How do you do that without intending to?
By drawing the fine line between intentially parking the train across the crossing (ie, being held out of a receiving yard, etc), and having it left there as the result of switching.
Doesn't change the end result....
We encounter the same thing here at work, when CSX is doubling (tripling, quadrupling...) out trains. Sometimes they have three crossings blocked while they make the air, etc.
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...
It is interesting that this crash occurred between the time this meeting about blocking crossings was scheduled and the time it was held.
Quote from the linked article above:
"Canadian National railroad representatives assured local officials Thursday the railroad never intends to block crossings in Fond du Lac County. Switching often leaves trains blocking crossings ...at the town of Friendship ...for an hour or more at a time."
Just posted to Wisrail:
ph1000632 wrote:Fond Du Lac (WI) Reporter: http://www.fdlreporter.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071019/FON0105/71019051 8/1290/FONnews or: http://tinyurl.com/ywjzgr Posted October 19, 2007 Railroad representatives assure officials of intent to keep area roadways unblocked Canadian National railroad representatives assured local officials Thursday the railroad never intends to block crossings in Fond du Lac County. Railroad, town of Friendship and state officials met Thursday during a meeting organized by Fond du Lac County Sheriff Mick Fink to talk about the issue of blocked crossings in the township. "The railroad told us they would do their best not to block crossings," Fink said after the meeting. "It is not in their best interest to have trains standing still either." ...
Fond Du Lac (WI) Reporter: http://www.fdlreporter.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071019/FON0105/71019051 8/1290/FONnews or: http://tinyurl.com/ywjzgr Posted October 19, 2007 Railroad representatives assure officials of intent to keep area roadways unblocked
Canadian National railroad representatives assured local officials Thursday the railroad never intends to block crossings in Fond du Lac County. Railroad, town of Friendship and state officials met Thursday during a meeting organized by Fond du Lac County Sheriff Mick Fink to talk about the issue of blocked crossings in the township. "The railroad told us they would do their best not to block crossings," Fink said after the meeting. "It is not in their best interest to have trains standing still either."
...
outback76 wrote:This so called "moron" was my friend. A moron he was not. He was a husband, a father, a son, a friend and so much more. Shame on you too.
outback 76,
It is interesting that you have posted here with your first-hand relationship with this accident. What is your opinion about the reason your friend ran the stop sign?
outback76 wrote: SHAME ON YOU - you helpless soul. Do you know the absolute facts about what happened? Did you even stop to think that family and close friends of Nate's might be reading this?!!! SHAME ON YOU. Maybe you should read the facts before you go mouthing off about someone's loved one. No where is it written that alcohol or drugs played a part. It was also an extremely dark that night as it was overcast with no moon. Growing up in that area - I've almost hit the trains myself - when there are no markings on the trains, they're not that easy to see. I know for a solid fact that you are not from the rural Oshkosh area, because if you were, you would know how unbelievably annoying the trains are that sit on the tracks that block MILES of crossings to main roads. Getting from one side of a country block to the other can take an unbelievably long amount of time to cross - it's annoying, and quite frankly a hazard. It blocks access for rescue vehicles. Dealing with the issue of parked trains is long overdue. Its too bad that it took the death of a fine human being to get things rolling.
SHAME ON YOU - you helpless soul. Do you know the absolute facts about what happened? Did you even stop to think that family and close friends of Nate's might be reading this?!!! SHAME ON YOU. Maybe you should read the facts before you go mouthing off about someone's loved one. No where is it written that alcohol or drugs played a part. It was also an extremely dark that night as it was overcast with no moon. Growing up in that area - I've almost hit the trains myself - when there are no markings on the trains, they're not that easy to see. I know for a solid fact that you are not from the rural Oshkosh area, because if you were, you would know how unbelievably annoying the trains are that sit on the tracks that block MILES of crossings to main roads. Getting from one side of a country block to the other can take an unbelievably long amount of time to cross - it's annoying, and quite frankly a hazard. It blocks access for rescue vehicles. Dealing with the issue of parked trains is long overdue. Its too bad that it took the death of a fine human being to get things rolling.
