Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in

We've had murder cars, now we've got murder-trains in Florida of course 13

Status
Not open for further replies.
I guess I have to fall back in "not reported on". I live a 1/4 mile from a section of railroad that is popular for suicide and live in the San Francisco Bay area by that most infamous bridge. I see the emergency response but never a story.
 
That is called whatabouting and is the same thing used in many cases to claim that avoidable problems aren't so bad because other avoidable problems exist.

Sure, it's fine to imply that suicide is just worthless people removing themselves from life and that it is so unfair to gun makers that they don't report suicides on train tracks like "15 year old dies painlessly and instantly when hit by train." because the public really needs to know all the details to make an informed decision about trespassing on rail property.

But then I wonder why the defending of guns and think well, if the suicides are just worthless people as implied, it's not the gun's fault or the fault of the companies that sold 1.2 times the US population of firearms.

Until I see those 1 and 2 year olds killing themselves, their siblings, their cousins, relatives, parents, unborn future family members. And a 6 year old getting gun to kill a teacher. It's like macbre roulette - guess how many days it's been since a 2 year old killed someone with a gun.

I reflect on a guy in college who got a gun for self defense and committed manslaughter over the student lounge TV station.

Maybe another thread on how unfair the presentation of gun violence is to gun makers that sell guns for export to Mexico, to be used by cartels to fight the Mexican government, to keep American supplied with fentanyl, that is defended by gun-toting gangs, to advertise how dangerous the gangs are so everyone needs guns, which makes it easier to buy guns in America for export to Mexico.
 
Staying with pedestrian deaths while crossing railroad tracks, here is one from 30 years ago:


She plainly walked in front of an oncoming train while crossing the tracks. She did not check for approaching trains on those tracks. She (apparently) ignored the pedestrian gates. And, once warned by the safety equipment, continued walking without checking for oncoming trains.

Would YOU have done that?

WHAT are we to do here? Magic bungee cords that wisk people out of harm's way? Armored crash-proof taxis? Run trains across crossings at 3 MPH?

My view is to trust the innate survival instinct of humans (and other animals), and to not do a lot.

You may have other views. Building on that, would YOU be willing to pay for the various overcrossings, undercrossings, escalators, people movers that would be needed to eliminate human-train interaction? How much? If we did a go-fund-me, how much would you put in?


spsalso
 
That is a common cause. One train parks directly at the crossing, continuously triggering a false warning, blocking the view of the second track, and overriding the warning from the second train. In many locations a parked train will leave the crossing in this state for hours, causing those most familiar to come to ignore the warning and cross as dozens did in that video.

Often the reason for stopping so close is to allow the crew to shorten their walk for a meal break rather than stopping outside the warning block on the track and leaving the sightline from the crossing clear and the signal operated by moving stock.

The railroads do this so much there are towns where children have to climb over and under rail cars to get to and from school. They have 100% immunity and no motive to change procedures. They can, and do, blame the victims.

Mary T. Wojtyla was killed by the procedure of parking so close. I have seen emergency vehicles hit by the same trap.
 
My dad works in agriculture and the ag community was always against the expansion of railroad in the region because a certain company's operators made a game about blocking access roads.

I have experienced issue with that same company locally, they will leave the final car across a major thoroughfare (2x2 lanes) during switching for 20 minutes. It's like a game to the operators.

I also know someone who has to cross the tracks to get to his house. It is a very unique situation. He is also a drunk that complains a lot. I have seen it, though. The railroad intentionally parks trains across his access, usually 6-10 cars with plenty of room to shift either way. They want him out.

Suicides on the track are sad but don't restrict our access due to sad people. Fence off the areas with poor visibility and let the tracks be crossable just like any other one or two lane road.
 
The approaching train was not hidden by the parked one. You can clearly see it approaching while Mary T Wojtyla was at least 15-20 feet away from the impact point. She kept going.

It did NOT "sneak up" on her. And the stopped train was not obstructing her view. The person accompanying her clearly saw it, and stopped. She did not.




spsalso

 
You can, from where the camera is, but not for her before reaching the critical decision to cross, as all the others did. Had the parked train not obscured the view the lawyer and she would not have started across the tracks.

Is the moving train clearly visible at the distance it would have triggered the crossing from the side of the tracks all the people were crossing from? If not, the parked train obstructed her view of the moving train.

15-20 feet at 88 feet per second is less time than most people can identify a problem and far less time than they can react.

Stop making excuses for procedural failures that apply false warnings and create obstructed views. This is the most common situation for crashes at multi-track crossings.

It's not sneaking, it is making a false alarm; it is lying, it is concealing a danger.
 
Nevertheless, the lawyer with her clearly saw the train and stopped short, but she just wasn't paying attention until it was too late for her. In the full video, you can see her actually behind the the lawyer and she speeds up and when she gets hit, she's about 4 ft ahead of him. Not paying attention is a fairly common cause for lots of injuries and deaths, ala distracted driving, but ditto distracted walking.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
The initiating factor was a false alarm that lasted so long dozens of people, without stopping to look, crossed those tracks. It is sensory overload, where the warnings are prolonged and there is an obvious cause that is clearly not dangerous concealing a separate hazard.

Had there been independent alarms, one for each track, or the first train not concealed the second, she would be alive.

We know that proper alerting could be added and that sensory overload is a frequent problem, so which is the moral failure?

More than that, the nonchalance of the others crossing in front of the stationary train and its engineers indicates the parked train operator knew about the hazard over a long time, would have been aware of the risk of the second train, known that not everyone has experience around tracks, and did nothing - not even signs warning that a parked train might conceal a second one traveling at very high speed or moving to completely block the street; did not even sound a horn to protest stepping onto the track by the parked engine that could see the danger and had not involved police to arrest those going around the arms so casually and practiced.

Can't save everyone, but safety measures are there to save as many as possible and the clear observation was that they were being ignored by a lot of people.
 
WE can see the oncoming train when she is 15' away from that track.

SHE is between us and that train.

So she could have seen what we see. It was not obscured from her view.

The mass of the stopped locomotive is not great enough to bend the light path in a curve such that we could see what she could not.


I am not sure why people seem to assume that there cannot be an approaching train hidden by a stopped one. I recall it happening locally.

"I see a stopped train. Therefore it is safe to cross all the tracks."


spsalso
 
They applied the logic: If we run we minimize the time on the track which minimizes the time we are exposed to risk.
 
IRstuff said:
Nevertheless, the lawyer with her clearly saw the train and stopped short, but she just wasn't paying attention until it was too late for her. In the full video, you can see her actually behind the the lawyer and she speeds up and when she gets hit, she's about 4 ft ahead of him. Not paying attention is a fairly common cause for lots of injuries and deaths, ala distracted driving, but ditto distracted walking.
Click to expand...

I have not yet looked at that video.

Are trains louder than AC/DC on the headphones?

--
JHG
 
I would recommend against looking at the entire video. The lawyer had gotten ahead of her and so she was running to catch up; the lawyer had even sped up just before the second track, and she sped up more to continue closing the gap. Her momentum carried her into path of the train - she was leaning back, fully on the brakes as it were, when the train hit, about 0.5 seconds after she realized why the lawyer stopped. They were following after a large crowd that had not stopped to look had also gone across the tracks.

The parked running train and false crossing warning from the parked train were loud. The second train gave a toot on the horn, but did not sound continuously as it approached the blind intersection. Earphones or not, the noise level didn't seem to change much.

is the start of the replay of the crowd behavior before the death, but sequenced on Youtube after the death, so you won't see the instant before the death without rewinding.

I see no one stop completely before going onto the second track and only a few even look.
 
The woman with the white bag looked, saw the train coming, backed up, and waited. The lawyer was hurrying across the track in case a train was coming.
 
Of course, the crowd had already passed before the train approached the crossing. The one woman with the white bag was alone. Saw the train coming and waited. Removing train was blasting its horn as it approached the crossing. He probably even told the women," if we hurry up, we'll make it ".
 
If one was so inclined that would be the perfect way to murder someone unfamiliar with trains, especially the little speedup and sudden stop. If that fails, then Plan B.
 
This image shows it all. The camera angle is nearly in-line with the people before they even get to the tracks, and the oncoming train is clearly visible (the whitish blob to the right of the stopped train). THAT is why the first woman stopped, and she's looking at the moving train to wait out its crossing. Neither the lawyer nor Wojtyl were even paying attention, since the train was less than 100 ft away and clearly visible before they even cross the first set of tracks. There is no way they wouldn't have seen the train had they bothered to look.


train_xygoto.png


TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
"Bothered" carries a lot if they are not expecting a train to be there, an impression enhanced by the continuous false warning and the stationary train as clear cause for the false warning. The situation changed but the track warning did not.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JohnRBaker
  • News
28 cars crash during a single accident at a NASCAR event...
Replies
10
Views
23
drawoh
drawoh
Reverse_Bias
  • Locked
  • Question
Acapulco now modern ruins 54
4 5 6
Replies
118
Views
119
dik
dik
IRstuff
  • Locked
  • Question
Self-Driving Cars and Taxis Are Here! 5
2
Replies
31
Views
32
Luceid
Luceid
Retrograde
  • Question
Bridge Collapse in Dresden 1
2
Replies
33
Views
73
Ingenuity
Ingenuity
hpaircraft
  • Locked
  • Question
Bridge collapse in Vietnam
Replies
1
Views
17
JAE
JAE
Back
Top