# Carolinian 80(9) Grade Crossing accident



## jis (Mar 9, 2015)

Apparently a grade crossing accident involving the Carolinian.

http://www.wral.com/train-accident-reported-in-halifax-county/14502409/



> Halifax County, N.C. Authorities are responding to a train accident in Halifax County near U.S. Highway 301 and N.C. Highway 903.
> 
> Ted Camarata, a passenger on the train, said the train is the Amtrack Carolinian heading from Raleigh to Philadelphia, but authorities have not confirmed that information. Camarata sent photographs that appear to show at least one derailed car.
> 
> Authorities have closed N.C. Highway 903 and U.S. Highway 301 in both directions at the location of the accident, and a detour has been set up.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 9, 2015)

jis said:


> Amtrack Carolinian heading from Raleigh to Philadelphia


head_explode.gif


----------



## Blackwolf (Mar 9, 2015)

> The Daily Herald in Roanoke Rapids reported that the train collided with a transfer truck, and the train's engine was on its side.


Oy... Not good. :/


----------



## jis (Mar 9, 2015)

http://www.rrdailyherald.com/news/breaking_news/amtrak-train-collides-with-truck-derails/article_64f15c40-c67e-11e4-a1a6-7bc6670724dd.html

Engine is on its side. second car is fully derailed but apparently upright and the third car is partially derailed. There are non life threatening injuries.


----------



## PRR 60 (Mar 9, 2015)

Looks like the truck was an oversize, heavy load (large trailer, six axles). Maybe bottomed-out on crossing and was stuck?


----------



## jis (Mar 9, 2015)

Looks like scratch one baggage car.....







Also looks like someone's house just got decimated.....






Will take a while to clear up this mess..

It is pretty much in the town of Halifax between Petersburg and Rocky Mount. Will affect all Atlantic Coast Service.


----------



## MrFSS (Mar 9, 2015)

Wonder what the speed of the train was. Usually they end up much further from the intersection than this one did, yet fast enough to knock everything apart and over.


----------



## KmH (Mar 9, 2015)

A, stuck, bottomed out heavy load trailer could sure cause the engine to derail.

As close to the crossing as the engine is, it looks like the train slowed a fair amount before the impact.

Here is the crossing on Google Maps:

Right click, choose "What's here" and then *Street View* at upper left, and you can have a look around, including looking back up the tracks to get an idea of the sight line the Engineer had.


----------



## PRR 60 (Mar 9, 2015)

Video HERE of the actual impact. Video is sideways, but still viewable.

Scroll down to the "Remy" tweet.


----------



## Guest (Mar 9, 2015)

Boy the Cardinal is really having some bad luck. I'm taking the Silver Star Friday down to Tampa. Hope things are cleared up by then.


----------



## Agent (Mar 9, 2015)

PRR 60 said:


> Video HERE of the actual impact. Video is sideways, but still viewable.
> 
> Scroll down to the "Remy" tweet.


This should be a direct link to the video.


----------



## jis (Mar 9, 2015)

OK, as expected the entire Atlantic Coast Service is now in Service Disruption, except 90, which is about to arrive into Rocky Mount. Presumably it will terminate there since it has nowhere to go, with passengers bustituted to Richmond. I am almost certain that 91 will be held in Washington. 89 will probably have to go back to Petersburg or Richmond. Wonder if they will bus bridge Richmond to Rocky Mount.



Guest said:


> Boy the Cardinal is really having some bad luck. I'm taking the Silver Star Friday down to Tampa. Hope things are cleared up by then.


Cardinal? What does Cardinal have to do with the Carolinian? Cardinal doesn't come anywhere near where this incident took place!

Anyway, from the video it seems that the baggage car is not as damaged as it originally looked from the photo.


----------



## FriskyFL (Mar 9, 2015)

What's it going to take in order to end the callous, reckless disregard for railroad crossings? Jailing the drivers and their employers? Massive fines? They just cannot be educated.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 9, 2015)

I think the speed limit for that train in that area is 79 m.p.h. This is the main line: The route of the A-Train, the Silvers, etc., plus heavy freight traffic.

There is NO convenient detour around this. I wonder what will be the impact on these other trains. The technical term for this is "Cluster-[fill in the blank]".

The Roanoke Rapids newspaper's unattributed story refers to the derailed baggage car as the second car. They must think the locomotive is a car.

Be very wary of reports from unidentified writers who are not informed about their subject.

Ryan, maybe they just decided not to go to Charlotte or New York today. On a whim. Ya never know.

Note: This crossing was "protected" by gates and flashers and presumably bells. Maybe the truck bottomed out. That's poor planning.

As they say, you can't fix stupid.

Tom


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 9, 2015)

FriskyFL said:


> What's it going to take in order to end the callous, reckless disregard for railroad crossings? Jailing the drivers and their employers? Massive fines? They just cannot be educated.


Can't be done. The better way is to close the crossings and provide other ways around them.

jb


----------



## jis (Mar 9, 2015)

Ooops! CNOC forgot to update 90's status to "Disruption". It still says that it expected in Persburg on time, even though it is sitting at RMT at 0mph. 89 is sitting at Petersburg at 0mph. 79 must be there somewhere between Richmond and Petersburg. It is not visible on real time status map as far as I can see.


----------



## William W. (Mar 9, 2015)

Looks like another baggage car and (potentially) a valuable GE Genesis bite the dust.

Glad no one is seriously hurt. It will be a great day when all major grade crossings are eliminated. You can't fix stupid, but you can make it so that stupid is less able to put others at risk.


----------



## Safe Driver (Mar 9, 2015)

Another trucker endangers hundreds of people. When are they going to require brains to get a trucking license?


----------



## PhilaBurbTom (Mar 9, 2015)

I've got a bedroom on the Auto Train on Wed. Do you think I should plan on driving?


----------



## FriskyFL (Mar 9, 2015)

John Bobinyec said:


> FriskyFL said:
> 
> 
> > What's it going to take in order to end the callous, reckless disregard for railroad crossings? Jailing the drivers and their employers? Massive fines? They just cannot be educated.
> ...


Or elevate and grade separate the entire line, from Miami all the way to DC.
Yes, that'll work.


----------



## xyzzy (Mar 9, 2015)

That's a 70 mph curve on what is otherwise 79 mph for passenger trains.

I would guess there are 250 grade crossings between Richmond and Jacksonville. Closing or bridging over them all would be an impossible expense.

As busy as this line is, I suspect it will be open with 12 hours. There is a siding just north of the crossing that can temporarily hold the damaged equipment.


----------



## CCC1007 (Mar 9, 2015)

Why does it feel like I shouldn't photograph p42s? This is the third one that I have photographed only to hear several years later that it wrecked and rolled over!! The numbers have been 187, 185, and 60.


----------



## Paulus (Mar 9, 2015)

Truck had apparently spent _15 minutes_ trying to make the turn there and had a state trooper on scene and not one freaking person thought to call the railroad or 911 and tell them that the crossing was blocked?!


----------



## ScottRu (Mar 9, 2015)

Yes, Paulus. I find it astounding that the truck had been stuck for quite some time (the local TV report said 30 minutes), and no one thought to notify the railroads. It was stuck on RR tracks!! Geez.

Thank goodness there were evidently no life threatening injuries, but I'll bet the train crew has some psychological pain.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 9, 2015)

xyzzy said:


> I would guess there are 250 grade crossings between Richmond and Jacksonville. Closing or bridging over them all would be an impossible expense.


That number's got to be off by at least an order of magnitude.


----------



## Palmetto (Mar 9, 2015)

If the truck was on the crossing for some 20 minutes, and there was a state policeman there as well, calling 911 or the railroad should have come to someone's mind. The telephone number is stenciled on every crossing control box in the country. Kinda unbelievable.


----------



## afigg (Mar 9, 2015)

jis said:


> Anyway, from the video it seems that the baggage car is not as damaged as it originally looked from the photo.


The Heritage baggage car may not be badly damaged, but with the new baggage cars finally getting close to revenue service, I think it is safe to say that no significant funds will be spent on repair. At least, this accident did not occur with a brand new Viewliner baggage car on the Carolinian.
The grade crossing collision occurred on a single track segment of the line. That doesn't help with restoring service quickly. Boy, it has been a bad stretch of grade crossing collisions resulting in derailed passenger trains in recent weeks.


----------



## jis (Mar 9, 2015)

RyanS said:


> xyzzy said:
> 
> 
> > I would guess there are 250 grade crossings between Richmond and Jacksonville. Closing or bridging over them all would be an impossible expense.
> ...


There are that order of grade crossing between Miami and Jacksonville on the FEC is what I am told. I am sure there are more than 25 gated grade crossings between Richmond and Jacksonville.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 9, 2015)

I'll defer on the speed limit. It may well be 70 m.p.h. on that curve. Google Maps street view shows it to be pretty sharply superelevated.

Yes, I noticed that 15 minutes too. However, that was an estimate from a bystander who may or may not have been accurate in his estimate. For all we know, it could have been 5 minutes and the Highway Patrol may have been in the process of notifying the railroad. Or maybe the truck was stuck for 15-30 minutes, but the trooper may have only been on site for 5 minutes. Maybe they just didn't have as much time as the bystander thought. Let's not jump to contusions. Hopefully this will all come out in the investigation.

The line should be back in full operation by the time Wednesday's southbound Auto Train leaves. There may be slow orders through the accident site, but that probably won't create an unreasonable delay. The real problem will be the backlogged traffic that will have to be moved.

250 grade crossings? I once heard the number, but can't remember it. 250 is an extremely low estimate. The Auto Train's coach diner was placed between the engines and coaches for a number of reasons, one of which is to create more distance between the engine's horn and the coaches where passengers are trying to sleep at night.

Tom


----------



## xyzzy (Mar 9, 2015)

RyanS said:


> xyzzy said:
> 
> 
> > I would guess there are 250 grade crossings between Richmond and Jacksonville. Closing or bridging over them all would be an impossible expense.
> ...


I was thinking about signaled crossings. 600 miles, more or less, and a lot of them in desolate territory. But you're probably right that 250 is a low count. If you included crossings in the middle of nowhere that have only crossbucks, you could easily go over 1000.


----------



## KmH (Mar 9, 2015)

Safe Driver said:


> When are they going to require brains to get a trucking license?


When consumers are willing to pay considerably more for the products truckers haul?

Driving a truck is sure not rocket science, so just how much education and/or licensing do you think should be required for truck drivers?

There is no doubt the driver of the truck involved in this incident made a costly mistake.

I drove an over-the-road truck for 8 years.

There are good, mediocre, and not so good truck drivers.

I know because over that 8 year period I saw both kinds out there on the road.

There are good, mediocre, and not so good - state troopers, doctors, airline pilots, nurses, bus drivers, car drivers, dentists, nuclear physicists, and hair dressers too.


----------



## jis (Mar 9, 2015)

I imagine not so good airline pilots get naturally sorted out much quicker than not so good truck drivers do. Just a hunch mind you


----------



## KmH (Mar 9, 2015)

Mind you, the same is actually true of not so good truck drivers.


----------



## afigg (Mar 9, 2015)

RyanS said:


> xyzzy said:
> 
> 
> > I would guess there are 250 grade crossings between Richmond and Jacksonville. Closing or bridging over them all would be an impossible expense.
> ...


250 grade crossings may be on the low side, but I seriously doubt that it off by a factor of 10 times. According to the Amtrak timetable, the distance from Richmond Staples Mill to Jacksonville is 643 miles over the A-Line. Signaled crossing every 2.5 miles is not an unreasonable ballpark guess.
Closing or separating all grade crossings would not be an impossible expense, as we have somehow managed to pay for many more miles of limited access highways or many 100s of miles of grade separated tracks in the Northeast without that much fuss over the years. But given the rural nature of much of the route, not going to be much political support to go all out on grade separation.

Edit: hit enter too soon.


----------



## jis (Mar 9, 2015)

Dramatic video of the actual moment of the collision.

https://www.facebook.com/video.php?v=10152678490500950


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 9, 2015)

From http://abcnews.go.com/US/amtrak-train-derails-north-carolina-hitting-tractor-trailer/story?id=29506306

Cabin??



> Video from the scene shows that at least one cabin of the train derailed and flipped over on its side. The Federal Railway Authority later clarified that two of the train's seven cars and the locomotive derailed.


----------



## Bierboy (Mar 9, 2015)

Lots more photos plus the video HERE


----------



## willrandolph38 (Mar 9, 2015)

TV says truck was a lowboy (to accommodate high load under bridges) with a special permit and had to have state police escort. If so, wonder if trooper radioed CSX so dispatcher could alert Train of issue?


----------



## spacecadet (Mar 9, 2015)

Palmetto said:


> If the truck was on the crossing for some 20 minutes, and there was a state policeman there as well, calling 911 or the railroad should have come to someone's mind.


Why would you call 911 when the police are on the scene?

It seems to me that the problem is the police not calling Amtrak.


----------



## Guest (Mar 9, 2015)

Guest said:


> Boy the Cardinal is really having some bad luck. I'm taking the Silver Star Friday down to Tampa. Hope things are cleared up by then.


Yeah, as soon as I posted this I realized I misread "Cardinal" for the "Carolinian". Just hope it's all cleaned up by Friday.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 9, 2015)

Video of the collision getting heavy play here on tv in Austin along with the flooding videos from Central Texas.(we've had up to 4 inches of Rain on the I35 Corridir and more in East Texas!)

I'm wondering why the State Trooper didn't notify the Railroad and Amtrak so the train could be stopped? What good does it do if he was just racking up OT and did nothing when the truck got stuck!

Be interesting to see the official findings on this one! Looks like the trains are a mess on this line now!!!


----------



## KmH (Mar 9, 2015)

From what the ABC news article linked to above said the trailer was not bottomed out on the tracks, rather the driver was maneuvering to get the 164 foot long trailer around the right hand turn after the tracks.

Regular flatbed or box semi trailers are 48 feet or 53 feet long.


----------



## xyzzy (Mar 9, 2015)

If SEHSR had been funded, the train would not have been operating on the A-line and instead would have been operating on a rebuilt S-line at 110 mph with no grade crossings whatsoever. Of course, the construction price of SEHSR at 150 miles is at least a billion, maybe two -- and that's why it hasn't happened yet. Multiply that by four for the entire line RIchmond-Jacksonville.


----------



## DryCreek (Mar 9, 2015)

xyzzy said:


> If SEHSR had been funded, the train would not have been operating on the A-line and instead would have been operating on a rebuilt S-line at 110 mph with no grade crossings whatsoever. Of course, the construction price of SEHSR at 150 miles is at least a billion, maybe two -- and that's why it hasn't happened yet. Multiply that by four for the entire line RIchmond-Jacksonville.


In my later years, I am starting to question all of the money we spend blowing up things "over there". If we would mind our own business, we could have nice things like HSR crisscrossing the continent "here". Much like the other countries that _do_ have such infrastructure - and depend on us to go waste our money getting embroiled in losing engagements.

I know, I know - soon "they'll start hating us for our freedom to travel anywhere quickly", or something like that. Maybe if we could convince the MIC that we needed HSR for rapid _intra_continental troop deployment they'd come on board?

This is just the opinion of an aging six-year Navy veteran (1980-1986)


----------



## pennyk (Mar 9, 2015)

Amtrak Service Alert:



> Amtrak Carolinian Service Disrupted in North Carolina	Most Amtrak Trains to Operate Normally in North Carolina on March 10
> March 9, 2015
> 6:30 p.m. EDT
> 
> ...


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 9, 2015)

NCByTrain is NCDOT 's Facebook page. It has more detail about what is happening with the trains.

jb


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 9, 2015)

"Make-up 79" just departed Raleigh for Charlotte.

jb


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 9, 2015)

A few minutes ago, I got a text from a friend who is working tonight's southbound Auto Train. They are boarded, serving dinner, and leaving Lorton now. So I guess the powers that be, are expecting the line to be cleared soon. Halifax is about 3-1/2 hours running time from Lorton, but I wouldn't count on the A-Train making maximum speed.

I do not know whether this means tomorrow's Auto Train will run on schedule, or whether it will run at all, for that matter. If you're scheduled to be on any Amtrak train on the Silver corridor in the next few days, I recommend checking with Amtrak before counting your chickens.

Tom


----------



## Acela150 (Mar 9, 2015)

For those of you who are wondering why those state troopers didn't think to contact CSX to have trains stop I can answer the question. Cops are not the brightest people in the world. I can tell you endless stories of some of the stupid stuff I've seen them do in my many years as a Firefighter. You want a story shoot me a PM.

I should also state that on the railroad it is not an "accident" it is an "Incident".


----------



## SteveSFL (Mar 9, 2015)

Acela150 said:


> For those of you who are wondering why those state troopers didn't think to contact CSX to have trains stop I can answer the question. Cops are not the brightest people in the world. I can tell you endless stories of some of the stupid stuff I've seen them do in my many years as a Firefighter. You want a story shoot me a PM.
> 
> I should also state that on the railroad it is not an "accident" it is an "Incident".


It's interesting that you already know so much about whether or not the the troopers attempted to contact the railroad. I imagine there is more than one person on this board that might take offense to your generalization. I know police officers that feel the same way about firefighters, and their generalizations are just as wrong as yours.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 9, 2015)

One news report quotes a North Carolina Highway Patrolman as saying they had about 4 minutes --- not 15 as stated by a witness. As I said, it's too early to sort out all the facts for certain.

T.


----------



## Acela150 (Mar 9, 2015)

SteveSTX said:


> Acela150 said:
> 
> 
> > For those of you who are wondering why those state troopers didn't think to contact CSX to have trains stop I can answer the question. Cops are not the brightest people in the world. I can tell you endless stories of some of the stupid stuff I've seen them do in my many years as a Firefighter. You want a story shoot me a PM.
> ...


Ask me how many cop cars park in front of a burning building or a fire hydrant... My question to them is where is there hose? Cops hide behind a gun and a badge. Firefighters actually do work.

I'm not saying they didn't contact CSX. From what everyone else has been stating they didn't think they did.

If you have a problem with my comments. That's not my issue. I'm stating facts of life.

Now if 4 minutes is the time they had. A guess of about 2 minutes of warning to the train would still provide enough time to bring speed down.


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 9, 2015)

Not that this number of grade crossings is a contest, but so far afigg may be the closest. Just spent some time on Google Earth following the tracks from Richmond VA down to Jacksonville FL and counted 510 grade crossings of all types. Some were no doubt missed - especially those rudimentary ones connecting two farm fields. This count assumes the train takes the wye in a SW direction just after leaving the station in Richmond when heading South.

[Edit] Repeated the grade crossing count on 11 March going in the other direction and came up with 509 of them this time.


----------



## SteveSFL (Mar 9, 2015)

Acela150 said:


> SteveSTX said:
> 
> 
> > Acela150 said:
> ...


I'm glad you're content in your arrogance. Maybe the NTSB will consult you for their investigation.


----------



## William W. (Mar 9, 2015)

What is the damage to the P42 likely to be? Will they be able to return it to service? Amtrak obviously can't afford to lose a single one.


----------



## CCC1007 (Mar 9, 2015)

From the photos I saw, it should be back sometime.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 9, 2015)

niemi:

At Richmond, southbound trains do take the SW leg of the wye. It you have counted grade crossings between Richmond and Jacksonville, your count does not include the many crossings south of JAX, nor the many between WAS and RVA. In some locations, there are more than one per mile.

Tom


----------



## RampWidget (Mar 10, 2015)

FormerOBS said:


> I do not know whether this means tomorrow's Auto Train will run on schedule, or whether it will run at all, for that matter. If you're scheduled to be on any Amtrak train on the Silver corridor in the next few days, I recommend checking with Amtrak before counting your chickens.
> 
> Tom


53(9) is operating, albeit 4+ hours late, and has a second operating crew aboard in case the original crew outlaws before reaching Florence.

This equipment is scheduled to turn at SFA as 52(10). With 53(9) that late, expect 52(10) to depart at least two to three hours late, assuming a rested crew is available in Sanford.

52(9)'s departure from SFA was held until 8:00p.

98(9) & 92(9) both operated as scheduled, although 92(9) was delayed over an hour near Lakeland after striking a pedestrian.

91(9) & 97(9) are not operating.

90(9) terminated at RMT and turned as 89(9) to SAV.

Original 89(9) terminated at RVR and turned as a replacement 80(9) to WAS.


----------



## Bus Nut (Mar 10, 2015)

It seems like it's time for state and the federal government and railroads to do another round of outreach and education to truck drivers about railroad crossing safety. The videos I've found online are dated, to say the least.

They should also add more questions about RR crossing safety to the CDL test. For example, instructing operators to call the RR prior to calling 911. Could help.


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 10, 2015)

CCC1007 said:


> From the photos I saw, it should be back sometime.


It probably depends upon whether or not the frame is bent.

jb


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 10, 2015)

Watching the video on the news this morning, it looked like the engine's front went up in the air on impact. Guessing that's why it flipped.


----------



## VentureForth (Mar 10, 2015)

jis said:


> RyanS said:
> 
> 
> > xyzzy said:
> ...


Ahh - but Ryan didn't state in which direction he was off by an order of magnitude. He COULD have meant there were 2,500 crossings! 



niemi24s said:


> Not that this number of grade crossings is a contest, but so far afigg may be the closest. Just spent some time on Google Earth following the tracks from Richmond VA down to Jacksonville FL and counted 510 grade crossings of all types. Some were no doubt missed - especially those rudimentary ones connecting two farm fields. This count assumes the train takes the wye in a SW direction just after leaving the station in Richmond when heading South.


Are we playing by Price is Right rules? Closest without going over?


----------



## jis (Mar 10, 2015)

jis said:


> OK, as expected the entire Atlantic Coast Service is now in Service Disruption, except 90, which is about to arrive into Rocky Mount. Presumably it will terminate there since it has nowhere to go, with passengers bustituted to Richmond. I am almost certain that 91 will be held in Washington. 89 will probably have to go back to Petersburg or Richmond. Wonder if they will bus bridge Richmond to Rocky Mount.


So they did bus bridge. Well played Amtrak.
Too bad 91 and 97 were terminated in Washington without any further arrangements though.

I wonder if they will send empty consists south to balance out the consist situation, or simply do some more cancellation south to north to balance things out.


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 10, 2015)

After spending about 3 hours figuring out the most likely way South out of Richmond and scrolling down 643 602 miles of track on the Easternmost route using Google Earth, I just picked afigg's answer because...uh...er...just because I did. Whether there were 2½, 25, 250 or 2500 grade crossings didn't seem to matter too much anymore - Mr. Sandman (♫) was calling my name. :blink:

But as the two end points of the search had been specified, the task was simple but mind numbing. One like the following would be much _much_ more difficult:

Q: Which two consecutive stations on any Amtrak route have the most grade crossings between them?


----------



## xyzzy (Mar 10, 2015)

Q: Which two consecutive stations on any Amtrak route have the most grade crossings between them?

Worthy of a thread of its own.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 10, 2015)

Update from today's southbound Auto train:

Departed Lorton a bit before 9 p.m. last night. Normal running should have placed he A-T at the "incident" site around 12:30 a.m.

Delays encountered north of Halifax. Passed Halifax around 3:00 a.m.

Now underway with an expected arrival time in late afternoon. 4:00 - 5:00 p.m. is the estimate I heard, but I can't vouch for the accuracy of that.

I understand the northbound Auto Train may be doing better, but I have no info on that.

I have heard nothing about the condition of the engineer(s), and am very concerned about that.

Tom


----------



## afigg (Mar 10, 2015)

niemi24s said:


> After spending about 3 hours figuring out the most likely way South out of Richmond and scrolling down 643 miles of track on Google Earth, I just picked afigg's answer because...uh...er...just because I did. Whether there were 2½, 25, 250 or 2500 grade crossings didn't seem to matter too much anymore - Mr. Sandman (♫) was calling my name. :blink:
> 
> But as the two end points of the search had been specified, the task was simple but mind numbing. One like the following would be _much_ more difficult:


It would likely have been easier to locate track maps or CSX timetables for the A-line and count the number of crossings that way. The FRA has an Rail Crossing locator database app for smartphones (and tablets) that show ALL crossings on the map including private, public, grade separated (over or under) with links to incident reports for each crossing, if you really want to dive into it.

I have a track map from one of the Richmond to DC track improvement studies which has a track map with planned 3rd track segments and notations for all the grade crossings. Counting the track map, there are 8 remaining grade crossings between Fredericksburg and Alexandria, including one private grade crossing. There are lot more grade crossings between Fredericksburg and Staples Mill station, so those will be a costly challenge to deal with someday. But I can see an funded effort, as part of a 3rd track upgrade, to separate all the remaining grade crossings north of Fredericksburg in the interest of VRE and Amtrak safety.


----------



## xyzzy (Mar 10, 2015)

I have it on good authority that the two on the locomotive (engineer and trainee) are banged up but ok. Haven't heard about the six crew members in the train cars.


----------



## keelhauled (Mar 10, 2015)

It seems to me like if people had died this would have become a much bigger story. Given that no one involved (Amtrak, police department, hospital, etc) has confirmed deaths by now (plenty of time to notify next of kin), I for one am assuming that there are no fatalities (unless an injury becomes fatal at some point).


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 10, 2015)

keelhauled said:


> It seems to me like if people had died this would have become a much bigger story. Given that no one involved (Amtrak, police department, hospital, etc) has confirmed deaths by now (plenty of time to notify next of kin), I for one am assuming that there are no fatalities (unless an injury becomes fatal at some point).


It's been on my local and national news since yesterday. How much bigger story are you talking about?


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 10, 2015)

Southbound Auto Train is now in the vicinity of Jesup, GA, approx. 3 hours from Sanford.


----------



## neutralist (Mar 10, 2015)

FriskyFL said:


> What's it going to take in order to end the callous, reckless disregard for railroad crossings? Jailing the drivers and their employers? Massive fines? They just cannot be educated.


Capitalism demands performance metrics. Speed and time elapsed are some of the examples of performance metrics by truck drivers. With the current economy, it is understandable that people will push to the edge.

Same with people modifying the truck meters so that they can drive 36 hours without sleep and without being detected.


----------



## jis (Mar 10, 2015)

FormerOBS said:


> Southbound Auto Train is now in the vicinity of Jesup, GA, approx. 3 hours from Sanford.


So theoretically they could have run 91 and 97 too. They'd have had to bustitute ORL - Tampa.
I still wonder how they are going to get the consists in the right place. Presumably 92 and 98 on 3/11 will be canceled?


----------



## keelhauled (Mar 10, 2015)

AmtrakBlue said:


> keelhauled said:
> 
> 
> > It seems to me like if people had died this would have become a much bigger story. Given that no one involved (Amtrak, police department, hospital, etc) has confirmed deaths by now (plenty of time to notify next of kin), I for one am assuming that there are no fatalities (unless an injury becomes fatal at some point).
> ...


I've hardly seen a thing. There were the initial articles run, then one about someone who apparently was in a car crash and then this, but other than that, very little outside of industry specific sources.


----------



## Domefoamer (Mar 10, 2015)

So far, it sounds like the state trooper on the scene failed his responsibility to stop the train. hat would place a huge liability on the state government-- ironic, in the light of the recent Hoosier State controversy, where the state didn't want to be legally responsible for any mistakes in running the RR.

What can we do to reduce these accidents, which seem to strike Amtrak almost monthly? Eliminating all grade crossings isn't financially feasible (or is that "politically feasible"?). Trucker licensing should be revised to include extensive training drilling into these guys' heads that although the feel like Kings of the Road, to a moving train they're just a speed bump. And cops need to be trained to follow the notification procedures, of course.

Then, let's throw a little technology at the problem. It shouldn't take much invention. Using standard burglar alarm technology, let's include infrared monitoring at all passenger rail grade crossings. If a solid object remains on the rail for, say, 15 seconds or more, an alert would be sent to a dispatcher. Any junior engineer with ADT ought to be able to devise this. It ought to have been included in the PTC program, though I've never heard of that. For every sleeping engineer's overspeed accident, there seem to be a dozen of these crossing mishaps occurring.

Will it cost money? Of course, but probably less than we spend in placing closed-circuit cameras into mini-marts.


----------



## fairviewroad (Mar 10, 2015)

Domefoamer said:


> So far, it sounds like the state trooper on the scene failed his responsibility to stop the train.


No, it doesn't sound like that. We don't know enough to say whether or not the trooper tried to alert the railroad, or how much

time elapsed before the trooper arrived on scene until the train arrived. Maybe the cop called right away, and it was the railroad that dropped

the ball in terms of alerting the engineer in time. (See, I just cast aspersions on someone else entirely, also without any evidence!)


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 10, 2015)

xyzzy said:


> Q: Which two consecutive stations on any Amtrak route have the most grade crossings between them?
> 
> Worthy of a thread of its own.


Oh, I don't really think so. Only reason I did the Richmond to Jacksonville look-see was because I kind of enjoy taking trips along the tracks with my "Google Earth ultralight airplane". But the question posed above was just a rhetorical one. That's because to figure out a definite answer, I think all possibilities would have to be explored. And with about 880 stations spread out over all the different routes that task would be huge gargantuan! Perhaps only suitable for someone who's young and serving a life sentence - with keen vision.


----------



## john h (Mar 10, 2015)

Could technology help here, lets say a censor that puts a right light on the tracks if a vehicle is on the tracks more than say 30 secs?

No one should even be stopped on railroad tracks more than 10 secs even if theres a traffic light you just don't stop on the tracks


----------



## xyzzy (Mar 10, 2015)

FormerOBS said:


> Update from today's southbound Auto train:
> 
> Departed Lorton a bit before 9 p.m. last night. Normal running should have placed he A-T at the "incident" site around 12:30 a.m.
> 
> Delays encountered north of Halifax. Passed Halifax around 3:00 a.m.


Track opened about 2:30 am, so 53 would have been one of (if not the first) southbound through. Doesn't surprise me that 91 and 97 were annulled. By that time every stretch of second track between Collier Yard and accident site would have had a freight sitting in it. I suppose all three trains could have closed together just north of the accident site but that would have been risky if the track took longer to reopen than forecasted.


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 10, 2015)

Domefoamer said:


> Then, let's throw a little technology at the problem. It shouldn't take much invention. Using standard burglar alarm technology, let's include infrared monitoring at all passenger rail grade crossings. If a solid object remains on the rail for, say, 15 seconds or more, an alert would be sent to a dispatcher. Any junior engineer with ADT ought to be able to devise this. It ought to have been included in the PTC program, though I've never heard of that. For every sleeping engineer's overspeed accident, there seem to be a dozen of these crossing mishaps occurring.
> 
> Will it cost money? Of course, but probably less than we spend in placing closed-circuit cameras into mini-marts.


How big of a solid object? The size of a person? Car? House? A bird? A Plane? ...

That doesn't prevent the very slow solid object from getting on the tracks just before the train gets there. And what do you think will happen when kids or even vandals or thieves discover that all they have to do to stop the train is to stand in the middle of the track, holding up their hand in the stop position. Imagine the photo-op, let alone the thefts.

Consider the physics of the matter. Consider a mile-long freight train moving at 60 mph. It'll take about a mile to stop. That means the crossing needs to be kept clear once the train enters the last mile. In order to do that, the gates need to start operating. Now at that speed, it will also take the train 1 full minute to reach the crossing, let alone traverse it. Do you think John Q. Public will want to sit at the crossing a full minute before the train even gets there, and then however long it takes for the train to go by?

The answer is no. That's why there is no clear grade crossing feature in PTC.

jb


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 10, 2015)

Any system that alerts a train to the presence of an obstruction on the tracks, would have to alert the engine crew at least 60 - 90 seconds in advance. if the obstruction is present for 10 -15 seconds, it could likely clear the crossing within 30 - 45 more seconds. Meanwhile, the engineer has initiated an emergency brake application for nothing. Once he/she has done that, the train WILL stop. There is no changing your mind. An emergency stop will put stress on every part of the running gear of the train, and in extreme cases can result in a derailment. The train cannot safely resume its journey until it has been inspected. In the case of a long freight train, this means the engineer stays in the cab while the conductor walks to the rear of the train and then walks back to the front on the opposite side. Modern freight trains are often well over a mile in length. Then the train line must be recharged with air to release the brakes. If the obstruction is detected less than 60 - 90 seconds before impact, there may be no reason to slow or stop the train anyway because the collision may be inevitable. If that happened every time some driver cuts it close, the RR system would be nearly crippled with unnecessary stops. Yes, the problem is that widespread. The solution is not to stop the train from doing what trains do. The solution is to keep vehicular traffic off the tracks where they don't belong.

