Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

  • Congratulations KootK on being selected by the Eng-Tips community for having the most helpful posts in the forums last week. Way to Go!

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

Status
Not open for further replies.
Odd reading. The railroad procedure was to park so closely that her trip was started while the view was blocked and an indicators of train movement were triggered by the stationary train - blocking the view and triggering the inappropriate indicators was a direct result of the railroad procedure.

The casual acceptance of the pedestrians violating procedure was also a defacto railroad procedure. That was also a procedure.

Contrast that with airlines. If a passenger won't stay seated the plane will not push back from the gate. If the passenger refuses company procedure they will be removed from the plane and possibly banned from the property for life.

Airlines are the safest form of travel. Trains? Not so much because they have bad procedures and those sometimes kill people.

It was probably confusing by the contrast of good airlines procedures with crappy railroad procedures.

Recall the Florida crash a few years ago caused by not following the good procedure of triggering O2 generators and depleting the reactive chemicals prior to loading a fire bomb into the cargo bay right where it could cut the controls.

But for Mary, the railroad procedures tended to put people at risk and she was the victim. Had the railroad actively prosecuted pedestrians for going past the barriers as airlines do with uncooperative passengers, the initial crowd would have been still blocking the path. Had the railroad put a conductor at the crossing to be picked up as the end of that train departed the crossing, that would have been enough. Had the procedure been to park the train no closer than 500 feet from the crossing then the other train would have been visible to Mary and the lawyer when the crossing horn sounded and the crossing arms would be coming down and lights flashing, all reinforcing attention to the moving train.

Many locations are putting in double arms to block both lanes to prevent drive-arounds. Small changes can prevent many deaths.

Even if one thinks Mary was fully deserving and would gleefully shove her, the operator of the train that hit her wasn't deserving of experiencing that and neither was her family, the bystanders, or those who responded to the aftermath. For her it was done in an instant and no more. For everyone else, it's a large portion of a lifetime.
 
3DDave said:
Had the railroad actively prosecuted pedestrians for going past the barriers

California just legalized jaywalking...
 
About time, too :)

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
 
I live in SE Wisconsin and there are a significant number of 'no horn' crossings.
They have proven to be safer because they have center barricades and arms that fully reach them.
It does nothing about pedestrians, but it sure eliminates drives skirting the signals.
There is a train 2 or three times a week that because of hazardous cargo always sounds the horn.
I am a ways from the tracks but it is still odd to only hear the horns every now and then.

= = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = = =
P.E. Metallurgy, consulting work welcomed
 
Railroads have police, who can arrest people.

So do the cities that have the stations where the pedestrians are crossing the tracks.

Apparently the "procedure" of these government entities was not to do anything about it.

The particular government entity was Downers Grove, Illinois.


The stopped train was stopped because it was loading/unloading passengers at a station. The platform length is 800'. If the locomotive were to be 500' from the pedestrian crossing, that would allow only two passenger cars to be at the platform. It would also mean that passengers alighting from the train would have to walk 500' to cross the tracks. Or, of course, they could be impatient and......



spsalso
 
Build the platform away from the crossing?

The town may have no authority unless the railroad file a trespass complaint.

---

Car centric laws were designed to increase the danger to pedestrians. That is what jaywalking laws do.

The "WALK" sign is not matched by all-red and no-turn and as soon as I step off the curb I can be hit by turning drivers who are often looking at only the traffic they will merge with - 180 degrees from me.

If I jaywalk, I can see if the pavement is empty of cars for a great enough distance that I can cross before even the street racers can get me and I only need to look 2 directions and not 6 and I don't worry that some nearby stopped car will close the 3-5 foot gap and crush me because they saw an opening behind me and punch it to get that slot. There are cars to left and right and none behind.

Cities could place mid-block crossings to stop traffic and get the same effect, but that protects pedestrians.
 
She was walking on a public right of way. City police could have ticketed her.

I suspect the platform is placed where it is BECAUSE passengers can easily cross the tracks at the street. As opposed to, say, the tracks themselves. I can imagine the complaining from the public if they had to walk an extra 500 feet. If I was the railroad, I'd let the city decide: "We'll put it wherever you want it."

Imagine the complaining if passengers had to climb stairs to a bridge to cross the tracks. MUCH safer. Ain't happening.

spsalso
 
This is my local crossing on a blind curve. Everybody that wants to seems to make it across successfully. I have also included a picture of the fence. There is evidence of a lot of foot traffic through that fence.

PXL_20231007_230935631_p67xhf.jpg


PXL_20231007_231054793_zvolml.jpg


Dang it, now everyone on train is going to think I'm a foamer
 
I'm late to the party.

Like a couple others have said unfamiliarity is the problem here. The solution isn't necessarily an engineered one. If we had adopted that approach to roads we would have all around roads fenced off once cars became the dominate road going vehicle.

I'm all for safer streets, but that is a completely new topic. Streets are where people actively live. Rail tracks are for the most part not. Though there are clear exceptions!
It really isn't that hard to recognise and avoid a rail track and a train running on one. Trying to fence them off in many sparsely populated areas is like trying to fence off a river/lake/ocean to avoid drowning. Even fencing them off in a populated area is open for debate for reasons already outlined.

spsalso said:
Australia being quite similar to the US, I wonder what THEIR approach to fencing is.
Sporadic. Even in large metropolises of 5milion people there are areas in inner city which are unfenced. Though crossings are largely fenced and controlled. Rural areas are often lights only, quite rural areas are merely signed.

spsalso said:
I don't understand why tracks in built up areas aren't fenced, tbh. These incidents are all happening within urban or suburban areas, not in some cornfield 100 miles from anywhere.
Why is the same argument not applied to streets where we have cars? Cars are far less predictable.


This is a commuter rail line, <5km from the city centre in a metropolis of 5million people in a highly developed nation by OECD measures.
temp_hjc7jn.png


It is also located in a state and country known for its "nanny state" approach to safety. That generally exceeds safety requirements in the US and Europe. (I'm not necessarily saying that is a good thing though!) Around here whenever we have European workers on engineering site we half baby sit them the entire time to make sure they don't break any of our stringent workplace safety rules. (I'm not faulting the European workers, just pointing out the difference in standards.)
 
Like a couple others have said unfamiliarity is the problem here.

Unless someone grew up in a cave and never watched TV or movies and never once had to cross a street, that might be a valid point; I'm having trouble seeing why the required logical leap from street to track might be so difficult to make. Babies have to learn to be afraid of lots of things, but these are not babies.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
Recently police left a car on the tracks with a suspect locked inside, train sounding the horn as it approached the crossing. The car was crushed like a beer can and carried hundreds of feet down the track; even then the cops had no sense for the difference in scale and did not drive their SUVs along the smooth path parallel to the rail, but grabbed a first aid kit and ran, covering in 30 seconds what could have been done in 5 seconds, and leaving all other tools behind.

Are police unfamiliar with roads and cars and unable to convert that to rail? Apparently the answer is, Yes.

Most people "get it."

Why are there guard rails on highways if most people get it? Because there should not be a death penalty for those who do not.
 
The police in this case had extreme tunnel vision, and little situational awareness--very similar to Mary Wojtyla.


spsalso
 
With the invention of LRAD, perhaps it's the to upgrade from a horn to a verbal warning. The crossing gates indicate when a train is present but not what it's doing. "Get off the tracks, there is a train coming!" Better yet, "It's not worth it, call this phone number for assistance (555)***-****.

I'd hate this. I live near tracks.
 
From the Antiplanner blog, Brightline has struck again.

"The good news is that it took a month before a Brightline train on its new Orlando route killed a pedestrian. The bad news is that it did so in the same circumstances as previous fatalities south of West Palm Beach:"

EDIT: Maybe suicide, maybe not...

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
 
Yeah, you'd think :)

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
 
Antiplanner noted a lack of crossing gates in the street view photo.

However, that photo shows the mounts for Antiplanner's "missing" gates already installed. Depending on the photo date, those gates are likely already in.

That includes crossing gates for pedestrians on both sides of the street.

Note also the bazillion red flashing lights.

So: Gates. Bells. Red flashing lights. Possibly loud locomotive horns, unless the locals complained about the sound (then Antiplanner could blame THEM for the death).

The crossing should probably also have an Acme Hovering Grabber Drone to snatch people out of the way before the impact.


spsalso
 
"Acme Hovering Grabber Drone". I like it. Why be half safe? LOL

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand
 
Machine gun towers would be a surer bet. Anything that moves, day or night...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor