Metro North, 6 dead

[Norm48327]

Did the conductor set enough brakes?

[Deggesty]

I am sure that all of the reders of this thread are aware that if Situation A had been in effect, situation B would not have developed. However, situation A was not in effect, so situation B developed. The horse is dead.

[MidlandMike]

The Harlem Division was first electrified about 100 years ago as far north as North White Plains.  I have ridden that section a few times, and there were few, if any, at-grade road crossings.  The section north of NWP (Valhalla is the next station north) was only electrified in the 1980s.  Apparently grade seperation was not a priority at that time.

[schlimm]

Paul_D_North_Jr

It'll be a cold day in He-l-l before railroad managements will voluntarily agree to such an arrangement on a broad scale.

Why not?   Is not the safety of crew and passengers worth the short-term cost?   

[Euclid]

All I did was mention the so-called intelligent crossings under development to be used in conjunction with PTC.  Clearly the plan is to stop rail traffic in case of distant obstructions on grade crossings.  I don’t know why the mere mention of this plan should be so upsetting to people.  It is not my idea.  I am only reporting it.  It is part of the news of this Valhalla crash.  The news reports that politicians are calling for these crossing improvements now that the crash has demonstrated a need for them.

There was also news mentioning that special distant warning signals had been planned for that crossing because of unusually short sight lines to the crossing for road vehicles.  That improvement had been funded, but the funding was pulled and redirected. 

But now, after seeing the crash at Valhalla, they are talking about removing all the crossings on the line. 

The news also reports that the detour overwhelmed the crossing and this is being looked at by the investigators to see what roll it may have played in the crash. 

And the roll of the “bottom contact” third rail is also emerging in the news.  The first car of the train ingested 468 feet of that rail.      

Lots of changes will follow this accident.  They will follow like the proliferation of railroad rules that are said to be written in blood.  In other words, the need for safety improvement is often resisted or unrecognized until injury or loss of life makes it obvious.

[Norm48327]

The safest thing they could do with that crossing is close it. It's unnecessary as the cemetery is easily accessable from Lakeview St.

[oltmannd]

Euclid

All I did was mention the so-called intelligent crossings under development to be used in conjunction with PTC.  Clearly the plan is to stop rail traffic in case of distant obstructions on grade crossings. 

The current PTC plans to implement WABTEC I-ETMS as an overlay include nothing of the sort.  All PTC will do is enforce existing rules.

[Euclid]

oltmannd

Euclid

All I did was mention the so-called intelligent crossings under development to be used in conjunction with PTC.  Clearly the plan is to stop rail traffic in case of distant obstructions on grade crossings. 

 

The current PTC plans to implement WABTEC I-ETMS as an overlay include nothing of the sort.  All PTC will do is enforce existing rules.

When I said that clearly the plan is to stop rail traffic in case of distant obstructions on grade crossings, I think that is generally accurate.  It is described in current FRA literature where it is referred to as a “goal.”

 

I don’t pretend to know exactly what PTC will include, and I doubt that it is entirely knowable at this time.  As I have mentioned in the past, I expect PTC to develop a life of its own and become a work ever in progress as technology evolves quicker than implementation.  In my opinion, PTC is a rare blend of hardware, software, and politics.

In all references to PTC that I have been able to find, there is clear reference to this grade crossing control system being integrated as part of the PTC system.  Actually, I see it as somewhat wrong-headed thinking on the part of the planners.  This intelligent grade crossing seems to be driven by a feeling that the biggest problem to solve is that trains take a long time to stop.  That point is constantly emphasized in all crossing safety presentations.

But, the unusually long stopping distance for trains is not the main problem.  I doubt that it plays any part in the vast majority of crashes.  It played no part in this Valhalla crash, and yet, politicians are invoking it as something that the crash proves the need for.  What is needed is safety focused on the near encounter of trains and vehicles.

In any case, I expect the primary issue coming out of this crash will be the danger of vehicles snagging and lifting the third rail in grade crossing crashes.  I expect a lot of smoke to blown over that as officials struggle to avoid blaming North Metro.  They are already calling it a freak accident.  I disagree with that characterization.  Just because something has never happened before does not mean that it is improbable.          

 

[BroadwayLion]

Euclid

 

Lion,

Your insight on these lines is most welcome.  I was thinking that you would be familiar with them.  Is the “rail” of the third rail composed of actual railroad running rail section, or is it just some sort of bar stock?

 

It is neither, it is estruded as third rail. I guess the profile of is specific to each railroad. AFIK, Chicago L rail, BMT/LIRR, and Sprague/MNCR are all different.

ROAR

[Euclid]

Thanks LION,

I did notice a photo of a section of the third rail being cut with a torch in one of the news photos.  It looks like a sort of “H” section with an extremely massive “web” feature.  I was just wondering about the weight and mass of these rails in connection with them being ingested by the first car.  It looks like they may be 80-120 pounds per yard. 

[gardendance]

Euclid had given this link back on page 1

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/05/nyregion/metro-north-train-crash.html

It says, as I've read a few times, that the eyewitness driver behind the SUV says the SUV was stopped before the gate came down, but doesn't say why. It's 2 track territory, other reports have said the SUV was clear of the near track, and the train was on the far track.

If she stopped the SUV because of traffic in front of her, that traffic must have been at least 1 car on the near track, otherwise how could she have been clear of the track, presumably with 1 or 2 other cars in front of them between or on the far track. Those cars of course must have cleared before the train came.

It just really boggles my mind to think that there were 2 to 4 automobiles that ventured onto the right of way. But it also boggles my mind to think that the SUV driver would have gone past the gate and stopped before the gate came down if there was nobody in front of her.

[cx500]

Euclid's "There was also news mentioning that special distant warning signals had been planned for that crossing because of unusually short sight lines to the crossing for road vehicles.  That improvement had been funded, but the funding was pulled and redirected."

This is a complete red herring in the situation under discussion.  The lady would have been well past any advance warning signal before it activated.  That type of traffic signal can indeed be useful where a road user will not see the the crossing signals until he is very close.  Then he may need to start slowing earlier, especially if exceeding the speed limit for that road or the surface is icy.  In this case the lady could have, and should have, stopped before fouling the crossing.

 

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

schlimm

  

Paul_D_North_Jr

It'll be a cold day in He-l-l before railroad managements will voluntarily agree to such an arrangement on a broad scale.

Why not?   Is not the safety of crew and passengers worth the short-term cost? 

 Cost was not any part of my consideration in that statement.  Instead, my objection is that it's likely to not be effective in a substantial percentage of such events, and the consequences may well be worse ("Law of Unintended Consequences" again).  

[BroadwayLion]

More Information from Railway Age.

[Euclid]

Paul,

As I mentioned, I too do not believe this advance warning system would be particularly effective, however, my reasons are somewhat different than yours.  First, I do not assume that the advance warning to the train would be limited to time interval between the crossing signal activation and the arrival of the train at the crossing. 

That advance warning could be anything.  The only connection between the advance warning and the signal activation interval would be in cases where a vehicle is trapped by the gates.  Then the connection stems from the fact that there will be no trapped vehicle to warn of being trapped by the gates until the gates lower.

But let’s say you have a lowboy truck that has become high centered and stuck on the track 30 minutes before train time.  Then the system will detect the truck and stop the train.  It is not just for warning of cars trapped by the gates. 

To your other points:  If someone is fouling the crossing ahead of a distant train, the system is not going to account for this fouling until it persists for some time.  Only then will it read the fouling as an emergency that requires signaling the train.  So there will be limited opportunity for a false alarm that brakes the train only to have the obstruction clear before the train gets to it.  And these more distant warnings will not require making an emergency application, so there is less chance of a false alarm causing a derailment by triggering an emergency application.

So I can see a window of opportunity for this system to be worthwhile, but stopping the train for drivers trapped by the gates would seem to be only on the margin of that window.  The greater utility would be for obstructions more distant from the train.  My only objection would be that these issues of more distant warning are relatively rare.  They also naturally give the driver of the vehicle more time to move to safety away from the vehicle. 