NO MACHINE CAN COMPENSATE FOR POOR JUDGMENT.

Tom


----------



## jis (Mar 10, 2015)

Amtrak P42 #185 after re-railing:

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=522514


----------



## john h (Mar 10, 2015)

FormerOBS, thanks for your thoughts from the average driver I had no idea all of that was involved

Anyway can you share your thoughts on the system they use in Connecticut?

http://www.nbcbayarea.com/news/national-international/Sensors-on-Connecticut-Amtrak-Line-Alerts-Trains-to-Vehicles-on-Track-290850911.html


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 10, 2015)

I don't have any knowledge or experience with the system in Connecticut, so it wouldn't be appropriate for me to comment. However, it seems to me that any system that alerts the train in time, will probably block the crossing for a longer time than many drivers will tolerate. Probably at least 90 - 120 seconds.

I did not edit the above post, even though it says I did. The system would not accept my edits. I was going to add that the inspection of a train after an emergency stop would be seriously complicated by such additional factors as pitch darkness, snow/sleet/rain storms, etc. Of course, the conductor would have additional problems if part of the train is in a tunnel, stretched out on a bridge, or in a high crime area.

Tom


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 10, 2015)

Again, my last post was not edited because the system wouldn't accept my changes. (??????)

I was going to add that there was a very good, thorough discussion of these "smart" grade crossing issues on the Kalmbach Publishing Co., Trains Magazine forum after the Valhalla, NY collision a couple weeks ago.

To


----------



## Ryan (Mar 10, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> Ahh - but Ryan didn't state in which direction he was off by an order of magnitude. He COULD have meant there were 2,500 crossings!


Actually, that is the direction I was talking about. Thinking about it a little more analytically, 2500 crossings in 600+ miles would mean a crossing every 1/4 mile, which is obviously way too high.

Even 500 seems way too low to me, when you account for private crossings (the original comment didn't specify crossings protected by gates and flashing lights).



jis said:


> Amtrak P42 #185 after re-railing:
> 
> http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=522514


Looks like that'll buff right out.


----------



## jis (Mar 10, 2015)

RyanS said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak P42 #185 after re-railing:
> ...


Looks like it bounced around a bit on soft ground and did not hit any immovable solid object while at it.


----------



## me_little_me (Mar 10, 2015)

FormerOBS said:


> Any system that alerts a train to the presence of an obstruction on the tracks, would have to alert the engine crew at least 60 - 90 seconds in advance. if the obstruction is present for 10 -15 seconds, it could likely clear the crossing within 30 - 45 more seconds. Meanwhile, the engineer has initiated an emergency brake application for nothing. Once he/she has done that, the train WILL stop. There is no changing your mind. An emergency stop will put stress on every part of the running gear of the train, and in extreme cases can result in a derailment. The train cannot safely resume its journey until it has been inspected. In the case of a long freight train, this means the engineer stays in the cab while the conductor walks to the rear of the train and then walks back to the front on the opposite side. Modern freight trains are often well over a mile in length. Then the train line must be recharged with air to release the brakes. If the obstruction is detected less than 60 - 90 seconds before impact, there may be no reason to slow or stop the train anyway because the collision may be inevitable. If that happened every time some driver cuts it close, the RR system would be nearly crippled with unnecessary stops. Yes, the problem is that widespread. The solution is not to stop the train from doing what trains do. The solution is to keep vehicular traffic off the tracks where they don't belong.
> 
> NO MACHINE CAN COMPENSATE FOR POOR JUDGMENT.
> 
> Tom


Your assumption is based on whether or not the train can completely stop in time to avoid an accident. But given that there is a detector that senses a large object (vehicle) inside the gates once the gates begin to come down, would not an immediate signal to the train to initiate a non-emergency stop at least reduce the effects of the impending crash? It may not save the idiot blocking or running the gates but could mitigate engine, engineer and passenger damage.


----------



## afigg (Mar 10, 2015)

niemi24s said:


> Oh, I don't really think so. Only reason I did the Richmond to Jacksonville look-see was because I kind of enjoy taking trips along the tracks with my "Google Earth ultralight airplane". But the question posed above was just a rhetorical one. That's because to figure out a definite answer, I think all possibilities would have to be explored. And with about 880 stations spread out over all the different routes that task would be huge gargantuan! Perhaps only suitable for someone who's young and serving a life sentence - with keen vision.


Or get route data and write a database query program to examine the extensive FRA database on road-rail grade crossings and compare it to the route to determine how many public and private grade crossings are on the route. The FRA's Office of Saferty Analysis provide very detailed information and statistics on grade crossings, accidents, injuires, going back many years on this webpage. Or ask Amtrak, but I suspect they won't be inclined to provide detailed stats on grade crossings on their routes, because they rather not play aspect that up.

As for the grade crossing where this incident occurred, the crossing ID is 629659J. Using the query feature to pull up accident reports for the crossing, there have been 5 reported accidents since 1977. The most recent was in 2005 with a 62 car long CSX freight train, hitting the trailer of an empty vehicle that was stopped on the crossing. Going further back, on November 4, 1977 at 4:30 PM, a 8 car long Amtrak train hit a, there is a theme here, vehicle that was stopped on the crossing. There are 2 reports for the 1977 incident, one from Amtrak and another from Seaboard Coast Line RR.

Not many collisions over a 38 year period, but still, 4 out of the 5 are listed as vehicles stopped on the crossing, 1 is listed as driver driving around the lowered gates (in 1984, somehow no injuries).


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 10, 2015)

To "me...."

Yes, it might lessen the severity of the collision. But the fact remains, it's up to the automobile driver to ensure that he doesn't stall, get stuck, park, run out of gas, stop for a smoke, drive off the road and onto the track, pause to kiss his girlfriend, make a three-point turn, or do any other things of that kind on the crossing. The ultimate responsibility has to be up to the driver because of the basic principles of physics.

As for the number of crossings, I think I once heard that the number of crossings on the Auto Train route was close to one per mile. I'm sure that number has been reduced since I heard that number.

Tom


----------



## nanavc (Mar 10, 2015)

I live in Lakeland it wasn't the 92 that hit the pedestrian it was a freight and she was texting ,walked around the gates and into the side of the train. Compund fracture to her arm and injury to her leg. Story here... 8.wfla.com/1HvD54a


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 10, 2015)

RyanS said:


> Even 500 seems way too low to me, when you account for private crossings (the original comment didn't specify crossings protected by gates and flashing lights).


I counted every place along the tracks that looked like a place where a wheeled vehicle could get across without too much difficulty - even the crude ones allowing farm machinery to get across from one field to another or a dirt road that just leads to a farm house. I suspect things like dirt bikes and ATV's don't need anything fancy to get across as long as it's not in the middle of a bridge, for instance. But there's probably a million different places along the route where they could. There are a fair number of paces on Google Earth that appear to be some sort of grade crossing at first glance, but a closer look reveals many of them to be merely a place where two roads approach each other on opposite sides of the track but don't connect. Maybe there had been a grade crossing at some of these locations in the past, but zooming in reveals nothing but fresh ballast, ties and rails.

And I'm not claiming to have found 100% of them or to have accurately recorded those I did find for later addition. The only ones not included in the 510 total were those in yards appearing to be for use by railroad vehicles - not the general public.

If you've got three spare hours to fritter away, why not open up Google Earth and see how many you can find?


----------



## fairviewroad (Mar 10, 2015)

niemi24s said:


> If you've got three spare hours to fritter away, why not open up Google Earth and see how many you can find?


Or buy a ticket and listen very, very carefully to the whistle patterns!


----------



## Just-Thinking-51 (Mar 10, 2015)

The oversized cargo is my issue. Too many big supersized items moving on the highways that don't need to be there. House and commerical building. Cheaper to build in a factory and then drive it the to site. But really no reason to be a supersized load other than greed.

That load could of been on several normal size flat bed truck. Sure it cost more to put together, but much safer to transport.

Ever see a telecom shelter on a truck. The sides are overhanging, but there is space in front and in back of it. No good reason at all. You could make it no wider than the truck and just make it longer.

Greed before Safety.


----------



## RampWidget (Mar 10, 2015)

nanavc said:


> I live in Lakeland it wasn't the 92 that hit the pedestrian it was a freight and she was texting ,walked around the gates and into the side of the train. Compund fracture to her arm and injury to her leg. Story here... 8.wfla.com/1HvD54a


nanavc, you are correct. 92(9) was delayed behind the freight train involved in the pedestrian incident, not directly involved in the incident. Thanks for catching my oversight.


----------



## RampWidget (Mar 10, 2015)

jis said:


> FormerOBS said:
> 
> 
> > Southbound Auto Train is now in the vicinity of Jesup, GA, approx. 3 hours from Sanford.
> ...


52(10) ETD SFA 1100p (7 hr L)

53(10) dp LOR 500p (1 hr L)

89(10) 1 hr 25 mn L by YEM

90(10) originated FLO, operating on schedule

91(10) operating on schedule

97(10) operating on schedule

98(11) operate as scheduled out of MIA - with what consist, I have not heard

92(11) will operate as scheduled out of MIA - ditto


----------



## jis (Mar 10, 2015)

Maybe the ferried empty consists south? They definitely had enough time to do so.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 10, 2015)

Northbound Auto Train began boarding shortly after 10:30 EDT.


----------



## ehbowen (Mar 10, 2015)

john h said:


> Could technology help here, lets say a censor that puts a right light on the tracks if a vehicle is on the tracks more than say 30 secs?
> 
> No one should even be stopped on railroad tracks more than 10 secs even if theres a traffic light you just don't stop on the tracks


If we did put a sensor on the tracks, and the word got out, the amount of time before yahoos began parking on the tracks and daring the train to stop could probably be most conveniently measured in minutes.

Unless, perhaps, we coupled it with a "Stop here and lose your license and your car/truck/semi" camera. Now, that's a thought.


----------



## Jordan Knapp (VirginiaR..) (Mar 10, 2015)

Hey! Thats my Photo!! lol

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=522514
http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=522510
(Photos Courtesy of Myself)


----------



## PaulM (Mar 11, 2015)

jis said:


> RyanS said:
> 
> 
> > That number's got to be off by at least an order of magnitude.
> ...


Aha! I've always wondered what an "order of magnitude" was. I heard it mentioned lot when I lived in DC  , but never studied it in any math class. Now at least I know it has something to do with the number 10.


----------



## RampWidget (Mar 11, 2015)

jis said:


> Maybe the ferried empty consists south? They definitely had enough time to do so.


Good point; could well be, but I haven't seen any extra equipment headed south. It shouldn't be an issue to find four or five Viewliner sleepers at HIA, and we know there are several Viewliner bags (theoretically) available. There's AMF and likely a diner in or around the maintenance facility, but I wouldn't think there would be two diners, two cafes, and eight coaches ready for service. It will be interesting to see what the folks at the coach yard come up with this morning.


----------



## PhilaBurbTom (Mar 11, 2015)

I just got up to check my e-mail as I have reservations on S/B 53 today (3/11). The e-mail was sent at 12:31AM this morning I called AMTRAK as they asked me to in the e-mail and said that check-in at Lorton had been pushed back until 4pm due to the derailment. I suppose late is better than cancelled.


----------



## SilverService (Mar 11, 2015)

Train 98(11) is cancelled account no equipment. Enough equipment was readied to operate 92(11) with a normal consist plus an extra sleeper.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 11, 2015)

PaulM said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > RyanS said:
> ...


Powers of 10 - so if his 250 was off by an order of magnitude, the correct answer is 25 or 2500. Off by 2 orders of magnitude would be a factor of 100, so 2.5 or 25000. So on from there.

I really should have thought about it in terms of track length. An average of 1 grade crossing per mile feels about right to me, so something on the far side of 600 crossings for that stretch, which isn't too far off from what was counted.


----------



## PRR 60 (Mar 11, 2015)

Some interesting info:

The truck was carrying a modular power distribution center. This is kind of a small substation used at commercial and industrial facilities. They are built in a factory, hauled to the site, set on foundations, and plugged-in (not quite that easy, but you get the idea). They are pretty big and pretty heavy.

The truck was operating under an oversize load permit that, in North Carolina, requires a state police escort. The patrolman was at the scene and directing traffic as the truck was attempting to turn left onto US 301.

During the process as traffic was stopped, a woman in the stopped traffic lowered her window and asked one of the workers flagging traffic if he could alert the railroad. He said that he did not think so.

When asked why the patrolman had not called the railroad, the state police said the trucking company is responsible to call the railroad if a truck is stuck on a crossing.

McClatchy DC

WRAL

News & Observer


----------



## dlagrua (Mar 11, 2015)

We seem to be reading reports of Amtrak grade crossing accidents more frequently. If it keeps going like this, the situation could result in a severe shortage of engines and other cars. AFAIK, Amtrak doesn't have much spare equipment and Bear or Beech Grove can't do repairs overnight. I hope that more train cancellations won't be a result.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 11, 2015)

Your feelings are not born out in actual data:




Graph constructed by me, based on data available here: http://oli.org/about-us/news/collisions-casulties



PRR 60 said:


> When asked why the patrolman had not called the railroad, the state police said the trucking company is responsible to call the railroad if a truck is stuck on a crossing.


That's so completely ridiculous that I actually believe it's true. So much for "To protect and serve"...


----------



## chrsjrcj (Mar 11, 2015)

> When asked why the patrolman had not called the railroad, the state police said the trucking company is responsible to call the railroad if a truck is stuck on a crossing.


What. That's the most ridiculous thing I've ever heard.


----------



## VentureForth (Mar 11, 2015)

What bothers me in the first two of these articles is that a woman asked if *they* should call the railroad. If she was concerned, *she* should have called them and then stayed on the phone until the truck cleared.



RyanS said:


> Your feelings are not born out in actual data:


This is the longest "plateau" without improvement since the beginning of the graph and even a slight uptick since 2009. Fair to say that there's been a bit of complacency in the last 6 years.
But what we hear about isn't necessarily AMTRAK incidents. It's passenger rail incidents. The other two this year were Metro North and Metrolink.


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 11, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> What bothers me in the first two of these articles is that a woman asked if *they* should call the railroad. If she was concerned, *she* should have called them and then stayed on the phone until the truck cleared.


So you're saying the woman should have parked her car in the middle of the road (because she was stuck in traffic), presumably leaving the kids and the dog in the car alone, walked over to the little blue sign to get the dispatcher's phone number and called on her cell phone.

I don't expect most people would do that - ESPECIALLY if they are expecting a wreck. In that situation, if the gates start going down, they'd want to make some sort of crazy maneuver to get the heck out of there.

I happen to have the numbers already entered in my cell phone, but the average person would not.

jb


----------



## VentureForth (Mar 11, 2015)

My assumption was that if she was close enough to roll her window down to talk to the truck driver, she was close enough to see the phone number on the crossing arm.

I would not expect anyone to put themselves or others into additional danger.


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 11, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> Fair to say that there's been a bit of complacency in the last 6 years.


I don't think that can be fairly said without factoring in the total amount of passenger and freight traffic.


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 11, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> My assumption was that if she was close enough to roll her window down to talk to the truck driver, she was close enough to see the phone number on the crossing arm.
> 
> I would not expect anyone to put themselves or others into additional danger.


The number is not on the crossing arm. The number is written on a LITTLE blue sign which stands at the side of the road, just in front of the crossbucks sign. I doubt if anyone could read it from their car stopped at the crossing. Perhaps it should be written on a big RED sign so that it would be legible from a stopped car at the crossing.

jb


----------



## afigg (Mar 11, 2015)

PRR 60 said:


> During the process as traffic was stopped, a woman in the stopped traffic lowered her window and asked one of the workers flagging traffic if he could alert the railroad. He said that he did not think so.
> 
> When asked why the patrolman had not called the railroad, the state police said the trucking company is responsible to call the railroad if a truck is stuck on a crossing.


