From the minds of the St. Louis Post - Dispatch, posted without comment:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8qGHTApzqtw
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
Typical press response -- blame the railroad because it's there instead of blaming the parents for not teaching their children the dangers of trespassing on railroad property.
An important distinction needs to be made here.
Some people who are hit by trains have made the bad judgement of walking on or near the tracks.
Other people deliberately do so in order to commit suicide.
Growing up in a big railway town we always were aware of what monsters trains were, and we knew they could not stop on a dime, we stood well back from any train, looked both ways twice and listened for trains, when we crossed tracks, we always looked for an out when (dangerously) crossing a trestle, we listened, went from one water barrel stand to the next so we could duck in if a train appeared., we even crossed under standing boxcars in the middle(never under the coupler) and did it as fast as we could. I don't recommend anyone doing the same today, and we also had to look out for the C.P.R. police who nabbed us and took our names and usually knew our parents, and we got it again when we got home.
The C.P.R. police showed us films of accidents at school and tried to tell us 100 car trains take a mile to stop, they usually don't even bother puttung on the brakes, some of the scenes from the movies were very gory indeed.
Don't blame me for my bad decision that got me killed.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
So, let me get this right, it's the railroad's fault that one of their trains killed someone trespassing on their property. But the parents knew about it and did nothing. Why isn't it their fault? Wasn't it their child? I'm fairly sure the RR didn't take the child to raise. It seems to me that it's not a hard thing to understand. Trains are big, heavy and are hard to stop. They also can't turn to come and get you, therefor if you stay off the tracks you won't get run over. It's not rocket science! Whether walking driving or whatever, just stay off the tracks. There ,4 sentences, all the education you need for the average person to stay safe around RR tracks!
The other day I was talking with a woman of my age whose father retired off the IHB. She told me a story about her older sister playing around a railroad trestle. The father, while at work for the railroad, saw his daughter doing this.
The father then warned his daughter to stay away from the trestle and told her it was dangerous to be there. The next day the father was on a caboose and saw the daughter who had been warned playing around the trestle.
He got home from work around 2:00 AM and went straight to the girl's bedroom. He hauled her out of bed and administered significant corporal punishment. Problem solved.
Those days are gone.
Rikers Yard So, let me get this right, it's the railroad's fault that one of their trains killed someone trespassing on their property.
So, let me get this right, it's the railroad's fault that one of their trains killed someone trespassing on their property.
I don't think that it's fair to say that the deaths were the railroad's fault. But you have to understand that in this day and age merely having deep pockets in close proximity to anyone suffering a misfortune...is dangerous. To the deep pocket.
I think we're all pretty much in agreement about the blame, but I'm still wondering how you get "surprised" by a train. Blinding headlights, deafening horn, the ground shakes!
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Paul of Covington I think we're all pretty much in agreement about the blame, but I'm still wondering how you get "surprised" by a train. Blinding headlights, deafening horn, the ground shakes!
Under the right conditions, trains can be very stealthy - we have had on duty train service employees hit and killed because they didn't see/hear/feel the train that killed them - the most recent on my territory was about 5 years ago (employee steped off a trailing engine in a locomotive consist on the high side of a curve and stepped into the center ditch and was hit be a train going in the same direction as the employees train - overtaking train had bell ringing and was sounding horn as required - sound of the employees trains's locomotives masked all the other sounds).
If the wind is blowing the 'wrong' way the noise of a coasting train does not become audible until the train is practically on top of one - if the horn is not being sounded.
While these situations do occur - they are not in any way a excuse for individuals not using situational awarness. The cardinal rule of railroading that is taught to you from your first day on the property 'trains can move on any track at any time in any direction without warning'. Anyone, employee or trespasser must protect themselves; those who don't will pay the price.
What bothered me most is the second story, where the mother had her son upon the bridge with her, tossing rocks into the water way/stream?
What in the world possessed this woman to place herself and her child into such a position?
The woman’s father was upset there weren’t walkways where she could "escape" when the train came...(pssst, she wasen't supposed to be up there on the bridge in the first place!)
Railroad bridges don’t have walkways,(most of them anyway) for a simple reason, if they did have walkways, people would trespass even more using the bridge to cross the waterway!
The walkway becomes an “attractive nuisance” under most state laws…in essence, its presence is a invitation to use it, thereby making the bridge owner liable for anyone hurt on their bridge.
The first story, where Dad wonders why the railroad doesn’t fence in the right of way…bet you a dollar to a donut if the railroad did fence the area, the home owners and parents would get all upset because the mean railroad was making their kids walk an extra two or three blocks to cross at the street crossing, making them late for school, or forcing the kids, and their parents, to get up a little earlier in the morning!
The essence I hear of the junk coming out of the reporter is it’s the railroad responsibility to protect people from their own bad decisions….
23 17 46 11
IMHO the reaction of these parents is somewhat understandable...however, all of the relatives of the people killed that were interviewed for this piece directly indicated that they knew all along that the areas their loved ones were traveling in and tresspassing on were regularly traveled by the kids and others in their area BUT they still did so and it eventually got them killed...BOTTOM LINE, the "responsible" adults did NOT do a sufficient job warning/stopping the victims from doing such potentially self-destructive things and they are to blame in large part. It is always easier to blame the big, bad railroad company than to look inside ones self and ask "Did I do all I could to prevent this from having happened?".
BaltACD Under the right conditions, trains can be very stealthy -
Under the right conditions, trains can be very stealthy -
+1
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...
Reading that over the past few weeks has not been good for my blood pressure. But it does please me that the majority of reader response on the comments section sides with logic and common sense, that the parents and loved ones are blaming the wrong folks.
I went back and looked at The St. Louis Post Dispatch. There is a series of articles that goes beyond this one accident and the newspaper raises a number of issues. Some are:
--Education. Do we do enough to teach our children about the dangers of railroad tracks. And whose job is it to teach our children? The railroads? The parents? The community in local schools?
--Fences. Should tracks be fenced? And if so, who should pay for the fences?
--Warnings. This case involves a mother and son walking on a railroad trestle. The railroad has declined to have locomotives sound a routine warning as they approach the trestle. The reason given is that Federal Regulations do not require it. Actually, the engineer did see the mother and child on the tracks and did sound his horn but apparently it was too late because they were on the trestle and hand no safe place to retreat.
From my personal perspective as a man in the street (and safely away from the grade crossing) the thought that a mother would take her child and walk across a railroad trestle is incomprehensible. Except that it did in fact happen. I don't know what to think.
It's been odd reading and responding to the comments since in a few cases, the parents of the young kids killed on tracks are commenting. I forget the names, but the mother of one of the young boys is doing herself no favors coming across as someone who just wishes to fight anyone who mentions personal responsibility of the kids and the parents. The father of the teenage girl, Mary, saddens me though. He keeps saying he wants answers on why this happened to his daughter. His daughter was killed walking the tracks at dark wearing headphones when she was hit from behind.
Joe the Photog the mother of one of the young boys is doing herself no favors coming across as someone who just wishes to fight anyone who mentions personal responsibility of the kids and the parents.
This concerned Mom doesn't know who her friends are. No railroad management would ever want this kind of tragedy to happen. But railroads cannot do the whole job of keeping people safe themselves. If at some point parents do not join the effort safety for children will never happen.
While these situations do occur - they are not in any way a excuse for individuals not using situational awareness.
A concept totally alien to the general public as this nation continues to be "dumber down."
Since I live in St. Louis, I saw all the articles run by our paper for this series. I agree that trespassing is wrong and it's the fault of the person who gets hit, not the railroad. Growing up in a RR family, I knew very young that you didn't play around tracks and to always be careful. To this day, I still slow down at a crossing and look both ways when I'm driving. When my Dad was still working for Frisco, it took the electric current from an engine to set off the crossing gates, a free rolling freight car would not do it. He knew of crews that had to chase cars that got away from them and they'd roll right past a crossing without activating the gates and lights. I have heard that the setup is different now, but I still stop anyway, that's what Dad taught me to do.
It's sad when people get killed, even if it's their own fault, but they can't the blame the RR for their actions. If the RR's did put up fences, people would only climb over them or find another way across the tracks, like the young woman did whose twin had been killed by a train. She went around the fence and walked in front of a train to die like her sister.
I don't think the basic technology of crossing approach detection has changed significantly for many years - it involves a shunting of the rails - ie, creating a short across them. The only active electrical component is provided by the crossing circuit itself, not by any rolling stock.
The problem with cars is that by themselves they may not provide a good enough shunt, thus will not be properly detected by the crossing protection. A locomotive, by virtue of its weight, is more likely to do so.
The change in recent years has been to circuitry with can detect the speed of an approaching train and adjust the warning times appropriately. Some crossings have that technology, some don't.
Sunnyland Since I live in St. Louis, I saw all the articles run by our paper for this series. I agree that trespassing is wrong and it's the fault of the person who gets hit, not the railroad. Growing up in a RR family, I knew very young that you didn't play around tracks and to always be careful. To this day, I still slow down at a crossing and look both ways when I'm driving. When my Dad was still working for Frisco, it took the electric current from an engine to set off the crossing gates, a free rolling freight car would not do it. He knew of crews that had to chase cars that got away from them and they'd roll right past a crossing without activating the gates and lights. I have heard that the setup is different now, but I still stop anyway, that's what Dad taught me to do. It's sad when people get killed, even if it's their own fault, but they can't the blame the RR for their actions. If the RR's did put up fences, people would only climb over them or find another way across the tracks, like the young woman did whose twin had been killed by a train. She went around the fence and walked in front of a train to die like her sister.
My carrier restricts SINGLE engines or other moving equipment that shunts track circuits to 30 MPH. The relative 'shortness' of single engines or equipment moving at higher speeds does not give relay based signal circuits used in crossing protection enough time to activate. On my carrier this failing was discovered back in the middle 50's when they started operating single Budd RDC car trains. Problem had not surfaced previously because a steam engines also had a tender to extent the length of the shunt and diesels of the period were generally operated in MU'd sets on the main tracks. Automatic crossing protection has been installed in many different forms since it was invented and many of those forms still exist today.
edblysardWhat bothered me most is the second story, where the mother had her son upon the bridge with her, tossing rocks into the water way/stream?
Complete ignorance.
edblysard The woman’s father was upset there weren’t walkways where she could "escape" when the train came...(pssst, she wasen't supposed to be up there on the bridge in the first place!) Railroad bridges don’t have walkways,(most of them anyway) for a simple reason, if they did have walkways, people would trespass even more using the bridge to cross the waterway! The walkway becomes an “attractive nuisance” under most state laws…in essence, its presence is a invitation to use it, thereby making the bridge owner liable for anyone hurt on their bridge.
You answered it in part, and it would cost more to maintain and build the bridge.
edblysard The first story, where Dad wonders why the railroad doesn’t fence in the right of way…bet you a dollar to a donut if the railroad did fence the area, the home owners and parents would get all upset because the mean railroad was making their kids walk an extra two or three blocks to cross at the street crossing, making them late for school, or forcing the kids, and their parents, to get up a little earlier in the morning! The essence I hear of the junk coming out of the reporter is it’s the railroad responsibility to protect people from their own bad decisions….
Just people wanting their cake and eating it too, being in denial, and just plain being completely blind as to what they are actually saying. Not the railroad's fault if a teenager who is a 5 time letterman and honor student gets killed just because he "didn't see" the train coming,or "thought he could beat it", or "didn't know that it was still in use", or even "didn't say not to stay off (plenty of warnings to prevent this [people see them, they are just plain ignoring them, sad........]).
The Lehigh Valley Railroad, the Route of the Black Diamond Express, John Wilkes and Maple Leaf.
-Jake, modeling the Barclay, Towanda & Susquehanna.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.