So you are suggesting that he is a bad person because he is excersizing his constitutional right to hire an attorney, and a "smart" one at that?
So he sould only be allowed to hire a dumb attorney, or he shouldn't have the right in the first place?
On ABC last night, on of the spokesmen for the PD stated the driver made first contact with them,not the other way around, he went looking for a cop.
What if he was doing what OLS teaches, abandon the car, walk in the direction of the train and call 911?
23 17 46 11
English is not the drivers first language. I read in one of the articles, he has trouble communicating in English. He called his son to act as a interperter with his initial dealings with the police.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
The driver apparently made a mistake and drove onto the tracks when he intended to turn onto a cross street. He will probably get a ticket for traffic violation. He won't go to prison. I assume that these news sources would have shouted it from the mountaintop if he were found to be drunk. Thus he was not.
He became stalled on the tracks and did exactly what Operation Lifesaver tells drivers to do. They tell drivers to make no attempt to extricate your stalled vehicle. Just leave it where it is and run for safety. In this case, I think the driver even did make some attempt to extricate the vehicle and get it into the clear. The driver did contact the police about the situation exactly as he was supposed to do.
The distance from the crossing where the driver was found is a major RED HERRING. The driver did exaclty what he was supposed to do.
If I may add a little more conjecture to the conjecturing going on ....
It has been suggested that the driver may have been lost or confused in the dark when he turned onto the track. I have come upon many intersections that are not easy to make out in the dark. They are poorly lit, and you have headlights of other cars and bright lights in adjacent parking lots or brightly lit signs that make it hard to see the road. Maybe a few bright streetlights might be helpful at this crossing.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Buxtehude Reuters reports that the driver was released from custody last night and was not charged with any crime. The reason? He hired a smart lawyer...
Reuters reports that the driver was released from custody last night and was not charged with any crime. The reason? He hired a smart lawyer...
I'd wonder if it was his company had hired the "smart lawyer" as the company would likely be the deep pockets in the likely lawsuits.
Speaking of the Devil
Concerning the Tuesday, February 24, 2015 train wreck that is the subject of this thread, the cab car that collided with the truck at 79 M.P.H. was Metrolink No. 645. The locomotive pushing was Metrolink 870.
A little over a week earlier, on Sunday, February 15, 2015, both the SAME 870 (leading this time) and 645 (trailing) passed the State College Blvd. grade crossing (near Disneyland and where the California Angels play) in Anaheim on Metrolink’s Los Angeles-Oceanside line.
A heavy telephoto of the above train at the Anaheim stop, by Anaheim Stadium: The overhead bridge is the north-south 57 Freeway.
K.P. was at the Anaheim grade crossing photographing the site of ANOTHER grade crossing collision that took place there over 49 years earlier. How ironic that the train that I photographed (power and cab car) was involved in the Oxnard disaster of this thread just 9 days later!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.
In situations like this (Rail line parallel to busy road, intersection with cross street protected by crossing arms) I wonder if it would be useful to install crossing arms across the rail line. These would be triggered by the same track circuitry as the existing crossing gates, but work in the opposite direction (Road gate closes=Rail gate opens...train passes through...Road gate opens=Rail gate closes).
Hmmm, interesting idea and it makes sense.
ORNHOO In situations like this (Rail line parallel to busy road, intersection with cross street protected by crossing arms) I wonder if it would be useful to install crossing arms across the rail line. These would be triggered by the same track circuitry as the existing crossing gates, but work in the opposite direction (Road gate closes=Rail gate opens...train passes through...Road gate opens=Rail gate closes).
A number of British "Level Crossings" had gates which swung through 90 degrees, closing across the road for passage of a train and closing off the tracks when open for road traffic. In Britain the railways are generally fenced off for safety, and this feature of the crossing gates continued this idea.
On lesser used lines, these were manually operated, but on main lines they were power operated, but generally in a location where the gate operator could observe the road traffic. A heavy wood and steel gate is not as forgiving as a boom intended to break off on impact.
On the other hand, perhaps motorists would think twice about trying to beat a gate which could write off their vehicle, independent of the effect of any approaching train.
On double track lines there would have been four gates, each swinging through 90 degrees, but on single track lines, one gate each side would suffice.
The gates were painted white with a red circle in the centre with rai crossing markings.
A modern day equivalent could be a boom that swung through 90 degrees in a horizontal plane. Even this might discourage motorists from crossing at the last minute since the boom always remains at the closed height, greatly reducing the opportunity to avoid the boom. If four booms were used closing off the tracks in both directions and both lanes of the road (as appropriate) the chances of entering the crossing at the wrong time would be reduced.
There might be more boom impact incidents initially, but as people became familiar with the new arrangements, safety should be increased.
M636C
erikem Hmmm, interesting idea and it makes sense.
I agree - and it wouldn't take an special measures (beyond the equipment itself) to do so. One set of gates goes down, the other goes up. All the circuitry is already in place - just a couple more relays.
I would opine that the gates should somehow appear different, at least from the road side. Maybe black and yellow vs red and white. That way motorists would (hopefully) see them as different from crossing gates.
They should also not contain any lights, except possibly facing oncoming trains as an indication that the gate is down.
A down side of this is crossing failures. Currently, if crossing warning equipment fails, the worst that can happen to a train (other than hitting a vehicle) is having to stop and flag. This option would completely block the crossing.
I should note that this should not be a universal installation. It should be reserved for those places that have a history of people turning on to the tracks, which is going to be chiefly where there are parallel roads. Your run-of-the-mill 90 degree road crossing shouldn't need it. Anyone who turns onto the tracks there probably meant to.
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...
NICE JOB ! KP Fortituous Catch!
tree68A down side of this is crossing failures. Currently, if crossing warning equipment fails, the worst that can happen to a train (other than hitting a vehicle) is having to stop and flag. This option would completely block the crossing.
Wouldn't be a big deal. Just install a quick release mechanism for the gate itself so a crew member can detach it and toss it off to the side if needed.
I was wondering if special markings, paint and/or imbedded road reflectors would help as well at xings near intersections.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
zugmann I was wondering if special markings, paint and/or imbedded road reflectors would help as well at xings near intersections.
zugmannI was wondering if special markings, paint and/or imbedded road reflectors would help as well at xings near intersections.
I had about the same thought. However, short of the in-pavement lights, or some sort of texture, I'm not sure pavement markings alone would make a big difference. People rarely pay much attention to what's already there.
For the cost of some paint and some pavement grooving, though, it might be enough to make a difference.
The key point is looking at exactly how often it happens, and dealing with the problem areas. These probably aren't a one size fits all solutions.
The problem is less railroad and more MUTCD. White gate arm or heavy (16") white stripe throws the highway bubbas for a loop. (White being a relatively neutral color on the railroad side of the fence and smashboards not being out of the railroad vocabulary that long. Smashboards would cause "issues" in Class 3 track and up)....
In Los Angeles on the BNSF side, Rosecrans & Marquardt [Santa Fe Springs/ La Mirada] has been a constant headache for as long as I can seem to remember with continual new and creative stooopid people tricks.
FWIW, the LA Times website has an article on efforts to improve grade crossing safety. A couple of take-aways: The costs for a grade separations range from $20 million to $100 million. Four quadrant crossing gates have "99 per cent fewer collisions" than unprotected crossings, while dual quadrant gates have "81 per cent fewer collisons". The article did mention that several of the four quadrant gaes have trapped vehicle detectors and raise the appropriate gate to let the vehicle out.
mudchickenIn Los Angeles on the BNSF side, Rosecrans & Marquardt [Santa Fe Springs/ La Mirada] has been a constant headache for as long as I can seem to remember with continual new and creative stooopid people tricks.
Looks like Metro has 'rebooted' this grade separation project long awaiting funding:
http://media.metro.net/projects_studies/regionalrail/factsheet_rosecransmarquardt_2015-0224.pdf
http://www.whittierdailynews.com/general-news/20141021/la-mirada-santa-fe-springs-officials-celebrate-opening-of-valley-view-railroad-underpass
In the meantime they redid the raised median on Rosecrans last year but did Not put in four-quadrant gates.
Now, back to topic .....
Links to my Google Maps ---> Sunset Route overview, SoCal metro, Yuma sub, Gila sub, SR east of Tucson, BNSF Northern Transcon and Southern Transcon *** Why you should support Ukraine! ***
Concerning this statement by mudchicken:
mudchicken In Los Angeles on the BNSF side, Rosecrans & Marquardt [Santa Fe Springs/ La Mirada] has been a constant headache for as long as I can seem to remember with continual new and creative stooopid people tricks.
A number of months ago MikeF90 had somehow alerted me to the Rosecrans and Marquardt Avenues grade crossing in Santa Fe Springs, CA where the BNSF Transcon diagonally goes through the intersection. Because of him a September 1, 2014 visit to the site was made.
Personally, I found the grade crossing semi-well protected, but the red flashing lights visually blocked in at least one area (southbound on Marquardt Ave.).
Unfortunately, NO trains came while I was present and taking many photos. However, returning to my vehicle a couple of blocks away, a San Diego bound Amtrak passed. The crossing gate jumped out with flares to the middle of the southbound lanes and protected the crossing!
Seriously, I found the crossing just needing a visual clear path to that flasher and maybe center of the street flashers as well.
Concerning the Oxnard, CA location of the collision that this thread IS about, I’ve studied aerials and I find no reasonable reason why the vehicle that was struck was actually on the tracks. When I have some free time it is hoped a visit to the Oxnard site can be made. If I do, I’ll post photos slanted towards any problems with the grade crossing itself, but I very, very seriously doubt I’ll find much.
K.P. - I see several streetlights in your photos above. Are there any at the Oxnard crossing ?
- Paul North.
Paul_D_North_Jr K.P. - I see several streetlights in your photos above. Are there any at the Oxnard crossing ? - Paul North.
I'm not KP, but I was curious, so I did some looking. Don't know if this street view will load up properly:Oxnard Crossing I see one street light at the crossing, on the east side of the street. There are more up the street, looking north. This fellow is hardly the first to take the tracks instead of the street. In recent years that's been blamed on more than a few occasions on blindly following a GPS. No GPS has been mentioned in any reports so far, so it's likely we can rule that option out.
I see one street light at the crossing, on the east side of the street. There are more up the street, looking north.
This fellow is hardly the first to take the tracks instead of the street. In recent years that's been blamed on more than a few occasions on blindly following a GPS. No GPS has been mentioned in any reports so far, so it's likely we can rule that option out.
Paul D. North Jr. (3-1):
Greetings, Paul. It has been a while since we’ve exchanged thoughts.
In the below aerial link of 5th Street and Rice Ave. in Oxnard (CA), I see at least two stoplights with common lights that light up the intersection.
https://www.google.com/maps/place/Oxnard,+CA/@34.1969819,-119.1422211,99m/data=!3m1!1e3!4m2!3m1!1s0x80e84de61325679f:0x598049c0fa5eb645
There may or may not be more, but an onsite inspection will say for sure.
Best,
K.P.
Each crossing shows four street lights, one on each taffic signal mast of which there are four, one on each quadrent. How bright is another question but the intersections are definitely lit.
I recall one of the news reports said that the driver was not relying on, or following GPS, but rather, was only following a printed-out computer map.
Have fun with your trains
Same highway, too (CA34). The location is similar in layout: N 34.20546 W 119.04111
confirmed report engineer died of injuries. If so time to charge truck driver with involuntary manslaughter.
KABC Los Angeles is reporting he died.
Norm
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.