Amtrak #4 derails, lands all cars on side after hitting dump truck at Mendon KS today (/)

[Backshop]

I wonder if that driver had made previous, successful trips over the crossing?

I agree with Euclid. In first (creeper) gear, you can start on any grade.  It isn't even used in normal operation.

[Euclid]

wjstix

 

 

Euclid

So the rate of speed was too high to stop in time. This would depend on where he was when he decided to stop. The rate of speed could have been 100 mph, and still, the driver could have stopped short of the crossing if he planned on stopping and began braking early enough to give time for stopping

 

 

According to a local farmer, it is very hard to make it across that crossing in a farm vehicle or heavily laden truck because the grade up to the tracks is so steep. Trucks have to keep their momentum up or they could stall on the grade - or on the tracks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIpbUZ1QQLg

I can see the situation with the very steep and high approaches.  It raises the question as to whether the driver made a run for the incline and thus did not intend to stop for the sign.  I think that technically, he could have stopped at the bottom and called that the stop required by the sign. 

 

There was mention of the possibility that if he had stopped at the top, he might not have been able to restart.  I see a truck driver in the comments says that you can always restart on a grade if you are in a low enough gear and give it enough throttle.  But still, that restart would take time to get over the crossing and into the clear.  But too, the view down the track would be much further than it would be from the bottom of the hill. 

 

That video sequence showing that freight train pass through was taken from about the bottom the hill, and there was only 5 seconds from the point the train appeared emerging from the forest to the point where it entered the crossing.  A passenger train would have offered even less time. 

 

However, if you did start the run from the bottom with the short view, you could always abort if the increasing view suddenly revealed a train approaching.  A driver would really have to have this thought out. 

 

But the issue of just stopping at the sign would not be a question of whether you could restart.  It would be a question of the longer time span fouling the crossing as the truck slowly gets moving. 

 

The BNSF and Amtrak say the driver should not have attempted to cross because he should have known that the truck would snag the crossing due to the dangerous approach grades.  However, in the close up views, I see no evidence that the crossing was damaged by the truck.   So what actually happened here??  I cannot imagine the truck stalling by getting hung up, then getting hit by the train and demolished; and yet no marks on the crossing planks.

 

I recall some reporting suggesting that the truck was a tractor trailer instead of just a dump box truck. 

[BaltACD]

wjstix

 

Euclid

So the rate of speed was too high to stop in time. This would depend on where he was when he decided to stop. The rate of speed could have been 100 mph, and still, the driver could have stopped short of the crossing if he planned on stopping and began braking early enough to give time for stopping 

According to a local farmer, it is very hard to make it across that crossing in a farm vehicle or heavily laden truck because the grade up to the tracks is so steep. Trucks have to keep their momentum up or they could stall on the grade - or on the tracks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIpbUZ1QQLg

BTW Charlie Hebdo is quite correct regarding the surveys. Pretty much every town here in Minnesota has main cross streets that are one mile apart, making a series of squares that originally would have contained a farm or farms. It was only later if the area became suburbs that streets would be filled in between the old roads made on the survey lines.

It is easy to draw lines on a map and call them roads.  It is infintely harder and more expensive to make those lines into real roads and have them actually have traffic move over them.

[tree68]

wjstix

Pretty much every town here in Minnesota has main cross streets that are one mile apart,

Each state under that plan has a "baseline" and a "meridian."  Townships were measured from those lines - ie, Township 2 North, Range 7 East.  Each of those squares is a section (640 acres).  Most townships are 36 square miles.  

Property descriptions often refer to the "northwest quarter of the southeast quarter of section 7 of township 2 north, range 7 east."  Or something to that effect.  

Learned that in 7th grade "Michigan History and Government."  Wonder if they still teach that...

[wjstix]

Euclid

So the rate of speed was too high to stop in time. This would depend on where he was when he decided to stop. The rate of speed could have been 100 mph, and still, the driver could have stopped short of the crossing if he planned on stopping and began braking early enough to give time for stopping

According to a local farmer, it is very hard to make it across that crossing in a farm vehicle or heavily laden truck because the grade up to the tracks is so steep. Trucks have to keep their momentum up or they could stall on the grade - or on the tracks.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bIpbUZ1QQLg

BTW Charlie Hebdo is quite correct regarding the surveys. Pretty much every town here in Minnesota has main cross streets that are one mile apart, making a series of squares that originally would have contained a farm or farms. It was only later if the area became suburbs that streets would be filled in between the old roads made on the survey lines.

