If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Abilene Reporter-News)   Union Pacific: Hey, if the city, county and parade organizer don't let us know their parade route crosses our tracks, we can't be held responsible for what happens next   (reporternews.com) divider line 384
    More: Followup, Union Pacific, parade float, Ordinances of 1311, flatbed trucks, parades, chief warrant officer, Midland, train wrecks  
•       •       •

19279 clicks; posted to Main » on 27 Feb 2013 at 11:26 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



384 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2013-02-27 11:26:10 AM  
"Aaaand, the Blue Ribbon for this year's Longest Strip of Jerky goes to..."
 
2013-02-27 11:30:13 AM  
Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.
 
2013-02-27 11:31:15 AM  

Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


I will be suing Coca Cola because they didn't stop me from opening and consuming gallons of their product.
 
2013-02-27 11:31:30 AM  
Most of the trains out there in West Texas are pretty got-damn long, and they take a mile or so to stop.
They come blowing through those podunk towns at a good clip.
It's crazy.
 
2013-02-27 11:31:36 AM  
It doesn't sound like the railroad is at fault at all.  Are they supposed to have somebody on each track crossing at all times, in case somebody decides to throw a parade without telling them?  Are there important details not mentioned in TFA?
 
2013-02-27 11:31:58 AM  
They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.
 
2013-02-27 11:32:08 AM  

Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


No no no... Clearly the railroad is to blame since they have the most money
 
2013-02-27 11:34:00 AM  
There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.
 
2013-02-27 11:34:25 AM  
Over in two.

Those cross beams, flashing lights, and train horns are not meant to be taken very seriously. Trains are known for their innate ability to stop instantly upon sensing verterans on parades.
 
2013-02-27 11:34:38 AM  

Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.


But it's for  veterans. How can you expect people to participate in their fetish of worshiping our culture of death if you have a bunch of rules to follow.  Permits are only necessary to prevent them there queer pride parades.
 
2013-02-27 11:35:58 AM  
Uh, maybe I'm missing something, but how does one not notice a train coming, even with a large, loud crowd and absence of warning lights/bells?
 
2013-02-27 11:36:32 AM  

Benjamin Orr: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

No no no... Clearly the railroad is to blame since they have the most money


Thank you, Steve Dallas...
 
2013-02-27 11:36:34 AM  

Benjamin Orr: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

No no no... Clearly the railroad is to blame since they have the most money


You couldn't have said it better. This is why insurance costs so much in the US, people often go after the deepest pockets rather than accepting responsibility for their own actions or placing the blame where it should be.
 
db2
2013-02-27 11:36:35 AM  
I don't want to sound like I support killing veterans or anything (I don't), but parades suck.
 
2013-02-27 11:37:52 AM  

Maud Dib: Most of the trains out there in West Texas are pretty got-damn long, and they take a mile or so to stop.
They come blowing through those podunk towns at a good clip.
It's crazy.


If only there were some sort of alarm that would sound with a gate that descended to discourage people from endangering themselves, this might not have happened.
 
2013-02-27 11:38:08 AM  
In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later.

Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing
.

The idiot driving the float is clearly at fault.
 
2013-02-27 11:38:12 AM  
Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

Kevin Glasheen, one of the attorneys representing the plaintiffs in the Midland lawsuit, said Union Pacific's action was anticipated.

"For the railroad, it's a way to shift responsibly to other parties," Glasheen said.


What a crock of shiat. The warnings were working, the float decided to ignore those warnings, and now it's UP trying to "shift the blame"? Farking lawyers. On top of everything, these jackasses act like every mile of train track is administered locally, so Joe-Bob should have known the parade route and time and diverted the train. For Fark's sake, they cover 2/3 of the country, they aren't going toreceive your parade route details by psychic dispatch.

What this IS is an attempt to switch blame from the responsible parties to the giant corporation. Did I mention farking lawyers yet?
 
2013-02-27 11:38:23 AM  

db2: I don't want to sound like I support killing veterans or anything (I don't), but parades suck.


If you walk the other way, you can fast forward the parade.
 
2013-02-27 11:38:37 AM  

db2: I don't want to sound like I support killing veterans or anything (I don't), but parades suck.


I usually agree, but this one sounds like it was pretty exciting. Darwin must've been the parade marshal.
 
2013-02-27 11:38:42 AM  

Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.


NANNY STATE!
 
2013-02-27 11:39:36 AM  

justtray: Over in two.

Those cross beams, flashing lights, and train horns are not meant to be taken very seriously. Trains are known for their innate ability to stop instantly upon sensing verterans on parades.


Maybe it was a terrorist-hijacked train.

/another train has hit the south float!
 
2013-02-27 11:39:40 AM  
Why don't they look?

/gentle pressure
 
2013-02-27 11:39:51 AM  
Clearly the railroad is at fault, these trains just come out of nowhere, you never know when a train is just going to jump out in front of you. If only trains could be confined to a set, specific route, let's call it a track, then just maybe we would know where a train might be operating.
 
2013-02-27 11:39:52 AM  

Marcus Aurelius: Maud Dib: Most of the trains out there in West Texas are pretty got-damn long, and they take a mile or so to stop.
They come blowing through those podunk towns at a good clip.
It's crazy.

If only there were some sort of alarm that would sound with a gate that descended to discourage people from endangering themselves, this might not have happened.


Won't work without giant, flashing red lights...
 
2013-02-27 11:39:54 AM  

Ashyukun: Benjamin Orr: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

No no no... Clearly the railroad is to blame since they have the most money

Thank you, Steve Dallas...


I'm sure Sean Penn is to blame for this somehow as well. Don't care if he or Madonna will return to beat up the plaintiff.
 
2013-02-27 11:40:22 AM  
maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right? And is it right that you can cross over the tracks but remaining stationary or walking along the tracks is considered tresspassing, right?
 
2013-02-27 11:40:44 AM  
Here's a thought:  If you can't clear the tracks, DON'T GO ONTO THE TRACKS!

People are so farking stupid it makes my head hurt.
 
2013-02-27 11:41:32 AM  

havocmike: Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.

NANNY STATE!


They should have stopped at the crossing lights.

PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY!
 
2013-02-27 11:41:40 AM  

Mikey1969: . Did I mention farking lawyers yet?


it's one of my favorite things to do.
 
2013-02-27 11:42:52 AM  
Footage of the accident has just been posted to YouTube.
 
2013-02-27 11:43:17 AM  

Tom_Slick: Clearly the railroad is at fault, these trains just come out of nowhere, you never know when a train is just going to jump out in front of you. If only trains could be confined to a set, specific route, let's call it a track, then just maybe we would know where a train might be operating.


And if only there was some kind of visual and audible warning system when this "track" crosses a road.  Maybe even install some kind of barrier that should prevent people from crossing this "track".
 
2013-02-27 11:43:39 AM  
Trains are not known for stopping on a dime for a reason.
 
2013-02-27 11:44:30 AM  
I live near Atlanta, and Marietta, Kennesaw, and Acworth all have big festivals pretty much on the train tracks.  Presumably they tell the railroad because the engineers generally start blowing the horn earlier than normal and people still screw around getting off the tracks.

My understanding is that trains pretty much always have the right of way and as long as the crossing lights are working you are automatically at fault if you get hit.
 
2013-02-27 11:44:34 AM  
Wanted for questioning.

i.imgur.com
 
Pav
2013-02-27 11:46:01 AM  
The fact that this case hasn't been thrown out of the court system already is a disgrace unless this article is leaving out the prosecutions entire case.
 
2013-02-27 11:46:21 AM  
Yeah, I think it's weird that these men spent time in a hostile environment where somebody was probably trying to kill them every damn day. They come back to "the world" and Cleetus takes them out all at once in an act of stupidity.

Flashing lights? Warning bells? Shucks, them things are fer pussies... GUN IT!

Sue Cleetus.
 
2013-02-27 11:47:24 AM  

Wellon Dowd: Wanted for questioning.

[i.imgur.com image 850x566]


that's pretty

/I like trains
 
2013-02-27 11:48:14 AM  

db2: I don't want to sound like I support killing veterans or anything (I don't), but parades suck.


Normally, I'd agree, but watching a train hit one of the floats might make it worthwhile.
 
2013-02-27 11:48:17 AM  
"This item demonstrates how stupid the average American is. Every ninety minutes someone in this country is hit by a train. A train, okay? Trains are on tracks; they can't come and get you. They can't surprise you when you step off a curb. You have to go to them. Got that?"  -George Carlin
 
2013-02-27 11:48:24 AM  

cgraves67: There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.


No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

\too bad it wasn't a float full of lawers, though
 
2013-02-27 11:49:45 AM  

CheekyMonkey: cgraves67: There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

\too bad it wasn't a float full of lawers, though


And by 'lawers' I mean 'lawyers'.
 
2013-02-27 11:50:39 AM  

Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right? And is it right that you can cross over the tracks but remaining stationary or walking along the tracks is considered tresspassing, right?


Trains can go right over anything pretty much. Cars, pedestrians, semi trucks, cats, dogs...

in all seriousness, I think if you bypass the crossing gates(Especially the gates), you have absolutely Zero case. Maybe even Less Than Zero.
 
2013-02-27 11:51:14 AM  

CheekyMonkey: No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.


"In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later."
 
2013-02-27 11:51:28 AM  

Pav: The fact that this case hasn't been thrown out of the court system already is a disgrace unless this article is leaving out the prosecutions entire case.


What prosecution? As near as I can tell from that article, it's a civil case (or cases) against the railroad.
 
2013-02-27 11:51:38 AM  
\CSB..
Back in my high school days, I was stuck riding the bus every morning with 2 of my younger brothers.
The band director was our bus driver, he was an older guy and was known for getting the bus stuck every week or so in the muddy back roads of our school district. Usually some farmer would come pull him out with a tractor.
Anyhow, there were numerous crossings on the route, and most only had the old crossing sign, no lights, and no gates.
It was a terribly foggy morning, so he stopped to peer into the fog with his owlish coke-bottle glasses. After a minute or two he proceeded across the tracks.....just in time for the 7 AM 200-car coal train on the MKT line.
It came barreling out of the fog at 50 mph.
I was instantly awake, and grabbed the nearest brother and ran for the rear emergency door.
Then the old bastard floored it, getting most of the way across, so we ran for the front of the bus.
Meanwhile the train engineer is leaning frantically on the horn, about to kill 3 school kids and a blind, old ass band director.
We made it across with feet to spare.
Never rode that damn bus again.
 
2013-02-27 11:51:45 AM  

Forced Perspective: It doesn't sound like the railroad is at fault at all.  Are they supposed to have somebody on each track crossing at all times, in case somebody decides to throw a parade without telling them?  Are there important details not mentioned in TFA?


The article clearly states that the victims are veterans. As you know, our master race of military men is superior to everyone else, so this is clearly the railroad's fault. If you disagree, you're a terrorist sympathizer.
 
2013-02-27 11:52:09 AM  

GoodyearPimp: "This item demonstrates how stupid the average American is. Every ninety minutes someone in this country is hit by a train. A train, okay? Trains are on tracks; they can't come and get you. They can't surprise you when you step off a curb. You have to go to them. Got that?"  -George Carlin


And they live IN A DESERT!!!
 
2013-02-27 11:52:45 AM  

Hack Patooey


Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


Unfortunately, so are the veterans.
 
2013-02-27 11:53:20 AM  

Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right? And is it right that you can cross over the tracks but remaining stationary or walking along the tracks is considered tresspassing, right?


If the pedestrians and people operating those vehicles wish to remain alive, then yes.
 
2013-02-27 11:53:36 AM  

Pav: The fact that this case hasn't been thrown out of the court system already is a disgrace unless this article is leaving out the prosecutions entire case.



The float driver, the guy who purposely drove onto the tracks after the gates and bells were active, already had his case thrown out by a jury, so now they're going to go after everyone they possibly can, because someone must pay.

"Justice" isn't about convicting the guilty, it's about fulfilling the victims desire for retribution.
 
2013-02-27 11:53:40 AM  
CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.
 
2013-02-27 11:54:22 AM  
The float driver, the ONE person responsible is the only one completely off the hook for some reason. I don't get it,
 
2013-02-27 11:55:12 AM  

Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.


b-b-but GUBMINT REGULASHUN!!!
 
2013-02-27 11:55:54 AM  
I dont understand why the train didnt just stop or swerve out of the way of the truck.
 
db2
2013-02-27 11:57:10 AM  

ausfahrk: db2: I don't want to sound like I support killing veterans or anything (I don't), but parades suck.

Normally, I'd agree, but watching a train hit one of the floats might make it worthwhile.


I guess I can't argue with that.
 
2013-02-27 11:58:12 AM  
the dumbass that drove the truck onto the tracks is the responsible party here.  Yet he gets a pass.   FTFA: Midland County District Attorney Teresa Clingman announced Jan. 9 that a grand jury had declined to indict the driver, Dale Andrew Hayden.

obviously, he has no money.
 
2013-02-27 11:58:30 AM  
Sounds like that float driver needed a little less training.
 
2013-02-27 11:58:47 AM  

The Bestest: CheekyMonkey: No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

"In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later."



Even at parade speeds, how did the driver not get off the rails in seven seconds? Did he panic and park on the tracks?

/saw someone do exactly that once, luckily it was only a railroad truck that set of the alarms
 
2013-02-27 11:59:11 AM  

IamPatSajak: The float driver, the ONE person responsible is the only one completely off the hook for some reason. I don't get it,


I'm guessing the lawyers somehow threw the trial when they decided they could get rich going after Big Rail. If it isn't that, then somehow the driver gained the sympathies of the jury.
 
2013-02-27 12:00:30 PM  
Woodcock? Is that you?
 
2013-02-27 12:00:41 PM  
I believe that here should be ramps installed at railway crossings allowing the train to fly over any vehicles or parade floats using the roadways.
 
2013-02-27 12:01:38 PM  

Pav: The fact that this case hasn't been thrown out of the court system already is a disgrace unless this article is leaving out the prosecutions entire case.




Res ipsa loquitur.
 
2013-02-27 12:02:17 PM  
I don't know, I was watching a cartoon once and the character was at a train crossing in the middle of nowhere, he looked to his right down the tracks and nothing for miles, did the same looking left and again nothing for miles but wouldn't you know it, as soon as he crossed the tracks a train from nowhere came barreling down the tracks and creamed him, supprisingly he didn't die but yeah it can happen.
 
2013-02-27 12:03:50 PM  
Looks like a safe enough ride... obviously they have no concern that anyone would ever consider ignoring the warning signals at the railroad crossing ahead... (source)

i.dailymail.co.uk
/hot like freshly crushed metal
 
2013-02-27 12:04:21 PM  

Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.


Haven't you ever seen a cop movie?  It takes a street-smart maverick who shoots from the hip and plays by his own rules to get anything done.  All those stuffy, pencil-pushin' "by-the-book" bureaucrats are getting too old for this shiat anyway, and need to be put in their place.
 
2013-02-27 12:05:13 PM  
EDITOR'S NOTE: As of 11 a.m. Wednesday, hundreds of people were accessing this story from social media links.

"STOP THE PRESSES!  STOP THE PRESSES!  I've just found out that someone is reading this shiat!"
 
2013-02-27 12:05:53 PM  

Loaf's Tray: Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.

Haven't you ever seen a cop movie?  It takes a street-smart maverick who shoots from the hip and plays by his own rules to get anything done.  All those stuffy, pencil-pushin' "by-the-book" bureaucrats are getting too old for this shiat anyway, and need to be put in their place.


You've completely ignored the rag-tag band of misfits with nothing left to lose.
 
2013-02-27 12:07:37 PM  

No Time To Explain: Uh, maybe I'm missing something, but how does one not notice a train coming, even with a large, loud crowd and absence of warning lights/bells?


Yeah, you're missing something.  There were bells and lights.
 
2013-02-27 12:07:38 PM  

Wellon Dowd: Wanted for questioning.


Thank god it wasn't the E units
 
2013-02-27 12:10:39 PM  

fat boy: Wellon Dowd: Wanted for questioning.

Thank god it wasn't the E units


Or 3985

upload.wikimedia.org
 
2013-02-27 12:10:54 PM  

godxam: FTFA: Midland County District Attorney Teresa Clingman announced Jan. 9 that a grand jury had declined to indict the driver, Dale Andrew Hayden.


I know train 'drivers' are often called 'engineers', but I read this as Dale was the train's driver, not the float's driver
 
2013-02-27 12:11:54 PM  

Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


This
 
2013-02-27 12:12:03 PM  

Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


But sadly, the driver of that vehicle was not charged.  Even though he's a moron that thought he could beat the train.  And, since someone has to be blamed (it's the American way), the railroad is going to be sued.
 
2013-02-27 12:12:16 PM  

Wellon Dowd: Wanted for questioning.

[i.imgur.com image 850x566]


Also wanted for questioning:

en.touhouwiki.net
 
2013-02-27 12:13:03 PM  

mafiageek1980: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

This


whatever
i came here for pics of trains off the rails or smashing cars or asplosions

disappointed
 
2013-02-27 12:13:17 PM  
A friend of mine lost her brother-in-law in this accident.  Pretty stupid senseless thing all around, but yeah, it sure doesn't seem like it was the railroad's fault.
 
2013-02-27 12:15:32 PM  

The Bestest: CheekyMonkey: No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

"In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later."


Goddamn poor reading comprehension.  Must be these new glasses.  Thanks.
 
2013-02-27 12:16:01 PM  
FTFA: In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later.Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.I rest my case. Also, normally you would inform the railroad and they would issue a slow order for the area. Tehachapi does this every year for their fourth of July festivities.
 
2013-02-27 12:16:28 PM  

stuffy: Trains are not known for stopping on a dime for a reason.


Exactly. I thought trains would be able to just dodge the floats.
 
2013-02-27 12:16:41 PM  

GoldSpider: GoodyearPimp: "This item demonstrates how stupid the average American is. Every ninety minutes someone in this country is hit by a train. A train, okay? Trains are on tracks; they can't come and get you. They can't surprise you when you step off a curb. You have to go to them. Got that?"  -George Carlin

And they live IN A DESERT!!!


fail
 
2013-02-27 12:17:08 PM  

ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.


Yeah, poor reading comprehension on my part, for which I will be suing my eye doctor, of course.
 
2013-02-27 12:17:18 PM  

godxam: the dumbass that drove the truck onto the tracks is the responsible party here.  Yet he gets a pass.   FTFA: Midland County District Attorney Teresa Clingman announced Jan. 9 that a grand jury had declined to indict the driver, Dale Andrew Hayden.

obviously, he has no money.


The fact that he was not indicted will not shield him from civil negligence liability.  Now, getting anything out of him . . .
 
