ROBIN LUETHE Humans, given our evolutionary cognition are not designed to cope with flying through the air at 500 mph nor dodging X thousand ton trains.
Humans, given our evolutionary cognition are not designed to cope with flying through the air at 500 mph nor dodging X thousand ton trains.
I will disagree.
I think most humans ARE designed for that, being as most humans survive these threats to reproduce.
A very small fraction do not. And a fraction of those consequently do not reproduce.
This is called natural selection. Over time, the percentage of humans who cannot deal with these threats will drop even lower--approaching zero.
And I would also like to correct another error: Humans don't need to "dodge" X thousand ton trains. The trains' actions are very predicatable. With a bare minimum of thought, a human can easily avoid the need to dodge a train.
Truthfully, I cannot EVER recall the need to "dodge" a train. On the other hand, perhaps you have experienced it numerous times. Every one of which sounds like it would make an interesting story.
Ed
tree68 charlie hebdo But you are a "protected species" on here, never criticized. I've met MC - he knows his stuff. I'm sure he could fill several pages with chapter and verse to back up his statements, but that's not what his employer pays him to do. charlie hebdo I notice you never provide data. Nor do you. but you're quick to criticize others for not doing so. MC has demonstrated numerous times in the past his in-depth knowledge and experience on things railroad.
charlie hebdo But you are a "protected species" on here, never criticized.
I've met MC - he knows his stuff. I'm sure he could fill several pages with chapter and verse to back up his statements, but that's not what his employer pays him to do.
charlie hebdo I notice you never provide data.
Nor do you. but you're quick to criticize others for not doing so. MC has demonstrated numerous times in the past his in-depth knowledge and experience on things railroad.
But the point raised did not involve data. MC is a railroad employee. I am not. Thus he should be able to explain cogently what was wrong with the report. Instead he went on his usual rant about dime store lawyers and bubbas etc. None of us are paid to participate on here, so the fact that his employer doesn't is yet another red herring.
CSSHEGEWISCH Everybody agrees that grade crossings are an inherent safety hazard. The problem is that you have to move heaven and earth in order to get one closed.
Everybody agrees that grade crossings are an inherent safety hazard. The problem is that you have to move heaven and earth in order to get one closed.
Everyone agrees that it's someone else's crossing that's a problem. "Mine" is just fine...
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...
So long as they blamed automobile drivers and pedestrians the death rate only went higher as legal speed and size of other vehicles went up. Humans, given our evolutionary cognition are not designed to cope with flying through the air at 500 mph nor dodging X thousand ton trains. Safety is a function of constant improving of infrastructure. Railroads should not get a free pass. Grade crossings, although economically necessary, are inherently dangerous and a national program to reduce the number is always in order.
mudchicken matthewsaggie As I read the report, it's the railroads responsibility to report to the FRA. Not the DOT's or the law enforcement agency. Of course MC never misses a chance to dump on public officials, as if the railroads are perfect. Or he is. Grade crossing accident reporting is the responsibility of the local investigating agency, not the railroad police (who can't be everywhere with their limited numbers; the railroad does fill out a monthly summary form of known incidents - neither form can be used in a civil trial). Accident record side of the FRA website for crossings frequently shows no forms or reports filled-out for accidents (some fatal) that happened at a crossing. Some jurisdictions are considerably worse than others and the proof comes when matching-up known incidents versus the record that shows up in the FRA report. Things only got worse when the FRA revamped the forms and record in recent history. Those of us that have to research data to support applications for crossing closure, changes and upgrades for various reasons usually discover that the FRA record and prediction stats are "off" and predictably unreliable (errors on forms, etc.) - Nobody rides herd on these things from the state DOT's or FRA's side even though both have a role that is supposed to be more than just passing through data. Telling that when the lawsuits start, those of us working on parts of a lawsuit for crossing incident can recover a police report, newspaper reports, Highway Office reports, but not the FRA form (F-6180.57 Form) repeatedly. [Bridge strikes are even worse] Data integrity is a real problem. Some cases are caused by the locals not knowing their responsibility, thinking somebody else is supposed to fill out the form or even that the form is there. Involvement in an Engineering Safety Team for OLI has been eye-opening. I've worked both sides and have the dirty, on the ground experience that questions the office hopping effectiveness of the article put into question. CH -try doing your own research, I'm not doing it for you. Expert at everything, proficient at none doesn't help your credibility. Matthew - Try reading the FRA instructions before making judgements like that. I would very much like to see the railroads re-engaged on the crossing inventory and accident reporting functions - what is there now is flat awful. Simple case in point: In Denver, 136th Ave and 144th Ave have a reputation of being two of the worst crossings in the state. One crossing has no accidents reported and the other only a few (Fatals at both, both have seen upgrades after considerable political pressure)... There are plenty of others.
matthewsaggie As I read the report, it's the railroads responsibility to report to the FRA. Not the DOT's or the law enforcement agency. Of course MC never misses a chance to dump on public officials, as if the railroads are perfect. Or he is.
As I read the report, it's the railroads responsibility to report to the FRA. Not the DOT's or the law enforcement agency. Of course MC never misses a chance to dump on public officials, as if the railroads are perfect. Or he is.
Grade crossing accident reporting is the responsibility of the local investigating agency, not the railroad police (who can't be everywhere with their limited numbers; the railroad does fill out a monthly summary form of known incidents - neither form can be used in a civil trial). Accident record side of the FRA website for crossings frequently shows no forms or reports filled-out for accidents (some fatal) that happened at a crossing. Some jurisdictions are considerably worse than others and the proof comes when matching-up known incidents versus the record that shows up in the FRA report. Things only got worse when the FRA revamped the forms and record in recent history. Those of us that have to research data to support applications for crossing closure, changes and upgrades for various reasons usually discover that the FRA record and prediction stats are "off" and predictably unreliable (errors on forms, etc.) - Nobody rides herd on these things from the state DOT's or FRA's side even though both have a role that is supposed to be more than just passing through data. Telling that when the lawsuits start, those of us working on parts of a lawsuit for crossing incident can recover a police report, newspaper reports, Highway Office reports, but not the FRA form (F-6180.57 Form) repeatedly. [Bridge strikes are even worse] Data integrity is a real problem.
Some cases are caused by the locals not knowing their responsibility, thinking somebody else is supposed to fill out the form or even that the form is there. Involvement in an Engineering Safety Team for OLI has been eye-opening. I've worked both sides and have the dirty, on the ground experience that questions the office hopping effectiveness of the article put into question.
CH -try doing your own research, I'm not doing it for you. Expert at everything, proficient at none doesn't help your credibility.
Matthew - Try reading the FRA instructions before making judgements like that. I would very much like to see the railroads re-engaged on the crossing inventory and accident reporting functions - what is there now is flat awful.
Simple case in point: In Denver, 136th Ave and 144th Ave have a reputation of being two of the worst crossings in the state. One crossing has no accidents reported and the other only a few (Fatals at both, both have seen upgrades after considerable political pressure)... There are plenty of others.
M. Chicken: You made my point. I do not claim to be an expert on railroad accidents, only in my specialization within my field. Never did. Nor proficient. I notice you never provide data. You on the other hand never miss a chance to disparage lawyers, government, law enforcement officers, the FRA, and even other departments on your railroad. It must be cool to be so perfect. But you are a "protected soecies" on here, never criticized.
Or in my industry how the Ambulance chasers love to claim that OTR trucks are involved in thousands of accidents a year and they can get you money. They never disclose that 85% of all accidents are the fault of the car that was involved and that number is trending HIGHER now with dash cams becoming more popular in the industry as a way to show what happened at the time of impact. It is very hard to deny you brake checked a truck when in court your car is shown cutting off the trucker and your standing on your brakes at the same time your getting plowed into. It kinda makes the judges go case dismissed and the lawyers for the OTR trucking company go we are fighting a little harder to make this go away.
Here is another prime example of human stupidity leading to accidents. The government then decides to investigate and the investigation shows there are dangerous grade crossings. Then an accident occurs and the victims blame the railroad and government. When did it become government and railroads' responsibility for every stupid driver? The lawyers win.
matthewsaggieAs I read the report, it's the railroads responsibility to report to the FRA. Not the DOT's or the law enforcement agency. Of course MC never misses a chance to dump on public officials, as if the railroads are perfect. Or he is.
My interactions with personnel on my company with the responsibiltiy to make those reports - stated that the governmental contacts are exceedingly hard to get to answer the phone to receive the reports.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Hogwash? Perhaps you might address this with some constructive, fact-based analysis rather than crude invectives?
Hogwash...Before anything else is done, fix the uneven reporting of the DOT's and the local police. The rubber tired bubbas are smelling up the place. Reporting is uneven at best.
Over 2000 incidents per year. That is almost 6 a day. More proactive policies seem to be needed. Severe penalties for driver error along with crossing cameras might be a solution ?
https://www.oig.dot.gov/sites/default/files/FRA%20Grade%20Crossing%20Data%20Final%20Report%5E09-04-19.pdf
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.