Ulrich There are all kinds of bridges that allow pedestrians to cross and that do not invite mischief. Surely the number of people getting hit by trains would drop..IF you take the people off the tracks by giving them a convenient alternative...no?
There are all kinds of bridges that allow pedestrians to cross and that do not invite mischief. Surely the number of people getting hit by trains would drop..IF you take the people off the tracks by giving them a convenient alternative...no?
This wasn't a case of taking the shortest route to get to the other side of the creek, it was purely a case of teenage mischief, plain and simple. "Oh look, a railroad bridge... Lets walk out onto it to see what it's like. I've never been on one before". If their idea was to use the railroad bridge as a short cut to the other side, they all would've made it across in time, but witnesses say they were loitering on it for minutes before the train rounded the curve and began blowing for the eight grade crossings between the curve and the bridge which WAS heard by all of them; no iPods. The boy's instinct to run like hell when he heard 101's horn was correct and he did yell at his friends to follow suit, but instead they froze. They had a good minute to two minutes to get from the midpoint to the other side, a distance of about 320 feet, after realizing a train was approaching, but instead they chose to do nothing and just stood there. Who knows what they were thinking? The fact is that even if a safe haven was provided, they likely wouldn't have utilized it anyway. Sad really.
Ted M.
got trains?™
See my photos at: http://tedmarshall.rrpicturearchives.net/
Modelcar garr Using this analogy, unless the national psyche has changed, why make a railroad bridge more attractive to trespassers? In today's hyper legal atmosphere where lawyers try to find gray areas, even in very simple law such as trespassing, why give them more fuel for their arguments by making a catwalk on a railroad bridge? Trespassing is simple to understand, if it is not your land and you were not offered an invitation to stand on it, stay off. Add in a sign stating No Trespassing and it should be clear to anyone. First question above: To have the potential to save lives. Second question: To be there for plan "B"....For those who will not listen, catwalk or not....A space to jump to, or use in the first place to prevent tragedy with an approaching train. Third question: You say yourself, "add in a sign stating no tresspassing and it should be clear to anyone".....That is what I said in the first post....If a catwalk is in plece: "No tresspassing. Railroad employees ony. All others will be prosecuted". Or whatever legal language would be required on the signage. I certainly would not be suggesting a catwalk, or even an offset space every so many ft. to escape to make it easy for tresspassers.....but just a space to get to for the safety of a legit. person {RR employee}, or even a tresspasser {in an emergency....to save a life...! If tresspassers can't be stopped, doesn't it make some kind of sense to prevent someone from being killed.....I realize RR's probably wouldn't care to go this route, but just for this discussion, I think it would be worth having, to minimize potential tragedies. An off the wall thought: Perhaps a metal gate {locked}, at each end of the "walkway", of the bridge / trestle. And only RR employees would have keys for it....Now....If a tresspasser is found inside a "locked" space...do they still "win a case against the RR if somehow they still are injured....?
garr Using this analogy, unless the national psyche has changed, why make a railroad bridge more attractive to trespassers? In today's hyper legal atmosphere where lawyers try to find gray areas, even in very simple law such as trespassing, why give them more fuel for their arguments by making a catwalk on a railroad bridge? Trespassing is simple to understand, if it is not your land and you were not offered an invitation to stand on it, stay off. Add in a sign stating No Trespassing and it should be clear to anyone.
Using this analogy, unless the national psyche has changed, why make a railroad bridge more attractive to trespassers?
In today's hyper legal atmosphere where lawyers try to find gray areas, even in very simple law such as trespassing, why give them more fuel for their arguments by making a catwalk on a railroad bridge?
Trespassing is simple to understand, if it is not your land and you were not offered an invitation to stand on it, stay off. Add in a sign stating No Trespassing and it should be clear to anyone.
First question above: To have the potential to save lives.
Second question: To be there for plan "B"....For those who will not listen, catwalk or not....A space to jump to, or use in the first place to prevent tragedy with an approaching train.
Third question: You say yourself, "add in a sign stating no tresspassing and it should be clear to anyone".....That is what I said in the first post....If a catwalk is in plece: "No tresspassing. Railroad employees ony. All others will be prosecuted". Or whatever legal language would be required on the signage.
I certainly would not be suggesting a catwalk, or even an offset space every so many ft. to escape to make it easy for tresspassers.....but just a space to get to for the safety of a legit. person {RR employee}, or even a tresspasser {in an emergency....to save a life...!
If tresspassers can't be stopped, doesn't it make some kind of sense to prevent someone from being killed.....I realize RR's probably wouldn't care to go this route, but just for this discussion, I think it would be worth having, to minimize potential tragedies.
An off the wall thought: Perhaps a metal gate {locked}, at each end of the "walkway", of the bridge / trestle. And only RR employees would have keys for it....Now....If a tresspasser is found inside a "locked" space...do they still "win a case against the RR if somehow they still are injured....?
Quentin,
I think you make a good case with all your points. I'll bet FEC officials are having a lot of second thoughts along the same lines right now, especially considering the fact that they have a ten-foot-wide second track deck sitting there unused alongside of the active track.
As a side note, I predict that this story is on the verge of exploding with news about the trestle hazard and the responsibility of FEC in the matter.
Quentin
I think to protect themselves the RRs will eventually have to post very large "DO NOT ENTER - NO TRESSPASSING" signs at each side of bridges and tunnels like they do on Highways, these large very visable signages may be the best way to convey the peril one places themselves in if they ignore them and give the RRs a measure of protection, What, you didnt see the gianormous highway like sign before you walked out onto the bridge???
Have fun with your trains
UlrichThere are all kinds of bridges that allow pedestrians to cross and that do not invite mischief. Surely the number of people getting hit by trains would drop..IF you take the people off the tracks by giving them a convenient alternative...no?
First, my heart goes out to everyone involved in this incident. These senseless deaths will cause long term nightmares for the crew, the girls' family and friends, and the responders. I live 700 miles away, don't know anyone involved, yet am bothered by this as many of you are.
Now, crosswalks are located on streets, however people are still being hit crossing the streets in areas other than the crosswalk.
Yet, if the families decide legal action, there will be a lawyer willing to find gray where none should exist.
Jay--who always jay-walks whether in a crosswalk or not.
wabash1 Ulrich There are all kinds of bridges that allow pedestrians to cross and that do not invite mischief. Surely the number of people getting hit by trains would drop..IF you take the people off the tracks by giving them a convenient alternative...no? Here is a idea how about do nothing , should it be the railroads responsibility to give the treaspassers a place to hang out do as they want. NO in short if they treaspass and dont get off the bridge or jump then they die. easy simple and effective. the number of people getting hit by trains would drop if they wouldnt treaspass, make people accountable for thier actions. not the railroads and its employees.
Here is a idea how about do nothing , should it be the railroads responsibility to give the treaspassers a place to hang out do as they want. NO in short if they treaspass and dont get off the bridge or jump then they die. easy simple and effective. the number of people getting hit by trains would drop if they wouldnt treaspass, make people accountable for thier actions. not the railroads and its employees.
That is all true, but it might be cheaper for the railroads to add safety measures to trestles that reduce deaths rather than paying the civil settlements for those deaths. I wouldn’t be surprised if FEC pays a pretty penny for this one.
Yes..and the number of people who die from health issues every year would drop drastically too if everyone runs a mile every morning..doesn't smoke..and eats healthy. We could fix the healthcare system (reduce cost and taxes to us) by denying those people (who don't live a healthy lifestyle) healthcare..hey...they don't take care of themselves. ..why should that be our problem? I agree...we should be responsible for our actions...but...we live in a society.
Interesting. I am surprised though that the bridge lacks a catlwalk, or at least certain standings points you see on some large bridges. You'd think they'd have those for crews anyhow. And I wonder how the girls didn't knwo about the bridge on the other side. You'd think they could've jumped onto it.
Awesome! Bucyrus Modelcar....Could a "catwalk" with railings, be constructed on {any} RR bridge be labled as "No tresspasing" and have signage indicating: "For RR employes only, others will be prosecuted, etc..."....be done in such a way to make the RR free of a lawsuit if any person not associated with that RR did use it and possibly be injured being on it. Quentin, I think the addition of a catwalk could cut both ways. It is hard to predict how things could be spun to justify a lawsuit. A lot of trestles do have walkways with railings, coupled with no trespassing signs. Oddly enough, the one in Melbourne does have a second track deck already in place alongside the active track. Adding planking and a railing would encourage trespassing. But it would also have the potential to save lives, and that would go a long way to reduce the potential for lawsuits. It is going to be interesting to watch the public sentiment as it develops in the aftermath of this Melbourne tragedy. There has already been considerable mention of the poorly maintained no trespassing signs at the site. With the likely outpouring of sympathy for the victims, I suspect public opinion might quickly turn against the FEC. I are you trying to say the FEC its a fault?
Bucyrus Modelcar....Could a "catwalk" with railings, be constructed on {any} RR bridge be labled as "No tresspasing" and have signage indicating: "For RR employes only, others will be prosecuted, etc..."....be done in such a way to make the RR free of a lawsuit if any person not associated with that RR did use it and possibly be injured being on it. Quentin, I think the addition of a catwalk could cut both ways. It is hard to predict how things could be spun to justify a lawsuit. A lot of trestles do have walkways with railings, coupled with no trespassing signs. Oddly enough, the one in Melbourne does have a second track deck already in place alongside the active track. Adding planking and a railing would encourage trespassing. But it would also have the potential to save lives, and that would go a long way to reduce the potential for lawsuits. It is going to be interesting to watch the public sentiment as it develops in the aftermath of this Melbourne tragedy. There has already been considerable mention of the poorly maintained no trespassing signs at the site. With the likely outpouring of sympathy for the victims, I suspect public opinion might quickly turn against the FEC.