2013-02-27 12:17:36 PM  
Hm. Android ate my carriage returns on my last post.
 
2013-02-27 12:18:37 PM  
What do you expect from Midland, Tx?

static.infowars.com
 
2013-02-27 12:18:38 PM  
Parades are idiotic.  I never saw the appeal to watching Shriners go by on a flatbed truck.  Local parades are just an excuse for local business to throw candy and hand out business cards.
 
2013-02-27 12:21:39 PM  

ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.


A gate, and completely flat land as far as the eye can see.  They would have seen the train coming for at least a minute before it actually reached them.  No possibility that it was behind a hill or curve.
 
2013-02-27 12:24:55 PM  

CheekyMonkey: CheekyMonkey: cgraves67: There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

\too bad it wasn't a float full of lawers, though

And by 'lawers' I mean 'lawyers'.


Can you imagine a world without lawyers?

25.media.tumblr.com
 
2013-02-27 12:25:06 PM  
I'm going to be driving my train swinging my arms and if you get your float in the way, it's not my fault.

In all honesty though how this could even remotely be UPRR's fault is beyond me.

/CHOO CHOO MOTHERFARKER
 
2013-02-27 12:25:42 PM  
Farking laws of physics, how do they work?
 
2013-02-27 12:26:06 PM  
"There are four lights!!"


Anyway...  I used to cross a fairly busy rail line on my way to and from work.  3 tracks.  Some commuter, some freight.  It was busy enough that I got stopped pretty much every day.  Once in a while, the gates would be down and the lights would be flashing, for longer than usual, but there was no apparent train coming from either direction.  Once in a while, someone would get impatient and actually navigate around the gates and cross - then like 2 seconds later a commuter train wizzes past at like 70mph!!!

It never ceased to amaze me how stupid and impatient people could be.  It also never ceased to amaze me that no one got hit (that I know of).
 
2013-02-27 12:26:30 PM  

Mikey1969: Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right? And is it right that you can cross over the tracks but remaining stationary or walking along the tracks is considered tresspassing, right?

Trains can go right over anything pretty much. Cars, pedestrians, semi trucks, cats, dogs...

in all seriousness, I think if you bypass the crossing gates(Especially the gates), you have absolutely Zero case. Maybe even Less Than Zero.


You (or your estate) should be liable for the years of therapy (and lost work?) the poor engineer will need to get over washing the pieces of you off the front of the train.
 
2013-02-27 12:26:39 PM  

Chariset: ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.

A gate, and completely flat land as far as the eye can see.  They would have seen the train coming for at least a minute before it actually reached them.  No possibility that it was behind a hill or curve.


The Parade Truthers are going to have a field day with this one.
 
2013-02-27 12:29:16 PM  
"For the railroad, it's a way to shift responsibly to other parties," Glasheen said.

You mean onto the parties that failed to do something even as basic as get a parade permit? Yeah, i cant see how they might be partially responsible.

How about getting a copy of the train schedule?
How about putting a guard/voulenteer at the crossing to keep an eye out?
How about NOT planning a slow-moving parade route over an at-grade crossing on an active line?
 
2013-02-27 12:30:02 PM  

NIXON YOU DOLT!!!!!: You (or your estate) should be liable for the years of therapy (and lost work?) the poor engineer will need to get over washing the pieces of you off the front of the train.


My old neighbor was an engineer, he hit 3 cars during his career, he told me there was not a worse feeling in the world when his train was about to hit a car and kill the occupants and there was absolutely nothing he could do about it.
 
2013-02-27 12:30:57 PM  

I_Can't_Believe_it's_not_Boutros: Loaf's Tray: Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.

Haven't you ever seen a cop movie?  It takes a street-smart maverick who shoots from the hip and plays by his own rules to get anything done.  All those stuffy, pencil-pushin' "by-the-book" bureaucrats are getting too old for this shiat anyway, and need to be put in their place.

You've completely ignored the rag-tag band of misfits with nothing left to lose.


The blame for this resides on the evil South African. But he has diplomatic immunity.
 
2013-02-27 12:31:05 PM  

JT_Goalie: godxam: FTFA: Midland County District Attorney Teresa Clingman announced Jan. 9 that a grand jury had declined to indict the driver, Dale Andrew Hayden.

I know train 'drivers' are often called 'engineers', but I read this as Dale was the train's driver, not the float's driver



According to the Daily Fail link originally posted above, Dale was the truck driver, not the engineer.
 
2013-02-27 12:31:09 PM  
I understand that some of the people killed were wounded veterans, but if I'm sitting on an open flatbed truck in the direct path of an oncoming train . . . my ass is flying off the back of that flatbed before the collision.  If I'm a paralyzed veteran in a wheelchair on the back of the train, I'll be rolling and faceplanting off of it.

Seriously, how were those people killed? Did the train leave the tracks and chase them after they jumped off?  Or were they all, "Welp, here comes a train, but I'd better stay put and see if we clear the tracks in time."
 
2013-02-27 12:35:00 PM  
But were they wearing their high visibility jackets?

You have to make sure to obey the proper safety protocols.
 
2013-02-27 12:35:19 PM  
Wow, it's not often that I get to side with a large corporation on Fark...
 
2013-02-27 12:36:33 PM  
Plaintiffs to be sentenced to get run over by another train for wasting the courts time.
 
2013-02-27 12:37:23 PM  
Wow.  It takes a lot of ineptitude to make a capitalistic megacorporate railroad company look like the innocent victim.

Congratulations, Midland, Texas.
 
2013-02-27 12:37:44 PM  

MadMattressMack: I_Can't_Believe_it's_not_Boutros: Loaf's Tray: Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.

Haven't you ever seen a cop movie?  It takes a street-smart maverick who shoots from the hip and plays by his own rules to get anything done.  All those stuffy, pencil-pushin' "by-the-book" bureaucrats are getting too old for this shiat anyway, and need to be put in their place.

You've completely ignored the rag-tag band of misfits with nothing left to lose.

The blame for this resides on the evil South African. But he has diplomatic immunity.


No good. The stuffy one who's getting too old for this shiat just revokes it.
 
2013-02-27 12:39:05 PM  
How about adding Isaac newton to the list, since he invented those pesky laws governing moving stuff like trains?
 
2013-02-27 12:39:05 PM  

Forced Perspective: It doesn't sound like the railroad is at fault at all.  Are they supposed to have somebody on each track crossing at all times, in case somebody decides to throw a parade without telling them?  Are there important details not mentioned in TFA?


urt.parsons.edu

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Side_Line_(NYCRR)
 
2013-02-27 12:39:18 PM  

Tom_Slick: Clearly the railroad is at fault, these trains just come out of nowhere, you never know when a train is just going to jump out in front of you. If only trains could be confined to a set, specific route, let's call it a track, then just maybe we would know where a train might be operating.


I can tell you've never been hunting. Tracks are something that is left behind so you use those to tell where something has been, not where it is going to be.
 
2013-02-27 12:39:48 PM  

CheekyMonkey: The Bestest: CheekyMonkey: No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

"In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later."

Goddamn poor reading comprehension.  Must be these new glasses.  Thanks.


There is a federal regulation that says a railroad crossing warning system has to be activated 20 seconds before a collision?
 
2013-02-27 12:39:59 PM  

Myria: Wow, it's not often that I get to side with a large corporation on Fark...




thisdistractedglobe.com

'Time of your life, eh kid? I hear Lana likes choo-choos.'
 
2013-02-27 12:41:59 PM  

Maud Dib: Most of the trains out there in West Texas are pretty got-damn long, and they take a mile or so to stop.
They come blowing through those podunk towns at a good clip.
It's crazy.


Like a tiger that goes crazy tiger and kills a person in its domain. A long, fast moving train sounds like a train doin' train stuff.
 
2013-02-27 12:43:02 PM  

Pvt. Walter Gibson: I understand that some of the people killed were wounded veterans, but if I'm sitting on an open flatbed truck in the direct path of an oncoming train . . . my ass is flying off the back of that flatbed before the collision.  If I'm a paralyzed veteran in a wheelchair on the back of the train, I'll be rolling and faceplanting off of it.

Seriously, how were those people killed? Did the train leave the tracks and chase them after they jumped off?  Or were they all, "Welp, here comes a train, but I'd better stay put and see if we clear the tracks in time."


As I recall most did or tried and at least one of the dead pushed his wife off.
 
2013-02-27 12:43:15 PM  

Tom_Slick: My old neighbor was an engineer, he hit 3 cars during his career, he told me there was not a worse feeling in the world when his train was about to hit a car and kill the occupants and there was absolutely nothing he could do about it.


It is never the train's fault.
 
2013-02-27 12:43:41 PM  

inner ted: mafiageek1980: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

This

whatever
i came here for pics of trains off the rails or smashing cars or asplosions

disappointed

Here's a video of trains hitting cars. I think they were all staged accidents so they could convince people that it's a bad idea to park on the railroad tracks, but it's an impressive video anyway. And there's an asplosion in the second crash.
 
2013-02-27 12:45:18 PM  
I had never before ever even considered that the railroad was at fault with this.  What the hell, people?
 
2013-02-27 12:45:28 PM  

TheGreatGazoo: My understanding is that trains pretty much always have the right of way and as long as the crossing lights are working you are automatically at fault if you get hit.


Trains always have the right of way, it takes them miles to stop.
 
2013-02-27 12:51:51 PM  
Nobody pays attention to stop signs or railroad crossings in Midland

www.firstladies.org
 
2013-02-27 12:52:57 PM  
Well, looking over these comments, it seems pretty clear that consensus among the fark-reading and comment -posting of us is that it was NOT the railways fault, and this is nothing but a naked money grab from the deepest pockets of those involved.


Seems pretty clear that a like-minded jury would agree fairly quickly.  And given that, hardly a good reason to take it to trial.

Now, hands up:  How many here are going to try to duck jury duty next time they are called?
 
2013-02-27 12:53:39 PM  
FTA: a grand jury had declined to indict the driver, Dale Andrew Hayden


Don't see how the driver isn't culpable here.
I wouldn't think Dale was some out of town guy they hired in for the event. Could have been, but doubtful.
If you live anywhere in that area you know full well about the train traffic. Article states that the train was doing 62mph. Trains don't go that fast unless there are guarded, clear and safe crossings. And anyone living there would be used to the volume and activity of the trains.
Clearly the driver should have heeded to safety over not wanting to fall behind in the parade.
And as the article states the warnings were active and functioning properly.
Maybe 20secs warning for high speed trains should be looked at. Seems a short warning to me. But that isn't the trains fault. That's the NTSB that sets that.
I'm thinking Dale is a good ole boy, and nobody wants him to feel any worse than he already feels for being an incompetent moran that shouldn't have been driving.
 
2013-02-27 12:53:39 PM  
Did Adam Lanza's mother organize this?
 
2013-02-27 12:55:07 PM  
www.prorail.nl

If you wish to stay alive, wait a while.

It's the latest in Darwin orevention awarenes. Still, of someone is stupid enough to go and try and cross a railroad track while all the alarms and lights are going off, you might just deserve what you get. Too bad about the passengers and the train engineer.

/Does not rhyme in English
 
2013-02-27 01:00:56 PM  

bedtundy: CheekyMonkey: CheekyMonkey: cgraves67: There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

\too bad it wasn't a float full of lawers, though

And by 'lawers' I mean 'lawyers'.

Can you imagine a world without lawyers?

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x382]



Yeah, it was called "Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome."
 
2013-02-27 01:01:47 PM  

coldcuts: Well, looking over these comments, it seems pretty clear that consensus among the fark-reading and comment -posting of us is that it was NOT the railways fault, and this is nothing but a naked money grab from the deepest pockets of those involved.


Seems pretty clear that a like-minded jury would agree fairly quickly.  And given that, hardly a good reason to take it to trial.

Now, hands up:  How many here are going to try to duck jury duty next time they are called?


Since my employer compensates my pay while I am doing my civic duty, the money from jury duty is a bonus (not much of one, but still).

/aware that most employers don't do this
//if they did jurors might actually pay more attention.
///something about threes...
 
2013-02-27 01:02:11 PM  

LargeCanine: In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later.

Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

The idiot driving the float is clearly at fault.


I'm going to lay blame on the large-breasted MILF sitting in the lawn chair like Tammy 2.
 
2013-02-27 01:04:13 PM  
There's a crossing near my house that's somewhat set back from the intersection of two 4 lane city streets that I have to cross every day. If you're headed east, there is room for exactly one car between the intersection and the tracks, yet every single farking day I see some dumbass cross them instead of stopping at the stop line on the other side of the tracks while waiting for the red light, blisfully unaware that the ass end of their SUV is going to get clipped at 60mph if a train happens to come through.

People are generally morons.
 
2013-02-27 01:04:59 PM  

misterfweem: Footage of the accident has just been posted to YouTube.


..!.,
 
2013-02-27 01:06:54 PM  
They should have sort of warning device installed, with lights and bells, to let people know there's a train coming.
 
2013-02-27 01:06:56 PM  

GoodyearPimp: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

I will be suing Coca Cola because they didn't stop me from opening and consuming gallons of their product.


If you really want to get messed up, purchase 5 gallons of the syrup from Smart and Final and start drinking that straight up.
 
2013-02-27 01:10:34 PM  

elkman: inner ted: mafiageek1980: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

This

whatever
i came here for pics of trains off the rails or smashing cars or asplosions

disappointed
Here's a video of trains hitting cars. I think they were all staged accidents so they could convince people that it's a bad idea to park on the railroad tracks, but it's an impressive video anyway. And there's an asplosion in the second crash.


smiley face
 
2013-02-27 01:11:04 PM  

buzzcut73: There's a crossing near my house that's somewhat set back from the intersection of two 4 lane city streets that I have to cross every day. If you're headed east, there is room for exactly one car between the intersection and the tracks, yet every single farking day I see some dumbass cross them instead of stopping at the stop line on the other side of the tracks while waiting for the red light, blisfully unaware that the ass end of their SUV is going to get clipped at 60mph if a train happens to come through.

People are generally morons.


Sounds like Imperial Blvd near where I work.  It's ok, the railroad is actually disabled right now.  It's possible a train will come through but if it doesn't strike your car it'll strike the railroad ties sticking out of the tracks a little ways down.
 
2013-02-27 01:12:19 PM  

Chariset: ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.

A gate, and completely flat land as far as the eye can see.  They would have seen the train coming for at least a minute before it actually reached them.  No possibility that it was behind a hill or curve.


Of course, the plaintiffs will take this fact and turn it around to claim that the train driver should have seen the parade and started putting on the brakes. Of course, doing so probably would not have changed the result since the reaction likely would have been, "we're cool, he's slowing down for us."
 
2013-02-27 01:13:49 PM  
As someone who has organized floats I have to say there was a lot of stupid to go around. But not the train folks. You have to let them know. It's not rocket science.
/Never got to hold up the Amtrak though. Just CN.
//Disappointed.
 
2013-02-27 01:13:53 PM  
When are they going to limit the number of cars a locomotive can pull?  And require background checks for engineers and a 5-day cooling off period before they can buy a train?

/and ban assault trains too
i.ytimg.com
 
2013-02-27 01:14:10 PM  

DownDaRiver: Maybe 20secs warning for high speed trains should be looked at. Seems a short warning to me. But that isn't the trains fault. That's the NTSB that sets that.


Why would the speed of the train matter as to the length of the warning? If the train can't stop in time, it can't stop whether it is doing 40 or 60. 20 seconds is 20 seconds despite the speed of the train.
 
2013-02-27 01:14:55 PM  
oakleym82
That's street running, a big thing down South & parts of PA & KY.  Most of the lawyers have made it a thing of the past, if not very slow moving.  SP used to run freights after hours down the old Pacific Electric tracks on Santa Monica Blvd's median.  Steve Martin would have his audience @ the Troubadour hop a flatcar & ride to La Cienega.  A waitress @ Duke's Tropicana Cafe told me they'd always have to wake up Tom Waits & Chuck E Weiss when they passed out on them so the train wouldn't run 'em over

Tom_Slick  Or 3985
UP keeps one last running big-ass Centennials they used to haul their corporate train.  In Louisiana it hit a dumptruck in 2000 & actually killed a higher-up from Omaha when debris smashed thru the loco's door. Here's Uncle Pete's "Desert Victory" SD40 painted to honor their employees who fought in Desert Shield/Storm.  Yes I realize that's 3 Middle Eastern wars ago...www.railpictures.net
 
2013-02-27 01:15:55 PM  
Years ago a friend was driving and we crossed some tracks.  I looked out my window into the grill of a train maybe 10 ffet away tops.

We got over the tracks and it screamed by behinds us.

Then went and bought new pants.
 
2013-02-27 01:16:37 PM  

Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


Please for the love of God put me on that jury so I can hastily suppress a snort every time the claimants' lawyer tries to say anything.

If you have done something that a third-grader knows not to do, your lawsuit should be thrown out immediately with prejudice.
 
2013-02-27 01:17:46 PM  

harlock: FTFA: In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later.Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.I rest my case. Also, normally you would inform the railroad and they would issue a slow order for the area. Tehachapi does this every year for their fourth of July festivities.



I miss Tehachapi! I grew up there and don't get back nearly enough.
 
2013-02-27 01:19:53 PM  

the ha ha guy: "Justice" isn't about convicting the guilty, it's about fulfilling the victims desire for retribution.


Pretty sure it's about "gettin' paid", not "retribution".

part of a weekend of hunting and shopping for veterans wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq and their wives.

Wait. You can purchase veterans? What's the going rate?
 
2013-02-27 01:20:24 PM  
Midland-Odessa, the land of "ohl" fields, boozin', meth and Republicans....odd that they want to blame Union Pacific.
 
2013-02-27 01:25:50 PM  
In a train vs. flatbed fight it would appear the train is the winner. Seriously how the fark do you manage to be that stupid without dying long before getting hit by a train?
 
2013-02-27 01:27:52 PM  

oldfarthenry: I believe that here should be ramps installed at railway crossings allowing the train to fly over any vehicles or parade floats using the roadways.


You're thinkin' too small...

basementrejects.com
 
2013-02-27 01:29:26 PM  
I don't know.... those trains can be pretty sneaky. Even if you do see the flashing lights and cross bars and hear the ringing bells and blaring train whistle, you really just never know for sure where the damn things are gonna be.
 
2013-02-27 01:30:20 PM  

Great_Milenko: Shvetz:

But it's for  veterans. How can you expect people to participate in their fetish of worshiping our culture of death if you have a bunch of rules to follow.


Hey guy. MOST people who join the military don't end up killing anyone ever, or even shooting at people.

/paperwork
//lots and lots of paperwork.
 
2013-02-27 01:30:36 PM  

A Terrible Human: In a train vs. flatbed fight it would appear the train is the winner. Seriously how the fark do you manage to be that stupid without dying long before getting hit by a train?


Locamote Man, Locamote Man.
Locamote Man hates Flatbed Man.
They have a fight. Locamote Wins.
Locamote Man.
 
2013-02-27 01:30:48 PM  
My first job out of college was actually working for Union Pacific.  I drove one of the trucks that can get on the train tracks to inspect areas with no easilly accessible roads.  It amazed me the number of people who go around the gates when they are down and who flat out ignore the massive speeding train bearing down on them so they can get some place 10-15 minutes sooner.   I was inspecting a gate one time when it dropped and a school bus went around it to avoid having to wait.   Stopping a train going 60 mph with 100 coal cars behind it is like trying to stop the Titanic with a tug boat, eventually it will happen but not when you need it to.
 
2013-02-27 01:30:57 PM  
Wow, that whole town reeks of fail.
 
2013-02-27 01:31:18 PM  
In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later.
Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.


Sure, Union Pacific is to blame for this.  Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.
 
2013-02-27 01:31:24 PM  

Maud Dib: Most of the trains out there in West Texas are pretty got-damn long, and they take a mile or so to stop.
They come blowing through those podunk towns at a good clip.
It's crazy.


I see only one solution to this problem. Slow the trains down to 10 mph. Sure, it'll take 2 weeks to go coast to coast, but I'm certain those who use freight trains to forward their cargo will understand that it's of utmost importance to keep parade floats safe when crossing the tracks.

/think of the children
//and the veterans
 
2013-02-27 01:31:45 PM  
I know a woman from Midland.  Sweet kind gal, but yeah, not very bright.  tfa isn't helping the rest of the town.
 
2013-02-27 01:32:25 PM  

special20: Looks like a safe enough ride... obviously they have no concern that anyone would ever consider ignoring the warning signals at the railroad crossing ahead... (source)

[i.dailymail.co.uk image 634x420]
/hot like freshly crushed metal


Gotta love the Daily Fail: One of the article's captions reads "Pubic safety officials huddle after the trailer was struck"

/wonders exactly what a pubic safety official is
 
2013-02-27 01:32:46 PM  

Mikey1969: Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right? And is it right that you can cross over the tracks but remaining stationary or walking along the tracks is considered tresspassing, right?

Trains can go right over anything pretty much. Cars, pedestrians, semi trucks, cats, dogs...

in all seriousness, I think if you bypass the crossing gates(Especially the gates), you have absolutely Zero case. Maybe even Less Than Zero.


I've been told train conductors fear only three things on the trains ahead.

1. A tank
2. A gasoline truck
3. Another train

All other obstacles are someone else's problem.
 
2013-02-27 01:33:17 PM  
The thought of a bunch of USS-Iwo Jima hats loaded with small pins and rascal scooter parts flying through air amid streamers and confetti raining down is a hilarious mental image.

Sorry a Darwin Award candidate took other lives, and not his own through negligence.
 
2013-02-27 01:33:45 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: oldfarthenry: I believe that here should be ramps installed at railway crossings allowing the train to fly over any vehicles or parade floats using the roadways.

You're thinkin' too small...

[basementrejects.com image 450x295]


So are you.

rookery.s3.amazonaws.com
 
2013-02-27 01:35:42 PM  
Also it turns out a dump truck is better for stopping a train.

www.pajiba.com
 
2013-02-27 01:35:57 PM  

poe_zlaw: I dont understand why the train didnt just stop or swerve out of the way of the truck.


Because it was an older model locomotive. No ABS.
 
2013-02-27 01:37:21 PM  

LeroyBourne: I know a woman from Midland.  Sweet kind gal, but yeah, not very bright.  tfa isn't helping the rest of the town.


Maybe there's something in the water sorta like that one Stephen King short story The End of the Whole Mess?
 
2013-02-27 01:38:24 PM  

DownDaRiver: Maybe 20secs warning for high speed trains should be looked at. Seems a short warning to me. But that isn't the trains fault. That's the NTSB that sets that.


It doesn't  sound like much time, but if you count it out, it's longer than it sounds like it'd be. That'd should be enough time to clear almost anything from the track, even starting from stationary and giving a few seconds to realize WTF is going on. About the only time I can think of when it wouldn't would be if the vehicle is actually  stuck, in which case a longer time is unlikely to help. (I guess you could have other traffic blocking it in, but that's a different problem and why did you stop on the railroad tracks anyway.) 20 seconds seems like a reasonable compromise to me between not blocking traffic for an unnecessary amount of time and provoking tempting fate vs giving enough warning.

(Though maybe there should be something like a yellow light: give a yellow light 10 or 20 seconds before the red.)

The_Homeless_Guy: Why would the speed of the train matter as to the length of the warning? If the train can't stop in time, it can't stop whether it is doing 40 or 60. 20 seconds is 20 seconds despite the speed of the train.


Um, because maybe it  could stop in time at a lower speed, or at least give more additional time? Your second sentence is true, but it's true because the premise  isn't. For instance, trains come through here at, I dunno, probably 10-20 mph. I'm not sure what their stopping distance is, but they  do occasionally stop to allow someone to throw a switch. (Well, they did, but then that switch and one of the tracks was removed.)  I suspect at that low speed, it'd actually be able to stop before hitting something on the tracks, so in some sense a shorter warning would suffice.

It's a similar reason to why you'll often see yellow lights that are only a second or two long on residential streets but see yellow lights that will last for five seconds (or even more, sometimes) on highways. (Well, until they put a red light camera there at least.)
 
2013-02-27 01:40:07 PM  

Mikey1969: Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right? And is it right that you can cross over the tracks but remaining stationary or walking along the tracks is considered tresspassing, right?

Trains can go right over anything pretty much. Cars, pedestrians, semi trucks, cats, dogs...

in all seriousness, I think if you bypass the crossing gates(Especially the gates), you have absolutely Zero case. Maybe even Less Than Zero.


Cows. I don't know why but trains are cow magnets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_iRtXDwu4U
 
2013-02-27 01:40:13 PM  

SurelyShirley


poe_zlaw: I dont understand why the train didnt just stop or swerve out of the way of the truck.

Because it was an older model locomotive. No ABS.


That's ridiculous. How the hell is a train going to do sit-ups??
 
2013-02-27 01:42:14 PM  

Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.


Ban patriotism.   It engenders dangerous feelings of entitlement and security.
 
2013-02-27 01:43:01 PM  

PooperMcSlides: Benjamin Orr: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

No no no... Clearly the railroad is to blame since they have the most money

You couldn't have said it better. This is why insurance costs so much in the US, people often go after the deepest pockets rather than accepting responsibility for their own actions or placing the blame where it should be.


Thank you Captian Obvious.
 
2013-02-27 01:45:38 PM  
 
2013-02-27 01:46:29 PM  

The_Homeless_Guy: DownDaRiver: Maybe 20secs warning for high speed trains should be looked at. Seems a short warning to me. But that isn't the trains fault. That's the NTSB that sets that.

Why would the speed of the train matter as to the length of the warning? If the train can't stop in time, it can't stop whether it is doing 40 or 60. 20 seconds is 20 seconds despite the speed of the train.


Maybe you want to rethink your question.
Regardless of object. Think, getting from point A to B, and how speed plays in to that.
Also, the actual warning of the guards were only 13secs.

Still doesn't answer why a driver isn't responsible to be observent and and take caution when crossing RR tracks.
 
2013-02-27 01:47:03 PM  

SpaceBison: Mikey1969: Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right? And is it right that you can cross over the tracks but remaining stationary or walking along the tracks is considered tresspassing, right?

Trains can go right over anything pretty much. Cars, pedestrians, semi trucks, cats, dogs...

in all seriousness, I think if you bypass the crossing gates(Especially the gates), you have absolutely Zero case. Maybe even Less Than Zero.

Cows. I don't know why but trains are cow magnets. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l_iRtXDwu4U


Holy NSFW guy!
 
2013-02-27 01:47:33 PM  
MBooda:
So are you.

[rookery.s3.amazonaws.com image 624x411]


Ahem...

blog.animeinstrumentality.net
 
2013-02-27 01:53:43 PM  

ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.


Wow, I was assuming it must have been in the middle of town with buildings blocking the view down the tracks or something. Clear view both ways, warning gates - not sure how this could in any way, shape or form be the railroad's fault unless the gate wasn't working, and by the sound of it it has been established that the gates were working.
 
2013-02-27 01:56:48 PM  

coldcuts: Well, looking over these comments, it seems pretty clear that consensus among the fark-reading and comment -posting of us is that it was NOT the railways fault, and this is nothing but a naked money grab from the deepest pockets of those involved.


Seems pretty clear that a like-minded jury would agree fairly quickly.  And given that, hardly a good reason to take it to trial.

Now, hands up:  How many here are going to try to duck jury duty next time they are called?


i877.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-27 01:57:20 PM  
Darwined.

I get a special kick when some asshole on a snowmobile does something stupid enough to lose their own life.
But racing a train?
I'm going to send the funeral home a wreath that says, :"You dumbass. You really deserved it. "
 
2013-02-27 01:59:09 PM  
1.bp.blogspot.com

Wanted for questioning
 
2013-02-27 01:59:25 PM  
xa.yimg.com
OHHHH IIII LOVE A PARAAAADE
 
2013-02-27 01:59:33 PM  

ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.


Even if there wasn't a gate, take a look at that picture. 

Harvey Manfrenjensenjen: Chariset: ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.

A gate, and completely flat land as far as the eye can see.  They would have seen the train coming for at least a minute before it actually reached them.  No possibility that it was behind a hill or curve.

Of course, the plaintiffs will take this fact and turn it around to claim that the train driver should have seen the parade and started putting on the brakes. Of course, doing so probably would not have changed the result since the reaction likely would have been, "we're cool, he's slowing down for us."


The float went over the tracks after the lights came on and while the gate was lowering.  The engineer, then realizing he was on a collision course with the salt of the earth, then pulled the emergency brake.  The engineer had all of nine seconds or so to stop the train.

I haven't seen anything that says how much that train was pulling, only that it was going 60 some odd miles per hour when it hit - but I doubt even just the engine could have gone from 60 to 0 in 9 seconds.
 
2013-02-27 02:01:06 PM  

GoodyearPimp: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

I will be suing Coca Cola because they didn't stop me from opening and consuming gallons of their product.


Clearly the railroad is to blame here, since they make it their business to regularly invite parades to cross their tracks as often as possible.
 
2013-02-27 02:01:38 PM  

I_Can't_Believe_it's_not_Boutros: Why don't they look?

/gentle pressure


Can you identify this bucket of veterans?
 
2013-02-27 02:04:08 PM  

Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.
 
2013-02-27 02:05:26 PM  

vudukungfu: I'm going to send the funeral home a wreath that says, :"You dumbass. You really deserved it. "



The driver lived. The only victims were the passengers on the back of the flatbed trailer.

I suppose you could make the case that those on the trailer could have jumped off rather than sit there and wait for the train to stop, but they had no part in the initial decision to race the train.
 
2013-02-27 02:06:01 PM  

Ned Stark: Plaintiffs to be sentenced to get run over by another train for wasting the courts time.


I've never met you before, but suddenly, I like you and the way you think.
 
2013-02-27 02:06:17 PM  

TheGreatGazoo: I live near Atlanta, and Marietta, Kennesaw, and Acworth all have big festivals pretty much on the train tracks.  Presumably they tell the railroad because the engineers generally start blowing the horn earlier than normal and people still screw around getting off the tracks.

My understanding is that trains pretty much always have the right of way and as long as the crossing lights are working you are automatically at fault if you get hit.


Actually, I think the tracks are owned by the railroad, so if you are loitering on them you are technically trespassing.

Railroads have deep pockets, that's the only reason this case is happening.  I think the railroads should counter-sue for damages, time taken inspecting equipment, counseling for the engineer, cleaning blood off their trains, and legal costs.  That's what needs to be done to counter this kind of b.s.
 
2013-02-27 02:06:55 PM  

PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.


It did.  But you don't just stop several hundred/thousand tons of metal in 9 seconds.

/Heck, my car probably couldn't go from 60 to 0 in 9 seconds.
 
2013-02-27 02:10:26 PM  

PsiChick: That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.



As a general rule of thumb, it takes a loaded train over a mile to stop at moderate speeds. Under the best conditions, an engineer can only see that the track is obstructed less than a mile ahead.

Outside of a "derail train" button, there was nothing more the engineer could do to prevent the collusion.
 
2013-02-27 02:12:34 PM  

GoodyearPimp: "This item demonstrates how stupid the average American is. Every ninety minutes someone in this country is hit by a train. A train, okay? Trains are on tracks; they can't come and get you. They can't surprise you when you step off a curb. You have to go to them. Got that?"  -George Carlin


They're called suicides George.
 
2013-02-27 02:13:35 PM  

PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.


The only thing that could keep the human in board from watching the train crush someone would be a set of mini blinds. Trains can't just stop when they are going 60 mph
 
2013-02-27 02:14:14 PM  

Englebert Slaptyback: SurelyShirley

poe_zlaw: I dont understand why the train didnt just stop or swerve out of the way of the truck.

Because it was an older model locomotive. No ABS.


That's ridiculous. How the hell is a train going to do sit-ups??


I used to train all the time doing situps. If I can do it, why can't others?
 
2013-02-27 02:14:35 PM  

ladyfortuna: Great_Milenko: Shvetz:

But it's for  veterans. How can you expect people to participate in their fetish of worshiping our culture of death if you have a bunch of rules to follow.

Hey guy. MOST people who join the military don't end up killing anyone ever, or even shooting at people.



Or doing anything whatsoever that warrants the automatic hero worshiping that is lauded upon them.
 
2013-02-27 02:15:32 PM  

PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.


trains have brakes...and (literally) tons of mass.  takes them quite a while to stop.  it's a big part of why you stay out of the way of trains.
/thought everyone knew this
 
2013-02-27 02:15:40 PM  

evaned: It's a similar reason to why you'll often see yellow lights that are only a second or two long on residential streets but see yellow lights that will last for five seconds (or even more, sometimes) on highways. (Well, until they put a red light camera there at least.)


The train was travelling about 91 feet/second. 
In 20 seconds that train covered 1818 feet or more than a third of mile. 6 farking football fields.

A train going 30 mph will only travel 900 or so feet in the same amount of time.

Float driver may not have even seen the train when he started across.
Given that he was part of a parade he may not have been able to just 'gun it' to clear the tracks.
And if people were standing around the tracks maybe he thought someone just set the warnings off somehow. People are really uneducated on how those crossings are set up to not have false-positives. 
Still stupid to cross.
 
2013-02-27 02:17:55 PM  
I hate a parade
 
2013-02-27 02:20:37 PM  

dryknife: Nobody pays attention to stop signs or railroad crossings in Midland

[www.firstladies.org image 197x288]


Your shot. It is incredibly cheap. Go stand in the corner.
 
2013-02-27 02:20:46 PM  

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.


As a general rule of thumb, it takes a loaded train over a mile to stop at moderate speeds. Under the best conditions, an engineer can only see that the track is obstructed less than a mile ahead.

Outside of a "derail train" button, there was nothing more the engineer could do to prevent the collusion.


Ah. Okay, yeah, that makes more sense.

/I thought it was a shorter distance\more visible.
 
2013-02-27 02:21:25 PM  
I've worked on a few rail construction projects.  The best was putting in a new pedestrian bridge (and it's footings) about ten feet from a busy freight/commuter line.  We have permits, flagging, all the gear, a dedicated CN flag man who is in radio contact with central dispatch and the commuter engineers.

Safety rule #1?  Don't step on the tracks.  And when a train is coming, all work stops and you back off the track, never letting your eyes off the damn train.

Trains are big.  You are small.  Train wins.  Everytime.
 
2013-02-27 02:22:02 PM  
It's a nitpick, but this is a common misunderstanding:

"Right of way" does not mean "Entitlement to go first". "Right of way" simply means "road". Simple physics says the train will ALWAYS get the right of way, even if your float was already in it.
 
2013-02-27 02:22:31 PM  

ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.


I also see unobstructed view for miles there! The float driver should be knee-capped and left on the tracks. Trains are the next best thing to a force of nature, you don't fark with trains.

Perhaps he was paralyzed with fear? <CSB> I remember once when I was a kid I was crossing a railroad track with some friends, a low speed train was around 150m away. I made the mistake of looking at the train while crossing and everything went still for a second. It was like my brain decided the train was a giant predator and there was no way to escape it, it was inevitable. Luckily it only lasted a second or so and I got the fark out of the way.</CSB>

/I was like 10 at the time
 
2013-02-27 02:23:04 PM  

Perducci: ladyfortuna: Great_Milenko: Shvetz:

But it's for  veterans. How can you expect people to participate in their fetish of worshiping our culture of death if you have a bunch of rules to follow.

Hey guy. MOST people who join the military don't end up killing anyone ever, or even shooting at people.


Or doing anything whatsoever that warrants the automatic hero worshiping that is lauded upon them.


I never asked for any of that and it actually makes me uncomfortable when it happens. I don't wear my army coat to the grocery any more after the kid at the checkout made a big deal out of it. I have gotten free coffee a couple of times while in uniform, but they basically force it on you at that point. Probably half my Army friends feel the same way.
 
2013-02-27 02:23:26 PM  

the ha ha guy: vudukungfu: I'm going to send the funeral home a wreath that says, :"You dumbass. You really deserved it. "

The driver lived. The only victims were the passengers on the back of the flatbed trailer.

I suppose you could make the case that those on the trailer could have jumped off rather than sit there and wait for the train to stop,


Many of them did, or at least tried.

Trains go fast.


the ha ha guy: PsiChick: That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

As a general rule of thumb, it takes a loaded train over a mile to stop at moderate speeds. Under the best conditions, an engineer can only see that the track is obstructed less than a mile ahead.

Outside of a "derail train" button, there was nothing more the engineer could do to prevent the collusion.


You need to talk to Michael Bay.  That's like three movies' worth of plot right there.
 
2013-02-27 02:25:39 PM  

bionicjoe: Float driver may not have even seen the train when he started across.



I'm not sure the driver could claim low visibility.
http://goo.gl/maps/rq2f4

Also, the NTSB says that the driver drove across AFTER the gate started lowering. Even if he did think it was a false positive, what was he trying to do, use the gate to scrape all the passengers off the back of his truck?
 
2013-02-27 02:28:56 PM  

bedtundy: CheekyMonkey: CheekyMonkey: cgraves67: There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

\too bad it wasn't a float full of lawers, though

And by 'lawers' I mean 'lawyers'.

Can you imagine a world without lawyers?

[25.media.tumblr.com image 500x382]


I don't have to. See drug dealers don't have access to lawyers or contract law to enforce their deals. That is why they use guns. In a world with out lawyers everyone would have to settle disputes the old fashioned way. Anyone who does not understand that obviously is too stupid to live.
 
2013-02-27 02:30:11 PM  
My guess is, the float driver had enough of living in Slodeatha, and decided to end it all quickly when he saw the chance.
 
2013-02-27 02:30:35 PM  
So, can someone explain what it is, exactly, that UP should have done differently (according to plaintiffs, etc.)?
 
2013-02-27 02:31:10 PM  
These trains are clearly at fault.  We should limit where they can drive.  Maybe we could even put them on rails, and wherever they crossed civilian traffic we could have warning bells.

If only there was some system where people could pool there money ahead of time so that when tragedy strikes the people who need it could have money.  We could call it insurance or something, and we could use it when no one is at fault.


Clearly, we need to just give all our money to the driver of the float.  If we give him lots of money, everyone can actually sue the correct person in this case.
 
2013-02-27 02:32:03 PM  

PsiChick: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.


As a general rule of thumb, it takes a loaded train over a mile to stop at moderate speeds. Under the best conditions, an engineer can only see that the track is obstructed less than a mile ahead.

Outside of a "derail train" button, there was nothing more the engineer could do to prevent the collusion.

Ah. Okay, yeah, that makes more sense.

/I thought it was a shorter distance\more visible.


Nope.  If it's literally just the train engine cruising along all by it's lonesome it probably wouldn't take all that long to stop, but the amount of momentum a mile+ long train has when traveling at full speed is absolutely obscene.  There is no braking mechanism on the planet capable of stopping that much force on a dime.
 
2013-02-27 02:36:07 PM  

China White Tea: So, can someone explain what it is, exactly, that UP should have done differently (according to plaintiffs, etc.)?


At the very least they should have put in crossing gates that covered all lanes of traffic, at most they should have put in an overpass so that the trains and cars could never occupy the same space at the same time.
 
2013-02-27 02:37:23 PM  

Jormungandr: It was like my brain decided the train was a giant predator and there was no way to escape it, it was inevitable.


Hopefully, you will be standing next to me the next time one of those pesky T-Rex's pops out of nowhere and catches my scent.

/Don't have to be the fastest runner.
//Just don't want to be the slowest.
///Slashie Trifecta
 
2013-02-27 02:39:06 PM  
"EDITOR'S NOTE: As of 11 a.m. Wednesday, hundreds of people were accessing this story from social media links."

Uh... okay.

Nice to know.
 
2013-02-27 02:39:38 PM  
The float driver probably thought he was a god because he was in a parade. "Fark you train. You'll have to wait as I'm... in a PARADE!" If he's not stopping for a train he wouldn't have stopped for ambulances, pedestrians, fire trucks, or even buildings. Give that guy a parade route that went through the mall and he'd probably just drive it. After all, parades have right of way over EVERYTHING.
 
2013-02-27 02:39:51 PM  
Gay Super bowl ruined and dead soldiers = Fred Phelps creaming his pants
 
2013-02-27 02:41:18 PM  
And now everyone on that truck is afflicted with sleep, poison, darkness, silence, slow, stop, berserk, confuse, doom, petrify, and vit 0.

What a tragedy.
 
2013-02-27 02:41:35 PM  

Non-evil Monkey: PsiChick: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.


As a general rule of thumb, it takes a loaded train over a mile to stop at moderate speeds. Under the best conditions, an engineer can only see that the track is obstructed less than a mile ahead.

Outside of a "derail train" button, there was nothing more the engineer could do to prevent the collusion.

Ah. Okay, yeah, that makes more sense.

/I thought it was a shorter distance\more visible.

Nope.  If it's literally just the train engine cruising along all by it's lonesome it probably wouldn't take all that long to stop, but the amount of momentum a mile+ long train has when traveling at full speed is absolutely obscene.  There is no braking mechanism on the planet capable of stopping that much force on a dime.


Also train wheels are steal just like the rails, there is very little traction compared to rubber tires on a road.
 
2013-02-27 02:41:56 PM  

Non-evil Monkey: PsiChick: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.


As a general rule of thumb, it takes a loaded train over a mile to stop at moderate speeds. Under the best conditions, an engineer can only see that the track is obstructed less than a mile ahead.

Outside of a "derail train" button, there was nothing more the engineer could do to prevent the collusion.

Ah. Okay, yeah, that makes more sense.

/I thought it was a shorter distance\more visible.

Nope.  If it's literally just the train engine cruising along all by it's lonesome it probably wouldn't take all that long to stop, but the amount of momentum a mile+ long train has when traveling at full speed is absolutely obscene.   There is no braking mechanism on the planet capable of stopping that much force on a dime.


challengeaccepted.jpg

What would it take to stop an out-of-control freight train using only b.b. guns?

(It's a great read.  It turns out to be theoretically possible, but you must (as the author puts it), "relax the BB gun requirement".)
 
2013-02-27 02:48:00 PM  

No Time To Explain: Uh, maybe I'm missing something, but how does one not notice a train coming, even with a large, loud crowd and absence of warning lights/bells?


Are you around trains a lot? It's pretty easy, actually.
 
2013-02-27 02:52:54 PM  

PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.



Sometimes, posts simply leave me speechless. Often, they're authored by PN. I don't think that this is the same sort of situation.
 
2013-02-27 02:54:16 PM  
I don't know who is at fault. After reading I don't think the railroad did anything wrong.  I don't understand why you would have a parade over train tracks.  I looked a google's satellite images and the town doesn't have squat on one side of the tracks.
 
2013-02-27 02:57:27 PM  

BigNumber12: PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.


Sometimes, posts simply leave me speechless. Often, they're authored by PN. I don't think that this is the same sort of situation.


As I said--TFA didn't elaborate, and I didn't realize that they couldn't see them, so the only logical explanation I could come up with was that there  weren't brakes. There are very few humans who would willingly hit someone with a train.
 
2013-02-27 02:57:55 PM  
Y'all slackin'.

theinspirationroom.comAlso, there was a big "accident" here a few years back when some teens tried to cross the tracks and got hit by an oncoming. There were two tracks right next to each other and they crossed in front of the stopped train, which was blocking their view. I think in all 12 people died. It took them days to re-assemble all the parts and identify them.

Here's the wiki.
 
2013-02-27 03:00:05 PM  

NicoFinn: No Time To Explain: Uh, maybe I'm missing something, but how does one not notice a train coming, even with a large, loud crowd and absence of warning lights/bells?

Are you around trains a lot? It's pretty easy, actually.


Really? I don't live in Midland where this happened, but I live 6 blocks from those very same train tracks. Aside from the lights, bells and crossing bars those trains begin blowing their horn a half mile from every intersection, which basically amounts to them blowing all the way through town, even inside my house 6 blocks away its pretty hard to miss.
 
2013-02-27 03:00:12 PM  

lendog: I don't know who is at fault.


Obama. It's always Obama.
 
2013-02-27 03:01:18 PM  

PsiChick: As I said--TFA didn't elaborate, and I didn't realize that they couldn't see them, so the only logical explanation I could come up with was that there  weren't brakes.


i238.photobucket.com
 
2013-02-27 03:02:10 PM  

PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes


it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.
 
2013-02-27 03:02:22 PM  
Did the parade organizers put the track there? No. The railroad did. It's pretty clear who's fault this is.
 
2013-02-27 03:04:09 PM  

ReapTheChaos: NicoFinn: No Time To Explain: Uh, maybe I'm missing something, but how does one not notice a train coming, even with a large, loud crowd and absence of warning lights/bells?

Are you around trains a lot? It's pretty easy, actually.

Really? I don't live in Midland where this happened, but I live 6 blocks from those very same train tracks. Aside from the lights, bells and crossing bars those trains begin blowing their horn a half mile from every intersection, which basically amounts to them blowing all the way through town, even inside my house 6 blocks away its pretty hard to miss.


Really. If they  aren't blowing their whistles and you're in a crowded area where there is a lot of commotion or noise, yes it's entirely possible to miss the train's approach. However, if you're driving a vehicle, especially one in which you're responsible for the lives of other passengers, it's your responsibility to make goddamned sure the tracks are clear when you're crossing.
 
2013-02-27 03:04:17 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: lendog: I don't know who is at fault.

Obama Bush. It's always Obama Bush.


FTFY
 
2013-02-27 03:05:24 PM  

rumpelstiltskin: Did the parade organizers put the track there? No. The railroad did. It's pretty clear who's fault this is.


I think you win.
 
2013-02-27 03:05:32 PM  

Lurk sober post drunk: it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.


Obviously trains do have brakes, but stopping thousands of tons takes a little longer than stopping a Geo Metro.
 
2013-02-27 03:06:07 PM  
In his defense the parade organizer did drive the route the day before the parade and there wasn't a train at the crossing.
 
2013-02-27 03:07:22 PM  

jshine: Lurk sober post drunk: it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.

Obviously trains do have brakes, but stopping thousands of tons takes a little longer than stopping a Geo Metro.


that is what i have been saying throughout this thread...
 
2013-02-27 03:07:35 PM  

Tom_Slick: fat boy: Wellon Dowd: Wanted for questioning.

Thank god it wasn't the E units

Or 3985

[upload.wikimedia.org image 640x427]


Indeed; I'd hate to see such a beautiful machine get damaged by some idiot truck-driver ignoring a crossing-gate.
 
2013-02-27 03:09:08 PM  

Russ1642: In his defense the parade organizer did drive the route the day before the parade and there wasn't a train at the crossing.


Lurk sober post drunk: jshine: Lurk sober post drunk: it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.

Obviously trains do have brakes, but stopping thousands of tons takes a little longer than stopping a Geo Metro.

that is what i have been saying throughout this thread...


Ahh, my apologies then; I just jumped in.
 
2013-02-27 03:09:12 PM  

elkman: inner ted: mafiageek1980: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

This

whatever
i came here for pics of trains off the rails or smashing cars or asplosions

disappointed
Here's a video of trains hitting cars. I think they were all staged accidents so they could convince people that it's a bad idea to park on the railroad tracks, but it's an impressive video anyway. And there's an asplosion in the second crash.


This one isn't staged.
 
2013-02-27 03:09:32 PM  
UP?

I'd poop myself if I was stupid enough to be in the path of an oncoming train
 
2013-02-27 03:09:32 PM  

Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.


You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.
 
2013-02-27 03:11:27 PM  

PsiChick: As I said--TFA didn't elaborate, and I didn't realize that they couldn't see them, so the only logical explanation I could come up with was that there  weren't brakes. There are very few humans who would willingly hit someone with a train.



According to the NTSB:
The lights and bells started 20 seconds before the collusion.
The gated started lowering 13 seconds before the collusion.
The truck started crossing the track 12 seconds before the collusion. (after the gates started lowering)
The train sounded its horn and applied its emergency brake 9 seconds before the collusion. (a fully loaded train normally takes over a minute to stop)

From this timeline, it appears that:
The truck driver had a full 8 seconds of warning before pulling on to the tracks, and attempted to drive across anyway.
The engineer had 9-12 seconds of warning, and did everything in his power to stop during that time.
The truck driver had 9-12 seconds of warning to get off the track, and apparently did nothing.


Somehow, I'm not sure the engineer is the one to blame here.
 
2013-02-27 03:12:27 PM  

PsiChick: You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Jesus. I'm really starting to hope that you're not serious about this.

PsiChick: You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


You must hang out with an interesting crowd.
 
2013-02-27 03:12:44 PM  

FlyingJ: Here's Uncle Pete's "Desert Victory" SD40 painted to honor their employees who fought in Desert Shield/Storm. Yes I realize that's 3 Middle Eastern wars ago...


The sentiment is ok, but painting a train in a camouflage pattern is extraordinarily stupid for reasons that should be pretty clear in this thread.
 
2013-02-27 03:13:10 PM  

jshine: Russ1642: In his defense the parade organizer did drive the route the day before the parade and there wasn't a train at the crossing.

Lurk sober post drunk: jshine: Lurk sober post drunk: it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.

Obviously trains do have brakes, but stopping thousands of tons takes a little longer than stopping a Geo Metro.

that is what i have been saying throughout this thread...

Ahh, my apologies then; I just jumped in.


no problem, what you quoted was my response to someone saying that "the train had no brakes" was logical.
 
2013-02-27 03:13:14 PM  

Shvetz: They kind of have a point. The article states that the parade organizer never sought a permit from the city, and the city never enforced their existing laws. This is why we have things like parade permits. Yeah, it's annoying to deal with "red tape" and it's a hassle to do things by the book, but there's a reason for it.


No, no, you're doing it wrong. Government is evil and worthless and never does anything useful. Regulations have a stranglehold on the innovation of this great nation, and if some people gotta get run over by a train every now and then, well, that's a small price to pay for FREEDOM!!!!!
 
2013-02-27 03:13:15 PM  

DownDaRiver: coldcuts: Well, looking over these comments, it seems pretty clear that consensus among the fark-reading and comment -posting of us is that it was NOT the railways fault, and this is nothing but a naked money grab from the deepest pockets of those involved.


Seems pretty clear that a like-minded jury would agree fairly quickly.  And given that, hardly a good reason to take it to trial.

Now, hands up:  How many here are going to try to duck jury duty next time they are called?

[i877.photobucket.com image 128x128]


Am I the only one that wants to do jury duty? I figure it'd be interesting.
 
2013-02-27 03:15:20 PM  
FFS, this shiat makes me want to kill!  Why in the holy fark is Union Pacific on the hook for anything?!  It's like here in the Bay Area when Cal Train hits someone.  By the reactions you would think that the goddamn train jumped the tracks and chased some innocent bystander down the street to murder them, when it's always some dumb-fark jackass walking on the tracks for whatever reason.  These are not accidents in any reasonable sense and they sure the fark aren't the fault of malicious trains.

i55.tinypic.com
 
2013-02-27 03:16:21 PM  

PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


do you...know anything about trains?
 
2013-02-27 03:19:41 PM  

vrax: FFS, this shiat makes me want to kill!  Why in the holy fark is Union Pacific on the hook for anything?!  It's like here in the Bay Area when Cal Train hits someone.  By the reactions you would think that the goddamn train jumped the tracks and chased some innocent bystander down the street to murder them, when it's always some dumb-fark jackass walking on the tracks for whatever reason.  These are not accidents in any reasonable sense and they sure the fark aren't the fault of malicious trains.

[i55.tinypic.com image 600x360]



Ah, a fellow Caltrain commuter. Glad to know I'm not the only Farker pulling my hair out every time there's an "incident."
 
2013-02-27 03:19:52 PM  

PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


You went full retard, man. Never go full retard.
 
2013-02-27 03:21:41 PM  

BigNumber12: And now everyone on that truck is afflicted with sleep, poison, darkness, silence, slow, stop, berserk, confuse, doom, petrify, and vit 0.

What a tragedy.


If only they had Sabin.
 
2013-02-27 03:22:36 PM  

PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Please stop hurting yourself.

Or explain how trains would stop for loading, unloading and fueling without brakes.
 
2013-02-27 03:22:45 PM  
I can see how this could happen. A parade is a well-organized thing. Many rules are suspended while a parade is taking place including many of the rules of the road. You can imagine the people in the parade might mentally extend this suspension of rules to include the train crossing without thinking too much about the actual physics that are about to ruin their day. In hindsight it seems pretty obvious but I can see someone making this mistake in the "heat" of the moment.

/I really hate this goddamn HTML editor, by the way
//any time you cursor over something, it inserts paragraphs and style and basically just mucks it all up
 
2013-02-27 03:22:56 PM  

Glendale: You went full retard, man. Never go full retard.


But The Full Retard is a good song by El-P.
 
2013-02-27 03:23:55 PM  

NicoFinn: ReapTheChaos: NicoFinn: No Time To Explain: Uh, maybe I'm missing something, but how does one not notice a train coming, even with a large, loud crowd and absence of warning lights/bells?

Are you around trains a lot? It's pretty easy, actually.

Really? I don't live in Midland where this happened, but I live 6 blocks from those very same train tracks. Aside from the lights, bells and crossing bars those trains begin blowing their horn a half mile from every intersection, which basically amounts to them blowing all the way through town, even inside my house 6 blocks away its pretty hard to miss.

Really. If they  aren't blowing their whistles and you're in a crowded area where there is a lot of commotion or noise, yes it's entirely possible to miss the train's approach. However, if you're driving a vehicle, especially one in which you're responsible for the lives of other passengers, it's your responsibility to make goddamned sure the tracks are clear when you're crossing.


They're always blowing their horns, pretty hard to miss.
 
2013-02-27 03:24:45 PM  
240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?
 
2013-02-27 03:25:13 PM  

Lifeless: BigNumber12: And now everyone on that truck is afflicted with sleep, poison, darkness, silence, slow, stop, berserk, confuse, doom, petrify, and vit 0.

What a tragedy.

If only they had Sabin.


You get full points for referencing an earlier game than I've played.

Bodyslamming the train... I lol'd.
 
2013-02-27 03:26:34 PM  

A Terrible Human: DownDaRiver: coldcuts: Well, looking over these comments, it seems pretty clear that consensus among the fark-reading and comment -posting of us is that it was NOT the railways fault, and this is nothing but a naked money grab from the deepest pockets of those involved.

Seems pretty clear that a like-minded jury would agree fairly quickly.  And given that, hardly a good reason to take it to trial.

Now, hands up:  How many here are going to try to duck jury duty next time they are called?

[i877.photobucket.com image 128x128]

Am I the only one that wants to do jury duty? I figure it'd be interesting.


I moved between apartments just often enough that I wasn't ever eligible.  Now that I'm stationary (at least for a few years), I'm hoping to get thrown into the pool as it were.

I figure, not only is it my chance to bring some sanity to a ridiculously stupid world, but I'm a citizen and oh hey look at that, it's my goddamn responsibility, because participatory democracy doesn't farking work when people don't participate.

But I fully expect to get booted during the selection process.  Trial lawyers depend on being able to sway a jury with emotional arguments, or bamboozle them with jargon.  Finding out that a juror is a professional scientist who was trained to withhold judgement until he haz all the dataz... yeah, they don't like us.
 
2013-02-27 03:27:11 PM  
FTA:


"For the railroad, it's a way to shift responsibly to other parties," Glasheen said.
In preliminary statements after the accident, National Transportation Safety Board officials said the crossing's warning system was activated 20 seconds before the collision in accordance with federal regulations and that the guardrail began to descend seven seconds later.

Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.
Midland County District Attorney Teresa Clingman announced Jan. 9 that a grand jury had declined to indict the driver, Dale Andrew Hayden.

=======
None of that makes any sense.  The driver did the worst thing possible; he's off scot-free.  The railroad equipment worked as designed.  And they're trying to shift blame?

/this comes from someone who is all for frying corporations when they're at fault
 
2013-02-27 03:28:36 PM  

fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?


240 times 110... plus 100... carry the two.

 I believe its a Metric Assload of kinetic energy
 
2013-02-27 03:30:45 PM  

PsiChick: the only logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes


Thousands of tons of mass traveling at 80 mph takes a very long time to stop.

I bet that poor engineer had that train on full reverse from the moment he saw the float, doing everything he possibly could to stop his train.

But trains simply don't stop on a dime.

Can you imagine how horrific that must be? braking as hard as you can and knowing by the time you do stop, you'll have hit a parade float full of people and pushed it a quarter of a mile down the tracks?
 
2013-02-27 03:31:12 PM  

fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?


About tree fiddy
 
2013-02-27 03:31:19 PM  

PsiChick: You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.



Without brakes, how would a train stop at its destination? How would it stop for other trains? How would it slow for a junction?

Brakes aren't some optional equipment to fix other's screw ups, they are literally half the point of the engine.
 
2013-02-27 03:32:56 PM  

Kibbler: None of that makes any sense. The driver did the worst thing possible; he's off scot-free. The railroad equipment worked as designed. And they're trying to shift blame?


Not really scott free.

He has to live with those deaths for the rest of his life. Why imprison him? He's already in hell.
 
2013-02-27 03:33:03 PM  
That's what happens when you drowned (sic) government in the bathtub. Thank you for playing.
 
2013-02-27 03:33:48 PM  

Benjamin Orr: Please stop hurting yourself.

Or explain how trains would stop for loading, unloading and fueling without brakes.


This is the sort of citizen we're producing. No real interest in technical knowledge or a basic understanding of physics to help with understanding the mechanics of the world, but exceedingly quick to run with a fashionable, emotional, knee-jerk response like "evil corporations" / "think of the children veterans" / etc. And, with sheer numbers on their side, they're able to use the legal process to do real damage to companies that were operating completely lawfully.
 
2013-02-27 03:35:35 PM  

the ha ha guy: Without brakes, how would a train stop at its destination? How would it stop for other trains? How would it slow for a junction?

Brakes aren't some optional equipment to fix other's screw ups, they are literally half the point of the engine.


If the brakes on a train car are not properly connected, (they're powred pneumatically) the brakes fail in their engaged state, locking the car in place.

The brakes were working perfectly fine or the train wouldn't have been moving at all.

It just takes a long long time to stop a speeding train.
 
2013-02-27 03:35:37 PM  

fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?


It was actually traveling at ~60mph. Napkin math says about 64 gigajoules, or roughly the same energy as 15 tons of TNT.
 
2013-02-27 03:36:03 PM  

Hack Patooey: fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?

240 times 110... plus 100... carry the two.

 I believe its a Metric Assload of kinetic energy


Except it's Texas, the last place in the world to convert to metric.  Because, you know, socialism.  So the conversion is 1.74 Imperial Assloads of energy.

/their car mileage involves hogsheads
//speed is measured in furlongs per fortnight
///unit cancellation is weird
 
2013-02-27 03:37:00 PM  

Maud Dib: Most of the trains out there in West Texas are pretty got-damn long, and they take a mile or so to stop.
They come blowing through those podunk towns at a good clip.
It's crazy.


And it's not crazy to ignore the crossing warnings? It's unfortunate that they did not indict the driver for ignoring the warnings.
 
2013-02-27 03:37:10 PM  

BKITU: It was actually traveling at ~60mph. Napkin math says about 64 gigajoules, or roughly the same energy as 15 tons of TNT.


And there we have it folks. the reason why the trains cant stop quickly, and why it is not the rail roads fault.
 
2013-02-27 03:37:19 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: the ha ha guy: "Justice" isn't about convicting the guilty, it's about fulfilling the victims desire for retribution.

Pretty sure it's about "gettin' paid", not "retribution".

part of a weekend of hunting and shopping for veterans wounded in Afghanistan and Iraq and their wives.

Wait. You can purchase veterans? What's the going rate?


It doesn't seem very sporting to hunt wounded veterans.
 
2013-02-27 03:37:27 PM  

Ring of Fire: PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.

The only thing that could keep the human in board from watching the train crush someone would be a set of mini blinds. Trains can't just stop when they are going 60 mph


Friend of mine who used to work for the Southern Pacific told me that the advice given tot he engineer in such a situation is simple and really brutally wise...

1) apply emergency brake
2) avent eyes
 
2013-02-27 03:38:36 PM  

Hack Patooey: fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?

240 times 110... plus 100... carry the two.

 I believe its a Metric Assload of kinetic energy


I think you meant Metric Ass-Ton.
 
2013-02-27 03:39:00 PM  
On the other hand, tornadoes are very good at stopping trains.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-smEEHYdGQ
 
2013-02-27 03:39:06 PM  

over_and_done: I figure, not only is it my chance to bring some sanity to a ridiculously stupid world, but I'm a citizen and oh hey look at that, it's my goddamn responsibility, because participatory democracy doesn't farking work when people don't participate.


That's exactly how I feel about voting too. Good to know at least some people feel the same way. :p
 
2013-02-27 03:39:33 PM  

the ha ha guy: PsiChick: You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Without brakes, how would a train stop at its destination? How would it stop for other trains? How would it slow for a junction?

Brakes aren't some optional equipment to fix other's screw ups, they are literally half the point of the engine.


Since PsiChick  can't even comprehend air brakes let's not even bring up dynamic breaking or heads may asplode.
 
2013-02-27 03:40:43 PM  

fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?



1x10-3 kilotrains.
 
2013-02-27 03:41:02 PM  

Benjamin Orr: fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?

About tree fiddy


Goddamnit Nessy! (That's why it keeps comin' back!)
 
2013-02-27 03:41:10 PM  

NicoFinn: Also, there was a big "accident" here a few years back when some teens tried to cross the tracks and got hit by an oncoming. There were two tracks right next to each other and they crossed in front of the stopped train, which was blocking their view. I think in all 12 people died. It took them days to re-assemble all the parts and identify them.


In high school I had a friend that committed suicide via truck on the highway. He was depressed, he was stopped with his mom getting gasoline at a place next to the highway. He decides it was time, runs to the highway, and steps in front of an 18-wheeler. I don't know all the details, but rumor was the force was enough to cause multiple dismemberments. Apparently he had tried to commit suicide seven times in the six months leading up to his death.

Can't find an article about the accident itself, but apparently his parents went on to do a lot of mental health awareness:  http://www.voxmagazine.com/stories/2007/05/31/running-darkness/
 
2013-02-27 03:41:17 PM  
Wow.  Having seen some of the evidence related tohttp://www.startribune.com/local/north/149597375.html?refer=y this case, it's easy to think that the railroad might have been up to something (BNSF managed to destroy the data tape from the crossing that recorded how fast the train was going and whether the gate functioned properly.  Witnesses said that the gate didn't function.

Anyway, this current case seems open and shut.  Warnings were functional, float driver was a colossal retard.

Speaking of colossal retards, is this the place to ask why the engineer didn't just use the brakes?
 
2013-02-27 03:44:10 PM  

fluffy2097: Why imprison him? He's already in hell.



If the person responsible for the deaths were properly convicted, then perhaps the prosecutor wouldn't be going on this witch-hunt against those who actively tried to prevent the accident.

Justice is not when the most convenient/richest scapegoat is held responsible and the saddest people go free, but that's basically what you're advocating when you say the guy who has all but admitted to committing manslaughter should go free just because he feels guilty that his negligent actions killed four people.
 
2013-02-27 03:48:51 PM  

BKITU: fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?

It was actually traveling at ~60mph. Napkin math says about 64 gigajoules, or roughly the same energy as 15 tons of TNT.


Or in graphical form, about this much:
i.telegraph.co.uk

Think about that if you ever try to beat a train at a railroad crossing.
 
2013-02-27 03:50:26 PM  

A Terrible Human: DownDaRiver: coldcuts:

Am I the only one that wants to do jury duty? I figure it'd be interesting.


It probably woudnt be so bad if you didn't have much else to do anyway. But when it completely disrupts your life with kids/family, lost wages, planned events, whatever. Then I think it would really suck. No, I don't have a solution or any other fancy ideas that are any better than the current system.
 
2013-02-27 03:51:13 PM  

Glendale: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Without brakes, how would a train stop at its destination? How would it stop for other trains? How would it slow for a junction?

Brakes aren't some optional equipment to fix other's screw ups, they are literally half the point of the engine.

Since PsiChick  can't even comprehend air brakes let's not even bring up dynamic breaking or heads may asplode.


i think it's really irresponsible of union pacific to just give the engineers anchors that are chained to the engine, that they throw out the door when they are nearing depots.  fat cats!
 
2013-02-27 03:51:35 PM  

the ha ha guy: fluffy2097: Why imprison him? He's already in hell.


If the person responsible for the deaths were properly convicted, then perhaps the prosecutor wouldn't be going on this witch-hunt against those who actively tried to prevent the accident.

Justice is not when the most convenient/richest scapegoat is held responsible and the saddest people go free, but that's basically what you're advocating when you say the guy who has all but admitted to committing manslaughter should go free just because he feels guilty that his negligent actions killed four people.


There is no prosecutor in this lawsuit - it's a civil case.
Although I have no idea why the judge hasn't already summarily dismissed the claims against Union Pacific and hit up the plaintiffs for UP lawyers' fees.
 
2013-02-27 04:00:08 PM  

ausfahrk: CheekyMonkey:

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

Google street view of the area. Image date May 2008.  Looks like a gate to me.


looks like a great place for a parade...
 
2013-02-27 04:01:49 PM  

Lurk sober post drunk: Glendale: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Without brakes, how would a train stop at its destination? How would it stop for other trains? How would it slow for a junction?

Brakes aren't some optional equipment to fix other's screw ups, they are literally half the point of the engine.

Since PsiChick  can't even comprehend air brakes let's not even bring up dynamic breaking or heads may asplode.

i think it's really irresponsible of union pacific to just give the engineers anchors that are chained to the engine, that they throw out the door when they are nearing depots.  fat cats!


I heard that the executives took away the anchors to use them on their yachts. Now they have to use ropes to try and lasso a tree.
 
2013-02-27 04:02:22 PM  

BKITU: fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?

It was actually traveling at ~60mph. Napkin math says about 64 gigajoules, or roughly the same energy as 15 tons of TNT.


Sir Issac Newton is the deadliest sumbiatch on the road.
 
2013-02-27 04:02:48 PM  

Karac: BKITU: fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?

It was actually traveling at ~60mph. Napkin math says about 64 gigajoules, or roughly the same energy as 15 tons of TNT.

Or in graphical form, about this much:
[i.telegraph.co.uk image 460x288]

Think about that if you ever try to beat a train at a railroad crossing.


The funny thing is, that's not even an exaggeration.  fluffy2097's hypothetical freight train greatly exceeds the force experienced at any single point during almost any nuclear explosion.
 
2013-02-27 04:04:22 PM  

fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?



A shiatload?
 
2013-02-27 04:05:31 PM  
 
2013-02-27 04:05:41 PM  

PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Unlike  somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful and provide you with a video that should give you a rough idea of what it takes to stop a train. The loud sound you will hear on this video (after the crash of the locomotive into the truck, that is) will be the full application of brakes on every one of those railroad cars.



Link
 
2013-02-27 04:06:08 PM  
According to TFA it's a jury trial. Can someone explain why?

I assume the train company is the defendant, so don't they get to pick? Seems to me a judge would be better as they won't be emotional about the "big bad train company" and instead focus on the facts at hand.
 
2013-02-27 04:06:51 PM  

The Bestest: Wellon Dowd: Wanted for questioning.

[i.imgur.com image 850x566]

that's pretty

/I like trains


So you're a camelspotter?
 
2013-02-27 04:07:36 PM  

ReapTheChaos: NicoFinn: ReapTheChaos: NicoFinn: No Time To Explain: Uh, maybe I'm missing something, but how does one not notice a train coming, even with a large, loud crowd and absence of warning lights/bells?

Are you around trains a lot? It's pretty easy, actually.

Really? I don't live in Midland where this happened, but I live 6 blocks from those very same train tracks. Aside from the lights, bells and crossing bars those trains begin blowing their horn a half mile from every intersection, which basically amounts to them blowing all the way through town, even inside my house 6 blocks away its pretty hard to miss.

Really. If they  aren't blowing their whistles and you're in a crowded area where there is a lot of commotion or noise, yes it's entirely possible to miss the train's approach. However, if you're driving a vehicle, especially one in which you're responsible for the lives of other passengers, it's your responsibility to make goddamned sure the tracks are clear when you're crossing.

They're always blowing their horns, pretty hard to miss.


I wouldn't know. I don't live there. I live in Europe and use passenger trains everyday to get around. They don't blow their horns here unless there's someone or something on the tracks or unless they're going through an intersection that's not got guardrails. Hence, my original comment-- it's possible to be taken by surprise.
 
2013-02-27 04:08:54 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.

Unlike  somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful and provide you with a video that should give you a rough idea of what it takes to stop a train. The loud sound you will hear on this video (after the crash of the locomotive into the truck, that is) will be the full application of brakes on every one of those railroad cars.

Link


Yeah, like I said, I do have a rough idea of the whole 'trains do not stop easily' thing, what threw me was the visibility--I assumed the folks on board could see the float in time to stop the train and didn't have the means, not that the float just wasn't visible. That's a good vid, though, thanks. :)
 
2013-02-27 04:12:25 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: Unlike somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful


Farkied as "wet blanket."
 
2013-02-27 04:12:47 PM  

fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?


I think, that adds up to about 12 Mbps, but that's metric. Don't know the conversion to imperial, sorry.
 
2013-02-27 04:14:44 PM  

BigNumber12: Old_Chief_Scott: Unlike somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful

Farkied as "wet blanket."


Well, thanks for not putting me in there as "Knows everything about everything" like everyone else does.
 
2013-02-27 04:16:14 PM  
I was going to get all indignant until I eead the part about the float driver ignoring all the warnings and crossing anyway. Also, im going to figure the veterans were on top of the float. How is that they didnt see all the warnings or the fact that a farking train was barreling down on them and just jump off the float?

I live about 2 miles from a train track and I can hear the train and its horns at night even with thw windows shut. The sound is faint but it is there.
 
2013-02-27 04:17:45 PM  

Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.

do you...know anything about trains?


I would think the answer to that question is obvious. ("No.")

I live about a half-mile from train tracks. I can actually *feel* the trains before they reach the nearest crossing, just by their extreme mass vibrating the ground. If for some unknown reason Cleetus the Float Driver couldn't actually *see* the train (unlikely to impossible given what has been linked here from Google), then he *should* have felt the damned thing coming for him and his precious float.

I can't believe anyone would ever actually, seriously consider the railroad to be at fault here. Obviously, it's the whole deepest pockets thing. Friggin lawyers.
 
2013-02-27 04:18:07 PM  

Hack Patooey: fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?

240 times 110... plus 100... carry the two.

 I believe its a Metric Assload of kinetic energy


We don't use the metric system in this country. You must be one of them foreigners I've heard about coming to our country, taking our jobs...
 
2013-02-27 04:19:45 PM  

Old_Chief_Scott: BigNumber12: Old_Chief_Scott: Unlike somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful

Farkied as "wet blanket."

Well, thanks for not putting me in there as "Knows everything about everything" like everyone else does.


I've always assumed that people are required to know everything about everything just to be allowed to register here on Fark. I needed a good way to distinguish you from everyone else.
 
2013-02-27 04:25:28 PM  
encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com
 
2013-02-27 04:25:31 PM  

Maud Dib: On the other hand, tornadoes are very good at stopping trains.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=a-smEEHYdGQ


Holy shiat.
 
2013-02-27 04:25:42 PM  

PsiChick: Old_Chief_Scott: PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.

Unlike  somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful and provide you with a video that should give you a rough idea of what it takes to stop a train. The loud sound you will hear on this video (after the crash of the locomotive into the truck, that is) will be the full application of brakes on every one of those railroad cars.

Link

Yeah, like I said, I do have a rough idea of the whole 'trains do not stop easily' thing, what threw me was the visibility--I assumed the folks on board could see the float in time to stop the train and didn't have the means, not that the float just wasn't visible. That's a good vid, though, thanks. :)



In order for the train to stop in time, it would have to hit the emergency brakes over a minute before the truck even approached the tracks.

Since the truck was off the tracks until only 12 seconds before the collusion, not even a lone engine would have been able to stop in time, let alone a fully loaded train going ~60MPH.
 
2013-02-27 04:25:45 PM  

over_and_done: I believe its a Metric Assload of kinetic energy

Except it's Texas, the last place in the world to convert to metric. Because, you know, socialism. So the conversion is 1.74 Imperial Assloads of energy.


i2.cdnds.net

What 1 imperial ass-load may look like.
 
2013-02-27 04:26:24 PM  

PsiChick: Old_Chief_Scott: PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.

Unlike  somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful and provide you with a video that should give you a rough idea of what it takes to stop a train. The loud sound you will hear on this video (after the crash of the locomotive into the truck, that is) will be the full application of brakes on every one of those railroad cars.

Link

Yeah, like I said, I do have a rough idea of the whole 'trains do not stop easily' thing, what threw me was the visibility--I assumed the folks on board could see the float in time to stop the train and didn't have the means, not that the float just wasn't visible. That's a good vid, though, thanks. :)



There was less than 20 seconds between when the float drove onto the tracks and when the collision occurred. How would a train traveling at over 60 mph stop in less than 20 seconds?
 
2013-02-27 04:26:45 PM  

StanleyPuff: Jormungandr: It was like my brain decided the train was a giant predator and there was no way to escape it, it was inevitable.

Hopefully, you will be standing next to me the next time one of those pesky T-Rex's pops out of nowhere and catches my scent.

/Don't have to be the fastest runner.
//Just don't want to be the slowest.
///Slashie Trifecta


Sure thing, I love T-rexes. I'll gladly trip help you.
 
2013-02-27 04:34:22 PM  

BKITU: about 64 gigajoules


img.photobucket.com

64 GIGAJOULES!
 
2013-02-27 04:36:21 PM  
Igor Jakovsky:

I live about 2 miles from a train track and I can hear the train and its horns at night even with thw windows shut. The sound is faint but it is there.

Same here, but I live in a valley so it amplifies the noise a bit. I used to live really close to a track though and it kind of comforts me at night, and isn't loud enough to wake me up. As to the horns thing, that depends on the area. At my old apartment, the track was all fenced off and went right past residential buildings, so they rarely used the horn. It would have been deafening.
 