[rdamon]

Has the equivalent of unmanned red light cameras been installed anywhere?

Maybe in addition to “Do Not Stop on Tracks” a sign that said “Photo Enforced - $500 fine”

 

May modify behavior.

 

One application for a PTC based approach may be to install emergency roadside boxes where a dispatcher or 911 center could “lock down” a crossing.

I see all sorts of problems with an automatic system with false positives.

 

I will bet that there may be an investigation in to the third rail design after this incident.

 

I mis spel chez

[Euclid]

As I predicted, here is most recent emerging news on the role of the third rail. It says the investigation seeks to discover whether the rail merely ignited the vehicle gasoline, and then the gasoline caused the fire in the first car; or whether the rail remained energized, and that caused an electrical fire.  It also seeks to discover how much death and injury was caused by the blunt force of the rail itself. 

Also the investigation will look at the design of the underrunning third rail to see if that played a role in presenting a hazard of snagging a vehicle in a grade crossing crash.  In my opinion, it did indeed present that hazard, and I expect the investigation to bear that out. 

Even the running rails can be scooped up by a derailing train, but the lower they are, the less likely a struck vehicle would be to snag them.  The underrunning third rail is mounted at a higher elevation than the more common overrunning third rail.  So the underrunning third rail presents the greatest potential to snag a vehicle as the vehicle encounters the blind end of the third rail where it is gapped at a grade crossing.   

It would be possible for a struck vehicle to snag the third rail, and have the rail simply pass through the vehicle until it “sawed” its way out of the vehicle.  But once it happens to pass through the vehicle and snag the first car of the train, there is no way for it to get away from the train.  But the deeper it goes, the more likely it is to break into shorter sticks, which is what happened as it broke into 12 sticks left lodged in the first two cars. 

Unfortunately, the breaks making the sticks did not occur until after they entered the car.  So that left the feeding end of the rail engaged with the car to feed the next stick.

It reminds me of the “snakehead” hazard of the old time strap rail occasionally being scooped up by the wheels and exploding through the floor of passenger cars in the 1800’s.  This Metro North crash would have been snakeheads on steroids.    

http://www.wsj.com/articles/third-rail-is-a-focus-of-inquiry-in-metro-north-crash-1423532917

[rdamon]

I can imagine if the end/beginning of the third rail is just a square end it would tend to impale things.

 

I wonder if a design like this would reduce the chances of something getting under it. There could be an insulated joint that keeps them from electrocuting the worms.

 

[tree68]

rdamon

I can imagine if the end/beginning of the third rail is just a square end it would tend to impale things.

 

I wonder if a design like this would reduce the chances of something getting under it. There could be an insulated joint that keeps them from electrocuting the worms.

 

 

Interestingly, this design, which dates back to the 1960's, was designed to remove the battering ram end of existing guard rails.  Now it's falling out of favor and being replaced by cushioning devices, as the result of several incidents in which cars rolled or otherwise went airborn after running up the tapered end.

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Larry's right.  But a couple months ago there was an out-of-control car - from sliding on the ice after an early-season freezing rain - on Route 611 southbound, just north of Mt. Pocono.  It encountered the tapered end, mounted it - and when it stopped, it was balanced on top of the guide* rail !  

*Pennsylvania name for what everyone else calls "guard rail" - it's a long, sordid story involving lawyers . . .

What about inadvertently grounding it in a heavy rain, or snow as we've had recently - especially if the salt brine from the road gets thrown that far ?  

Doubt this kind of collision occurs that often in 3rd rail territory that this feature would be effective enough to be worthwhile - or that it would have changed the result here ?  Maybe.

- Paul North.

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Euclid:

OK, thanks for your clarifications and further explanation.

- Paul North. 

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

BroadwayLion

More Information from Railway Age.

 It's exactly the same content as the Feb. 7th column/ blog by Schanoes that I referenced on Sunday, Feb. 8th about 1/3 of the way down Page 4 of this thread:  http://ten90solutions.com/confessions_of_a_heartsick_man

Apparently RA just reprinted it on Monday, Feb. 9th.  

- Paul North. 

[erikem]

Euclid

Also the investigation will look at the design of the underrunning third rail to see if that played a role in presenting a hazard of snagging a vehicle in a grade crossing crash.  In my opinion, it did indeed present that hazard, and I expect the investigation to bear that out. 

If a car getting snagged on the third rail is as much of a problem as you are trying to make it out to be, then the most rational answer is to immediately block off the grade crossings and let the communities figure out what to do about it. My guess is that more people ride the train over the crossing than drive over it.

Anther approach would be to set up cameras to catch people violating the vehicle code pertaining to the crossing, with some real teeth to enforcement, such as revocation of their driver's license and confiscation of their car/truck.

[Paul_D_North_Jr]

Euclid

Thanks LION,

I did notice a photo of a section of the third rail being cut with a torch in one of the news photos.  It looks like a sort of “H” section with an extremely massive “web” feature.  I was just wondering about the weight and mass of these rails in connection with them being ingested by the first car.  It looks like they may be 80-120 pounds per yard. 

Some generic info on third rails:

[matthewsaggie]

Regarding under running vs. Over running third rail, don't we always hear how bad it is out on the LIRR when there is ice, etc. and how the should have gone with the NYC system. The securement method needs to be looked at, but this is really a black-swan event. Lot of noise, if you include the pundits and the pol's, but it really does not need to change.

[BaltACD]

Why are we not AUTOMATICALLY stoping vehicular traffic when crossing protection is activated, thus preventing them from occupying the crossing.  Today's vehicles have computers and Wi-Fi out the ying yang. 

My personal vehicle has keyless entry, activated by my keyfob from a distance of little more than 50 feet by activating a RFID signal to the vehicle.

When the crossing protection is activated - the crossing protection sends a narrowly defined Wi-Fi signal up the highway and the vehicles within range of the signal are brought to a STOP prior to entering the crossing.  An appropriate indication of the reason for the stop would appear on the dashboard of the vehicle.  Vehicles of 1/2 ton to 40 tons can be stopped in much shorter distances than can vehicles of 500 to 20,000 tons with steel wheels operating on steel rails.

[schlimm]

BaltACD

Why are we not AUTOMATICALLY stoping vehicular traffic when crossing protection is activated, thus preventing them from occupying the crossing.  Today's vehicles have computers and Wi-Fi out the ying yang. 

great idea!!

[rdamon]

While Wi-Fi may not be the correct technology. I think this has merits. An "Alert" beacon that overrides any music or phone call in the car could also be used for emergency vehicles and EAS alerts.

[tree68]

rdamon

An "Alert" beacon that overrides any music or phone call in the car could also be used for emergency vehicles and EAS alerts.

The technology has been around for nigh on to twenty years, at least with regard to emergency vehicles.  If people bought into the idea, it should have been in virtually every vehicle by now.

Using a cell phone (hands-free excepted) and texting while driving have been illegal in NYS for several years.  But that doesn't seem to deter folks.  

If people are annoyed enough by such devices, they'll find a way to defeat them, if it means crawling up under the dash with a pair of wire cutters, figuratively or actually.  

 

[Euclid]

BaltACD

Why are we not AUTOMATICALLY stoping vehicular traffic when crossing protection is activated, thus preventing them from occupying the crossing. 

Oh don’t worry, the vehicle based warning is right around the corner, as I have predicted here in the past.  It will stop cars at grade crossing plus a whole lot more.  The entire driving experience will become a giant red light camera.  This will be a mandatory, factory installed, part of every vehicle.  It will require drivers to fund a bond deposit that will be debited on the move as violations are committed.  If the bond reaches zero, the vehicle stops until more money is deposited.  And, trust me, there will be no snipping of the wires to disable this dashboard wonder.

It will be a control freak’s dream, and the government is full of them.  This actually will catch up with rail transit and render it obsolete overnight.  It will turn your car into public transit.