the crossing. Watch the cab don't pay attention to any thing else in the video. You'll see the cab light up red. Which is a feature on newer GE's when a penalty brake application is initiated the cab lights illuminate in red, not to sure about EMD's having this cab light feature.
My understanding was that a "penalty application" was something that happens if an engine runs a red signal, or in other similar situations. I don't understand what triggered a penalty application in this case. Maybe radar facing forward from the cab?
Am I not correct that a penalty application is a full service application (not "emergency" application) which happens to be made by the engine's safety system, not the engineer?
I don't understand that either. I don't understand how a penalty application would fit into this scenario. Before reaching the crossing, the train appeared to be slowing down over the last 500-800 feet at least. I assume that was due to engineer initiated braking.
The train was braking before we saw it on the video. Trains don't stop as fast as cars or for that matter 18 wheel trucks. On Main tracks with Clear signals or appropriate Track Warrant authority - TRAINS ARE NOT LINE OF SIGHT VEHICLES.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
zugmanncaldreamer Twice I was the engine when we hit someone. Both occured on the commuter line between San Jose and San Francisco. SP rule was come to a stop if possible, otherwase hit them and then come to a stop. Stoping before you hit them at 70+ MPH was impossible. SP did not want those bilevel commuter cars derailing. Was that ever written down, though?
Twice I was the engine when we hit someone. Both occured on the commuter line between San Jose and San Francisco. SP rule was come to a stop if possible, otherwase hit them and then come to a stop. Stoping before you hit them at 70+ MPH was impossible. SP did not want those bilevel commuter cars derailing.
Was that ever written down, though?
This reminds me of what some PRR engineers told me when I was riding in the cab back in the late '50s and talking about train/auto accidents. "We apply power hoping to knock them into the field rather than having them go under us and cause a derailment." I got this from more than one crew and don't knew whether they were pulling my leg or not but it had some possibility of truth. And on one trip, when I was back in coach, we did hit a car and did "knock them into a field". Wounded the E-8 by bending the pilot to where it would not clear the rail. Caught the car in front of its front wheel. The two occupants survived. Oh, and the worst crash they told me about was a train/fuel truck accident. How to scare a young man. The view from the cab approachng grade crossings is that a car does not appear to be slowing down. Until it does. I suspect you've experienced this when driving on a divided highway that has cross streets with stop signs and you see cars approaching. You wonder if they are going to stop.
OvermodA potential issue with 'aprons' on either side of the crossing will be the assumption of implied risk.
I think that ship sailed with the collection of all the various Ashland cars stuck on the tracks videos on youtube. Those are going to end up being shown in court one of these days, if they haven't already.
An emergency application (by crew or something back in the train) triggers the red light, not a penalty application. Penalty applications happen because of cab signal or PTC changes that aren't or can't be acted upon in time. Overspeed conditions (locomotive governor not necessarily track speed) can cause a penalty application.
To me, when it cuts to where the train is first visible it appears like he is slowing. I think he was braking then, before the crossing. Alerted either by the visible commotion or a call from the dispatcher. If a call from the dispatcher, too late to stop using service braking, plugging it when he realized he wasn't going to stop short.
It looked like an intermodal train, those things don't slow down quickly. The multi-platform cars don't have as many brakes as a train made up of conventional cars. Had he been doing track speed he would've smacked that car a lot harder.
Jeff
If this was the drivers first time through Ashland, I could see his confusion. Lots of things to be watching.
I didn't see the LIRR reflective flexible 'bollards' delineator solution mentioned in this thread (maybe I missed it?).LIRR Notches Dramatic Railroad Crossing Safety ImprovementsApparently pretty effective so far:
The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) has recognized MTA Long Island Rail Road for a nation-leading program that has dramatically improved railroad safety through the use of flexible delineators at railroad crossings and enhanced GPS alerts. The delineators and a partnership with Google/Waze have in their first year virtually eliminated the problem of motorists inadvertently turning onto tracks, which until last year had been happening with increased frequency
rdamon If this was the drivers first time through Ashland, I could see his confusion. Lots of things to be watching.
Beg to differ, but no there aren't. As I've said I've been through that grade crossing many times and it's not rocket science to figure it out.
Also, I've seen drivers stopping on the tracks at that location due to traffic back-ups. Luckily there's been no incidents, but how do you keep people who should know better from doing something so foolish?
We've gone through this issue over and over and over again on various threads. You can't save some people from themselves. If they don't kill themselves with a car then they'll kill themselves backing too close to the edge of the Grand Canyon taking a selfie. Or with electricity. Or using gasolene as a cleaning fluid. Or barbecuing in a closed garage on a rainy day. Or setting the back deck on fire with a turkey deep fryer. You can try, in some cases it might work, but at some point where do you realize you're on a fools errand?
To close, let me relate a personal story. When I was a boy I was reading the directions on a jar of contact cement. In the "Don'ts" section was a line I never forgot:
"Don't put the contents in your mouth. God only knows why you would!"
