Trains.com

30+ hurt when CTA train jumps platform at O'Hare

7731 views
35 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    August 2005
  • 964 posts
Posted by gardendance on Tuesday, April 8, 2014 6:28 AM

If the train was going 26 mph at the stopping mechanism, and the speed limit is less than 26 mph, then it seems to me that the fault's both the operating employee's and the stopping mechanism's, and which one's more at fault I'm sure people can debate.

Patrick Boylan

Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Tuesday, April 8, 2014 6:43 AM

schlimm

Phoebe Vet

Then it needs to

be redesigned.

Definitely.  Goes to show that accidents are not always only the fault of operating employees.  

 
By what twisted logic did you decide that the failure of a safety system to stop the train means that the accident was not the sleeping operating employee's fault?

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, April 8, 2014 10:09 AM

I did not say that. perhaps I worded it poorly. Hardly "twisted logic."    All I am saying is what the NTSB investigation has said.   It was her fault to a large degree in this sense. By falling asleep, she put the train in danger.  But the safety system failed to do its job, namely to stop a train in time when it was going too fast.  What good is a safety system, which is supposed to be a correction for human error, if it was not designed to properly do its job?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • 8,156 posts
Posted by henry6 on Tuesday, April 8, 2014 10:19 AM

I agree Schlimm...this was either a poor design or application of the system....If the train were going 26mph at the control point, the system should have been designed to stop it at 26 mph.  Evidently it is designed to stop the train only at track speed at that location.  That don't work.

RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.

  • Member since
    September 2007
  • From: Charlotte, NC
  • 6,099 posts
Posted by Phoebe Vet on Tuesday, April 8, 2014 2:26 PM

Any place where a passenger occupied train is approaching an impenetrable barrier, there should be a system in place to prevent the overrun regardless of the actions of the operator.

A failure of that system does not, in any way, relieve the operator of liability for the collision.

Dave

Lackawanna Route of the Phoebe Snow

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, April 8, 2014 4:00 PM
  • Phoebe Vet

    Any place where a passenger occupied train is approaching an impenetrable barrier, there should be a system in place to prevent the overrun regardless of the actions of the operator.

    A failure of that system does not, in any way, relieve the operator of liability for the collision.

Bang Head  No one said it did.  But from a legal point of view, the CTA is also liable for not having said system that works.   If the operator had passed out or died, one would expect such a system to be properly designed and operable on any system.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy