Renamed: Sigh! Moron hits train

[Poppa_Zit]

The rural railroad crossing where a car struck a train early Sunday morning is marked only with a stop sign and "crossing ahead" sign, a Fond du Lac County Sheriff's Department official says.

This perhaps is the most interesting quote to come out of this story. "Only a stop sign..."

Sheesh.

Since when are stop signs optional? 

[AlcoRS11Nut]

(colored highlights mine) 

Man killed after hitting train on Cemetery Road

By Peggy Breister
The Reporter [e-mail]

TOWN OF FRIENDSHIP, WI - The rural railroad crossing where a car struck a train early Sunday morning is marked only with a stop sign and "crossing ahead" sign, a Fond du Lac County Sheriff's Department official says.

The crossing at Cemetery Road in the town of Friendship where Nathan L. Novotny, 30, of Oshkosh, was killed is not marked with flashing lights or gates.

Novotny is believed to have struck the stopped Canadian National train at 2:30 a.m. Sunday, according to a Fond du Lac County Sheriff's Department report. He was pronounced dead at the scene.

His eastbound Ford Explorer passed under the train and came to rest on the east side of the tracks, said Fond du Lac County Sheriff's Department Chief Deputy Mark Strand.

The train engineer did not realize a vehicle had struck the train and the train eventually continued northbound.

A passerby saw Novotny's vehicle at 3:46 a.m. and called 911, Strand said.

The crossing is marked with a stop sign and a "railroad crossing ahead" sign.

There are no flashing lights or gates there, said Sheriff Mick Fink.

"Although it is properly marked, would it be better with flashing lights? Probably," Fink said. "Does it meet the statutory requirements as is? Yes."

Modifying crossings requires a request to the Office of the Commissioner of Railroads. An investigation is typically performed into the necessity of upgrading the crossing. If the OCR determines modifications are needed, it assesses costs for the project.
http://www.fdlreporter.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071016/FON0101/710160374/1985

==============================================================

This vehicle was travelling so fast that the SUV went under the train and ended up on the other side!!  Gee, d'ya think maybe excessive speed and/or alcohol just might possibly have been a contributing factor?? 

If this idiot had hit a bridge or streetlight, would the community demand the city do something about those menacing obsticales?

Sigh.

 

No sympathy here....another idiot out of the world...how is that bad? 

[CNW 6000]

Here's a link to the Oshkosh North Western web site with the story.

[spokyone]

PZ.  I emailed the reporter again. Still no reply.

Good. I called the newsroom of the newspaper this afternoon and one of the editors said he'd talk to her.

Peggy just emailed me. She said she is checking.

[Poppa_Zit]

PZ.  I emailed the reporter again. Still no reply.

Good. I called the newsroom of the newspaper this afternoon and one of the editors said he'd talk to her.

[CNW 6000]

The original news story of this senseless tragedy said the results of the tox tests on the driver wouldn't be available until one week after the accident (last Oct. 14).

With over 160 posts in this thread and over 4800 views, there was a lot of interest here. So I'd say this topic deserves some closure.

I have been looking online a couple times a week ever since but could find nothing. Any of you guys in the Oshkosh area know if the newspapers ever did a follow-up revealing the tox report? It would have popped up in their 60-day file last Saturday.

Dan?   

I've heard nothing publicly.  My 'source' at the ONW says that the attitude in the bull pen was to drop it and move on because it wasn't 'juicy' enough.  I plan on following up and will keep you posted.

[spokyone]

PZ.  I emailed the reporter again. Still no reply.

[Poppa_Zit]

The original news story of this senseless tragedy said the results of the tox tests on the driver wouldn't be available until one week after the accident (last Oct. 14).

With over 160 posts in this thread and over 4800 views, there was a lot of interest here. So I'd say this topic deserves some closure.

I have been looking online a couple times a week ever since but could find nothing. Any of you guys in the Oshkosh area know if the newspapers ever did a follow-up revealing the tox report? It would have popped up in their 60-day file last Saturday.

Dan?   

[jfallon]

Re-

http://forums.thenorthwestern.com/viewtopic.php?t=14234

I noticed that "Investigator" suggested that failure-to-activate signal malfunctions are responsible for a large number of grade crossing crashes, and that railroads cover up this type of cause.  I have always wondered about the possibility of grade crossing signals failing to activate.  It seems rare, but not altogether impossible.  I have heard that grade crossing signals are fail safe.  But does that really mean that they cannot possibly fail?  If failure does occur from time to time, wouldn't there be accident records indicating that signal failure was the cause?  I would think there would be public statistics available. 

    It seems that evry time some fool tries to beat a train through a crossing, he claims that the signals weren't working. Even when he is driving in the oncoming lane to pass the line of cars stopped at the flashing lights (oh, are those the signals). Perhaps what should happen is that the states pass laws requiring all vehicles to come to a complete stop at all RR crossings, and to look for oncoming trains before proceding. This would be the safest alternative!

                                John "I Brake for Trains" Fallon
 

[Steam Is King]

Maybe its just me but even when the lights aren't flashing and/or the gates are up I slow down and look bnoth ways as if it were a rural crossing marked only with wooden crossbucks.Its not a goodidea  to trust someone elses techology with your life when all you need to do is exercise a little caution at the tracks.It doesn't require much  effort.It reminds me of the people wjho insist on driviong even though their windshiled is coated with ice and they cant see out. I've eve seen poeple driving with their head  out the window so they can see.

Chico

[Anonymous]

Re-

http://forums.thenorthwestern.com/viewtopic.php?t=14234

I noticed that "Investigator" suggested that failure-to-activate signal malfunctions are responsible for a large number of grade crossing crashes, and that railroads cover up this type of cause.  I have always wondered about the possibility of grade crossing signals failing to activate.  It seems rare, but not altogether impossible.  I have heard that grade crossing signals are fail safe.  But does that really mean that they cannot possibly fail?  If failure does occur from time to time, wouldn't there be accident records indicating that signal failure was the cause?  I would think there would be public statistics available. 

[Murphy Siding]

     Has there been anything published, about whether alcohol was a factor in this accident?

[Anonymous]

I saw this while researching another story.
http://www.hartandassociates.net/PracticeAreas/Railroad-Accidents.asp

 

Hmmm....... this doesn't say it's the railroad's fault as much, but they do mention malfunctioning of the crossing systems, but don't mention the drivers swerving around gates trying to beat the train. They also mention speeding, but wether they mean the train or the car, I'm not sure

[zardoz]

I believe the money spent on installing and maintaining reflectors would buy more safety if it were spent on roadside lighting for passive grade crossings without stop signs, that are in un-illuminated areas.

Might I suggest that some this magic money be spent on driver education.  Perhaps knowledge of a more stringent set of basic rules be required before a driving license is handed out.  The DMV seems to allow anyone to drive, with the only requirement be that they are able to sit upright (traffic law knowledge optional).  How about having to re-pass a driving test every time a license needs to be renewed?  At least a written test. 

I would guess that if whatever states of mind these drivers are in when they hit trains (or drive in the path of a train) are also responsible for many of the other traffic incidents that dot our landscape on a daily basis.

[csmith9474]

Smitty, there were a couple of such crossing devices installed along what is presently UP's line between Joliet and St. Louis, but it was because of the upgrading of this line to high-speed standards.  I only got to see one of these crossings; it has since been replaced with four-quadrant gates.

There was an incident along this line where a signal maintainer, through neglect, rendered grade-crossing signals inoperative, and it resulted in a fatality.  I can't remember whether it was at one of these crossings--but the elaborate design was removed soon afterwards.

Thanks. Now that you mention the high speed upgrade, that jogs my memory as to why they wanted to use these types of crossing protection.

Yikes!! I didn't hear the one involving the signal maintainer's neglect.

[Anonymous]

People run into trains for different reasons, and with some of those reasons, roadside lighting would not help.  And with some of those reasons, reflectors would not help.  Considering what probably occurred with the Friendship, WI crash, I believe that either roadside lighting or reflectors may have prevented it, whereas the stop sign did not.  In fact, I would say that roadside lighting would have contributed far more crash prevention than the stop sign.