Flintlock76 rdamon If this was the drivers first time through Ashland, I could see his confusion. Lots of things to be watching. Beg to differ, but no there aren't. As I've said I've been through that grade crossing many times and it's not rocket science to figure it out. Also, I've seen drivers stopping on the tracks at that location due to traffic back-ups. Luckily there's been no incidents, but how do you keep people who should know better from doing something so foolish? We've gone through this issue over and over and over again on various threads. You can't save some people from themselves. If they don't kill themselves with a car then they'll kill themselves backing too close to the edge of the Grand Canyon taking a selfie. Or with electricity. Or using gasolene as a cleaning fluid. Or barbecuing in a closed garage on a rainy day. Or setting the back deck on fire with a turkey deep fryer. You can try, in some cases it might work, but at some point where do you realize you're on a fools errand? To close, let me relate a personal story. When I was a boy I was reading the directions on a jar of contact cement. In the "Don'ts" section was a line I never forgot: "Don't put the contents in your mouth. God only knows why you would!"
Idiots have been outsmarting idiot proof devices since the dawn of humanity.
SD60MAC9500 Upon seeing he wouldn't he threw it into emergency to get stopped as soon as possible.
In that case, I would think that upon seeing an auto hung up on the tracks, and all the public safety strobes flashing, the engineer would have wanted to get the train to stop as soon as possible, much sooner?
I recall a similar incident in Kamloops, BC back in 1982. A young lady made a left onto the railroad tracks in downtown Kamloops. About a mile down the track she hit a standing train.. no injuries, but her car was done. People make mistakes.
Convicted One SD60MAC9500 Upon seeing he wouldn't he threw it into emergency to get stopped as soon as possible. I would think that upon seeing an auto hung up on the tracks, and all the public safety strobes flashing, the engineer would nave wanted to get the train to stop as soon as possible, much sooner?
I would think that upon seeing an auto hung up on the tracks, and all the public safety strobes flashing, the engineer would nave wanted to get the train to stop as soon as possible, much sooner?
I would think that too. Yet track speed through Ashland I'm assuming is under 35MPH. If the stack train was traveling at 30 or less, which it appears he must have been given the distance he come to a halt. I'm thinking the hogger figured based on his speed and distance from the crossing he could stop in time with a full service application, upon reaching the crossing he knew he wasn't going to stop short of the vehicle, hence the emergency application. That's what I get out of the situation.
Convicted One SD60MAC9500 Upon seeing he wouldn't he threw it into emergency to get stopped as soon as possible. I would think that upon seeing an auto hung up on the tracks, and all the public safety strobes flashing, the engineer would have wanted to get the train to stop as soon as possible, much sooner?
I would think that upon seeing an auto hung up on the tracks, and all the public safety strobes flashing, the engineer would have wanted to get the train to stop as soon as possible, much sooner?
Nobody will question the need for an emergeny application if an actual collision occurs-- even if the emergency application comes after the impact, which would make the emergency application pointless.
Balt, who knows this stuff, says the speed thru Ashland is 45 mph.
It seems like the engineer would have known from about 100 yards out that he was not likely to stop in time. He seems to have misjudged pretty badly. (But then I wasn't in his shoes, so what do I know?) But it does seem that dumping the air when he did was at that point pointless; the cake was baked by then.
Convicted OneI would think that upon seeing an auto hung up on the tracks, and all the public safety strobes flashing, the engineer would have wanted to get the train to stop as soon as possible, much sooner?
Think of it like you were driving your car with a pot of soup in the front passenger seat. You want to stop as quickly as possible, but without spilling the soup. Hopefully you find the right mix of braking and keeping the pot upright to stop in time and still have the soup in the pot.
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...
EuclidMaybe he would not want to stop as soon as possible if he thought there was a chance that the obstuction would clear in time.
With all the public safety strobes flashing, I don't believe that would be an assumption that anyone would feel comfortable making. The auto is clearly derelict, it's not like it was sitting on the crossing in bumper to bumper traffic.
EuclidNobody will question the need for an emergeny application if an actual collision occurs-- even if the emergency application comes after the impact,
I actually believe that answer comes closest
tree68Think of it like you were driving your car with a pot of soup in the front passenger seat. You want to stop as quickly as possible, but without spilling the soup. Hopefully you find the right mix of braking and keeping the pot upright to stop in time and still have the soup in the pot.
I agree that avoiding impact with the car is likely not the highest priority the engineer is faced with.
Lithonia OperatorBalt, who knows this stuff, says the speed thru Ashland is 45 mph.
To my knowledge, the track speed through Ashland is 35 MPH until the head end clears the downtown area, then the engineer can open it up.
Hair-splitting though, not trying to start an argument with Balt.
Just so everyone knows, that's the old RF&P mainline and still a busy one both with CSX freights and Amtrak. A good place to go trainwatching if you're so inclined.
And just to add to dumb stuff people do, several days ago the wife watched (Not in Ashland ) a dummy in an SUV drive around lowered crossing gates while at the same time a pedestrian ducked under lowered pedestrian crossing gates. This was on the NJ Transit tracks in Fair Lawn NJ. Both in a hurry I guess.
