# Union Pacific Safety Education Train



## Trainmans daughter (Sep 22, 2010)

Today, this UP train paid a visit here in Chico. I rode on the lower level of the dome car. (Upper level was reserved for Chico's elite - city council members, etc). The route took us 6 miles north of the station. Then the crew walked to the engine on the south end and pulled us back. The trip took about 45 minutes. Safety volunteers and UP police were onboard to give information about the safety program and the train. Great fun!


----------



## jimhudson (Sep 22, 2010)

Trainmans daughter said:


> Today, this UP train paid a visit here in Chico. I rode on the lower level of the dome car. (Upper level was reserved for Chico's elite - city council members, etc). The route took us 6 miles north of the station. Then the crew walked to the engine on the south end and pulled us back. The trip took about 45 minutes. Safety volunteers and UP police were onboard to give information about the safety program and the train. Great fun!


:hi: Nice trip, wish it would come down our way! And why limit the Dome to the big shots,  we peons try to share when were lucky enough to be on a train that has this kind of sightseeing opportunity! Oh, that's right, they are special! Thanks!


----------



## had8ley (Sep 23, 2010)

Very nice...what you rode is called an "Operation Lifesaver" special. it's nice to see they used the WP power; BTW, the number "1983" is the year the UP acquired the Western Pacific. I bet only the mayor and higher ups were the only ones on the business car "Feather River."


----------



## Trainmans daughter (Sep 23, 2010)

Thanks for the info, Had8ley. The volunteer on board told us the loco on the north end was WP 1983 (I probably wrote it down wrong), and the one on the south end is SP 1996. He explained that the number are the dates they were aquired by UP.

This morning's paper had a nice write-up about the train and the Operation Lifesaver program. Here is a link to the article. Hope it comes through OK.

http://www.chicoer.com/ci_16150953?IADID=Search-www.chicoer.com-www.chicoer.com


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Sep 23, 2010)

Sounds like a great ride and naturally I'm a little jealous. But oddly enough this is what caught my eye more than anything.



> Railroad authorities said it is only legal to *walk* or drive over the tracks at a designated, controlled crossing. In addition to hosting riders, Union Pacific had a large contingent of their own police force in Chico Wednesday watching the tracks for trespassing violations. U.P. spokesman Andy Perez said officers *wrote citations* to two motorists for attempting to drive around railroad crossing arms, and *two pedestrians for trespassing* on the tracks.


Seriously? I agree completely that you shouldn't be able to _drive_ over tracks except at crossings but you should absolutely be able to walk over them when no train is passing. People who don't understand how it's done will eventually get hit and won't be an issue anymore. If they're able to sue and win (doubtful) then adjust _that_ part of the law and stop trying to prevent idiots from harming and killing themselves. The more we protect them from their own stupidity the larger the percentage they represent.


----------



## John Bredin (Sep 23, 2010)

daxomni said:


> Seriously? I agree completely that you shouldn't be able to _drive_ over tracks except at crossings but you should absolutely be able to walk over them when no train is passing. People who don't understand how it's done will eventually get hit and won't be an issue anymore. If they're able to sue and win (doubtful) then adjust _that_ part of the law and stop trying to prevent idiots from harming and killing themselves. The more we protect them from their own stupidity the larger the percentage they represent.


I respond to your "seriously?" with my own "seriously?"  People crossing tracks at unexpected spots pop out in front of trains from behind shrubbery, poles, etc. and either get creamed or give the engineer a good fright.

Not everyone who crosses that way is an idiot, or at least not a permanent and irredeemable idiot. :lol: Teenagers are infamous for taking all sorts of untoward risks, and many of the places I can think of here in metropolitan Chicago where people repeatedly cross rail lines at inappropriate locations are near high schools. But most teens grow out of that phase, and rather than taking the smug Darwinian approach you recommend, society tends to apply rules to teens to give them the conscience/experience/common sense they haven't _fully_ developed for themselves yet.

Even if we write off everyone who crosses tracks on foot at inappropriate locations as idiots we are better off without, there are two good reasons to try to legally discourage people from doing so:

(1) Running over pedestrians is traumatic to engineers. Most don't share your Vulcan approach to death and become upset that, despite their best efforts, their engine became an instrument of death.

(2) Running over pedestrians delays trains, which is a significant enough issue for freight trains but even more significant for intercity and commuter passenger trains. Delaying service for an hour on a major Chicago commuter line can affect the commutes of thousands of people, up to a hundred thousand if the incident occurs during rush-hour at certain locations (closer to the city is worse than farther away, for instance).


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Sep 23, 2010)

John Bredin said:


> People crossing tracks at unexpected spots pop out in front of trains from behind shrubbery, poles, etc. and either get creamed or give the engineer a good fright.


Then make popping out the offense and not the mere act of crossing the tracks. I have committed the offense of safely crossing tracks a thousand times while train spotting and no engineers were harmed or even knew it ever happened. It's a victimless crime that should be legal when done safely. Unless we actually want this nanny state nonsense that takes the easy way out (ban all crossings) instead of allowing responsible people to make their own decisions and benefit or suffer from the result. I don't gleefully dance on the graves of those who are harmed or killed, unlike some folks on here, but I don't want my freedoms restricted for the sake of protecting idiots.


----------



## AlanB (Sep 23, 2010)

daxomni said:


> John Bredin said:
> 
> 
> > People crossing tracks at unexpected spots pop out in front of trains from behind shrubbery, poles, etc. and either get creamed or give the engineer a good fright.
> ...


It's not about protecting people, although I’m sure it’s a nice side benefit, it's about property rights. The RR owns the tracks and the land immediately adjacent. Allowing people to walk across the private property of the RR’s would be the same as me allowing the neighbors on your block to walk through your backyard to reach the local bus/train stop simply because it's shorter.

The only difference here is that the RR's have granted people the right to cross at pre-determined points. Otherwise, if you cross anyplace else you are trespassing just that same as if your neighbors started walking through your backyard.


----------



## had8ley (Sep 23, 2010)

Trainmans daughter said:


> Thanks for the info, Had8ley. The volunteer on board told us the loco on the north end was WP 1983 (I probably wrote it down wrong), and the one on the south end is SP 1996. He explained that the number are the dates they were aquired by UP.
> 
> This morning's paper had a nice write-up about the train and the Operation Lifesaver program. Here is a link to the article. Hope it comes through OK.
> 
> http://www.chicoer.com/ci_16150953?IADID=Search-www.chicoer.com-www.chicoer.com


Sounds like the UP knocked out two birds with one stone. The gate runner ticketing is a program called "Trooper on the Train" and has been very successful where it was welcome. Believe it or not some municipalities don't want their motorists to be safe and don't want to participate in the program. (Probably because the mayor is the chief violator of running downed gates.) I participated in one as the engineer where we repeatedly crossed a major highway. On the other side was at least a dozen state troopers, numerous sheriff's deputies and the local yocals. I got a call about half way into the operation and was asked to not proceed any more. The reason? Some of the state troopers had run out of tickets and everyone was getting writers cramps because they had issued 182 tickets in less than 2 hours !!! :blush:


----------



## amtrakwolverine (Sep 24, 2010)

So let me get this straight. I can walk in the street of a 4 lane road with heavy traffic to cross the tracks to get to the otherside But if i cross the tracks itself cause its safer and away from the speeding motorists I can be arrested for trespassing. **** that.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Sep 24, 2010)

AlanB said:


> It's not about protecting people, although I’m sure it’s a nice side benefit, it's about property rights.


So saving lives is just an inadvertent "side benefit" of projects like the _SAFETY Train_ and _Operation LIFESAVER_? If so then UP should be honest about their ruse and stop hiding behind this fake PR spin.



AlanB said:


> Allowing people to walk across the private property of the RR’s would be the same as me allowing the neighbors on your block to walk through your backyard to reach the local bus/train stop simply because it's shorter.


I agree. But if the police won't write a citation for people crossing my unfenced lawn then neither should they be writing citations for people crossing unfenced rail lines. Once you remove the "side benefit" of safety you remove any reason for the police to treat it differently than any other private property.


----------



## Eric S (Sep 24, 2010)

amtrakwolverine said:


> So let me get this straight. I can walk in the street of a 4 lane road with heavy traffic to cross the tracks to get to the otherside But if i cross the tracks itself cause its safer and away from the speeding motorists I can be arrested for trespassing. **** that.


Well, the street and street right-of-way is public property. The railroad tracks and railroad right-of-way is private property. So, walking along a street is not trespassing (although walking across a street could be jaywalking), while walking along or across railroad tracks is trespassing.


----------



## Eric S (Sep 24, 2010)

daxomni said:


> John Bredin said:
> 
> 
> > People crossing tracks at unexpected spots pop out in front of trains from behind shrubbery, poles, etc. and either get creamed or give the engineer a good fright.
> ...


Trespassing on railroad property (whether actually crossing railroad tracks or not) while train spotting (or rail fanning) is part of what gives railfans such a bad image in much of the railroading industry.


----------



## had8ley (Sep 24, 2010)

daxomni said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > It's not about protecting people, although I’m sure it’s a nice side benefit, it's about property rights.
> ...


In 1997, the UP fenced, with razor wire, the entire former SP Lake Charles, LA yard account of the element trespassing and cutting through the yard during switching operations. The fence went up and the next day the special agent got a call of a trespasser at Lake Charles. When he drove up he discovered a "trespasser" who had gotten hung up on the razor wire and bled to death.


----------



## AlanB (Sep 24, 2010)

daxomni said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > It's not about protecting people, although I’m sure it’s a nice side benefit, it's about property rights.
> ...


Although OLI does talk about trespassing in general, it's about far more than that. In fact, its primary focus is to get people to actually obey the rules of the road. They include stopping for any crossing with a passive crossing device, and of course stopping at any crossing with an active warning device that is activated and flashing.



daxomni said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Allowing people to walk across the private property of the RR’s would be the same as me allowing the neighbors on your block to walk through your backyard to reach the local bus/train stop simply because it's shorter.
> ...


Actually I believe that this comes down to clout and expediency. UP is big enough to make a stink and get the local police to pay attention. If you get hit by a train while crossing the tracks and live, when the cop shows up he doesn't hand you a ticket for getting hit by the train; he hands you a ticket for trespassing. You also find many more people violating the RR's property as compared to a neighbor's property. People for some reason seem to think that RR tracks are public property, perhaps because no one actually lives on them.

Finally, I'm not denying that a secondary benefit of all of this is to keep people from hurting themselves. But again, the bottom line is that one is trespassing.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Sep 24, 2010)

daxomni said:


> John Bredin said:
> 
> 
> > People crossing tracks at unexpected spots pop out in front of trains from behind shrubbery, poles, etc. and either get creamed or give the engineer a good fright.
> ...


It's trespassing. A railroad is not public property. I don't care how many times you cross a railroad track without an incident, it's still trespassing. It's not nanny state, it's safety. It you got hit and killed or injured, your family's lawyer would be suing the railroad, saying, well nobody ever stopped him. If you're trespassing while railfanning, you're a bad railfan who gives makes it harder for railfans who obey the laws. Are you from the United Kingdom or something?, nobody calls it train spotting in the U.S.


----------



## MikefromCrete (Sep 24, 2010)

amtrakwolverine said:


> So let me get this straight. I can walk in the street of a 4 lane road with heavy traffic to cross the tracks to get to the otherside But if i cross the tracks itself cause its safer and away from the speeding motorists I can be arrested for trespassing. **** that.


It's not safer. Walk on the side of the road, not in the middle. A train can be on any track at any time in any direction.


----------



## MattW (Sep 24, 2010)

Unless I've misunderstood quiet-zone rules, there are no no-horn crossings that only have passive warning devices. Thus, crossing at a public-easement is GOING to be safer as the train is trying to tell you its there whether through horn use, or the bridging of a crossing-gate-track-circuit (unless the crossing has failed, but that's something else...). Whether you listen or not, that's your problem.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Sep 24, 2010)

Eric S said:


> Trespassing on railroad property (whether actually crossing railroad tracks or not) while train spotting (or rail fanning) is part of what gives railfans such a bad image in much of the railroading industry.


Look, I'm a child of the 1970's. You know, back when American railroads actually _welcomed_ interest by fans instead of looking for ways to detain and fine us. They didn't target people crossing the tracks when no train was anywhere near the area. They never even knew it happened or cared to know. When they _did_ see me walking around they invited me to come aboard and ride along as they switched freight cars. They showed me around the cab and let me operate the controls. Today those people are long gone. They've been replaced with a rather different type of railroad employee who freaks out over even minor events and tries to keep the fans as far away as possible from the action.



AlanB said:


> Actually I believe that this comes down to clout and expediency.


In other words, _might makes right_, except that I don't agree with that immoral philosophy.



MikefromCrete said:


> It's trespassing. I don't care how many times you cross a railroad track without an incident, it's still trespassing. It's not nanny state, it's safety.


It's trespassing. No, wait, it's safety. Well, whatever it is, it's definitely _not_ a nanny state. Right. I'm not entirely sure what you're actually trying to say here but I remain convinced that these $150+ fines for pedestrians crossing barren tracks are completely unnecessary. The fact that our lopsided legal system allows it doesn't sway me in the slightest.



MikefromCrete said:


> It you got hit and killed or injured, your family's lawyer would be suing the railroad, saying, well nobody ever stopped him.


Well, since I actually _know_ my family I can assure you that would never happen. Nor would I initiate such a lawsuit on _their_ behalf. But thanks for that claim of imaginary hypocrisy concocted out of nothing but hot air.



MikefromCrete said:


> If you're trespassing while railfanning, you're a bad railfan who gives makes it harder for railfans who obey the laws. Are you from the United Kingdom or something?, nobody calls it train spotting in the U.S.


Well, if being a "good" railfan requires a guilty conscience combined with a subservient self-hating outlook then I guess I'd rather be one of the bad guys. *shrug*


----------



## AlanB (Sep 24, 2010)

daxomni said:


> Eric S said:
> 
> 
> > Trespassing on railroad property (whether actually crossing railroad tracks or not) while train spotting (or rail fanning) is part of what gives railfans such a bad image in much of the railroading industry.
> ...


Hey I was born in 1960, so I understand. Our generation then grew up and decided to start suing everyone and changed the rules. So sadly that world no longer exists.



daxomni said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > Actually I believe that this comes down to clout and expediency.
> ...


Whether you argree with it or not doesn't change the fact that you could end up being the proud owner of a ticket if you do cross the tracks like that, and that argument won't win you any points in your defense should you try to challenge the ticket.


----------



## Trainmans daughter (Sep 27, 2010)

Every Saturday, the editorial in the Chico paper is a collection of what the editor considers "Hits" (good things) and "Misses" (bad things). The Safety Train was considered a "Miss"! :angry2: Here is the article:

MISS — It seems incongruous that Union Pacific's way or telling people to steer clear of the railroad tracks is to invite hundreds of people to come down to the railroad tracks.

That's what happened Wednesday, however, when Union Pacific brought something called the "safety train" to town to warn people to stay off the railroad tracks.

The safety train featured some refurbished 1950s-era Pullman cars. About 200 people boarded the train at the Orange Street station and went for a ride that took passengers 10 miles north and 10 miles south. The train displayed some of the safety improvements made by Union Pacific to keep people safe from trains. That included better fencing along the tracks and more stringent enforcement of no-trespassing laws.

The same day, Union Pacific police stepped up enforcement for people walking on the tracks or driving around railroad crossing arms.

While we certainly think the railroad is wise to enforce trespassing laws, here's a simple idea on how to made Chico citizens safer: slow down the trains in the city limits. If a car or pedestrian happens to be on the tracks, it's much easier to elude a train going 25 mph than one going 45 mph.


----------