And at what point does the driver have to take some responsibility?  We could light up every crossing like the Vegas strip, but at some point people need to learn how to protect themselves.  Maybe we should have crash netting come up anytime a train comes near, just in case a careless driver thinks that the rules of the road don't apply to them.

The drivers have been expected to take all the responsibility up until the point where the FRA said that freight trains can be hard to see at night.  Why would the FRA tell us that trains can be hard to see at night, and add reflectors to light them up instead of just telling drivers to live up to their responsibility to make sure the crossing is clear? 

I believe the money spent on installing and maintaining reflectors would buy more safety if it were spent on roadside lighting for passive grade crossings without stop signs, that are in un-illuminated areas.

[spokyone]

I saw this while researching another story.
http://www.hartandassociates.net/PracticeAreas/Railroad-Accidents.asp

 

[CShaveRR]

Smitty, there were a couple of such crossing devices installed along what is presently UP's line between Joliet and St. Louis, but it was because of the upgrading of this line to high-speed standards.  I only got to see one of these crossings; it has since been replaced with four-quadrant gates.

There was an incident along this line where a signal maintainer, through neglect, rendered grade-crossing signals inoperative, and it resulted in a fatality.  I can't remember whether it was at one of these crossings--but the elaborate design was removed soon afterwards.

[CShaveRR]

This is almost embarrassing to admit, but I blew a stop sign at a railroad crossing in Michigan a couple of weeks ago.  Just plain didn't see the sign under the cross-bucks.  My wife did...

I've been known to do strange things while driving in the vicinity of a railroad track.  I'd submit that in my case, I'm probably distracted by the presence of said track, and am therefore unlikely to run into a train, or into the path of one.  In my defense, I'll say that "my" crossing was less than familiar to me (in fact, the track was more familiar than the road!), and I'm far more used to fully-protected grade crossings.  But that doesn't make the possiblity of distraction, momentary absent-mindedness, or whatever, less scary.

And my wife and I both know whose fault any incident would have been.

Everyone needs to be more careful out there!

 

[csmith9474]

People run into trains for different reasons, and with some of those reasons, roadside lighting would not help.  And with some of those reasons, reflectors would not help.  Considering what probably occurred with the Friendship, WI crash, I believe that either roadside lighting or reflectors may have prevented it, whereas the stop sign did not.  In fact, I would say that roadside lighting would have contributed far more crash prevention than the stop sign.

And at what point does the driver have to take some responsibility?  We could light up every crossing like the Vegas strip, but at some point people need to learn how to protect themselves.  Maybe we should have crash netting come up anytime a train comes near, just in case a careless driver thinks that the rules of the road don't apply to them.

Sort of similar to the crash netting thing, I recall in the early 00's when the railroads (I believe it was UP to be specific) was testing the gates that came down to completely block the grade crossings in Illinois. I believe these things would even stop an 18 wheeler. I wonder what ever happened to that program. I remember seeing one, and it was quite a rig up. I would imagine they would be quite expensive to maintain relative to the standard crossing gates.

[n012944]

People run into trains for different reasons, and with some of those reasons, roadside lighting would not help.  And with some of those reasons, reflectors would not help.  Considering what probably occurred with the Friendship, WI crash, I believe that either roadside lighting or reflectors may have prevented it, whereas the stop sign did not.  In fact, I would say that roadside lighting would have contributed far more crash prevention than the stop sign.

And at what point does the driver have to take some responsibility?  We could light up every crossing like the Vegas strip, but at some point people need to learn how to protect themselves.  Maybe we should have crash netting come up anytime a train comes near, just in case a careless driver thinks that the rules of the road don't apply to them.

[Anonymous]

Okay so simple solution to this "problem" (quotes are because only a certen group of people consider it a problem because they arnt smart enough not to be effected) is install a pole with a light on it at every single crossing that will light up the crossing from above at all times day or night,...

I would say that adding roadside lighting to all un-illuminated, un-signalized grade crossings would help a lot to reduce run-into-train crashes.  Making every crossing signalized with flashing red lights and gates would be the best solution, but the cost is an obstacle.  Certainly signals decrease the likelihood of all types of car/train crashes, but roadside illumination alone would significantly reduce the likelihood of run-into-train crashes, yet the cost would be far less than adding signals and gates to crossings.  Only the completely un-illuminated passive crossings would need this added roadside lighting.  This would solve the problem only where it exists, unlike universal reflectors, which apply their effects to all grade crossings, most of which are not unduly risky.

Adding stop signs to grade crossings would also help reduce the probability of run-into-train crashes, but highway engineers are sometimes reluctant to force a stop if it is not absolutely necessary because they worry about the likelihood of rear end crashes between vehicles that can occur if a vehicle stops.

People run into trains for different reasons, and with some of those reasons, roadside lighting would not help.  And with some of those reasons, reflectors would not help.  Considering what probably occurred with the Friendship, WI crash, I believe that either roadside lighting or reflectors may have prevented it, whereas the stop sign did not.  In fact, I would say that roadside lighting would have contributed far more crash prevention than the stop sign.

[oscaletrains]

what i get from reading investagators poasts:

1. he is a major leauge ***

2. he depends too much on tecnolagy

3. he has a personal grudge against the railroads

this guy is wanting the railroad to isue common sense

[vsmith]

It all comes back to the same thing. HE RAN A STOP SIGN. What would the naysayers say if he ran a stop sign at a corner and nailed someone.

Yep, no amount of reflectorized tape can cover that single fact. If he had slowed down and stopped their would have been no collision. What if he ran a stop at an intersection and went under a milk tanker in the same way? same result, is it the trucks fault? no

[Soo 6604]

It all comes back to the same thing. HE RAN A STOP SIGN. What would the naysayers say if he ran a stop sign at a corner and nailed someone. Will you hear the same outcries? Most likely. They need a flashing red light or traffic signals.  It's a 2-sided coin.

We could discuss something more civil like Politics or religion

Paul

PS. It might hard to fathom but, most things at night are hard to see. Believe it or not

[spokyone]

So instead of "RAILROAD CROSSING" on the crossbucks, maybe we should go back to these:

This is what WSOR has done.
http://www.wsorrailroad.com/safety/stopsigns.html

[K&ARailfan]

So instead of "RAILROAD CROSSING" on the crossbucks, maybe we should go back to these:

I agree 100% PZ, they're safe and look great!

[Poppa_Zit]

So instead of "RAILROAD CROSSING" on the crossbucks, maybe we should go back to these:

[Mr_Ash]

Okay so simple solution to this "problem" (quotes are because only a certen group of people consider it a problem because they arnt smart enough not to be effected) is install a pole with a light on it at every single crossing that will light up the crossing from above at all times day or night, that way stupid people cant say they didnt see it.... Unless ofcorse stupid person #443 hits the light pole 15 minutes before stupid person #764 gets off work to take that same route home from work

IMHO though, they should just let natural selection take its course

[Anonymous]

 Granted, the law requires this vigilance on the part of drivers, but if a motorist runs into an obstruction that is hard to see, the law tends to at least partly blame the obstruction.

It is true that the crossbucks and signage at a grade crossing is reflectorized, but the visibility of these items only tells a driver that a grade crossing is there.  So the reflectorized warning of the signage is irrelevant if a driver does not see a train and therefore perceives the crossing to be clear.

I disagree with your conclusion. The perception of a clear crossing does not alter the fact that is was not clear.

I agree that it does not alter that fact, but all a driver has to go on is perception, and the FRA has declared that the perception of trains at night can be difficult for drivers.  I am just agreeing with them.

With regard to the legal outcome, I must clarify that the crossing example that I gave where I believe the railroad would be partly negligent in the case of a vehicle hitting a stopped train does not apply to this Friendship, WI crash because that crossing had a stop sign. 

There is no excuse for not seeing a reflectorized stop sign preceded by an advance reflectorised warning sign, and no excuse for running that stop sign.  The evidence of this crash suggests that the driver did not stop for the stop sign.  If a driver were to stop at a crossing that was occupied by a train, either moving or standing, it is very unlikely that the driver would proceed after stopping and run into that train.  So I have no idea what the legal outcome of this Friendship crash will be, but it seems like the driver was completely at fault.