2013-02-27 04:36:34 PM  

Benjamin Orr: Lurk sober post drunk: Glendale: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Without brakes, how would a train stop at its destination? How would it stop for other trains? How would it slow for a junction?

Brakes aren't some optional equipment to fix other's screw ups, they are literally half the point of the engine.

Since PsiChick  can't even comprehend air brakes let's not even bring up dynamic breaking or heads may asplode.

i think it's really irresponsible of union pacific to just give the engineers anchors that are chained to the engine, that they throw out the door when they are nearing depots.  fat cats!

I heard that the executives took away the anchors to use them on their yachts. Now they have to use ropes to try and lasso a tree.


We'll just have to replace it with a donut. Is there anything they can't do?
 
2013-02-27 04:38:24 PM  
Well the rail road has over 150 years of case law on thier side, so the plaintiff better have some chewbacca defense worthy stuff if thye wanna win.
 
2013-02-27 04:39:54 PM  

IamPatSajak: The float driver, the ONE person responsible is the only one completely off the hook for some reason. I don't get it,


He doesn't have money.
 
2013-02-27 04:42:37 PM  

Robert Farker: PsiChick: Old_Chief_Scott: PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.

Unlike  somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful and provide you with a video that should give you a rough idea of what it takes to stop a train. The loud sound you will hear on this video (after the crash of the locomotive into the truck, that is) will be the full application of brakes on every one of those railroad cars.

Link

Yeah, like I said, I do have a rough idea of the whole 'trains do not stop easily' thing, what threw me was the visibility--I assumed the folks on board could see the float in time to stop the train and didn't have the means, not that the float just wasn't visible. That's a good vid, though, thanks. :)


There was less than 20 seconds between when the float drove onto the tracks and when the collision occurred. How would a train traveling at over 60 mph stop in less than 20 seconds?


Jesus?
 
2013-02-27 04:43:01 PM  
Fool me once (trust the Iraq and Afghan troops to give you support when we needed it) shame on you, fool me twice (have a clunk-head drive our parade float full of veterans into an oncoming train) shame on me.
 
2013-02-27 04:44:39 PM  
Sounds like that train should be retrofitted with a Wilwood "Big Brake" kit.

www.wilwood.com
 
2013-02-27 04:48:28 PM  

Slaves2Darkness: China White Tea: So, can someone explain what it is, exactly, that UP should have done differently (according to plaintiffs, etc.)?

At the very least they should have put in crossing gates that covered all lanes of traffic, at most they should have put in an overpass so that the trains and cars could never occupy the same space at the same time.


If the city/county/state would like to build a grade separation, they're welcome to so do on their dime. It's not UP's responsibility to do more than what's already in place.
 
2013-02-27 04:50:31 PM  

fluffy2097: 240 tons of locomotive.

110 tons of cargo in each car.

30 tons a car.

100 30 ton cars filled with 110 tons of cargo.

and it's all moving at 80 miles an hour.

Anyone care to do the math on the amount of kinetic energy something like that as?


According to the Kinetic Energy Equation it should be around 8GJ of energy, apparently about 2 tons of TNT

assuming the train is 12,727,272kg and speed = 128kph
 
2013-02-27 04:53:12 PM  

Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right?


No.  You have the right of way.  They will stop.
 
2013-02-27 04:56:50 PM  
I detest red light camera abuse by government as much as anyone else, but put the darn things at these RR
crossings so that anyone who tries to cross against flashing lights + gates gets a ticket. That's
probably the best way to get idiots to stop entering the tracks and trying to beat the train.

Also place a traffic cam at each crossing and relay the image to oncoming locomotives so the Engineer
can see if there is a problem before he is on top of it and has time to react.

I don't think the RR is at fault, but given the cost of dealing with these accidents, its probably cheaper to protect idiots from themselves.
 
2013-02-27 05:01:31 PM  

cgraves67: There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.


But were there whistles in addition to the bells?
 
2013-02-27 05:02:49 PM  

realityVSperception: Also place a traffic cam at each crossing and relay the image to oncoming locomotives so the Engineer
can see if there is a problem before he is on top of it and has time to react.



That won't help in the vast majority of cases, including this one, as most of those who are hit only enter the tracks seconds prior to the collusion.
 
2013-02-27 05:04:58 PM  

CMcMahon: cgraves67: There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.

But were there whistles in addition to the bells?


no. this was an older crossing, so it didn't have all the bells and whistles.
 
2013-02-27 05:05:22 PM  
Another to visualize how much energy a train has: how much fuel does it take to get the train up to speed? Imagine that quantity of fuel exploding all at once.
 
2013-02-27 05:06:01 PM  
realityVSperception: I detest red light camera abuse by government as much as anyone else, but put the darn things at these RR
crossings so that anyone who tries to cross against flashing lights + gates gets a ticket. That's
probably the best way to get idiots to stop entering the tracks and trying to beat the train
.

I'm okay with that.

Also place a traffic cam at each crossing and relay the image to oncoming locomotives so the Engineer
can see if there is a problem before he is on top of it and has time to react.


Wouldn't have helped in this case.

I don't think the RR is at fault, but given the cost of dealing with these accidents, its probably cheaper to protect idiots from themselves.

Well, if they manage to ignore the flashing lights, gate arms, and 130 dB whistle, how else can we help them?
 
2013-02-27 05:06:24 PM  

Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


Its worse than that.

I really wish it had not been veterans.....if it were like civil servant of the year winners or 2012 most violent rapper parade...I would even make fun of it.

But the only thing that matters here is that the operator of the float has a responsibility to operate safely. If the parade route had gone right over an enormous sinkhole that had opened in the last fifteen minutes would the guy drive right into it and blame the city engineering department?  Vehicle wreck with burning gasoline? Herd of sauroposeidons? The rule for level crossings has been around for a hundred years, visually confirm that no train is approaching and that there is enough room for you to clear the tracks on the other side before entering the restricted area.

The only thing the train company did was put a train through there on a set schedule.
 
2013-02-27 05:08:12 PM  

Igor Jakovsky: I was going to get all indignant until I eead the part about the float driver ignoring all the warnings and crossing anyway. Also, im going to figure the veterans were on top of the float. How is that they didnt see all the warnings or the fact that a farking train was barreling down on them and just jump off the float?

I live about 2 miles from a train track and I can hear the train and its horns at night even with thw windows shut. The sound is faint but it is there.


They were previously wounded. Many did make it off. Two were killed on the spot and two died from injuries in hospital. Its all spelled out in an article linked to earlier in the thread.
 
2013-02-27 05:08:13 PM  

PsiChick: BigNumber12: PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.


Sometimes, posts simply leave me speechless. Often, they're authored by PN. I don't think that this is the same sort of situation.

As I said--TFA didn't elaborate, and I didn't realize that they couldn't see them, so the only logical explanation I could come up with was that there  weren't brakes. There are very few humans who would willingly hit someone with a train.


Pretty much everytime someone gets hit by a train, it's not by intent of the conductor--it's because the human who was hit was doing something so damned stupid as to be suicidal (crossing closed gates, crossing when a warning is blaring, deliberately lying down in front of the tracks, being Terminally Stupid levels of Pre-Teen, etc.).

The thing is...trains are pretty damn farking massive, to the point they can be pretty much considered Supertankers Of The Land (not uncommon for there to be hundreds of cars in a freight train that is miles long, each of those cars containing volumes of stuff weighing as much as twenty cars...hell, often what they are hauling IS train cars filled with a dozen passenger vehicles).

A shiatload of mass like that at speed takes....some considerable amount of time to slow down if you don't want to fark the train and the track (and surrounding landscape) in the process...basic physics, a body in motion tends to stay in motion and if that body weighs something like 200 tons or so cumulatively it's going to take rather longer to stop than, say, a mere one-ton or two-ton vehicle.

/full disclosure--have in-laws who work for and/or are recently retired from one of the Big Four railroads
 
2013-02-27 05:10:31 PM  

Karac: Or in graphical form, about this much:
i.telegraph.co.uk

Think about that if you ever try to beat a train at a railroad crossing.


15 tons, not 15 kilotons.

Nukes -- even the smallest of them -- are orders of magnitude more powerful.

Not that I would want to put myself anywhere near the release of 64 GJ of energy, but just keeping a sense of scale, as it were.
 
2013-02-27 05:13:17 PM  

Great Porn Dragon: /full disclosure--have in-laws who work for and/or are recently retired from one of the Big Four railroads


Evil corporate shill scumbag! I'm glad that you're getting good internet connectivity out on the yacht.
 
2013-02-27 05:17:10 PM  

the ha ha guy: realityVSperception: Also place a traffic cam at each crossing and relay the image to oncoming locomotives so the Engineer
can see if there is a problem before he is on top of it and has time to react.


That won't help in the vast majority of cases, including this one, as most of those who are hit only enter the tracks seconds prior to the collusion.


Hence the red light camera ticketing. If getting ticketed is 100% certain, there is no upside to trying to beat the train, so there is no point in trying.

The camera is for breakdowns/congestion. The Engineer can start slowing down if things look unusual- like a bunch parade floats crossing the tracks.
 
2013-02-27 05:23:15 PM  

Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.


Oh, I'm sure they had brakes--Union Pacific is one of the Big Four and they do get checked very frequently by NTSB to make sure all is well.  (I'd honestly be more worried about short lines and regionals, myself.)

The thing is, even with brakes, it takes a train (especially a fully loaded freight) an average of two miles or more to come to a stop--even with proximity sensors on the track (which the Big Four on average DO have at their crossings) it's STILL not enough time to bring a shiat-ton of metal to a stop in time.  (And no, the conductor wouldn't see it in time to bring it to a full stop, unless somehow Union Pacific has started hiring peregrine falcons to spot stopped vehicles at crossings).

And since apparently not a single Farker (who hasn't worked around trains, that is) seems to know this and WHY even despite fancy warning devices that folks are still told to not drive around the goddamn crossing gates, here's the Operation Lifesaver website that helpfully explains to drivers of small vehicles as to why the drivers of that float were not only invoking Darwin but practically baring their metaphorical asscheeks to Death Himself screaming "COME AT ME BRO!".

/no, I have no sympathy whatsoever for the stupids behind the float tragedy.   YOU DO NOT CROSS THE GODDAMN GATES WHEN CLOSED
//the only permanent cure for this would be raising the road crossing above track level or raising the track above road level--and a lot of the high-speed crossings ARE being re-engineered in this fashion, but harder to do so within a smaller city
///trust me when conductors have a shiatty day, week, month, and rest of their lives after something like this--not uncommon for folks to quit after this, despite the fact that railroad retirement in lieu of SS is liquid awesome in comparison
 
2013-02-27 05:23:21 PM  

trappedspirit: Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right?

No.  You have the right of way.  They will stop.


Is that before or after they hit you?
 
2013-02-27 05:28:03 PM  

PsiChick: That said, there should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.


not possible, newton's third law.

if trains were designed with strong brakes on every wheel which could exert enough force to stop the train in such a short distance, the force would bend and buckle the tracks, derailing the train, and it still wouldn't stop, depending on where the wreck happened it could level a large number of structures and kill hundreds of people
 
2013-02-27 05:28:48 PM  
Reading this from work at Union Pacific Headquarters, so I'm getting some kicks.

/mapping legal agreements that grant ingress and egress for track crossings.
 
2013-02-27 05:30:13 PM  
3.bp.blogspot.com

If only there were some signal that could be placed near the crossing that was automatically activated when a train was approaching.  Vehicles about use that crossing might know to wait until the train had passed.

Problem here is clear, those involved in the parade though it was the most importantist thing evah and set common sense aside.

The use of "veterans" here is disgusting.  This implies that their deaths are somehow different than others.  Worth more or less depending on your point of view.

Midland County District Attorney Teresa Clingman announced Jan. 9 that a grand jury had declined to indict the driver, Dale Andrew Hayden.

Well there's your problem right there.  Why go after the guy who ignored the signal, he doesn't have deep pockets.  Go after the railroad, go after the organizers of the parade.  Sue anyone with some money.
 
2013-02-27 05:33:39 PM  
PsiChick added at least 50 posts to this thread.
 
2013-02-27 05:38:20 PM  

Benjamin Orr: PsiChick added at least 50 posts to this thread.


Been a while since I've done that, too. Good to know I've still got it. :p
 
2013-02-27 05:40:14 PM  

realityVSperception: Hence the red light camera ticketing. If getting ticketed is 100% certain, there is no upside to trying to beat the train, so there is no point in trying.



I completely agree with this. But I doubt there's enough money in catching those who race against trains, so TPTB would likely never approve it.


realityVSperception: The camera is for breakdowns/congestion. The Engineer can start slowing down if things look unusual- like a bunch parade floats crossing the tracks.



This was only the second float of the parade, so again, a video feed would have had no effect whatsoever in this case.

In the case of a breakdown, your first mistake would be crossing the tracks slowly enough that you can get stuck on them if your engine quits, and 911 will forward that information to the engineer. As for congestion, if you drive onto the tracks without a clear exit, you're practically summoning Darwin.
 
2013-02-27 05:40:56 PM  

Benjamin Orr: PsiChick added at least 50 posts to this thread.


I still don't know if they were epic trolling, seriously thinks trains operate without brakes, or believe trains can stop as quickly as a Geo Metro in a school zone.
 
2013-02-27 05:41:35 PM  

Great Porn Dragon: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

Oh, I'm sure they had brakes--Union Pacific is one of the Big Four and they do get checked very frequently by NTSB to make sure all is well.  (I'd honestly be more worried about short lines and regionals, myself.)

The thing is, even with brakes, it takes a train (especially a fully loaded freight) an average of two miles or more to come to a stop--even with proximity sensors on the track (which the Big Four on average DO have at their crossings) it's STILL not enough time to bring a shiat-ton of metal to a stop in time.  (And no, the conductor wouldn't see it in time to bring it to a full stop, unless somehow Union Pacific has started hiring peregrine falcons to spot stopped vehicles at crossings).

And since apparently not a single Farker (who hasn't worked around trains, that is) seems to know this and WHY even despite fancy warning devices that folks are still told to not drive around the goddamn crossing gates, here's the Operation Lifesaver website that helpfully explains to drivers of small vehicles as to why the drivers of that float were not only invoking Darwin but practically baring their metaphorical asscheeks to Death Himself screaming "COME AT ME BRO!".

/no, I have no sympathy whatsoever for the stupids behind the float tragedy.   YOU DO NOT CROSS THE GODDAMN GATES WHEN CLOSED
//the only permanent cure for this would be raising the road crossing above track level or raising the track above road level--and a lot of the high-speed crossings ARE being re-engineered in this fashion, but harder to do so within a smaller city
///trust me when conductors have a shiatty day, week, month, and rest o ...


The only permanent cure for this would be to remove the gates.

If you're too stupid to look both ways before crossing the roadmotherfarking train tracks, then you are too stupid to live.  You darwinate out of the gene pool.

The rest of world gets progressively smarter and smarter on average.
 
2013-02-27 05:46:18 PM  

Glendale: Benjamin Orr: PsiChick added at least 50 posts to this thread.

I still don't know if they were epic trolling, seriously thinks trains operate without brakes, or believe trains can stop as quickly as a Geo Metro in a school zone.


We will never know the truth :)
 
2013-02-27 05:46:50 PM  

Igor Jakovsky: I was going to get all indignant until I eead the part about the float driver ignoring all the warnings and crossing anyway. Also, im going to figure the veterans were on top of the float. How is that they didnt see all the warnings or the fact that a farking train was barreling down on them and just jump off the float?

I live about 2 miles from a train track and I can hear the train and its horns at night even with thw windows shut. The sound is faint but it is there.


I live around 2 miles from a track (and three miles-ish from one of the three major train depots in town) and I can still hear them pretty well at night; I've also been at a park near one of the depots (which actually does have the track bordering it--nicely fenced, fortunately) and you can well feel the freight trains arrive well before the actual engine passes you.  Helen farking Keller could notice a train was coming there :D
 
2013-02-27 05:48:10 PM  

PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.


If trains could stop fast they would completely destroy the track doing so. Inertia is a biatch.
 
2013-02-27 05:49:47 PM  

realityVSperception: the ha ha guy: realityVSperception: Also place a traffic cam at each crossing and relay the image to oncoming locomotives so the Engineer
can see if there is a problem before he is on top of it and has time to react.


That won't help in the vast majority of cases, including this one, as most of those who are hit only enter the tracks seconds prior to the collusion.

Hence the red light camera ticketing. If getting ticketed is 100% certain, there is no upside to trying to beat the train, so there is no point in trying.

The camera is for breakdowns/congestion. The Engineer can start slowing down if things look unusual- like a bunch parade floats crossing the tracks.


It would also be good for the occasional jackass who decides suicide by train is the way to go. That's happened a couple of times locally just since I moved here a few years ago, one incident may or may not have been suicide or else just stupidity, but cameras would have helped them figure that out a lot faster.

People have a right to off themselves, but involving another person who is operating a vehicle is a shiatty thing to do to them...
 
2013-02-27 05:52:40 PM  

itsfullofstars: Why go after the guy who ignored the signal,


Maybe he was told that the railroad was aware of the parade, and that he was clear to proceed even if there are lights.

Maybe the lights came on after he was on the tracks, but there was a farking paraded ahead and behind him, and he was unable to move off the tracks.
 
2013-02-27 05:54:12 PM  

BigNumber12: Great Porn Dragon: /full disclosure--have in-laws who work for and/or are recently retired from one of the Big Four railroads

Evil corporate shill scumbag! I'm glad that you're getting good internet connectivity out on the yacht.


Does it count as Evil Corporate Shill Scamboogery if said inlaws worked at one of the Big Four that is NOT Union Pacific? :D  (Seriously, the employees of the Big Four do tend to talk shiat about their fellow Big Four companies :D)

Also, I'm not employed by the RR and do wish I had a yacht because I'd be spending alll day at LBL catching fish :D

/hell, I'm presently trying to find where all these mythical telework positions people keep talking about on Fark exist :D
//would also be quite happy if passenger rail returned to my home town.  Nicer than Greyhound, don't have to get up at ass-thirty for the TSA Groping or for Megabus, and Amish aren't bad travel company
///main holdup is the farking shortline between Indy and Louisville owned by K&I that literally hasn't been rebuilt since the 20s
 
2013-02-27 05:54:31 PM  

LavenderWolf: If trains could stop fast they would completely destroy the track doing so. Inertia is a biatch.


They'd probably melt flat spots into their wheels and then weld themselves to the track once they stop too.
 
2013-02-27 05:54:52 PM  

PsiChick: BigNumber12: PsiChick: Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.

That said, there  should be some sort of braking system on trains so the human on board can, you know, not be forced to watch the train crush someone who ended up on the tracks. TFA didn't really go into why the train didn't stop, but even if they aren't at fault, this might be a good wake-up call for creating a braking system.

/If it's just that it was a blind corner and there wasn't enough time to stop, fair enough, but it's worth noting that trains probably should have brakes.
//I'm slightly stunned this train didn't\couldn't use them.


Sometimes, posts simply leave me speechless. Often, they're authored by PN. I don't think that this is the same sort of situation.

As I said--TFA didn't elaborate, and I didn't realize that they couldn't see them, so the only logical explanation I could come up with was that there  weren't brakes. There are very few humans who would willingly hit someone with a train.


Trains big. Big things hard to stop.
 
2013-02-27 05:55:11 PM  

NMTurtlelady: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.

do you...know anything about trains?

I would think the answer to that question is obvious. ("No.")

I live about a half-mile from train tracks. I can actually *feel* the trains before they reach the nearest crossing, just by their extreme mass vibrating the ground. If for some unknown reason Cleetus the Float Driver couldn't actually *see* the train (unlikely to impossible given what has been linked here from Google), then he *should* have felt the damned thing coming for him and his precious float.

I can't believe anyone would ever actually, seriously consider the railroad to be at fault here. Obviously, it's the whole deepest pockets thing. Friggin lawyers.


Are you familiar with what a "suspension system" is and how it works? I'm pretty sure your house doesn't have one but even the tires on the float, and I think it was a flatbed semi trailer they were on, would take care of the ground vibration warning the driver.
WTH are you thinking with?
All of a sudden after reading this thread I'm less concerned with the damage lawyers are doing and more concerned with critical thinking skills. Second thoughts on wanting a jury trial in my future.
 
2013-02-27 05:58:25 PM  

over_and_done: The only permanent cure for this would be to remove the gates.

If you're too stupid to look both ways before crossing the roadmotherfarking train tracks, then you are too stupid to live. You darwinate out of the gene pool.

The rest of world gets progressively smarter and smarter on average.


Except in this case the float driver inflicted fatal stupidity on others.
 
2013-02-27 05:58:46 PM  

PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Do you want a shovel?
 
2013-02-27 05:58:49 PM  

fluffy2097: Maybe the lights came on after he was on the tracks



Nope. NTSB says that he drove onto the tracks AFTER THE GATE STARTED TO LOWER.

Regardless of what he was told to do, the gate alone would have been inconvenient for those who got caught under it and scraped off the back of the trailer.
 
2013-02-27 06:00:50 PM  
Good lord, PsiChick turned this thread into a train wreck.
 
2013-02-27 06:01:52 PM  

fluffy2097: itsfullofstars: Why go after the guy who ignored the signal,

Maybe he was told that the railroad was aware of the parade, and that he was clear to proceed even if there are lights.

Maybe the lights came on after he was on the tracks, but there was a farking paraded ahead and behind him, and he was unable to move off the tracks.


Unlikely and illegal--it turns out in the discovery process that there was NOT any notification given to UP (like there SHOULD have been) of a parade--they can in fact explictly re-route trains or hold traffic in such cases at dispatch.

And crossing a closed crossing-gate is not only suicidally dangerous but illegal--only ones who could have given actual authorisation are either the railroad itself (where a MOW worker would have flagged them across) or via law enforcement (in coordination with UP dispatch on the radio, who would receive authorisation from the UP railroad police and MOW to flag them across).  Neither of these were done, and apparently the city up and completely neglected to inform Union Pacific whatsofarkingever of said parade.

(Seriously, when it comes to rail crossings, the railroad is God And Emperor as far as the law goes.  Railroads have their own dedicated police with arrest authority (the ONLY private companies other than the privatized US Postal Service to do so, in fact), and even other law enforcement and EMS have to get explicit authorisation from railroad law enforcement and safety officials before they can do their own rescue and investigation, and in general even EMS is advised to generally coordinate rescue operations with the railroad so that the RR can make sure a train doesn't plow into an ambulance by accident.)
 
2013-02-27 06:06:22 PM  

IPCONFIG -ALL: Are you familiar with what a "suspension system" is and how it works? I'm pretty sure your house doesn't have one but even the tires on the float, and I think it was a flatbed semi trailer they were on, would take care of the ground vibration warning the driver.



Apparently you aren't familiar with suspension systems at all, because I know firsthand that a semi-truck suspension (or any other type for that matter) DOES NOT isolate the vibration from passing trains.

And you seem to be ignoring the 20 seconds of lights and bells, the lowering gate, and the 9 seconds of the train horn all warning the driver to get off the farking track. At that point, if you're relying on the vibration alone to figure out of that's a good place to have a picnic, you deserve a visit from the Darwin fairy.
 
2013-02-27 06:07:25 PM  

realityVSperception: I detest red light camera abuse by government as much as anyone else, but put the darn things at these RR
crossings so that anyone who tries to cross against flashing lights + gates gets a ticket. That's
probably the best way to get idiots to stop entering the tracks and trying to beat the train.

Also place a traffic cam at each crossing and relay the image to oncoming locomotives so the Engineer
can see if there is a problem before he is on top of it and has time to react.

I don't think the RR is at fault, but given the cost of dealing with these accidents, its probably cheaper to protect idiots from themselves.


So the engineer should watch the little screen in the cab of the train engine with the relayed images of the intersection up to a mile in front of the train, and read the minds of the drivers up to a mile away from the crossing, giving him the ability to know up to a minute in advance when he should slam on the emergency brake. Good thing RR crossings aren't close together. The engineer would need 4 or 5 monitors for the different crossings then.
/not even going to start on the whole "ticketing" idea.
 
2013-02-27 06:20:12 PM  

Great Porn Dragon: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

Oh, I'm sure they had brakes--


yeah, i was pointing out that "not having brakes" was not a logical explanation. as you are the second person to misunderstand, apparently i not so good at the writing.
but what i've been saying this whole thread is "trains heavy, don't be in front of them."
 
2013-02-27 06:34:25 PM  

Lurk sober post drunk: Glendale: the ha ha guy: PsiChick: You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.


Without brakes, how would a train stop at its destination? How would it stop for other trains? How would it slow for a junction?

Brakes aren't some optional equipment to fix other's screw ups, they are literally half the point of the engine.

Since PsiChick  can't even comprehend air brakes let's not even bring up dynamic breaking or heads may asplode.

i think it's really irresponsible of union pacific to just give the engineers anchors that are chained to the engine, that they throw out the door when they are nearing depots.  fat cats!


Research tells me the 'anchor method' is proper way to stop a runaway monorail.
 
2013-02-27 06:36:07 PM  

the ha ha guy: IPCONFIG -ALL: Are you familiar with what a "suspension system" is and how it works? I'm pretty sure your house doesn't have one but even the tires on the float, and I think it was a flatbed semi trailer they were on, would take care of the ground vibration warning the driver.


Apparently you aren't familiar with suspension systems at all, because I know firsthand that a semi-truck suspension (or any other type for that matter) DOES NOT isolate the vibration from passing trains.

And you seem to be ignoring the 20 seconds of lights and bells, the lowering gate, and the 9 seconds of the train horn all warning the driver to get off the farking track. At that point, if you're relying on the vibration alone to figure out of that's a good place to have a picnic, you deserve a visit from the Darwin fairy.


OK, hahaguy, here's the deal, i was replying to NMTurtlelady who made the comment below;

I live about a half-mile from train tracks. I can actually *feel* the trains before they reach the nearest crossing, just by their extreme mass vibrating the ground. If for some unknown reason Cleetus the Float Driver couldn't actually *see* the train (unlikely to impossible given what has been linked here from Google), then he *should* have felt the damned thing coming for him and his precious float.

I can't believe anyone would ever actually, seriously consider the railroad to be at fault here. Obviously, it's the whole deepest pockets thing. Friggin lawyers.


I am not ignoring anything, just unable to believe anyone can post this with a straight face. i sit at crossings and don't feel the vibrations of the train going by, NMTurtlelady was using the vibrations of her house and extrapolating to a moving vehicle with a suspension system. I fully understand the conditions at the crossing as described, the person i was responding to discounted the other conditions.
The rest of your post is just throwing shiat around "you deserve a visit from the Darwin fairy" so i will just ignore it, i certainly hope all the other thinking people in this thread already have.
 
2013-02-27 06:37:46 PM  

CheekyMonkey: cgraves67: There were gates, bells, and lights. The float crossed the tracks with the lights flashing. I don't think the UPRR is at fault here. Maybe this could instigate a review of current regulations, but UPRR was fully compliant as it stands.

No gate, dude.  Just lights and bells, which the float driver ignored.  Float driver is completely at fault.

\too bad it wasn't a float full of lawers, though


I'm so confused as to how these presumably able-bodied vets couldn't bail out of the float, hearing the bells, whistle, and probably seeing the train coming at least a couple seconds out. For every fatal accident out there, at least a dozen cars are abandoned on the tracks at the last second.
 
2013-02-27 06:38:58 PM  
LargeCanine:The idiot driving the float is clearly at fault.

+1.  Plus, assuming that the float was blocked in by the tracks, that's 13 seconds left when the guards start descending.

A 'brisk' walking pace is 4 mph, assuming the vets weren't disabled(I figure they'd have stated that as well to make a bigger sob story if they were).  There's 5280 feet to a mile.  About 5.8 feet per second.  In that 13 seconds they should have been able to move 75 feet.  A train is only about 8 foot wide, so they should have been able to easily clear it, even assuming they went the long way.
 
2013-02-27 06:40:15 PM  

the ha ha guy: realityVSperception: Hence the red light camera ticketing. If getting ticketed is 100% certain, there is no upside to trying to beat the train, so there is no point in trying.


I completely agree with this. But I doubt there's enough money in catching those who race against trains, so TPTB would likely never approve it.


Ideally, you won't make a penny in fines. But there is a ton of money to be saved by preventing the accidents in the 1st place. The RR is already paying for the crossing equipment so adding a camera isn't a huge additional cost to what they are already paying. Esp if it is part of a monitoring system as well. Eliminating the cost of the accidents should more than cover them. Just preventing the cost of having to patch up the Loco damage and save the brake wear/damage of a panic stop would pay for for the camera at that crossing. Throwing the local town a few dollars in ticket revenue gives them an incentive to approve it and put in the teeth needed to make it work.

God forbid we use laws/fines as they are ment to be used- Not to punish for punishments sake but as a tool to prevent foolish and dangerous behavior for everyone's benefit.


realityVSperception: The camera is for breakdowns/congestion. The Engineer can start slowing down if things look unusual- like a bunch parade floats crossing the tracks.


This was only the second float of the parade, so again, a video feed would have had no effect whatsoever in this case.


I'm sure there were people lined up to see the parade. Engineers are pretty smart and attentive. Given a picture the Engineer might have figured something was up. A normally empty crossing has a crowd, decorations, and a truck decked out in ribbons? Hmmm, maybe unusual is happening. Just proactively slowing down ahead of time makes a huge difference in two ways. Energy is the square of the velocity, so going from 80 to 50 mph ahead of time bleeds off a lot of energy before the accident. It also give people at the accident site more time to get out of the way. It may not entirely prevent the accident, but it can slow it down. Inches and seconds can easily be the difference between life and death.


In the case of a breakdown, your first mistake would be crossing the tracks slowly enough that you can get stuck on them if your engine quits, and 911 will forward that information to the engineer.

A system riddled with points of failure. 911 desk is tied up. 911 operator not trained correctly. Misidentify the crossing. Can't reach the RR dispatcher, etc. There is zero redundancy, and any failure stops the warning. A direct visual feed to the critical person, the Engineer, is far more reliable and accurate.

As for congestion, if you drive onto the tracks without a clear exit, you're practically summoning Darwin.

So what? It still happens. If you kill everyone who makes a dumbass decision at some point in life, most everyone would be dead. I'm providng a sensible, feasible solution that keeps people alive in spite of themselves.
 
2013-02-27 06:42:36 PM  

the ha ha guy: Even at parade speeds, how did the driver not get off the rails in seven seconds? Did he panic and park on the tracks?

/saw someone do exactly that once, luckily it was only a railroad truck that set of the alarms


My dad's old beater once died right on the tracks, on Christmas Eve with my Super Nintendo in it. Fortunately, he had time to run to his neighbor's house, who came back and towed it off. Farking hated that Lincoln Continental. Of course, it was almost 25 years old by then....
 
2013-02-27 06:45:11 PM  

IPCONFIG -ALL: i sit at crossings and don't feel the vibrations of the train going by



So your sample size of one car invalidates every other car, truck, bus, semi, etc that ever has been or ever will be on the road. If you can't feel a train inside your vehicle, nobody can, ever, and that's that!

Glad we got that sorted out.
 
2013-02-27 06:52:25 PM  

foxyshadis: the ha ha guy: Even at parade speeds, how did the driver not get off the rails in seven seconds? Did he panic and park on the tracks?

/saw someone do exactly that once, luckily it was only a railroad truck that set of the alarms

My dad's old beater once died right on the tracks, on Christmas Eve with my Super Nintendo in it. Fortunately, he had time to run to his neighbor's house, who came back and towed it off. Farking hated that Lincoln Continental. Of course, it was almost 25 years old by then....


Glad to know the Nintendo made it.
 
2013-02-27 07:00:54 PM  
damn, I missed the railfan thread|

PSA

Don`t expect to win in a collision with a  10,000+ ton piece of metal moving at 70 mph
 
2013-02-27 07:21:52 PM  
t0.gstatic.com

stay out of counciltucky
 
2013-02-27 07:27:03 PM  
This text is now purple: Mikey1969: Langdon Alger: maybe someone can help here, but trains do have right of way over cars and pedestrians, right? And is it right that you can cross over the tracks but remaining stationary or walking along the tracks is considered tresspassing, right?

Trains can go right over anything pretty much. Cars, pedestrians, semi trucks, cats, dogs...

in all seriousness, I think if you bypass the crossing gates(Especially the gates), you have absolutely Zero case. Maybe even Less Than Zero.

I've been told train conductors fear only three things on the trains ahead.

1. A tank
2. A gasoline truck
3. Another train

All other obstacles are someone else's problem.


You should lookup a vid of a train hitting a gas tanker. It makes a Michael Bay movie look toned down.
 
2013-02-27 07:29:29 PM  

realityVSperception: Igor Jakovsky: I was going to get all indignant until I eead the part about the float driver ignoring all the warnings and crossing anyway. Also, im going to figure the veterans were on top of the float. How is that they didnt see all the warnings or the fact that a farking train was barreling down on them and just jump off the float?

I live about 2 miles from a train track and I can hear the train and its horns at night even with thw windows shut. The sound is faint but it is there.

They were previously wounded. Many did make it off. Two were killed on the spot and two died from injuries in hospital. Its all spelled out in an article linked to earlier in the thread.


OK, I was farking on a smartphone when I posted that and just skimmed the thread.  Also, the article itself didn't really mention anything about people trying to get off the thing.  That is really horrible though.  Based on your post, they know the train is coming, see others bailing and they can't do a farking thing about it.
 
2013-02-27 07:45:22 PM  
Lawsuits filed in Dallas and Midland claim Union Pacific was negligent on several fronts, including failing to provide proper warning at the crossing where the accident occurred.

Right.  Other than the train tracks and the flashing lights and the warning bells and the guardrail and all the noise from the train, nobody had a clue that a train might just come out of nowhere and kill them.

This isn't Union Pacific's fault at all.  But they have more money than the dumbass who was driving the truck.

The "parade organizers" didn't bother to even get a parade permit because they are just broke assholes who think "That train will stop for us".
 
2013-02-27 07:46:15 PM  

IPCONFIG -ALL: realityVSperception: I detest red light camera abuse by government as much as anyone else, but put the darn things at these RR
crossings so that anyone who tries to cross against flashing lights + gates gets a ticket. That's
probably the best way to get idiots to stop entering the tracks and trying to beat the train.

Also place a traffic cam at each crossing and relay the image to oncoming locomotives so the Engineer
can see if there is a problem before he is on top of it and has time to react.

I don't think the RR is at fault, but given the cost of dealing with these accidents, its probably cheaper to protect idiots from themselves.

So the engineer should watch the little screen in the cab of the train engine with the relayed images of the intersection up to a mile in front of the train, and read the minds of the drivers up to a mile away from the crossing, giving him the ability to know up to a minute in advance when he should slam on the emergency brake. Good thing RR crossings aren't close together. The engineer would need 4 or 5 monitors for the different crossings then.
/not even going to start on the whole "ticketing" idea.


First, you don't have to put a camera on every crossing, you can start with those with a history of problems.

There are two separate problems. Cars that try to run the lights is one, and cars that can't move off are another.

And yes, if a car or truck is obviously stalled on the tracks with the hood up, or smoking, or if two are smashed into each other, I think the engineer would like to see that while he still has time to react rather than plowing into it at speed.

Who said the screen needs to be little? And why a minute? The image display time should be based on the time needed to react. That would depend on the stopping time of the train. The forward track images from multiple cameras can be stacked on a 12"x18" screen with the closest image at the top. And if crossings are real close, the camera can be angled to pick up a stretch of track as opposed to a single intersection. Ever see an airplane cockpit and the instruments and screens a pilot scans while flying, navigating, and communicating in 3 dimensions? Scanning a track monitor in a locomotive cab isn't all that difficult in comparison.

The ticketing works on basic principles of positive/negative reenforcement.

The thing is, people do successfully run the lights all the time. Currently, if someone does run the signal successfully, they get to save the time waiting for a train, a positive reenforcement. This encourages them to try again, leading to more positive results. And for those with good judgement, it becomes a low risk, high reward behavior as they get better at it. (This works because the safety margin built in for the general public is excessive for the better drivers) Other people see them running the signal successfully , and try it themselves. Eventually, someone with inferior skills tries it and gets killed. But this negative outcome does not directly affect the other drivers so they continue to run the lights, and the patten continues.

Add a red light ticket camera, and the game changes. Running the light always results an a ticket, a 100% negative result for everyone. Now the advantage of running the light and beating the train is negated, so there is no longer a reward for doing so. Thus far fewer drivers try to run the crossing lights.

Now this solution doesn't prevent every accident at ground crossings, but it does provide a way to reduce them IMHO. Don't like it- feel free to propose something better.
 
2013-02-27 07:47:34 PM  
CSB:
Buddy of mine lived in Texas during his youth, way out in the sticks.  One foggy weekend evening while coming home from a party he t-boned a moving freight train.  Passed under it.  Caving in the top of his car and effectively scalping him.

The train noticed damage and bits of car stuck to one of the railcars at their next stop and county police found him in a ditch the next morning.  Given the shape of his car and what happened to it and him they begun to recover his dead body and got the hell scared out of them when they realized this bloody assed person with no scalp/hair was still alive.

He didn't regain consciousness until a few hours later when he was in the hospital with a doctor stapling his scalp back on.
 
2013-02-27 07:51:27 PM  
Satanic_Hamster: CSB:
Buddy of mine lived in Texas during his youth, way out in the sticks.  One foggy weekend evening while coming home from a party he t-boned a moving freight train.  Passed under it.  Caving in the top of his car and effectively scalping him.

The train noticed damage and bits of car stuck to one of the railcars at their next stop and county police found him in a ditch the next morning.  Given the shape of his car and what happened to it and him they begun to recover his dead body and got the hell scared out of them when they realized this bloody assed person with no scalp/hair was still alive.

He didn't regain consciousness until a few hours later when he was in the hospital with a doctor stapling his scalp back on.


CSB if true
 
2013-02-27 08:11:32 PM  

ameeriklane: According to TFA it's a jury trial. Can someone explain why?

I assume the train company is the defendant, so don't they get to pick? Seems to me a judge would be better as they won't be emotional about the "big bad train company" and instead focus on the facts at hand.


A bench trial is only available if both sides waive the right to a jury
 
2013-02-27 08:12:18 PM  
Do you know why it actually IS the railroad's fault?

It's incredibly irresponsible for them to keep using tracks with a grade crossing through a city as anything but a low-speed spur for local trains.  Surrounding that city is a big bunch of nothing, and if railroads want to continue to operate, they need to be forced to either move the tracks out of town or either bridge or depress the tracks to eliminate all grade crossings - preferably both.

We need a nationwide ban on grade-level crossings used by trains that are moving so fast that they can't stop in the distance they can see.  Give the railroads 25 years to remove all of them, but make them all go away.

Oh, and to keep them from just slowing long trains down, fine them $100,000 per minute they block a crossing longer than 5 minutes.
 
2013-02-27 08:16:29 PM  

the ha ha guy: IPCONFIG -ALL: i sit at crossings and don't feel the vibrations of the train going by


So your sample size of one car invalidates every other car, truck, bus, semi, etc that ever has been or ever will be on the road. If you can't feel a train inside your vehicle, nobody can, ever, and that's that!

Glad we got that sorted out.


That's how you refute that? My sample size was spread over the last 40 or so years ( I'm 50) and at least 25 different types of cars and trucks, as well as 10 different kinds of heavy equipment and even semi trailers sitting within 50 feet of the tracks. I even made sure of it since I replied to you when I had to wait for a train on the way home an hour or two ago.
So yes, a lifetime of experience trumps two mental midgets on an internet forum I think.
 
2013-02-27 08:18:45 PM  

DarkVader: Do you know why it actually IS the railroad's fault?

It's incredibly irresponsible for them to keep using tracks with a grade crossing through a city as anything but a low-speed spur for local trains.  Surrounding that city is a big bunch of nothing, and if railroads want to continue to operate, they need to be forced to either move the tracks out of town or either bridge or depress the tracks to eliminate all grade crossings - preferably both.

We need a nationwide ban on grade-level crossings used by trains that are moving so fast that they can't stop in the distance they can see.  Give the railroads 25 years to remove all of them, but make them all go away.

Oh, and to keep them from just slowing long trains down, fine them $100,000 per minute they block a crossing longer than 5 minutes.


lol. no
 
2013-02-27 08:25:08 PM  

IPCONFIG -ALL: the ha ha guy: IPCONFIG -ALL: i sit at crossings and don't feel the vibrations of the train going by


So your sample size of one car invalidates every other car, truck, bus, semi, etc that ever has been or ever will be on the road. If you can't feel a train inside your vehicle, nobody can, ever, and that's that!

Glad we got that sorted out.

That's how you refute that? My sample size was spread over the last 40 or so years ( I'm 50) and at least 25 different types of cars and trucks, as well as 10 different kinds of heavy equipment and even semi trailers sitting within 50 feet of the tracks. I even made sure of it since I replied to you when I had to wait for a train on the way home an hour or two ago.
So yes, a lifetime of experience trumps two mental midgets on an internet forum I think.



That depends on the type of train. In my experience, light passenger trains and unloaded freight trains are barely noticeable. Heavily loaded freight trains will rumble through almost any suspension when sitting still.

Perhaps we have different sensitivity to movement and sound, perhaps we've had vehicles with different quality suspensions, I don't know. But I do know firsthand that your claim that "even the tires" would eliminate the vibration and noise does not match my experience.
 
2013-02-27 08:27:01 PM  

DarkVader: Do you know why it actually IS the railroad's fault?

It's incredibly irresponsible for them to keep using tracks with a grade crossing through a city as anything but a low-speed spur for local trains.  Surrounding that city is a big bunch of nothing, and if railroads want to continue to operate, they need to be forced to either move the tracks out of town or either bridge or depress the tracks to eliminate all grade crossings - preferably both.

We need a nationwide ban on grade-level crossings used by trains that are moving so fast that they can't stop in the distance they can see.  Give the railroads 25 years to remove all of them, but make them all go away.

Oh, and to keep them from just slowing long trains down, fine them $100,000 per minute they block a crossing longer than 5 minutes.


Wasn't the train track there first? Didn't people effective move to the tracks as a result of the goods and services brought to the area by the train?

Aren't you effectively arguing in favor of people that suing a pre-existing nuisance?
 
2013-02-27 08:34:54 PM  

DarkVader: Do you know why it actually IS the railroad's fault?

It's incredibly irresponsible for them to keep using tracks with a grade crossing through a city as anything but a low-speed spur for local trains.  Surrounding that city is a big bunch of nothing, and if railroads want to continue to operate, they need to be forced to either move the tracks out of town or either bridge or depress the tracks to eliminate all grade crossings - preferably both.

We need a nationwide ban on grade-level crossings used by trains that are moving so fast that they can't stop in the distance they can see.  Give the railroads 25 years to remove all of them, but make them all go away.

Oh, and to keep them from just slowing long trains down, fine them $100,000 per minute they block a crossing longer than 5 minutes.


You sound like somebody that would build a McMansion a mile down the departure path of a major airport and then complain about jet noise.
 
2013-02-27 09:01:45 PM  
Re: video feeds, in addition to all that has been said, trains cross roads as often as every few hundred yards in a populated area. I can't imagine how many crossings the typical train my go through per hour, or even per minute, but the number would at times be very large. Imagine mounting all of those cameras and designing the software and network capable of routing the correct video feed to the driver at every single moment as he goes through a city or town.
Worse, let's suppose that in the next mile there are 10 crossings. Which of those 10 should be driver be watching? All of them? One of them?

It will never work. Putting aside all of these complexities, you are still limited by the fact that trains cannot stop for anything worth stopping that isn't completely stationary for many minutes. Physics, biatches.
 
2013-02-27 09:02:40 PM  
Train company should sue the city for damages to the train, and the conductor should sue the driver for emotional trauma.
 
2013-02-27 09:17:33 PM  

Yogimus: Train company should sue the city for damages to the train, and the conductor should sue the driver for emotional trauma.


that is a real problem. if you can find the right bar in los angeles you can hear about the suicides and the last look in their eyes before they jumped on the tracks.

if you can find the right bar in a lot of places

running into folks and making them go rorschach all over makes ya kinda thirsty, I understand
 
2013-02-27 10:34:32 PM  

Hack Patooey: Investigators have said the float began crossing the tracks even though warning bells were sounding and the crossing lights were flashing.

And we're done here.


Yeah but the yokels in Midland protected their boy and are trying to get a pay-day out of Union Pacific.

Sad the judge didn't throw it out as soon as it was filed.
 
2013-02-27 10:41:45 PM  
NeonBrown82 Reading this from work at Union Pacific Headquarters, so I'm getting some kicks.
/mapping legal agreements that grant ingress and egress for track crossings.
DO YOU KNOW WHO ELSE was a Railroad Lawyer?
i1015.photobucket.com
So much for disappointing the Hitler fans-post a picture of your cigarette in Big Nose George's skullcap ashtray if yer really @ Uncle Pete's HQ
http://www.historicomaha.com/upmusm.htm
 
2013-02-27 10:42:19 PM  

Jument: Re: video feeds, in addition to all that has been said, trains cross roads as often as every few hundred yards in a populated area. I can't imagine how many crossings the typical train my go through per hour, or even per minute, but the number would at times be very large. Imagine mounting all of those cameras and designing the software and network capable of routing the correct video feed to the driver at every single moment as he goes through a city or town.
Worse, let's suppose that in the next mile there are 10 crossings. Which of those 10 should be driver be watching? All of them? One of them?

It will never work. Putting aside all of these complexities, you are still limited by the fact that trains cannot stop for anything worth stopping that isn't completely stationary for many minutes. Physics, biatches.


Again- you start with the crossings that have the most problems.

Each camera broadcasts on a known wireless frequency. It doesn't have to be a continuous video feed, just updated snapshots every second or so, so the bandwidth is low. You only need to pick up the signal from a few miles away at most so its low power and you can recycle frequencies along the line. Each camera also broadcasts a location. The display in the loco shows the closest 5 cameras that the train is approaching, calculated from a gps fix provided from within the Loco. Every camera automatically sends its signal to all the locos that can use it. No fancy network or routing needed. You don't need to see every camera on the line all the time- you just need the ones a few miles ahead of the train.

Trains don't really like corners, so tracks tend to be straight. If you do have many crossings, point the camera along the stretch of track of interest and cover multiple crossings with one camera.

This way the loco monitors the camera frequenciees, picks up active cameras, and displays the approaching views sorted by dstance. Use a 12"x20" physical screen oriented portrait style and split it into 5 12"x4" virtual screens to show up to 5 cameras at a time.

And as I pointed out before, even if you can't completely avoid the accident, scrubbing off speed before impact makes a world of difference. Occpants of a car pushed aside at 20mph have a better chance of surviving than those who are punted at 80mph. And if its a passenger train, reducing the impact energy also protects potentally hundreds of people on the train.
 
2013-02-27 10:44:48 PM  

FlyingJ: NeonBrown82 Reading this from work at Union Pacific Headquarters, so I'm getting some kicks.
/mapping legal agreements that grant ingress and egress for track crossings.
DO YOU KNOW WHO ELSE was a Railroad Lawyer?
[i1015.photobucket.com image 500x583]
So much for disappointing the Hitler fans-post a picture of your cigarette in Big Nose George's skullcap ashtray if yer really @ Uncle Pete's HQ
http://www.historicomaha.com/upmusm.htm


nice.

big nose george's skullcap is across the river in cb. hq still downtown omaha, although I liked the older hq better
 
2013-02-27 11:55:04 PM  

Great Porn Dragon: fluffy2097: itsfullofstars: Why go after the guy who ignored the signal,

Maybe he was told that the railroad was aware of the parade, and that he was clear to proceed even if there are lights.

Maybe the lights came on after he was on the tracks, but there was a farking paraded ahead and behind him, and he was unable to move off the tracks.

Unlikely and illegal--it turns out in the discovery process that there was NOT any notification given to UP (like there SHOULD have been) of a parade--they can in fact explictly re-route trains or hold traffic in such cases at dispatch.

And crossing a closed crossing-gate is not only suicidally dangerous but illegal--only ones who could have given actual authorisation are either the railroad itself (where a MOW worker would have flagged them across) or via law enforcement (in coordination with UP dispatch on the radio, who would receive authorisation from the UP railroad police and MOW to flag them across).  Neither of these were done, and apparently the city up and completely neglected to inform Union Pacific whatsofarkingever of said parade.

(Seriously, when it comes to rail crossings, the railroad is God And Emperor as far as the law goes.  Railroads have their own dedicated police with arrest authority (the ONLY private companies other than the privatized US Postal Service to do so, in fact), and even other law enforcement and EMS have to get explicit authorisation from railroad law enforcement and safety officials before they can do their own rescue and investigation, and in general even EMS is advised to generally coordinate rescue operations with the railroad so that the RR can make sure a train doesn't plow into an ambulance by accident.)


Good information and well stated.  Farkied...  :)
 
2013-02-27 11:57:35 PM  

foxyshadis: the ha ha guy: Even at parade speeds, how did the driver not get off the rails in seven seconds? Did he panic and park on the tracks?

/saw someone do exactly that once, luckily it was only a railroad truck that set of the alarms

My dad's old beater once died right on the tracks, on Christmas Eve with my Super Nintendo in it. Fortunately, he had time to run to his neighbor's house, who came back and towed it off. Farking hated that Lincoln Continental. Of course, it was almost 25 years old by then....


Why was your dad navigating a ship on a roadway?  ;)
 
2013-02-28 12:02:44 AM  

realityVSperception: IPCONFIG -ALL: realityVSperception: I detest red light camera abuse by government as much as anyone else, but put the darn things at these RR
crossings so that anyone who tries to cross against flashing lights + gates gets a ticket. That's
probably the best way to get idiots to stop entering the tracks and trying to beat the train.

Also place a traffic cam at each crossing and relay the image to oncoming locomotives so the Engineer
can see if there is a problem before he is on top of it and has time to react.

I don't think the RR is at fault, but given the cost of dealing with these accidents, its probably cheaper to protect idiots from themselves.

So the engineer should watch the little screen in the cab of the train engine with the relayed images of the intersection up to a mile in front of the train, and read the minds of the drivers up to a mile away from the crossing, giving him the ability to know up to a minute in advance when he should slam on the emergency brake. Good thing RR crossings aren't close together. The engineer would need 4 or 5 monitors for the different crossings then.
/not even going to start on the whole "ticketing" idea.

First, you don't have to put a camera on every crossing, you can start with those with a history of problems.

There are two separate problems. Cars that try to run the lights is one, and cars that can't move off are another.

And yes, if a car or truck is obviously stalled on the tracks with the hood up, or smoking, or if two are smashed into each other, I think the engineer would like to see that while he still has time to react rather than plowing into it at speed.

Who said the screen needs to be little? And why a minute? The image display time should be based on the time needed to react. That would depend on the stopping time of the train. The forward track images from multiple cameras can be stacked on a 12"x18" screen with the closest image at the top. And if crossings are real close, the camera can be angled to p ...


Well said.  Do you train parrots, dogs, or people?
 
2013-02-28 12:11:53 AM  

Great Porn Dragon: fluffy2097: itsfullofstars: Why go after the guy who ignored the signal,

Maybe he was told that the railroad was aware of the parade, and that he was clear to proceed even if there are lights.

Maybe the lights came on after he was on the tracks, but there was a farking paraded ahead and behind him, and he was unable to move off the tracks.

Unlikely and illegal--it turns out in the discovery process that there was NOT any notification given to UP (like there SHOULD have been) of a parade--they can in fact explictly re-route trains or hold traffic in such cases at dispatch.

And crossing a closed crossing-gate is not only suicidally dangerous but illegal--only ones who could have given actual authorisation are either the railroad itself (where a MOW worker would have flagged them across) or via law enforcement (in coordination with UP dispatch on the radio, who would receive authorisation from the UP railroad police and MOW to flag them across).  Neither of these were done, and apparently the city up and completely neglected to inform Union Pacific whatsofarkingever of said parade.

(Seriously, when it comes to rail crossings, the railroad is God And Emperor as far as the law goes.  Railroads have their own dedicated police with arrest authority (the ONLY private companies other than the privatized US Postal Service to do so, in fact), and even other law enforcement and EMS have to get explicit authorisation from railroad law enforcement and safety officials before they can do their own rescue and investigation, and in general even EMS is advised to generally coordinate rescue operations with the railroad so that the RR can make sure a train doesn't plow into an ambulance by accident.)


Awesome post.  Covered everything except the why-don't-trains-have-brakes angle, but I didn't see THAT coming either.

/Dad's a train geek
//And there's a RR Cop in the neighborhood I grew up in (still, he drives his RR cop car home...)
 
2013-02-28 03:01:54 AM  
Only in this country can someone attempt to finger you responsible because you're not omniscient and they lack common sense.
 
2013-02-28 03:32:12 AM  

evaned: Um, because maybe it  could stop in time at a lower speed, or at least give more additional time?


bionicjoe: The train was travelling about 91 feet/second.
In 20 seconds that train covered 1818 feet or more than a third of mile. 6 farking football fields.
A train going 30 mph will only travel 900 or so feet in the same amount of time.


Except train warnings are speed-compensated -- they go off 20 seconds before the train arrives as the intersection regardless of its speed. And that's not a new technology; this has been the case since analog computers were all the rage.

At sufficiently low speeds the train would have little enough energy that it could stop before reaching the intersection. But there's still only 20 seconds in which to act, no matter the starting speed. The train engineer can't know there's a problem until he sees that the crossing signal is warning people to clear the track, and those signals start 20 seconds out. (Or sometimes more depending on local regulation, but always at least 20 seconds in the US)
 
2013-02-28 06:24:31 AM  

Lifeless: BigNumber12: And now everyone on that truck is afflicted with sleep, poison, darkness, silence, slow, stop, berserk, confuse, doom, petrify, and vit 0.

What a tragedy.

If only they had Sabin.


Use a Phoenix Down on the Ghost Train. Boom.
 
2013-02-28 02:01:21 PM  

PsiChick: Old_Chief_Scott: PsiChick: Lurk sober post drunk: PsiChick: logical explanation I could come up with was that there weren't brakes

it does not seem logical to me to build trains that have no brakes.  in fact, the idea strikes me as totally insane.
that said, if a train engineer sees something, he will hit it if it does not move.  not because he is a cruel man, but because trains are heavy.

You have seen the end result of other cost-cutting measures companies try, right? 'Well, we don't have brakes on here because we 'forgot' to replace them and nobody's ever on the tracks anyway' would  not be the dumbest thing I've heard.

Unlike  somepeople around here, I'm going to be helpful and provide you with a video that should give you a rough idea of what it takes to stop a train. The loud sound you will hear on this video (after the crash of the locomotive into the truck, that is) will be the full application of brakes on every one of those railroad cars.

Link

Yeah, like I said, I do have a rough idea of the whole 'trains do not stop easily' thing, what threw me was the visibility--I assumed the folks on board could see the float in time to stop the train and didn't have the means, not that the float just wasn't visible. That's a good vid, though, thanks. :)


When the train was a mile away, there was no reason to stop because the float wasn't there yet either. It was only when the float began to ignore the flashing lights and the guard rails dropping that the engineer would have known anything was up. To his credit, when that happened, he activated the trains horn and emergency brakes, but by then it was too late.

Think of it this way, unless they are just sitting there, chillin' on the tracks, if the train is far away enough to stop, then it's too far away to assume there is a problem. One simply cannot avoid the responsibility falling on those who *cross* the tracks no matter how much one would prefer to blame the train.
 
Displayed 384 of 384 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report