I'm sorry I passed judgement so quickly, but he did show poor judgement in running a stop sign at a crossing in an area where trains block crossings regularly.
[\quote]
I'm not sorry. I stand by my original statement. Just because they guy is able to reproduce does not in any way diminish the moron factor.
If this had been someone lost and not familiar with the area, then MAYBE I would be more sympathetic. But the facts remain: the high rate of speed, he ignored the BIG YELLOW warning sign, and he ignored the BIG RED stop sign.
Sounds like the actions of a moron to me.
EDIT: Actually, after looking up the definition of moron, I apologize for the use of the word; moron implies mental retardation, which is a medical condition and certainly not one to be made fun of, or imply that a clinically-diagnosed moron is any less of a person.
The term I should have used was IDIOT.
From Mirriam-Webster online:
Text: a stupid person <only an idiot would jump off a bridge just because their friends told them to>
Synonyms: blockhead, cretin, dodo, dolt, donkey, dope, dork [slang], dumbbell, dummy, dunce, fathead, goon, half-wit, ignoramus, imbecile, jackass, knothead, nincompoop, ninny, nitwit, numskull (or numbskull), pinhead, simpleton, stock, turkey
Related Words: booby, fool, goose, loony (also looney), lunatic, madman, nut, zany; loser; gawk; featherbrain, scatterbrain; beast, boor, cad, churl, clown, creep, cur, heel, jerk, skunk, snake, stinker, villain
Near Antonyms: egghead, intellectual, sage, thinker
Antonyms: brain, genius
I rest my case.
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
by The Fon du Lac Reporter Staff
TOWN OF FRIENDSHIP - It may be next week before officials know why a man drove his sport utility vehicle into a stopped train early Sunday.
Nathan Novotny, 30, of Oshkosh, was killed about 2:30 a.m. when his SUV drove into and passed under a tanker car parked on the tracks on Cemetery Road in the town of Friendship, said Fond du Lac County Sheriff's Department Capt. Dean Will.
Results of blood tests to determine if alcohol was involved in the accident are expected to be in next week, he said.
No skid marks were found at the scene of the crash, he said.
FWIW- The reason for 2 crossbucks--2 tracks(ex-Soo and ex-CNW) that run parallel from Fond du Lac to Oshkosh.
And, in Nate's obit, it listed him as an off road enthusiast and loved anything with an engine....
vsmith wrote: There is a very very obvious "ramp" at the tracks, even if there was no train, any vehicle at a "high rate of speed" would likely get airborne, could lose control and crash regardless. Now looking at the pic I CLEARLY see, 1. a crossing warning, and 2, a STOP SIGN, now I know some of these rural types are in a habit of blowing thru stop signs, especially late at night, but all the evidence presented to me indicates this guy was playing dice with the devil, and was going to lose one way or another. And I dont know about you but when I'm driving at night in a rural area, I use my highbeams, which even on my little rocketcar will still light up half a county, I think I could spot something as big as a train if its blocking the highway ahead of me. Makes me wonder...PoppaZit, this what your talking about?http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8oyEKEZTP8
There is a very very obvious "ramp" at the tracks, even if there was no train, any vehicle at a "high rate of speed" would likely get airborne, could lose control and crash regardless.
Now looking at the pic I CLEARLY see, 1. a crossing warning, and 2, a STOP SIGN, now I know some of these rural types are in a habit of blowing thru stop signs, especially late at night, but all the evidence presented to me indicates this guy was playing dice with the devil, and was going to lose one way or another.
And I dont know about you but when I'm driving at night in a rural area, I use my highbeams, which even on my little rocketcar will still light up half a county, I think I could spot something as big as a train if its blocking the highway ahead of me. Makes me wonder...
PoppaZit, this what your talking about?
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U8oyEKEZTP8
Yup. That video only needs the theme music from "Dukes of Hazzard"!
After seeing those guys in the video jump the tracks and go airborne and listening to the camera guy's stupid giggle, [warning, sarcasm coming] there's no way you could label them as "morons". No way.