Convicted One tree68 Think of it like you were driving your car with a pot of soup in the front passenger seat. You want to stop as quickly as possible, but without spilling the soup. Hopefully you find the right mix of braking and keeping the pot upright to stop in time and still have the soup in the pot. I agree that avoiding impact with the car is likely not the highest priority the engineer is faced with.
tree68 Think of it like you were driving your car with a pot of soup in the front passenger seat. You want to stop as quickly as possible, but without spilling the soup. Hopefully you find the right mix of braking and keeping the pot upright to stop in time and still have the soup in the pot.
I think you have the best chance of finding the right mix of braking in a life/death crisis if you forget about saving the soup.
I believe that there is a "lapse of consciousness" that people are vulnerable to. I consider myself an alert, safe driver. Yet I can recall a couple instances during my 62 years where I did something vaguely similar to what these cars are doing.....not on a RR track, and not in a lit central business district.
But in an area that I was not accustomed to, looking for a place to turn around on a dark country road, and mistook a clearing between groups of trees for a place I might turn around, only to find myself driving into a pasture. As I recall, I believe the error I was making is that I was "navigating" above the horizon, the clearing between the trees registered out of the corner of my eye, and I leapt before I looked.
I think this might be akin to how one can drive through an entire town without remembering it...not exactly that same metrics, but a similar lapse in cognizance? When you have other things on your mind, there is a sort of "auto pilot" we can from time to time enter into?
So, perhaps these unfortunate souls are mistaking the right of way for their "centerlanes" so to speak, without confirming there is asphalt there? Especially in this instance where the car was making a left turn, and possibly could have had their attention focused to their right, looking for cross traffic? In the dark, I believe there is a tendency to focus ones attention on headlights of other vehicles, and kinda go "tunnelvision" against most other things.
I would think that the data recorders would show exactly when the emergency application was made, and when the collision happened (which is about 4.5 seconds after the air dump), and the speed at the time of the collision. All of that would seem to me to show that the engineer misjudged pretty badly.
Si I'm not sure how that helps him cover his a$$. In fact, I'm not sure it wouldn't cause some manager to ask, "Why, once you knew you were going to hit the car anyway, did you then go to emergency and risk jack-knifing the train?" It seems like a pointless risk by then. That train was going to stop within a hundred yards or so anyway.
They could really use those flexible posts there. That would seem like a small investment, all things considered.
EuclidI think you have the best chance of finding the right mix of braking in a life/death crisis if you forget about saving the soup.
How about this? If you throw the train into emergency, and avoid the car.....but drop even one wheel on the ground.;....who is going to have to answer for it?
But, if you hit the car.....how can that be the engineer's (or the railroad's) fault? (no matter if you derail or not)
Yep, I'm actually crazy enough to think that way.
Convicted One Euclid I think you have the best chance of finding the right mix of braking in a life/death crisis if you forget about saving the soup. How about this? If you throw the train into emergency, and avoid the car.....but drop even one wheel on the ground.;....who is going to have to answer for it? But, if you hit the car.....how can that be the engineer's (or the railroad's) fault? (no matter if you derail or not)
Euclid I think you have the best chance of finding the right mix of braking in a life/death crisis if you forget about saving the soup.
If you withold an emergency application and hit a car, it can be your fault if the emergency application would have either prevented the collsion or slowed the train enough to make a difference in the severity of the collision.
Seeing the 13,000 foot monsters that CSX is running these days introduces the possibility that something could happen almost three miles behind the locomotives, with who knows what damage to go along with it. Would it do to have people killed two miles from the collision point, to save an empty auto? I'm not talking hazmat here - I'm talking plain mechanical damage.
It appears that the engineer had a full service brake application on coming up to the crossing - the train was being slowed as fast as possible short of an emergency application. Recall that the engineer was blowing the horn almost from the point where we could see the train on the video.
Any driver can be bone-headed.
I once had a photo shoot on a dairy farm, shooting the milking process for the regional dairy plant (Oakhurst, Maine's largest dairy-products company).
By the time I got done, it was pitch dark, and raining cats and dogs. I got my van packed up, hot to go home and have dinner, then drove quickly and confidently up the dirt road (I thought) I'd come in on. Until the truck just stopped, but without any impact. I was in a bog among the fields. I stepped out into mud up to my mid-calves, and had to walk back to the farmhouse, interrupt the family (which was just sitting down to their own dinner), and get the farmer to tow me out with his tractor.
When I had gotten there, I thought "I hope that don't see me as some dumb city-slicker." Well, they sure did by the time I was finally on my way.
EuclidIf you withold an emergency application and hit a car, it can be your fault if the emergency application would have either prevented the collsion or slowed the train enough to make a difference in the severity of the collision
That's subjective, no? Especially if you do drop anchor at SOME point before impact?
Lithonia Operator I got my van packed up, hot to go home and have dinner, then drove quickly and confidently up the dirt road
Misspent confidence can be the most damning intoxicant of them all.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.