Continue to Site

Eng-Tips is the largest engineering community on the Internet

Intelligent Work Forums for Engineering Professionals

Register Log in
  • Congratulations waross 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.
This is near me. Trains are not that unusual in South Florida. In fact they are very common. But brightline is a lot faster than any other trains we have here. And until Brightline, these tracks were used mostly for relatively slow freight trains (and in fact, they still are in addition to Brightline). And it is VERY quiet. You really don't hear it coming. Also in many areas, they don't blow the horn due to sound restrictions.

So many can misjudge and think they have more time than they think (comparing it to all of the other trains) to cross the tracks.

I don't know about other areas of the country, but much of this train line is right next to residential areas and there are no fences. Just tracks in an empty field a few feet from businesses and houses.

Also in the Ft Lauderdale area, a main road runs parallel but only maybe 50 feet from the tracks, but has crossings every mile or so. So many people would make a right turn and IMMEDIATELY run into a train crossing. While you can see the tracks, if the train is coming up from behind you while you are making that right turn, you will not hear it until it's hitting your car. Yes, there are gates, but some ignore them. Also many of them malfunction so often (dropping with no train anywhere near) that some may ignore them more than they should...
 
At those locations where the "warning device" (horn) is restricted, then it would seem like the entity that caused that would then be responsible for events that occurred due to lack of use of that warning device.

Similarly, if a person decides to go around a lowered gate, then they are responsible for being hit by the train. Surely a reasonable person would not assume that, just because there are many "false positives", that that means there are NO positives. Or. If I was going to do that, I would ABSOLUTELY make sure that a train was not coming THIS time.

Beyond that, it does look like all concerned should be revisiting the trackage with regard to safety.


spsalso
 
Has anyone in this thread ever... actually walked along train tracks when they are in use?

As shown in a video earlier in this thread, several rail workers, who I will remind you work on this equipment daily and are well versed in how these trains operate were barely able to dodge away from a commuter train. If you are on tracks anywhere in rural, farmland, or mountainous America, the tracks aren't always straight where you can look either direction for 10 miles. Often the tracks have multiple curves, elevation changes, and bends that limit view. In these situations, freight trains can also be difficult to prepare for, even if they are louder and slower than a typical commuter, you still have much less time that you would ever think to dodge the train, if the terrain around even allows you to evacuate the tracks, I know from experience.

I think engineered solutions, particularly around commuter tracks where the trains travel exceptionally quickly, are a prudent discussion point on these forums. I don't have a good solution (a really big mattress tied to the front of the train engine?), but I think it's worthwhile to brainstorm ideas.
 
The rule of law has slowly been eroding; people are driving crazy fast and making crazy lane changes; trucks going faster than 55 and taking 3 right lanes instead of 2, etc., cops taking advantage of asset forfeiture loopholes to line their pockets, etc.

TTFN (ta ta for now)
I can do absolutely anything. I'm an expert! faq731-376 forum1529 Entire Forum list
 
were barely able to dodge away from a commuter train
Click to expand...

That was a mainline express, not a commuter train.

However, your point is mostly still valid.

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.
 
Around me the tracks are all fenced except at grade level crossings. People cut holes in the fence. Personally, I like the holes. They allow access to a beach that is walkable from my house. The holes are cut at a curve that has been used for suicide purposes.
 
I don't understand why tracks in built up areas aren't fenced, tbh.
Click to expand...

There has to be big gaps in the fence at every crossing, rendering them somewhat useless at keeping cars and people off the tracks. Fences only works well for tracks that are isolated from road traffic.
 
"Has anyone in this thread ever... actually walked along train tracks when they are in use? "


I have. It used to be difficult to avoid it if you were a kid interested in trains.

An interest usually leads to knowledge of the subject, which can be very useful when on railroad tracks.

And so I can report that although I walked along those tracks, I have yet to be injured or killed by a train. And I fully expect that state to continue.



spsalso
 
Regarding the "one second to death" video posted earlier:

If those workers were only going to be on the tracks for a very short time, they should have posted a lookout. They did not.

A similar event happened on BART in October of 2013 (two killed):


Note the sentence:

"The procedures for such maintenance require one employee to inspect the track and the other to serve as a lookout for oncoming traffic, BART officials said."

Here is an NTSB report on the matter:


I note that it was not mentioned that the employees clearly failed to provide a lookout, even though they were supposed to. I think sometimes we CAN blame the victim.



If it was going to be a "longer" time, they should have shunted the rails, which would have put up a red block for the approaching train. They did not.

