http://variety.com/2014/film/news/midnight-rider-crew-member-killed-in-georgia-train-accident-1201114468/
Can anyone puzzle out what happened from this article? Was the entire film crew tresspassing?
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I find it astoundingly odd for the article to leave out the obvious question of the underlying cause for this apparent misunderstanding about the rail traffic; while a film crew was placing a bed on the tracks for a film production.
I actually cannot believe that they overlooked that question, so by default, I have to assume the film crew were trespassing, and article is protecting them for some reason. It is just my assumption unless this obvious question is answered with another explanation.
oltmannd http://variety.com/2014/film/news/midnight-rider-crew-member-killed-in-georgia-train-accident-1201114468/ Can anyone puzzle out what happened from this article? Was the entire film crew tresspassing?
Cannot say for sure, but I'd guess that the Railroad ( CSX )was not completely in the loop,if at all ? In 1998, I was on the edges of a OLI Instructional film that was filmed in North Georgia. It revolved around highway Grade Crossing incursion issues and regulations within the 'then new' Federal CDL program.
There was coordination and cooperation across the scale of the filming.Local Law Enforcement and State Levels also. NSRR was an active, and cooperating partner as was the State Trucking Assoc. . IT was done as safely, and professionally, as any interaction between automotive traffic and rail traffic could be done.
Sounds like the filming incident being noted here: on the CSX near Savanah; was not. I'd bet / guess that the fatality was the fault of a strict Trespassing violation on the part of the filmmaker...in violation of the reminder to 'expect a train at any time from any direction'... Had the CSX been involved, no one would have persihed for an unanticipated train.. IMHO.
Total conjecture on my part, but I would opine that they were assured by someone not of an official (RR) capacity that there are "hardly any trains on the line," or something to that effect.
I'm with Sam - barring further evidence, they were trespassing. Since this has some fairly high visibility, I'd love to see that issue pushed. The message would probably reach a much greater audience than any publicity a RR or OLI could hope for.
How many prom photos, etc, do we see that were taken on the tracks - and with little doubt with absolutely no knowledge of the railroad involved?
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...
Not enough information in the news piece to get the whole story. The journalist probably doesn't know what the right questions are to ask.
Unfortunately, this is true for most non-railroaders around railroads. It's been stated the film crew had "permission" but not from the railroad. Did the film makers know who to ask? It's a silly question for most of us but not necessarily for those who don't know our business. Remember, the vast majority of citizens do not realize railroads are private property. Furthermore, everyone has grown up with railroads in their periphery and thus think they know what railroads are all about. As we have seen this thinking can be deadly.
Editor Emeritus, This Week at Amtrak
The picture that is shown with the article has a sign about contacting Rayonier for access to the property. While Rayonier may control the trees - they don't control the railroad - especially a 79 MPH main line railroad.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
This article says that the Wayne County Sheriff's office was able to confirm that the film crew had permission from CSX to shoot "in that general vicinity."
They could have been given permission to shoot on railroad property but not within the fouling envelope (15 feet from centerline), and ventured onto the bridge "expecting two trains", "when a third train arrived unexpectedly" (quotes from OP's article). So yes, trespassing/unauthorized use is still an option.
If they were allowed on the tracks, they'd have to have a railroad flagman with them and have everyone on set be RWP-qualified (Roadway Worker Protection) and go through a job briefing with said flagman before the shoot. That flagman would provide them one of three types of protection: audible warning, foul time, and track out of service.
This incident could not have happened under foul time or track out of service unless human error was involved, giving the train permission to proceed. Given that the crew was "expecting two trains" and were caught off guard by a third, I doubt this.
Audible warning should not have been used if there was a bed placed on the tracks. It says the crew was warned by a "whistle" (either the locomotive horn or an compressed-air horn used by the flagman) providing them less than a minute of warning. That is permissible under FRA rules (the minimum warning time is 15 seconds), but having a bed on the tracks shouldn't have made that an acceptable option.
I'm also unsure where the place of safety would be on a bridge. The article notes that the film crew attempted to reach the plank walkway over the bridge...that's an iffy safe haven at best. At fifteen seconds, you're not going to make it off a bridge.
I'm not going to speculate on which option may have occurred. All we have right now is information from two mainstream news articles on the day after the incident. But here are some of the options I can see.
(references: I'm a commercial photographer and am RWP-qualified.)
It will be interesting to sort this one out. Any comment out there has yet to be vetted.
49CFR214(c) aside, every Class One have strict lease & contract rules for film/TV/ advertising that have been in place for years. These folks have an ugly reputation around railroads (especially in planning out in advance of a shoot and pony-ing up the flagman and permit fees)...As Roadmaster for a Cls 1 in LA, I had to deal with it constantly - rarely were these people on the property with the company's permission. Many times found myself shooing these folks off over the objections of a city film commission official. Furthering Ty's comments, if they were on the railroad with CSX's knowledge and consent, anybody without SX safety training had no business being out there. Anybody that deals with CSX knows how tough it is to get permission to access or encroach with those folks.
Something really smells at the moment.