Modelcar....Could a "catwalk" with railings, be constructed on {any} RR bridge be labled as "No tresspasing" and have signage indicating: "For RR employes only, others will be prosecuted, etc..."....be done in such a way to make the RR free of a lawsuit if any person not associated with that RR did use it and possibly be injured being on it.
I are you trying to say the FEC its a fault?
Any "normal" person wouldn't find fault with the railroad...but a lawyer might argue that FEC didn't do everything to prevent this from happening. Was there foot path leading to/from the bridge? Were there signs posted? Was there a fence in place at either end that would reasonably discourage tresspassers?
Nonetheless, one sometimes has to look past the legal aspects. A walkway/catwalk might encourage more pedestrian traffic just as paved roads and rubber tires encourage driving...and both activities are risky. People are going to cross bridges whether its legal or not...so may as well make it safer to do so.
Ted Marshall Here's an interesting news clip about Saturday's tragic event: http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/brevard_news/022110_Teen_girls_killed_by_train_community_shocked
Here's an interesting news clip about Saturday's tragic event:
http://www.myfoxorlando.com/dpp/news/brevard_news/022110_Teen_girls_killed_by_train_community_shocked
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...
Awesome! MP173 Why didnt the kids hear the train?My guess is IPod. Ed If you notice the bridge is not to long. I agree with your comment about the teenager maybe were using their I-Pod and they were able to hear the train. Does the NTSB investigate this type of accident or its left to our local police to investigate?
MP173 Why didnt the kids hear the train?My guess is IPod. Ed
Why didnt the kids hear the train?My guess is IPod.
Ed
If you notice the bridge is not to long. I agree with your comment about the teenager maybe were using their I-Pod and they were able to hear the train. Does the NTSB investigate this type of accident or its left to our local police to investigate?
the investigation will be by the local police and the fra.
Fox2!I believe that at least some of FEC's grade crossings in Melbourne/Eau Gallie are "silent."
There are no quiet zones or silent crossings anywhere on the FEC. There were some years ago, but they didn't last long. Grade crossing collisions and pedestrian strikes increased sharply so FEC discontinued the practice.
I think the addition of a catwalk could cut both ways. It is hard to predict how things could be spun to justify a lawsuit. A lot of trestles do have walkways with railings, coupled with no trespassing signs. Oddly enough, the one in Melbourne does have a second track deck already in place alongside the active track. Adding planking and a railing would encourage trespassing. But it would also have the potential to save lives, and that would go a long way to reduce the potential for lawsuits.
It is going to be interesting to watch the public sentiment as it develops in the aftermath of this Melbourne tragedy. There has already been considerable mention of the poorly maintained no trespassing signs at the site. With the likely outpouring of sympathy for the victims, I suspect public opinion might quickly turn against the FEC.
Two thoughts:
1) Why didn't they hear the train? iPod
2) In the TRAINS News Wire story "Train severs leg of subway vandal," (February 15, 2010) it states, "snip...The three were standing in boxes where maintenance workers stand to let trains pass. Juarez was struck by the train's third-rail shoe,...snip." If the catwalk is put there to "save lives" and doesn't, where does that put the railroad, law or no law requiring catwalks?
James
....Could a "catwalk" with railings, be constructed on {any} RR bridge be labled as "No tresspasing" and have signage indicating: "For RR employes only, others will be prosecuted, etc..."....be done in such a way to make the RR free of a lawsuit if any person not associated with that RR did use it and possibly be injured being on it.
Hence, if then when some tresspasser in the future might be on the bridge and tracks, and find himself in trouble, they could jump over to the catwalk and avoid being hit....saving his or their lives....
I suppose it can be agreed young people {and others}, will continue to tresspass on such structures, and the available catwalk could save their life / lives.
Perhaps this sounds like encouraging people to cross the bridge.....I don't know....But wouldn't it have a real possibility of preventing those {who seemingly can't be kept off such structures}, from being hit, hence saving lives and the RR's money from resulting lawsuits, etc....
No liability if the law requires it.. Sure..more pedestrians might use the bridge...but none would get hit by trains...so you one might have alot of people using the bridge safely instead of a few who run the risk of getting hit or falling off. The catwalk wouldn't be a foolproof solution of course...because fools are so ingenious especially when it comes to their own demise. As it is..it wouldn't take a very good lawyer to credibly argue that FEC negligent and is at least in part responsible for their deaths..
vsmith The problem with a catwalk is that it condones the trespassing, and that is the root cause of this tragidy, if they had simply stayed off the bridge they would still be alive. If this was a double track bridge at one time and now a single track, the other ROW trackage could be modified into a bikepath bridge but that would have to be done thru agreememnt with the local community and the railroad, and their are not many examples of this being done as no RR wants the possible liability of a bikepath/ walkway right next to their active tracks.
The problem with a catwalk is that it condones the trespassing, and that is the root cause of this tragidy, if they had simply stayed off the bridge they would still be alive. If this was a double track bridge at one time and now a single track, the other ROW trackage could be modified into a bikepath bridge but that would have to be done thru agreememnt with the local community and the railroad, and their are not many examples of this being done as no RR wants the possible liability of a bikepath/ walkway right next to their active tracks.
It is a double track bridge with one active track, and a second track with the rails removed, but most of the ties are still in place. There is a gap, however, between the two track decks. But it does not look like it would be too difficult to jump across the gap. There is photo showing the double track bridge deck in this link:
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/train-kills-3-teen-318663.html
I expect that there will soon be a lawsuit against the FEC alleging that the bridge was an unsafe, attractive nuisance, and that the FEC was aware of the fact that people routinely walked across the bridge.
Awesome! Usually, the FEC locomotives travel thru those areas around 50mph or more.
Usually, the FEC locomotives travel thru those areas around 50mph or more.
Track speed across Crane Creek is 40 MPH. What I find hard to swallow about all this is that there is 0.62 mile of tangency leading to the bridge abutment from the north and eight grade crossings Train 101 would have to blow for between the curve where they'd be out of sight and the bridge. How those kids couldn't know that a train was coming until it was right on top of them is beyond me. As tragic as this event is for everyone, it's hardly anything unusual and really comes as no surprise to those of us who live(d) in Florida's east coast cities. We're all too familiar with train/pedestrian incursions, many of which result in immediate death.
Ulrich Maybe these bridges could be modified a little by building them (or retrofitting older ones) with a catwalk that could be used for service personnel as well as pedestrians who are caught on the bridge. Surely such a catwalk would have saved the lives of these children as they would have walked along that instead of on the right of way directly. Yes, we all know that it is illegal and iresponsible to trespass...but it will continue to happen and kids will continue to pay with their lives unless these structures are modified somewhat to allow people. I hate to say it...but there should be a law that requires bridges to have catwalks. Hey..what would happen if train crew members or passengers had an emergency on that bridge? There would be no way to evacuate..
Maybe these bridges could be modified a little by building them (or retrofitting older ones) with a catwalk that could be used for service personnel as well as pedestrians who are caught on the bridge. Surely such a catwalk would have saved the lives of these children as they would have walked along that instead of on the right of way directly. Yes, we all know that it is illegal and iresponsible to trespass...but it will continue to happen and kids will continue to pay with their lives unless these structures are modified somewhat to allow people. I hate to say it...but there should be a law that requires bridges to have catwalks. Hey..what would happen if train crew members or passengers had an emergency on that bridge? There would be no way to evacuate..
Geez cry me a river, while we are at it why not set up a concession stand in the middle of the bridge so we can serve tea, soda, beer , snacks and have a lounge area so they can sit and enjoy the view. they was treaspassing and the ultimate happened. to build a walkway is just as easy as saying hey if you get caught out on the bridge just stand to the side. and its ok to be out there. they wouldnt have gave us a walk way to be safe if it wasnt ok. Or better yet look at it this way for Decades i was told not to treaspass on the railroad and for decades I have been told and been telling people to not race trains at crossing, and for decades we have been killing people who do just what we been preaching not to do. So cry your tears of JOY,HATE or SORRY and move on.
What if the crew had a emergency well if train is in emergency they walk as far as they can and then try and pull what they can, if it wont budge then if a railroad personel has walked the back half and nothing is wrong the conductor belly crawls under his train til he finds the problem fixes it and gets back out of the bridge,
Dan
eolafan...BUT they never do (I know it took me a long time to learn from a number of near tragedies, not rail related, until common sense began to win out over ignorance/stupidity in my own life). We can only hope humanity learns lessons earlier in life as the generations pass to new ones...but I'm not holding my breath waiting.
...BUT they never do (I know it took me a long time to learn from a number of near tragedies, not rail related, until common sense began to win out over ignorance/stupidity in my own life). We can only hope humanity learns lessons earlier in life as the generations pass to new ones...but I'm not holding my breath waiting.
Not to turn this into a science thread, but studies have shown that in most people the part of the brain responsible for risk/fear does not fully develop until ones early to mid twenties. Explains a lot of the risks we took as youth--and why youth continue to repeat the mistakes/risks of others.
Sometimes there are factors at play other than the testosterone or adrenaline rush.
Jay
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.