[BaltACD]

charlie hebdo

In states that were covered by the 1787  Northwest Ordinance (Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan and eastern Minnesota) plus many other states west of Alleghenies, there is a one mile grid system, established by the  Land Ordinance Act  of  1784 and 1785. So dirt roads and tracks were likely there long before railroads. So why are counties responsible for crossings?

Map lines in nominally uninhabited areas do not constituted improved roads for the movement of men and materials.

[charlie hebdo]

In states that were covered by the 1787  Northwest Ordinance (Illinois, Indiana, Wisconsin, Ohio, Michigan and eastern Minnesota) plus many other states west of Alleghenies, there is a one mile grid system, established by the  Land Ordinance Act  of  1784 and 1785. So dirt roads and tracks were likely there long before railroads. So why are counties responsible for crossings?

[Gramp]

How many commercial airport runways in the world have public/private highways or railroad lines crossing them at grade?  Two? Think of major, arterial rail lines from the perspective of a jumbo jet runway. 

[Overmod]

BaltACD

Did you design Champlain Towers South in Florida?  We know how that turned out!

"Inexpensive" is not "cheap".

We've pretty much ruled out $250K per crossing for something expensive to run and maintain.  The gist of the argument was that the crossing was improperly signed -- I'm adding inexpensive lighting to make the required signs more obvious, and provide a 'train approaching' indication separate from lighting to make the signs distinctive.

Since none of the existing gate systems are particularly proof against truck impact, how do you see an inexpensive short gate across a one-lane crossing as being 'criminally negligent' compared to a full railroad-standard gate?  Note that extended gate raising time and long dwell aren't problems for this kind of crossing.  It's possible that a horizontal-opening cattle gate or similar is all that's needed to assure that drivers understand they have to stop.

The alternative is, simply, not to have anything but crossbucks.  And no one is going to argue that's particularly satisfactory after this accident, and so many others.

[BaltACD]

charlie hebdo

 

BaltACD

Did you design Champlain Towers South in Florida?  We know how that turned out! You don't design and implement public safety installations on the cheap without getting bitten in the rear end for probably 10 or 20 times what the cost of doing it right the first time would have cost. 

Why the ad hominem attack?  Perhaps you lack a factual basis to dispute his suggestion?

Much rail and highway construction in many states seems overpriced and shoddy. Greased palms?

your posts seem to be overpriced and shoddy. In Florida I am sure palms got greased in the construction of Champlain Towers South.

Cheap construction breeds failure.

Ever since engineers began to get a handle on the finite strength of the materials used in construction and get pressed on the price of those materials - the cardinal rule for construction is do it cheap - who cares if it lasts.  Since we are about 70 years beyond the initial construction of the Interstates (that were built on a 50 year life expectancy).  It is becoming time to rebuild everything that was built for 50 years and is failing now that its life expectancy has been exceeded.

Remember, back in the day the Interstates were constructed with 90/10 Federal/State funding.  Doubt that the rebuilds will be done on those terms.

[Euclid]

The list of conclusion by Amtrak and BNSF says this:

 

“operating the Dump Truck, a commercial motor vehicle, at a rate of speed which did not permit the Dump Truck to stop before reaching the nearest rail of the railroad crossing…”

 

So the rate of speed was too high to stop in time.  This would depend on where he was when he decided to stop.  The rate of speed could have been 100 mph, and still, the driver could have stopped short of the crossing if he planned on stopping and began braking early enough to give time for stopping. 

 

If the driver did not heed the stop sign or rules about yielding to a visible train, was it due to simply not intending to stop-or-was it due to traveling at such a high speed that he could not stop?

 

I assume they have looked at the locomotive video.  They make it sound like the driver sped on through the crossing at 40-50 mph as he collided with the locomotive. 

 

Yet, they also suggest that the truck did strike the rails and crossing deck with the bottom of the truck frame due to the humped configuration of the crossing.  So did the truck get stuck by that fouling?  Was that type of getting hung-up what caused the truck to fail to move out of the path of the train in time?  

 

Did the truck that was going too fast to stop short of the crossing, then snag the crossing and stop for that reason after traveling only about 6 feet further? 

 

This odd list of crash cause factors seems like it was compiled to include every sense of law violation, and yet they never stopped to consider the various conflicts it was producing as it developed the overall conclusion.

[charlie hebdo]

BaltACD

Did you design Champlain Towers South in Florida?  We know how that turned out! You don't design and implement public safety installations on the cheap without getting bitten in the rear end for probably 10 or 20 times what the cost of doing it right the first time would have cost.

Why the ad hominem attack?  Perhaps you lack a factual basis to dispute his suggestion?

Much rail and highway construction in many states seems overpriced and shoddy. Greased palms?

[tree68]

Cheap, fast, well.  Choose two...

[BaltACD]

Overmod

I'll waive my normal rate for some advice.

We have speed-limit signs that have illuminated colored LEDs spaced around the periphery, to call attention to them.  These run indefinitely using a cheap solar panel and small bettery.  The 'distant' crossing warnings could be made this way when installed, then periodically maintained by the appropriate government.

It would not take much additional work and expense to have some of the LEDs alternate or chase, or change displayed color from yellow to red.  It wouldn't take much to put these into MUTCD as alternate crossing warnings for all these relatively slow-speed crossings.

QNS&L ran a form of poor-man's PTC for many years by placing radio transmitters and receivers in the locomotives -- you know when you were getting close to "a" locomotive and knew to exercise safe lookout.  Not rocket science to install small transponders on locomotives if an appropriate subsidy is provided... perhaps to use these as a technology base for alarms built into headphones, etc. but I won't go there other than to say the technological 'hooks' are easily added.  This assuming PTC is too expensive to use to provide a proximity signal to a 'distributed' device.

I had a 22' solar-powered gate.  Used a typical UPS-style lead-acid battery (which I had to replace a couple of times because it got cooked sitting out on the fence in its unvented black box).  Modern lithium cells are cheap and getting cheaper for this purpose... as are solar panels and circuitry to keep them properly charged.  You cannot tell me that a counterbalanced vertical gate requires more power than a long hinged piece of wrought iron, even if on ball-bearing hinges.

Private crossings don't need antiterrorist-grade heavy gates.  Just something that comes down across the road to signal NO.

If you're concerned with enforcement, put a couple of deer cams around, with enough resolution to resolve faces and read license plates.  If someone runs the crossing, have the local or state authorities throw the book at them.

Put one of those gas-powered augurs on an arm on the back of a pickup and fit a light crane and Tommy Gate.   Standardize all the footing bases. You wouldn't need a Redi-Mix truck to cement them in and I'll bet you could do many installations in one day once the procedures were practiced.

Did you design Champlain Towers South in Florida?  We know how that turned out!

You don't design and implement public safety installations on the cheap without getting bitten in the rear end for probably 10 or 20 times what the cost of doing it right the first time would have cost.

[Overmod]

I'll waive my normal rate for some advice.

We have speed-limit signs that have illuminated colored LEDs spaced around the periphery, to call attention to them.  These run indefinitely using a cheap solar panel and small bettery.  The 'distant' crossing warnings could be made this way when installed, then periodically maintained by the appropriate government.

It would not take much additional work and expense to have some of the LEDs alternate or chase, or change displayed color from yellow to red.  It wouldn't take much to put these into MUTCD as alternate crossing warnings for all these relatively slow-speed crossings.

QNS&L ran a form of poor-man's PTC for many years by placing radio transmitters and receivers in the locomotives -- you know when you were getting close to "a" locomotive and knew to exercise safe lookout.  Not rocket science to install small transponders on locomotives if an appropriate subsidy is provided... perhaps to use these as a technology base for alarms built into headphones, etc. but I won't go there other than to say the technological 'hooks' are easily added.  This assuming PTC is too expensive to use to provide a proximity signal to a 'distributed' device.

I had a 22' solar-powered gate.  Used a typical UPS-style lead-acid battery (which I had to replace a couple of times because it got cooked sitting out on the fence in its unvented black box).  Modern lithium cells are cheap and getting cheaper for this purpose... as are solar panels and circuitry to keep them properly charged.  You cannot tell me that a counterbalanced vertical gate requires more power than a long hinged piece of wrought iron, even if on ball-bearing hinges.

Private crossings don't need antiterrorist-grade heavy gates.  Just something that comes down across the road to signal NO.

If you're concerned with enforcement, put a couple of deer cams around, with enough resolution to resolve faces and read license plates.  If someone runs the crossing, have the local or state authorities throw the book at them.

Put one of those gas-powered augurs on an arm on the back of a pickup and fit a light crane and Tommy Gate.   Standardize all the footing bases. You wouldn't need a Redi-Mix truck to cement them in and I'll bet you could do many installations in one day once the procedures were practiced.

[wjstix]

Backshop

The worst is one of the meccas of railroading...Altoona, PA.  They have numbered streets going in one direction and numbered avenues going in the other. 

 

 

Here in Minnesota, people from St.Paul often complain about that when they visit Minneapolis. East-West streets are numbered, and avenues are north-south. East of Nicollet Ave. many of the avenues are numbered, so you might be told the place you're looking for is at "Fifth and Fifth" (Intersection of 5th avenue and 5th street.)

 

Of course St.Paul has their own problems. In most towns, each numbered cross street starts a new number series, so say in Minneapolis you'd know 900 Marquette Ave. would be on the corner of 9th St. and Marquette Ave. In St.Paul, they start at the Mississippi River with number 1 and just keep going north regardless of cross streets, so my workplace between at 12th and Robert St. is 600 Robert St., not 1200.

 

BTW once railfanning in Lake County (NE Minnesota, Iron Range) I came across County Road 666. I thought it might lead to Hades, but it just ended up in Hoyt Lakes.

[Murphy Siding]

BaltACD

Must say Amtrak and BNSF are throwing a lot against the wall

 

 

Railway Age:...

 

 

negligently operating the vehicle while utilizing or otherwise being distracted by an electronic wireless communications device; ...

 

This part stood out to me. 

[dpeltier]

zugmann

 

I'll ask again : Did Denver RTD ever get their PTC xing system working fully?  It was a big thing a few years back, but then the issue just kind of disappeared. 

And from a quick look, I'm reading their crossings aren't stand alone PTC-activated, but more of an overlay system that built on top of cab signal/ATC and I'm assuming still has traditional xing circuits?  So if the PTC system is down, or isn't working on a particular train*,  the xings will still activate.  <-- I'm still looking into that.  But they had a hell of a time with the PTC + xings.  I'm no signal maintainer, so not really clear on how that is set up. 

it's been a little while since I read through the whole back-and-forth between RTD and FRA out of some morbid curiosity, but from what I recall, you are correc that there is a PTC- based activation system overlayed on top of a conventional track circuit. The conventional circuits do NOT use constant-warning-time circuitry. The idea is that, if the PTC-based overlay is working, then it suppresses the normal crossing activation, and the crossing activatea based on the train's reported distance and speed. If there's any failure in the PTC-based overlay, the crossing activates as soon as the train enters the approach circuit regardless of train speed. This leads to some very long warning times, which RTD wants to avoid due to the effects on traffic congestion. The local FRA inspector observed repeated instances in which the PTC-based overlay failed, and wrote defects for what he considered unallowably long warning times. RTD argued that there is no regulation limiting maximum allowable overtime and that the system was working exactly how it was designed.

And take a note:  I'm not dismissing the idea or trying to find flaws with it.  I'm curious how it works with another agency that already is using it. And I'm one of the few here (not the only one) that does have experience using PTC. 

The other places I know of where crossings rely on radio communication with the train are in Michigan and Illinois on the Higher Speed Rail Lines. In Michigan, the PTC system is the orphaned ITCS system. In Illinois, the PTC system used for authority and speed enforcement is normal i-ETMS, but the crossings use somehow use the same ITCS technology as Michigan.

These systems also are overlayed on top of conventional track circuits. I've seen a presentation explaining how things work in Illinois, and I assume that Michigan is similar. All crossings have conventional track circuits, but a conventional CWT circuit cannot extend far enough to provide the desired warning time for trains traveling 110 MPH. The communication-based overlay activates the crossing way ahead of time based on reported train speed and location (and apparently FRA has never taken exception to that). If the crossing doesn't confirm activation, the train slows down enough that the conventional circuits can activate the crossing before the train arrives.

I believe both RTD and the Michigan / Illinois crossings all have 4-quad gates, which may help mitigate any safety problems from long warning times.

I don't know what track speed is at the few remaining at-grade crossings on the NEC or whether they have any atypical train detection systems. 

Dan

[Euclid]

That is really surprising that they would go on record with all of that at this early point with all of the litigation that is pending. 

 

Why don’t they show us the video while they are at it, so we can judge for ourselves?  When they say the driver did not stop for the stop sign, do they mean he never stopped, or that he stopped and restarted, failing to yield?  They say the truck did high-center.  Other reports say there was no high-center warning sign which is supposed to be posted by the railroad company.  How far was the train from impact at the moment of high-centering?  How was the driver supposed to know that the crossing would not allow his truck to pass?   

[BaltACD]

Must say Amtrak and BNSF are throwing a lot against the wall

Railway Age

Amtrak and BNSF cited no fewer than 20 points of how “MS Contracting and its agents, officers, or employees were negligent, grossly negligent, and/or reckless”:

 

failing to use the highest degree of care in the operation of the Dump Truck in violation of § 304.012 RSMo ; 

operating the Dump Truck in a careless and imprudent manner in violation of § 304.012 RSMo.; 

failing to stop at the railroad crossing in violation of a posted stop sign and § 304.351 RSMo.; 

failing to stop at the railroad crossing at a point between 15 and 50 feet of the nearest rail of the railroad track and not proceed until it was safe to do so in violation of § 304.035.1 RSMo; 

failing to stop at the railroad crossing at a point between 15 and 50 feet of the nearest rail of the railroad track despite the fact that Amtrak Train 4 was clearly visible and in hazardous proximity to the crossing; 

failing to stop at the railroad crossing at a point between 15 and 50 feet of the nearest rail of the railroad track despite the presence of traffic signs and/or, devices at the railroad crossing; 

operating the Dump truck through the railroad crossing without sufficient undercarriage clearance necessary to prevent the undercarriage of the vehicle from contacting the railroad crossing in violation of § 304.035.4 RSMo; 

operating the Dump Truck, a commercial motor vehicle, at a rate of speed which did not permit the Dump Truck to stop before reaching the nearest rail of the railroad crossing in violation of § 304.035.5 RSMo; 

driving the Dump truck upon or over the railroad crossing without taking due caution to ascertain that the course was clear in violation of § 304.035.5 RSMo; 

failing to observ

failing to observe and hear the approaching Amtrak Train 4; 

failing to yield the right-of-way to the approaching Amtrak Train 4; 

failing to maintain control of the Dump Truck;

failing to keep a proper lookout; 

negligently operating the vehicle while utilizing or otherwise being distracted by an electronic wireless communications device; 

failing to observe, hear and heed Amtrak Train 4 warning signals, including the train’s horn, bells and lights; 

failing to train and supervise its employees, including Barton, in the proper procedures for operating the Dump Truck in a safe and prudent manner, and in particular, in the operation of the Dump Truck at railroad crossings; 

failing to supervise, test, observe and otherwise ensure that its employees, including Barton, were sufficiently qualified, knowledgeable and understood and followed the proper procedures for operating the Dump Truck in a safe and prudent manner, and in particular at railroad crossings; 

failing to properly inspect, maintain, and/or repair the Dump Truck to ensure it operated in a safe manner; and 

failing to follow proper loading procedures for the Dump Truck.

 

 

 

[blue streak 1]

Google Maps

Take a look at this Railway age picture in the link below.  Look at the second picture in the link.  You can see the 113 crossing in the lower left of the second picture.  Above picture toward the upper right is route 128.  Notice all the dust probably from vehicles going to and from crash site.  Another gravel road. By blowin the picture up it appears that the 128 crossing the BNSF RR is much the same as the 113 has been described.  IMO the 128 crossing may  have identical approaches to the 113 crossing.

NTSB Investigation of Amtrak Southwest Chief Derailment Under Way, BNSF Track Opens, Lawsuits Filed (UPDATED July 1) - Railway Age

[tree68]

blue streak 1

I jusst came across a google map of the crossing.

I was able to find it on Acme Mapper a few days ago.  Your characterization of the area is spot on - there's not much of anything around it.

The idea of using the old Wabash underpass sounds reasonable - but one must consider that it looks to have been a single track line, and the existing structure and the roadbed may not be wide enough to handle possible traffic (farm equipment a case in point).

While the rail line may have been built up in the begining, it's just as likely that it was built up over time - one layer of ballast at a time.  three or four inches here, three or four inches there and pretty soon you're talking feet.  Point being that the crossing may have nearly flat years ago.

I suspect you'll see improvements there sooner rather than later, even if it's just to cut that brush.

[blue streak 1]

I jusst came across a google map of the crossing.

Google Maps

After looking I am going to take the position that this crossing should not spend money on gates.  Passive reflectors of train headlights yes. If MO  wants to upgrade the road let that be done.  Make the road beyond outside of the rail flat to rails on each side for 50 feet.  Then make an incline road further back of the crossing.  There must be many grade crossings in MO more deserving of gates.

113 proceeds north for approximately 3/4 mile then turns right going due east as 122 for about another 3/4 mile and crossing the RR at grade again.  There are no houses, drives. trails from crosing to crossing.  There is  Yellow Creek conservation area NW, N, NE of the 113 - 122 turn.

We have to wonder how many big trucks have used this crossing in the last 5 years.  If the Corp of Engineers was doing flood mitigation work that probably is the first time large trucks have used this crossing. Unless other Corp projects.  That is only if the work was being done at the above corner of 113 and 122. Where was the source of the riprap located?  This brings up a question someone posted is why didn't the Corp contractor provide flagging protection for a crossing not normally used by trucks?

One other item.  MO DOT.  It would not be beyond speculation that MO has ""plans"" for every RR crossing in the state so it can claim that improvements were just around the corner for every crossing just in case of a major incident.  MC might be able to put some thoughts on this.

Take a look at this map.  Crossing needs to be open for agriculture travel but a flat approach is important.  Some equipment can be very slow.  Gates might make it very difficult to cross the RR especially since road is single lane.  Farm equipent can be very wide..

Google Maps

[n012944]

7j43k

 

 

n012944

  Nope, sorry to disappoint.   It is correct phrase for someone too lazy to look something up themselves.  Calling a spade a spade is not a sign of hurt feelings.  

 

 

 

 

You do not disappoint at all.  

Using the same term twice to insult a person would appear to be a demonstration of hurt feelings.

Or is there some other reason, beyond that, that you wish to insult me?

 

 

 

Ed

 

 

If you took the phase spoon feed as an insult, perhaps it is you that has hurt feelings.  Again, a simple 2 second Google search came up with the link of the video that was not on Facebook.  You decided that was too much work, and countinued to put out incorrect information about the amount of vegetation blocking the view.  Again, calling a spade a spade is not a sign of hurt feelings, but whatever.  If you want to continue to think you did hurt my feelings by all means you go with yourself. 

[SD70Dude]

tree68

Backshop

The worst is one of the meccas of railroading...Altoona, PA.  They have numbered streets going in one direction and numbered avenues going in the other. 

Phoenix is about the same.  Oklahoma City has NW, NE, SW, SE.  

Calgary is like that too, the centre of their grid is right downtown so an approximately equal part of the city is in each quadrant.  Really have to pay attention to those initials or you'll end up in a completely wrong part of the city.  

The centre of Edmonton's grid is near the extreme southeast corner of the city limits, so the vast majority of the city is in the northwest quadrant and the southeast quadrant doesn't exist (yet).  

The newer parts of both cities have a lot of named roads and curves that are probably intended to keep through traffic out of neighborhoods, but in reality they just make navigation confusing.  

Our rural roads follow the grid laid out by the Dominion Land Survey, with north-south Range Roads every mile and east-west Township Roads every two miles.  The grid starts at each meridian and the road numbers end in 0-5, 6-9 aren't used (starting at a meridian, consecutive Range Roads are numbered 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 20, 21 and so on).  To name a couple, the Alberta-Saskatchewan border is the fourth meridian, and Provincial Highway 779 through Stony Plain is the fifth meridian. 

The 49th parallel would be Township Road 10 and their numbers just keep growing, by the time you the up to the High Level/Fort Vermillion area the number is over 1,000.  Most have even numbers since the original plan skipped every other mile.

There are also a number of 'correction lines', where the Range Roads shift slightly to help the grid fit the earth's curved surface.  Provincial Highway 37 just north of Edmonton is one such line.

[Euclid]

.

[tree68]

Backshop

The worst is one of the meccas of railroading...Altoona, PA.  They have numbered streets going in one direction and numbered avenues going in the other. 

Phoenix is about the same.  Oklahoma City has NW, NE, SW, SE.  

[Backshop]

The worst is one of the meccas of railroading...Altoona, PA.  They have numbered streets going in one direction and numbered avenues going in the other. 

[tree68]

SD70Dude

A small aside, I'm getting a headache trying to figure out how Missouri decides to name and number their rural roads.

NY isn't much better - and even with the state roads.  NYS 12 runs through my area, but there is a 12B, 12E, and 12F that I know of.

County route 179 is here in town,  So are CR 11 and 12...

And it's not unusual to find what would be the same street or road have different names from one side of town to the other...

[Backshop]

greyhounds

 If someone gave me a consulting contract at around $350/hour, I'd work it out.  

Now that's funny! An engineering consultant would be worth it, but not someone with a background in marketing.  BTW That CAT phone is just a cheap cellphone in a CAT-branded Otterbox protective cover.  If you think CAT actually has special phones...

You keep coming up with pie-in-the-sky ideas with no idea of the costs.  Then you denigrate the people who know the costs, the operating dept, and say that they just don't want to do anything.