Right about here: N 31.65453 W 81.82904
http://news.yahoo.com/officials-crew-hit-train-wasn-39-t-track-180939149.html
BaltACD http://news.yahoo.com/officials-crew-hit-train-wasn-39-t-track-180939149.html
The article posted by BaltACD pretty much lays it out!
FTA:"...JESUP, Ga. (AP) — A movie crew was working on train tracks without permission from the railroad when a freight train crashed into the production team and its equipment, killing one and injuring seven others, a sheriff's investigator said Friday...."
"...The deadly collision took place at a railroad trestle that crosses the Altamaha River in the rural county about 60 miles southwest of Savannah. The tracks, owned by CSX Railroad, cross private land owned by forest-products company Rayonier, which has a nearby paper mill. Joe Gardner, the lead detective on the case, said the crew had Rayonier's permission to film on its property next to the train tracks..."
Certainly feel sorry for The CSX crew and those people injured, and the young lady killed, as a result of someone's {make that a [ MORON'S ]bad decision.
TrainManTyThis article says that the Wayne County Sheriff's office was able to confirm that the film crew had permission from CSX to shoot "in that general vicinity."
The Wayne County Sheriff's Office is investigating this as a homicide.
"We treat any suspicious type of thing or serious accident as a homicide until we prove otherwise," said Det. Joe Gardner. "And that reasoning is always, I guess, to ensure that we err on the side of caution."
Meddin Studios' Creative Director said today's shoot on the trestle was coordinated with CSX Railroad and Raynioner. The Sheriff's Office confirmed that the crew had both companies' permission to film.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
schlimm TrainManTyThis article says that the Wayne County Sheriff's office was able to confirm that the film crew had permission from CSX to shoot "in that general vicinity." The Wayne County Sheriff's Office is investigating this as a homicide. "We treat any suspicious type of thing or serious accident as a homicide until we prove otherwise," said Det. Joe Gardner. "And that reasoning is always, I guess, to ensure that we err on the side of caution." Meddin Studios' Creative Director said today's shoot on the trestle was coordinated with CSX Railroad and Raynioner. The Sheriff's Office confirmed that the crew had both companies' permission to film.
-Charge the film production crew with murder and wreckless endangerment? CSX authorities are fully cooperating with local jurisdictions (the accident scene is on CSX jurisdiction first with the county second) The speculation and mis-information out there is rampant from people with no clue how things work.
Again, this will take a while to sort out. The more I see and hear , there are people in the film crew who ought to be worried about jail time and the production company is about to be sued out of existence (CSX needs to send a strong message that this is far beyond an unfortunate accident.)
I kinda hope that this gets widespread media coverage - especially the trespassing aspect. You can't buy this type of advertising, and a lot of people wouldn't pay attention anyhow.
Another article ...
http://www.enterkom.com/enterprise/?p=14278
"Miller had fallen onto the tracks before the train arrived but the still photographer pulled him off, according to the witness, saving his life. The bed was then hit by the train and exploded. That debris hit and injured several people, including one seriously, who was airlifted to Savannah’s Memorial Health University Medical Center."
Exploding Bed?
I probably should have read that tag before I pulled it off!!
It is hard to believe that CSX would have granted permission for the film crew to be on their property on just an informal verbal basis. And yet if the permission did not include the right to be on CSX property, why was their permission needed?
It is certainly not clear that this was a case of trespassing.
mudchickenCSX has also stated they were aware of a film crew in the area, but they had no authority to be on the property or fouling the track. -Charge the film production crew with murder and wreckless endangerment? CSX authorities are fully cooperating with local jurisdictions (the accident scene is on CSX jurisdiction first with the county second) The speculation and mis-information out there is rampant from people with no clue how things work. Again, this will take a while to sort out. The more I see and hear , there are people in the film crew who ought to be worried about jail time and the production company is about to be sued out of existence (CSX needs to send a strong message that this is far beyond an unfortunate accident.)
I agree that criminal charges are appropriate.
Maybe the second camera assistant was aware that they weren't technically supposed to be there. Maybe she wasn't. Somebody made the decision to shoot on the bridge, and everyone else followed along. Professional courtesy is very strong in the film/photography industry -- people are trusted to do their jobs -- and the hierarchy of second assistant to whoever was in charge makes very difficult to say "hey, maybe we shouldn't be doing this." I'm from the still photography world, but even as a first assistant it takes a lot to speak up against a higher-up.
In any case, it sure isn't the second assistant's job to know the dangers of that location, nor that of many of the other film crew members. It may be a complicated case to decide who decided to shoot there, who was responsible for getting permission, and who should have put their foot down.
Someone was unaware of trespassing laws or thought he or she could get away with shooting without permission, and a second camera assistant is dead because of it. Others are physically or mentally injured. Disgusting.
mudchickenCharge the film production crew with murder and wreckless endangerment? CSX authorities are fully cooperating with local jurisdictions (the accident scene is on CSX jurisdiction first with the county second) The speculation and mis-information out there is rampant from people with no clue how things work.
It is a technical difference, but murder requires that you attack someone and they die (murder 1, which is punishable by death in some states, requires that you wanted them dead, i.e. "premeditation") . It could be considered "reckless homicide" in that the film crew company should have known that they were risking death by their actions (I mean, what were they thinking?) Having lived in the South for a time (Florida) however my guess is nothing will ever come of this.
Euclid It is hard to believe that CSX would have granted permission for the film crew to be on their property on just an informal verbal basis. And yet if the permission did not include the right to be on CSX property, why was their permission needed? It is certainly not clear that this was a case of trespassing.
mudchicken CSX has also stated they were aware of a film crew in the area, but they had no authority to be on the property or fouling the track.
CSX has also stated they were aware of a film crew in the area, but they had no authority to be on the property or fouling the track.
And:
"Meddin Studios' Creative Director said today's shoot on the trestle was coordinated with CSX Railroad and Raynioner. The Sheriff's Office confirmed that the crew had both companies' permission to film."
Two contradictory statements: Where is the CSX statement you reference? Who said it? The sheriff's office confirmed means the sheriff's office checked with both Rayonier and CSX and found both had given permission.
Why don't we just wait till the facts are provided?
Norm
Two different statements from the news articles:
“CSX has also stated they were aware of a film crew in the area, but they had no authority to be on the property or fouling the track.”
“Wayne County Sheriff's office was able to confirm that the film crew had permission from CSX to shoot "in that general vicinity."”
I wonder if the general vicinity included the railroad tracks. And if CSX told them that they could film in the general vicinity, I wonder if they told them they could not be on the railroad tracks. It may very well be true that the film crew did not have authority to be on the track. But if this was not stated by CSX, and if CSX gave permission to be in a general vicinity that included the track, then that authority to be on the track could have easily been inferred by the film crew.
It sounds to me like CSX gave them permission to be on CSX property. Then either the film crew violated some provision of that permission, or the permission was misinterpreted by the film crew. I have a feeling that somebody from CSX is going to be on the hot seat.
Agreed Norm and I've been suggesting that all along.
As for the overbearing wannabe that can't leave well enough alone:
http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/02/21/movie-crew-in-fatal-train-crash-on-tracks-without-permission-investigator/
“CSX has told me they were aware they were out there, but they did not have permission to be on the train tracks,”* Gardner told reporters. (Gardner = a sheriff’s investigator for the county)
(*) This is what annoys those of us who are railroaders and those like Ty who have the training to be properly allowed out on the property. Poor judgement got somebody killed. I find it interesting that this disappeared from the national media after it started to become clear that CSX most likely was not at fault and the film media was.
If CSX had been aware the film crew would be on the tracks, they would have insisted on a flagman and lookout, after all, CSX knows when they are going to run their trains.
Having permission to be on property does not necessarily mean having permission to foul live tracks….we have several contractors who perform lots of different functions who have permission to be on property, but not allowed to come within 15 feet of the centerline of any tracks.
They are made aware of this when they sign the service contract, it’s in there, and are reminded all the time by employees.
Unless some underling at CSX gave verbal permission without checking with the proper officers, I can’t imagine the carrier allowing the film crew unlimited access everywhere, including a trestle or bridge on an active main.
We, on occasion, allow photographers to be on property, but the no foul clause is part of the release they have to sign, and they have to initial beside that particular clause….and I have never seen one of them unescorted, even on my small railroad.
The official BNSF photographer was here a few weeks ago, and he had to sign a release also, and this guy takes train photos for a living for a class 1 carriers.
Can’t see CSX giving official unlimited access.
23 17 46 11
I've never been allowed on railroad property (at least since about 1960) without a signed release in hand.
John Timm
mudchicken Agreed Norm and I've been suggesting that all along. As for the overbearing wannabe that can't leave well enough alone: http://news.nationalpost.com/2014/02/21/movie-crew-in-fatal-train-crash-on-tracks-without-permission-investigator/ “CSX has told me they were aware they were out there, but they did not have permission to be on the train tracks,”* Gardner told reporters. (Gardner = a sheriff’s investigator for the county) (*) This is what annoys those of us who are railroaders and those like Ty who have the training to be properly allowed out on the property. Poor judgement got somebody killed. I find it interesting that this disappeared from the national media after it started to become clear that CSX most likely was not at fault and the film media was.
From your same source: "A CSX spokeswoman, Kristin Seay, declined to comment further and would not confirm that film crew had no permission from the railroad to be working on the train tracks."
Pretty clearly there is a lot of contradictory information out there as well as folks doing a CYA. Too early for any valid conclusions as to blame, but it sure sounds like poor communication.
mudchicken Agreed Norm and I've been suggesting that all along.
Thanks MC. For 35 years in aviation I had to put up with others speculating on the cause of accidents. It always galled me to hear those who knew better than the investigators.
Norm48327Thanks MC. For 35 years in aviation I had to put up with others speculating on the cause of accidents. It always galled me to hear those who knew better than the investigators.
You are not an investigator of this accident. You know no more than what you have read, which has many contradictory statements that don't add up. We all need to wait, neither condemning either group involved or defending them.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.