Have fun with your trains
Poppa_Zit wrote: spokyone wrote: outback76 wrote:This so called "moron" was my friend. A moron he was not. He was a husband, a father, a son, a friend and so much more. Shame on you too.Perhaps Nate was not a moron, but he certainly used poor judgement that night when he ran a stop sign at a high rate of speed. At that moment he did a moronic thing.You hit the nail on the head, spokyone.No one here is "happy" this guy died. But for whatever reason it happened, it certainly was a very unnecessary and preventable death.Let's look at the evidence: forget the crossbucks. The "absolute facts" are a man ran a stop sign at an extreme rate of speed in the dead of night-- so fast his 4,000 lb. Explorer went UNDER a tank car he could not see but should have expected because as outback76 says, everyone in the area knows those crossings are frequently blocked. That's quite a costly error in judgement, I'd say. Look at the photo. This crossing has all the characteristics of a jump ramp. I see guys hit the gas hard going over similar rural crossings in Illinois all the time -- because they get their jollies going airborn over the crossing. No one needs to be impaired to do that, either.Kinda surprising a man who had the responsibilities of husband and father would take a stupid chance like that, man. He'd still be here if he'd obeyed the stop sign -- being inconvenienced by trains blocking crossing isn't the issue here, not at all. My guess it the county put the stop signs there because guys run that crossing all the time.
spokyone wrote: outback76 wrote:This so called "moron" was my friend. A moron he was not. He was a husband, a father, a son, a friend and so much more. Shame on you too.Perhaps Nate was not a moron, but he certainly used poor judgement that night when he ran a stop sign at a high rate of speed. At that moment he did a moronic thing.
You hit the nail on the head, spokyone.
No one here is "happy" this guy died. But for whatever reason it happened, it certainly was a very unnecessary and preventable death.
Let's look at the evidence: forget the crossbucks. The "absolute facts" are a man ran a stop sign at an extreme rate of speed in the dead of night-- so fast his 4,000 lb. Explorer went UNDER a tank car he could not see but should have expected because as outback76 says, everyone in the area knows those crossings are frequently blocked. That's quite a costly error in judgement, I'd say.
Look at the photo. This crossing has all the characteristics of a jump ramp. I see guys hit the gas hard going over similar rural crossings in Illinois all the time -- because they get their jollies going airborn over the crossing. No one needs to be impaired to do that, either.
Kinda surprising a man who had the responsibilities of husband and father would take a stupid chance like that, man. He'd still be here if he'd obeyed the stop sign -- being inconvenienced by trains blocking crossing isn't the issue here, not at all. My guess it the county put the stop signs there because guys run that crossing all the time.
I agree completely PZ.
"The "absolute facts" are a man ran a stop sign at an extreme rate of speed in the dead of night-- so fast his 4,000 lb. Explorer went UNDER a tank car he could not see but should have expected because as outback76 says, everyone in the area knows those crossings are frequently blocked."
That's exactly it, he should not have done so, and failing to stop cost him.
From the photo, I do not understand that crossing. Why are there two crossbucks facing in each direction? The second crossbuck on each side has a yield sign on its post, while the first crossbuck on each side does not have a yield sign. Then there is a freestanding stop sign facing in each direction.
I have never liked the concept of placing yield signs at grade crossings. Technically it is the correct message for a grade crossing, but the yield message is the most abused of all traffic instructions. It allows risk taking as extreme as possible. Any close call is OK as long as it is a miss for the yielder. Furthermore, the concept of yield is muddied by its relationship to the concept of merge because the two entirely different concepts come into play at similar looking road arrangements.
The message sent by a yield sign is that you do not have the right of way where it conflicts with another route if a vehicle is approaching on that route. But the message usually received is simply, "you don't have to stop." So I think yield signs make grade crossings more prone to risk taking because of their misunderstood, watered down message. Besides, the correct yield message is already perfectly embodied in the crossbuck, so a yield sign at a grade crossing is redundant.
The correct yield message is also perfectly embodied in a stop sign as a component of the total message, which is stop and yield. So, I find it particularly weird to post both yield and stop signs. A driver might easily rationalize that they have a choice between the two messages and pick the one that takes the least time. I think that is likely to be what happened with this collision. Certainly the driver knew about the crossing and the stop sign. He may not have thought stopping was necessary because he did not see any train approaching and failed to notice the one standing there. He may have overlooked the fact that stopping for no apparent reason might pay off by giving him time to realize a train was blocking the crossing.
Whether the yield sign contributed to a rationalization that stopping was not necessary nobody can say. But you have a stop sign standing right beside a sign that basically says "you don't have to stop" in a lot of people's minds, especially if they don't see another vehicle approaching. If it were my decision, I would get rid of the yield signs and extra crossbucks, and maybe make the stop signs bigger.
Mr_Ash wrote: outback76 wrote: SHAME ON YOU - you helpless soul. Do you know the absolute facts about what happened? Did you even stop to think that family and close friends of Nate's might be reading this?!!! SHAME ON YOU. Maybe you should read the facts before you go mouthing off about someone's loved one. No where is it written that alcohol or drugs played a part. It was also an extremely dark that night as it was overcast with no moon. Growing up in that area - I've almost hit the trains myself - when there are no markings on the trains, they're not that easy to see. I know for a solid fact that you are not from the rural Oshkosh area, because if you were, you would know how unbelievably annoying the trains are that sit on the tracks that block MILES of crossings to main roads. Getting from one side of a country block to the other can take an unbelievably long amount of time to cross - it's annoying, and quite frankly a hazard. It blocks access for rescue vehicles. Dealing with the issue of parked trains is long overdue. Its too bad that it took the death of a fine human being to get things rolling. If he lived in the area he should have known there was a RR crossing there and should have atleast slowed down, if theres no gate or warning lights you should use even more caution when approaching a RR crossing in the conditions you just discribedIts called people being in a hurry to get from point A to point B and not caring about safty, while adding flashing lights might provide people with more warning that there is a train it wont make them any smarter
If he lived in the area he should have known there was a RR crossing there and should have atleast slowed down, if theres no gate or warning lights you should use even more caution when approaching a RR crossing in the conditions you just discribed
Its called people being in a hurry to get from point A to point B and not caring about safty, while adding flashing lights might provide people with more warning that there is a train it wont make them any smarter
And, herein lies the rub with these threads. We have to remember, regardless of what we think of the person's level of common sense, that the people who die in these accidents are someone's family member, or friend, and it is tough to see these characterizations. Plus, we are passing judgement, in some cases, from hundreds, or thousands of miles away. Am I guilty of this...probably, because I am sure I may have made some characterizations of that order, so I will hang my head in shame too. I think a bit of compassion is in order here. I shake my head in disbelief at these accidents myself, but, I can't even comprehend what it must me like to see your friend, or family member alive one hour, and hear that they died in a horrible accident, the next.
Do people need to start paying attention to railroad crossings? Oh yes, you bet. I have gone on before about how it seems that some people either don't care about the fact the gates are down, or treat the whole thing with contempt. And, I know what I am thinking when I read these stories: "What a stupid, and absolutely senseless way to die" When at a crossing, or near railroad tracks of any kind while a train is approaching, there is a CHOICE involved here, either wait it out and live, or try and cross and die. The fact that there are people who actively make that choice leave me shaking my head.
Think about the family of that man that died at the train platform while his family watched. I can't imagine... but again, it was death due to a senseless act... a choice. He chose to show off, knowing the dangers, and possibly disregarding them, or misjudging his ability to get on the tracks and get back up. The nightmares will go on for years. Perhaps calling them "stupid" is an expression of our frustration at these people, who not only take their lives into their hands, but sometimes, the lives of others. In addition, there is the train crew to think about, the feelings they have and the things they go through when they take a life trhough no fault, or actions of their own. They are merely working, and doing their jobs, yet, they have to put up with people crossing their "workspace" and never knowing if the next one is going to wind up on the pilot of their locomotive.
I think we can offer an opinion, but, unless we hear for sure, mentioning drugs, or alcohol as being part of something like this, we should keep that opinion to ourselves. We do know the SUV went under the train, just looking at a box or tank car....it looks like considerable forward velocity would be needed to do that, from a purely phyiscal standpoint.
I sympathize with the families of all of the fatalities.....but, a moment's thought, and some common sense would prevent these tragedies.
Doesn't matter if there are markings on the trains or not, THERE WAS A STOP SIGN!!!! If this moron had stopped at the stop sign, we would not be having this conversation.
An "expensive model collector"
spokyone wrote:Yesterday in Rathdrum ID, a lady stopped at the stop sign at the grade crossing. Then she drove right into the path of the train. A cop saw it happen because he was there to cite motorists that run the stop sign. He said she must not have seen the train coming. She survived.
She probably thought it was a 4-way stop and expected the train to stop too.
Mark
Bucyrus wrote:The FRA says freight trains are hard to see at night, and this is the reason motorists run into them.
I am sure the reflective stop sign at the crossing was hard to see also.
They should do 2 things...
Plase a "severe tire damage" sign on the gates and or crossing post
Have a set of tire spikes raise up when the crossing signal is activated so anyone going around the gates gets 4 flat tires
Ofcorse then we would just see more storys in the news about stranded motorists on crossings with 4 flat tires getting hit by trains
People are stupid, Its called natural selection
Soo 6604 wrote:The train was parked on the main where the cops and others were taking parts and pieces off of the tanker. The tanker was set out along with a boxcar before it and after it. Any reason why they would do that? I might just have answered myself but would it possibly be not to disturb the car in question?Paul
The train was parked on the main where the cops and others were taking parts and pieces off of the tanker. The tanker was set out along with a boxcar before it and after it. Any reason why they would do that? I might just have answered myself but would it possibly be not to disturb the car in question?
Paul
Could the car after it have picked up some debris from the crash? Or perhaps the tank car's brake rigging was damaged (ie hand brakes inoperable) and the adjacent cars were needed to keep it safely parked.
zardoz wrote: dknelson wrote: It is quite obvious the guy did not stop at the stop sign, isn't it.I do have to say, however, that one time I nearly had a close call at a rural crossing protected only by crossbucks. A train was stopped there but I did not notice probably because the cars blocking the crossing were very low empty double stack tables. This was before they started putting so much reflective tape on them. Fortunately l always slow down for crossings rather than speed up like nonrailfans do. Strange as it may seem it was not easy to see that there was a train stopped at that crossing but clearly i should have been more attentive, too.Dave NelsonAgreed. However, as one can see in the photo accompanying the article, there is a BIG YELLOW warning sign clearly visible. No excuses for this guy.
dknelson wrote: It is quite obvious the guy did not stop at the stop sign, isn't it.I do have to say, however, that one time I nearly had a close call at a rural crossing protected only by crossbucks. A train was stopped there but I did not notice probably because the cars blocking the crossing were very low empty double stack tables. This was before they started putting so much reflective tape on them. Fortunately l always slow down for crossings rather than speed up like nonrailfans do. Strange as it may seem it was not easy to see that there was a train stopped at that crossing but clearly i should have been more attentive, too.Dave Nelson
It is quite obvious the guy did not stop at the stop sign, isn't it.
I do have to say, however, that one time I nearly had a close call at a rural crossing protected only by crossbucks. A train was stopped there but I did not notice probably because the cars blocking the crossing were very low empty double stack tables. This was before they started putting so much reflective tape on them. Fortunately l always slow down for crossings rather than speed up like nonrailfans do. Strange as it may seem it was not easy to see that there was a train stopped at that crossing but clearly i should have been more attentive, too.
Dave Nelson
Agreed.
However, as one can see in the photo accompanying the article, there is a BIG YELLOW warning sign clearly visible. No excuses for this guy.
In the early 60's, Northwestern University Traffic Institute published a study, in which one of their findings was that a stop sign placed on a crossbuck post was more likely to slow a driver down, because it was more familiar to the motorist. Of course, things have changed sinced the sixties, but I would say this crossing is well marked, including the yellow sign.
This does not factor in driving while drunk, speeding, and not seeing a stopped train. I'd like to see the Police report to see if any of the above are evident.
zardoz wrote:"There are all kinds of ways to get distracted these days," said police spokeswoman Kerry Delf. "We don't recommend any of them while you're driving."
"There are all kinds of ways to get distracted these days," said police spokeswoman Kerry Delf. "We don't recommend any of them while you're driving."
Ha! Very true, however...
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.