In my above link to a crash in Chester PA in 2016, the workers had not shunted the rails--two died.



spsalso
 
spsalso said:
Regarding the "one second to death" video posted earlier:

If those workers were only going to be on the tracks for a very short time, they should have posted a lookout. They did not.
Click to expand...

That's unhelpful and rather misses the key lesson. When dealing with high speed traffic on curves with poor sighting, simply "posting a lookout" doesn't create a safe system of work. At Egmanton, there was a lookout - but they weren't deployed effectively.

If you want to be really picky, rather than saying "they" (those workers), we need to say "he" (the PiC) should have .... - which puts a different complexion on the question of whether it's OK to blame the victims. While the rest of the team must call out unsafe practices if they see them, they shouldn't be assumed to have the knowledge of line speeds, sighting distances, location of trackside aids, etc. to be able to make that judgement in every case.

A.
 
I think A key lesson is that, if you post a lookout, that you realize the whole point of a lookout; and that the lookout should be able to warn of oncoming traffic in time to alert the crew properly. That being the whole point.

Another key lesson is that there's a point where you've gone from a "short time" to a longer one, and should shunt the track.

I do wonder if it was considered unacceptable to cause this VIT (very important train) to slow down, something that would have happened with a shunt.


spsalso
 
I think the problem they'd allowed themselves to believe they had was that there were a lot of trains and they were spending too much time standing around in the cess getting nothing done. The train that nearly hit them had been the third to pass through the worksite in the preceding five minutes and during the day, there's about fifteen movements an hour timetabled in one direction or the other. Having planned a system of work that used the available automatic warning systems (fitted because sighting times were known to be too short for effective lookout working), the PiC reverted to what was effectively simple lookout working to maximise time on the tools.

Shunting the track isn't part of the suite of protection options available in the UK - a fair bit of the network is no longer served with conventional track circuits (even if this one is) - so the closest (and undoubtedly better than just relying on lookout protection) option would have been to take a temporary line blockage. That's an administrative faff and the local signalling centre was already running as many blockages as it could cope with.

So not really about this particular train being too important - more a case of trying not to create a huge backlog of delayed services. You could easily make an argument that this part of the network is sweated too hard, with not enough money made available to move routine maintenance to times when there's less traffic.

A.
 
> I think sometimes we CAN blame the victim.

It is undoubtedly true. And each tragic case has its own twists and turns. But when you get a disproportionate share of problems you have to look beyond that. Brightline is apparently worst in the US.

I try to put it into context: one accident per 32,000 miles traveled (as Greg points out that's train miles, not people miles). So if the train is averaging 100 miles per hour, that one fatal accident per every 320 hours of train drive time?!? For each and every train in their fleet!?! That seems like a lot to me.
 
That little note that suicides are not included - very sad.

I suppose "other non-trespasser" are people at crossings? Probably explains the large number of injuries vs deaths compare to trespassers due to the protection of being in a vehicle.
 
Trains and bridges don't get suicides reported at all while guns get every suicide reported as violence.
 
When I was a kid we used to walk or ride our bikes between the tracks because the roads had basically no shoulders and it was more dangerous to walk along the roads. My brother actually got hit riding his bike on the road. We were always aware of what was going on with the train traffic, which wasn't very heavy, but was inconsistent. We would continuously be on the alert for any trains and move off the tracks if we saw or heard them. Of course, these were fairly slow freight trains, not high-speed trains.
 
People should learn not to play on the tracks any more than they know not to play on the roads.

TugboatEng said:
Trains and bridges don't get suicides reported at all while guns get every suicide reported as violence
Click to expand...

Do you even care that anything you say has a factual basis?
 
Did you read your link?


The statistics are not so easy to find because of these standards.

It's very disingenuous to not include the facts in reporting. It makes Trains, bridges, and guns seem a lot more dangerous than they really are. Using that logic one could argue that the Golden Gate Bridge is the most dangerous in the world yet it hasn't had a failure and I don't know of anybody that has "fallen" off since it's construction was completed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

JohnRBaker
  • News
28 cars crash during a single accident at a NASCAR event...
Replies
10
Views
222
drawoh
drawoh
Reverse_Bias
  • Locked
  • Question
Acapulco now modern ruins 54
4 5 6
Replies
118
Views
433
dik
dik
IRstuff
  • Locked
  • Question
Self-Driving Cars and Taxis Are Here! 5
2
Replies
31
Views
229
Luceid
Luceid
Retrograde
  • Question
Bridge Collapse in Dresden 1
2
Replies
33
Views
769
Ingenuity
Ingenuity
hpaircraft
  • Locked
  • Question
Bridge collapse in Vietnam
Replies
1
Views
341
JAE
JAE

Part and Inventory Search

Sponsor

Back
Top Bottom