# GPS Leads Woman Onto Railroad Tracks, Minivan Destroyed



## DET63 (Jun 20, 2013)

> by JON DAVID KAHN 20 Jun 2013, 8:16 AM PDT
> 
> BELMONT, Mass. — A woman and her two children, ages 7 and 10, narrowly escaped serious injury when a train smashed into their minivan after a GPS device led the driver onto MBTA train tracks Tuesday night.
> The woman was driving southbound on Brighton Street shortly before 9 p.m. when the GPS device directed her to make a right turn which placed her vehicle directly onto railroad tracks.
> ...


More (including video)


----------



## DET63 (Jun 20, 2013)

She must have either been trying to turn into a parking lot for Arlington Printing, which is just north of the tracks, or else planning to turn onto Hittinger Street, which is about 100 feet south of the crossing.


----------



## Tracktwentynine (Jun 20, 2013)

No. The GPS did not "lead" her onto the tracks. She drove onto the tracks.

If the GPS had told her to drive off a bridge, would she have done that? (probably)

Drivers are responsible for their own actions. And if they can't figure out the difference between railroad tracks and a street, or they feel like the GPS should override their judgement, they probably shouldn't be licensed to drive.


----------



## Anderson (Jun 20, 2013)

I generally agree that drivers need to be held responsible for stupidity like this...but at the same time, I'm not opposed to having some standard applied to GPS folks for liability for shoddy work. It's not so much cases of a turn indication being off by 50-100 feet that bug me, but rather cases where a non-existent road is marked (which happens every-so-often).


----------



## SarahZ (Jun 20, 2013)

I hate those things so much. They're distracting, and I prefer to watch the road signs and traffic patterns when I'm in an unfamiliar area. I still use a map and printed directions. If I saw railroad tracks, I'd just ignore the stupid machine and turn into the nearest parking lot to double-check the map, no matter how much it yelled at me to do a U-turn.

Regardless, I'm glad nobody was hurt.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Jun 20, 2013)

Damn Rail Roads! They need to move the Tracks Out of Town so it's Safe for Idiots like her to Drive Around in a Coma!!!


----------



## FriskyFL (Jun 21, 2013)

They need to move those tracks to match the GPS, it's obviously the railroad's fault.


----------



## JayPea (Jun 21, 2013)

I have heard another case where someone guided by GPS ran their vehicle onto railroad tracks, and barely making it out before their car was demolished. And of someone driving up a set of stairs and crashing into an outhouse. And of someone driving off the end of a pier.  I would think just a smidgen of common sense might have eliminated such problems.

OTOH, I concur with Anderson about shoddy work on the part of GPS manufacturers. On the route I take between my house and my Mom's, for instance, my GPS would have me turn onto a road that hasn't existed for years. After first driving up an embankment. And then crashing into a barn. And in that same location, it shows a rail line.....that was abandoned and the tracks pulled up 33 years ago!!  . I'd think a third of a century would be enough time to ensure that whatever map company the GPS relied on for its info would get it right.


----------



## cirdan (Jun 25, 2013)

JayPea said:


> I have heard another case where someone guided by GPS ran their vehicle onto railroad tracks, and barely making it out before their car was demolished. And of someone driving up a set of stairs and crashing into an outhouse. And of someone driving off the end of a pier.  I would think just a smidgen of common sense might have eliminated such problems.
> OTOH, I concur with Anderson about shoddy work on the part of GPS manufacturers. On the route I take between my house and my Mom's, for instance, my GPS would have me turn onto a road that hasn't existed for years. After first driving up an embankment. And then crashing into a barn. And in that same location, it shows a rail line.....that was abandoned and the tracks pulled up 33 years ago!!  . I'd think a third of a century would be enough time to ensure that whatever map company the GPS relied on for its info would get it right.


I heard one about somebody driving onto a frozen canal in the winter and driving several miles until reaching a point where the ice was thinner and then going under.

She was very fortunate that somebody saw it happen and could rescue her.

Making a wrong turn is one thing, but not noticing your error for several miles is another.


----------



## benjibear (Jun 26, 2013)

GPS is a great tool but you still need to look where you are going. I don't agree with the comments about using printed maps. I always look where something is before I go but there are juts too many odd road patterns here in this area. When you have to make fast lane changes and turns while going 65mph with cars blowing at you to get out of the way, you don't have time to look down at your map.


----------



## JayPea (Jun 26, 2013)

benjibear said:


> GPS is a great tool but you still need to look where you are going. I don't agree with the comments about using printed maps. I always look where something is before I go but there are juts too many odd road patterns here in this area. When you have to make fast lane changes and turns while going 65mph with cars blowing at you to get out of the way, you don't have time to look down at your map.



I don't either in those situations. I'm thinking more along the lines of when I go on a road trip in my area, which is at the corner of The Middle of Nowhere and We're Lost :lol: I look at the maps in advance, get an idea of where the turns are I want to make, and then do use the GPS to signal me when I'm approaching that particular intersection. If I need to I pull over and look at the maps again. As for freeways, I keep my eyes (well, my eye, since I'm blind in one eye) and pay attention to road signs first and then GPS.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Jun 26, 2013)

I'm actually very happy with my GPS.

Of course I'm not a careless idiot who doesn't know when to second guess the instructions or outright ignore them.

I found this part of the linked story rather curious...



> Fortunately the minivan's airbag deployed successfully.


Anybody manage to follow that reasoning?

The woman and children flee the vehicle but thank goodness the airbags deploy anyway.

I can't seem to make heads or tails of it.

Then again, what else would I expect from a half clueless and half fabricated resource like the late Andrew Breitbart's website.


----------



## chakk (Jun 27, 2013)

Short-term shutdowns (such as the closure of the SF-Oakland Bay Bridge for a long weekend to change the deck alignment a couple years ago) tripped up many out-of-towners using GPS in their rental cars. The GPS devices all routed folks over the closed bridge, with no obvious alternate routing provided.

When I carry my Tom-Tom GPS on Amtrak trains, it ALWAYS attempts to move the location pointer to a parallel highway, if one is available. I assume this is a "programming feature" of the Tom-Tom, assuming that the user MUST want to be on a highway instead of a railroad track whenever possible.


----------



## trainman74 (Jun 27, 2013)

chakk said:


> Short-term shutdowns (such as the closure of the SF-Oakland Bay Bridge for a long weekend to change the deck alignment a couple years ago) tripped up many out-of-towners using GPS in their rental cars. The GPS devices all routed folks over the closed bridge, with no obvious alternate routing provided.


I was in the Bay Area that weekend with my GPS, and it _did_ know about the closure -- because it gets traffic data, and the data service had programmed the closure information into their system.


----------



## DET63 (Jun 30, 2013)

One reason why GPS systems may be off by a few hundred feet is that they were probably keyed to maps initially drawn on a much less precise scale. In addition, curves may have been straightened out, hills leveled, or passing lanes added, all making changes that would not be worth re-drawing a map for.

If you follow Google maps up the Alaska Highway, overlaying the more recent satellite images with the drawn map, you will notice that, for any or all of the reasons alluded to above, there are places where the road appears to be shown hundreds of feet, perhaps even a few miles, from its actual location. This is not a problem for most travelers, since it's the only highway--in some cases, the only drivable road--around. However, if a GPS system is based on one of the old maps, it might try to get drivers to turn off onto a logging road, fire trail, or the like to "return" to the main highway.


----------



## DET63 (Jun 30, 2013)

> > Fortunately the minivan's airbag deployed successfully.
> 
> 
> Anybody manage to follow that reasoning?


Probably added as a joke.


----------



## Anderson (Jun 30, 2013)

I'm just wondering if the railroad might not have a cause of action against the GPS people for the damage/disruption on grounds of them selling negligently-produced software.


----------



## DET63 (Jul 2, 2013)

Anderson said:


> I'm just wondering if the railroad might not have a cause of action against the GPS people for the damage/disruption on grounds of them selling negligently-produced software.


They might if the woman turned onto a railroad track where there were no vehicular roads or the like for miles around. That was not the case here. Asking a satellite to precisely locate and advise a motorist where to turn from over 20,000 miles away is a bit much.


----------



## benjibear (Jul 6, 2013)

My Garmin has an off road feature that is good while on Amtrak.


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jul 6, 2013)

This woman is an terrbile and useless driver. She almost got herself and her kids killed! She should have her license revoked until more driving training is completed!

You do not follow your GPS, you have eyes for a reason!


----------



## SarahZ (Jul 8, 2013)

Yeah, liability is on the driver for this one. Despite what the GPS said, she has the responsibility to use her eyes. RR crossings are marked, and given the time and date, the sun was still up.


----------



## RailRide (Jul 26, 2013)

An observation, not an explanation of the accident:

I've used the GPS receiver in my Samsung Galaxy Player on a number of occasions--not relying on it for directions, but just to observe its performance (and only as a passenger). The accuracy of the location depends a lot on how many satellites the unit has a lock on. Three are needed for a 3-D fix. Using an Android app called GPS Test (Chartcross) I've observed that for quite a while you'll have a few satellites locked on, but only so-so, while another half-dozen or so are "visible", but the unit isn't getting a strong enough signal to "lock on" to them, Over time, some of these signals get strong enough to generate a lock-on, and some drift out. The accuracy of your fix can vary from under 20' to well over 150' depending on how many satellites you're locked on to.

The navigation app I use is CoPilot by ALK. I've messaged their support staff about the app desperately trying to place your position on the nearest road despite being on the train (all of the rail lines are included on the maps, so I often watch the path of the railroad and the train speed as I travel):




The staff tell me the app doesn't really have a means of depicting off-road locations. On my recent trip on the Pennsylvanian, I saw that if you get far enough from any mapped roads, the app will "give up" and show your actual position (though it doesn't treat the railroad tracks as anything more than scenery):




Of course, as soon as a road appears near your position, the app attempts to snap to it. Stand-alone GPS units (at least none that I 've seen) don't tell you anything about signal strength, and I wonder how they manage to get one's location so soon after being turned on. I can only imagine that sometimes the unit will place you on a road that you're not really on because the signal isn't good enough to accurately place your location.

And then there are those who never update the maps installed on their device.

---PCJ


----------



## SarahZ (Jul 26, 2013)

I think some GPS units have issues because they assume you're a vehicle and belong on the road. For vehicles, they're pretty accurate since you (usually) don't go off-road. For trains, it's best to use the "walk" setting for better accuracy (if your model has that). I did that on our last trip, and it was really cool to see exactly where we were and which roads and rivers were were following or crossing. I used the app "MapMyWalk", which is a fitness app, and it worked just fine. I'm surprised it let me "walk" at 90 mph.


----------



## trainman74 (Jul 26, 2013)

RailRide said:


> Stand-alone GPS units (at least none that I 've seen) don't tell you anything about signal strength...


Garmin Nuvi GPSes, I know, do have a display showing which satellites the unit is seeing/locked onto and the current distance accuracy -- although that display is somewhat "hidden."


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Jul 27, 2013)

RailRide, on your second picture it shows the train paralleling a river. If that's the Pennsylvanian, then is that the Juniata River or something else? I thought US Route 22 also parallels the Juniata.


----------



## RRUserious (Jul 31, 2013)

Somehow this brings to mind things that are done in the automatic cockpits of airliners. Pilots are led to believe that the computer knows better. Maybe its even somehwat true in a lot of situations. But I remember a crash in South America where a pilot keyed the wrong letter into the computer and flew straight into a mountain range. A similar thing happened when a plane was flying into an airport in, I think, Colombia. The information was faulty and the pilot believed one of the two mountain ranges that formed the valley was thousands of feet shorter than it was. That plane was so remote, they never recovered it. I have to look up those stories again. Computers can do a lot to remedy human shortcomings, but they lack the subtlety of human perception. If you were in your car, next to a ditch, and the GPS said "turn here", wouldn't you say"Not likely, pal". And look for a place where a turn makes sense. Other question I would have is "why stop on the tracks?" What possible sense could there ever be of going less than completely across the tracks? And if I couldn't get to where I wasn't on tracks, I don't think I'd start the crossing.

This may be a case of the all-too-common "licensed without being qualified". Those people are legion out on the roads.


----------



## chakk (Jul 31, 2013)

Both of my standalone GPS devices attempt to always move my position from railroad tracks to a nearby road -- if it within 100 feet or so of the railroad tracks. This is the way that the manufacturers have programmed the basic software in their units. There is no inherent reason that the device would choose roads over railroad tracks. The manufacturers could certainly reprogram their software to stay "on track" if they wanted to.


----------



## RRUserious (Jul 31, 2013)

Well, God gave us eyes to SEE we're on a track and get off it. Stop looking at the GPS, start looking at your surroundings. So like the Eastern Airlines plane that dove into the swamp while everyone was staring at an indicator light.


----------



## RailRide (Aug 7, 2013)

Swadian Hardcore said:


> RailRide, on your second picture it shows the train paralleling a river. If that's the Pennsylvanian, then is that the Juniata River or something else? I thought US Route 22 also parallels the Juniata.


According to my camera, the photo was taken at 4:26pm on 7/4. According to the travelogue I posted on my artsite, we left Huntingdon, PA at 4:22pm, so yes indeed, we were alongside the Juniata River on the long straight stretch north of Huntingdon before the river and railroad make an abrupt turn to the northwest, right about where a NS intermodal train can be seen on the line in the Google "satellite" view of the area.

---PCJ


----------



## Swadian Hardcore (Aug 11, 2013)

RailRide said:


> Swadian Hardcore said:
> 
> 
> > RailRide, on your second picture it shows the train paralleling a river. If that's the Pennsylvanian, then is that the Juniata River or something else? I thought US Route 22 also parallels the Juniata.
> ...


Thanks. I'll read the travelogue when I have more time.



RRUserious said:


> Well, God gave us eyes to SEE we're on a track and get off it. Stop looking at the GPS, start looking at your surroundings. So like the Eastern Airlines plane that dove into the swamp while everyone was staring at an indicator light.


Tunnel vision kills. I saw an article about Turkish Airlines (THY) pilots that click on autopilot as much as they can, while exibiting very poor flying skills. THY has great service, but safety dosen't seem nearly as good.


----------