The legal finger pointing of "hey it was the other guys responsibility" is just getting started. The modular power center was likely an expensive piece of equipment and, from the photos, is likely a complete write-off. This is going to be a costly accident for one or more insurance companies and the trucking company. This was an entirely avoidable collision if the trucking company had followed a proper procedure when moving a seriously oversized load. There should have been a detailed move plan that covered every intersection and turn and obstacle, including the grade crossing.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 11, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> But what we hear about isn't necessarily AMTRAK incidents. It's passenger rail incidents. The other two this year were Metro North and Metrolink.


Good point - we can dive into the FRA data, but that only includes Class Is, so we can look at Amtrak but not the commuter roads.

We can see that the number of highway-rail incidents is in fact increasing for Amtrak, when normalized for train miles:


----------



## afigg (Mar 11, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> This is the longest "plateau" without improvement since the beginning of the graph and even a slight uptick since 2009. Fair to say that there's been a bit of complacency in the last 6 years.
> 
> But what we hear about isn't necessarily AMTRAK incidents. It's passenger rail incidents. The other two this year were Metro North and Metrolink.


Presumably a number of reason for the plateau. The easier part in reducing grade crossing collisions has been done. Tighter state road and highway budgets since the 2008 recession have resulted - after the construction surge from the stimulus - in a big dropoff in completing grade separation and grade crossing improvement projects.

The HSIPR funded projects will close or improve hundreds of grade crossings on some Amtrak routes and there are state projects that will close grade crossings (Southern CA, CREATE, etc) but there are many thousands of grade crossings in the US. So reducing the grade crossing collision annual stats has probably moved into the increasingly difficult to do stage.


----------



## Karl1459 (Mar 11, 2015)

afigg said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> > During the process as traffic was stopped, a woman in the stopped traffic lowered her window and asked one of the workers flagging traffic if he could alert the railroad. He said that he did not think so.
> ...


It would be fun if we were to be a fly on the wall in the sorting out of liabilities.

The trucking company.

The DOT for issuing a permit (assuming there was no move plan)

The State Patrol, for failing to recgonize the hazard on the tracks and take approprate action in notifing the railroad.

As to the officer who felt it was not his job to notifiy the railroad, he may well find out it is no longer his job.


----------



## Paulus (Mar 11, 2015)

RyanS said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > But what we hear about isn't necessarily AMTRAK incidents. It's passenger rail incidents. The other two this year were Metro North and Metrolink.
> ...


You can get it for all passenger railroads as well.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 11, 2015)

Thanks!

Not a hugely different story:


----------



## VentureForth (Mar 11, 2015)

Paulus said:


> RyanS said:
> 
> 
> > VentureForth said:
> ...


And what is interesting from that site is that the trend seems to be going up with regards to injuries, and slightly decreasing for fatalities. Sorry - can't upload pretty charts from work. So, with Ryan's chart, it looks like incidents are on the rise, but deaths resulting from them are being reduced.

But, obviously, the best way to reduce injuries and accidents is to reduce the encounters in the first place.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 11, 2015)

Who had the legal responsibility to notify the railroad? We are talking about people who were supposed to be doing their job.

The job of the woman in the car was to drive safely and get her kid(s) to wherever they were going. So it wasn't her job to call the railroad.

The driver of a rig like that is not your ordinary semi driver. He was more specialized. His job was to move a very large, unconventional item to its destination safely. As part of his job, he needed to be aware of obstructions and potential obstructions, and he needed to deal with potential hazards, like trains doing what trains do. He had an obligation to be sure the way was clear BEFORE he started across the track. Looking down the track is not sufficient, especially when there is a blind curve both north and south. I think he bears the greatest share of the blame, unless this responsibility had been clearly delegated to somebody else, such as his flagman or a representative of his Company at Company headquarters.

The flagman who told the woman that he didn't think they could notify the railroad, showed that he is just plain ignorant and/or stupid, and not qualified to hold that job.

The job of a highway patrol officer is public safety as it relates to highway travel. Highway travel includes grade crossings. If he felt that it was solely the driver's responsibility to contact the railroad, then ordinary prudence would require him to ascertain whether the driver had actually made the contact. It appears that he did not, so he shares the blame.

I think we can all agree that it is not the job of the dispatcher to know about these things through intuition or E.S.P.

I think we can all agree that it is not the job of the engineer to be able to see around blind curves. If anybody had been killed, he'd have been the guy.

The courts will sort it out, and the lawyers are the only ones who will profit.

Tom

Tom


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 11, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> My assumption was that if she was close enough to roll her window down to talk to the truck driver, she was close enough to see the phone number on the crossing arm.
> 
> I would not expect anyone to put themselves or others into additional danger.


She was not talking to the truck driver, who I assume was in the truck. She was talking to a flag man. I suspect the traffic was stopped no where near the little blue sign if they were trying to give the truck room to make the turn.


----------



## KmH (Mar 11, 2015)

First - reports indicate the truck was not stuck. The truck just could not make the turn with out the trailer wheels on the inside of the turn going off the pavement and the trailer hitting something(s) on the inside of the turn.

The state says - It's not our fault we approved a route the truck could apparently not actually negotiate.

Law enforcement says - notifying the railroad is not our job.

The truck driver, the truck owner, and the escort vehicle operators haven't been heard from.

1. States need better information so they can do a better job of evaluating a route.

2. Law enforcement needs officers that have common sense.

3. Drivers of specialty trucks like the one in this incident need to be (are?) held to a higher standard than the drivers of normal, 18 wheeled, semi-tractor/trailer trucks.

The driver of the truck should have had sufficient experience as to be able to see he could not make the turn, or would have difficulty making the turn, _*BEFORE*_ he pulled up onto the railroad tracks. Kudos to Amber Keeter, the 19 year old who suggested notifying the railroad to the flagman (who likely worked for the escort car service).

Once he was unable to make the turn on the first attempt and had the tracks blocked, the truck driver, the trooper, and the escort vehicles should all have thought to immediately contact the railroad.

The truck owner - Guy M. Turner Inc. of Greensboro seems to be the most culpable entity in this incident.

The truck driver seems to be 2nd most culpable.

The trooper on the scene seems to have been less than competent to some degree, but like truck drivers LEOs don't have very stringent licensing requirements.

I'm trying to figure out why both escort vehicle were apparently behind the truck.

Tom's (FormerOBS) comments above are pretty much on the mark.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 11, 2015)

Synopsis: " It's not my job man!"

" Who's going to pay?"

The State Trooper that was working this gig probably needs to find a different line of work that wouldn't involve using common sense, Wal- Mart is always hiring!


----------



## StriderGDM (Mar 11, 2015)

Yeah the "it wasn't stuck" excuse won't fly. I think a good lawyer will easily make the case that being unable to clear the crossing, even if the truck was capable of movement still counts as "stuck".

The engineer is also probably quite likely that this was low trailer as it appears it allowed the engine to climb up and over a bit as opposed to hitting the trailer dead on.


----------



## xyzzy (Mar 11, 2015)

The NCHP officer failed to safeguard the public (i.e. the Amtrak crew and passengers) from what was a clear and imminent danger. Even if the primary responsibility of notifying CSX was the driver's, the NCHP officer should have verified that the driver had called. On average, a CSX or Amtrak train traverses this track every 40 minutes. Even if the trailer blocked the crossing for 5 minutes -- the lowest amount of time heard from witnesses -- there was a non-negligible probability of an arrival during that 5 minutes.

That said, legal liability of the State of NC in this instance will be determined by the "public duty doctrine" that makes it difficult, although not impossible, to find the State liable.


----------



## FriskyFL (Mar 11, 2015)

And the trucking company will contend that the train should have swerved to avoid the truck...and the jury will buy it.


----------



## Guest (Mar 11, 2015)

FormerOBS said:


> The driver of a rig like that is not your ordinary semi driver. He was more specialized. His job was to move a very large, unconventional item to its destination safely. As part of his job, he needed to be aware of obstructions and potential obstructions, and he needed to deal with potential hazards, like trains doing what trains do. He had an obligation to be sure the way was clear BEFORE he started across the track. Looking down the track is not sufficient, especially when there is a blind curve both north and south. I think he bears the greatest share of the blame, unless this responsibility had been clearly delegated to somebody else, such as his flagman or a representative of his Company at Company headquarters.





KmH said:


> The driver of the truck should have had sufficient experience as to be able to see he could not make the turn, or would have difficulty making the turn, _*BEFORE*_ he pulled up onto the railroad tracks. Kudos to Amber Keeter, the 19 year old who suggested notifying the railroad to the flagman (who likely worked for the escort car service).


More info about the truck driver is surfacing....

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/03/11/courts-truck-driver-in-nc-amtrak-crash-that-injured-55-is-felon-and-repeat/


----------



## jis (Mar 11, 2015)

jimhudson said:


> Synopsis: " It's not my job man!"
> 
> " Who's going to pay?"
> 
> The State Trooper that was working this gig probably needs to find a different line of work that wouldn't involve using common sense, Wal- Mart is always hiring!


This whole thing kinda reminds me of six monkeys pointing at each other.


----------



## john h (Mar 11, 2015)

Wow with news about the truck driver record, the trucking company will get a few lawsuits from those on the train I am sure, even if not badly injured


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 11, 2015)

If I saw him at Wal Mart, I'm not sure I'd trust him to direct me to the kitty litter dept.


----------



## RampWidget (Mar 11, 2015)

PhilaBurbTom said:


> I just got up to check my e-mail as I have reservations on S/B 53 today (3/11). The e-mail was sent at 12:31AM this morning I called AMTRAK as they asked me to in the e-mail and said that check-in at Lorton had been pushed back until 4pm due to the derailment. I suppose late is better than cancelled.


53(11) operating crew signed up on duty at LOR 830p. Train should be departing shortly.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 11, 2015)

I'm curious about the permitting process. If I were sitting at my desk and was told to look over and authorize the plan for moving an item that weighs that much, and measures 16' x 16' x 165', I think I'd be asking some very pointed questions about turning radius, the ability of the load to stay level over undulating road surfaces, etc., etc., etc. I'd want to know every detail about how these guys were going to negotiate EVERY intersection, whether there was a railroad nearby or not. Didn't anybody consider the benefits of modular construction? Bringing the components to New Jersey in several smaller shipments and assembling the "kit" on site? The mind that came up with this "plan" is a scary mind indeed.

Tom


----------



## Just-Thinking-51 (Mar 12, 2015)

Well I can not find any details about the drivers record. However I would think it just a bunch of media hype. Nothing I can find gives detail other than the overweight ticket and failure to show.

A history is a history, but is it current history?

There's nothing in the rules that disqualifies a driver with a criminal record from getting a commercial license. Heck my former employer would get federal funds for each ex-con we hired.

Sorry but sounds like BS.

Got a lot of issues with the whole event but the drivers past is not on that screen.

Truck driver, trucking company, flagging service, police, the shipper, the item, the receiver and the route plan by the state. So many issues....

This wreck should of never happen. Too many points of failure. Complete preventable IMHO.


----------



## NW cannonball (Mar 12, 2015)

The finger-pointing will go on, the lawyers will have good revenue. Sure.

But, in the private sector -- the response will be faster, but not very fast.

Because the builder and buyer of the (probably) multimillion dollar "load center" super-specialized custom multi-hundred-ton thing that was wasted in the collision are hurting financially.

The buyer of that thing has had their construction plans set back at least several months, maybe more, and the builder is probably already working on other projects.

Whatever the buyer was planning to do with that cargo, whether building a hospital, data center, factory - whatever - they, the buyer, will also be suing everyone in sight, because all their building plans just got totally blown.

Luckily, their (probably many many million ) loss didn't also cost any loss of life. But I'd guess they will have a new person planning and scheduling transport very soon.


----------



## X (Mar 12, 2015)

The state of North Carolina holds ultimate responsibility for this one in my opinion.

NC should require oversize load permit holders to notify the railroad of their moves in advance, so that the railroad can appropriately protect the crossings. The warning time for this crossing was probably only 20 seconds, and oversize loads often take longer than that to clear even when everything goes perfectly. Likely the *only* safe way for this load to have safely cleared the crossing is if the RR was able to protect it *before* the load entered it.


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 12, 2015)

X said:


> The state of North Carolina holds ultimate responsibility for this one in my opinion.
> 
> NC should require oversize load permit holders to notify the railroad of their moves in advance, so that the railroad can appropriately protect the crossings. The warning time for this crossing was probably only 20 seconds, and oversize loads often take longer than that to clear even when everything goes perfectly. Likely the *only* safe way for this load to have safely cleared the crossing is if the RR was able to protect it *before* the load entered it.


Instead of simply *notifying* the railroad, they should be required to *get permission* at the time they want to cross it.

jb


----------



## Guest (Mar 12, 2015)

With the decisions of liability and lawsuits, I am curious to ask, what about Amtrak?

Does Amtrak have insurance for this, or is Amtrak basically self-insured?

If Amtrak was to collect from one of the responsible parties, wouldn't they simply get depreciated value, not replacement value? What's the depreciated value of some (most?) of those cars? I mean, that heritage baggage car is worth what, $1? Compare that to the cost of a new Viewliner baggage car to replace it.


----------



## NW cannonball (Mar 12, 2015)

John Bobinyec said:


> X said:
> 
> 
> > The state of North Carolina holds ultimate responsibility for this one in my opinion.
> ...


Roger that -- schedule date, time risks assessment, pay the risk fee to to railroad and insurers, not kidding.When my neighbors need to cross my property for tree-trimming, utility installation, whatever, they ask me what they want, we agree what they need, we agree who's responsible for what, and we show each other and the contractors insurance people the agreement.

Why can't railroads and road owners do this seemingly obvious care?


----------



## Acela150 (Mar 13, 2015)

Who do you think would be able to get in touch with CSX sooner? A 911 dispatch center? Or a guy driving a guide car who doesn't know to look at the grade crossing for a number to the dispatcher for that segment of track. 911 dispatch centers have more phone numbers at their disposal then you can imagine.


----------



## prech786 (Mar 13, 2015)

Here is a picture of the intersection from an AP story the day after the crash. The original intent of the picture was to show the sign with the CSX Emergency Call Number which was prominently visible at the crossing. Can anyone see a problem here?

Yes, it looks like that box truck in the photo is blocking the RR Xing just waiting for the traffic light to change. 

Anyone care to guess/estimate how often this happens each day here?? That box truck could just as easily be a school bus.


----------



## jis (Mar 13, 2015)

Around where I live in Florida where there are numerous grade crossings across the FEC main line, in situations where a traffic light is adjacent to a railroad crossing, usually the stop line for the traffic light is painted on the side of the grade crossing away from the traffic light, thus indicating that traffic should stop short of the grade crossing while waiting for the light to change. Well, in Halifax NC, there is is a stop line thus painted at the right place. I suppose what is needed in addition is cross hatch painting across the rial indicating "do not foul when red". Stupidity can possibly be addressed to some extent by making it too obvious what is stupid to do.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 13, 2015)

It doesn't really matter what is the fastest way to reach the RR dispatcher. A rig like the one that got hit should NEVER EVEN START across the track until AFTER the dispatcher has been notified, no matter how long it takes to notify him. How about avoiding the problem in the first place, rather than trying to solve the problem after you've created it? It's something like waiting till you're neck-deep in quicksand before calling for help, when you could have read the warning sign and stayed out of the quicksand in the first place. It can be hard to stop the train when it's barreling down the track in your direction. How about making sure it's NOT barreling down the track? Requires active brain cells.

Tom


----------



## PRR 60 (Mar 13, 2015)

Normal design for a traffic signal adjacent to a railroad grade crossing is to synchronize the signal with the crossing protection. When a train activates the grade crossing protection, the traffic signal should change to provide a green aspect to the approach road crossing the tracks in order to clear any stacked traffic off the tracks. That is traffic signal design 101.

Whether this crossing is designed like that, I do not know. At least in Pennsylvania, a signal permit would not be issued for an intersection like that without the railroad/traffic synchronization. Given that, the simple fact that a truck is shown fouling the crossing at a red light, although wrong, should not end up being an issue with the safety of a properly designed crossing. If the crossing is not properly designed then, in my opinion, the fault is divided between the driver and the improper signalization design.


----------



## Karl1459 (Mar 13, 2015)

Guest said:


> With the decisions of liability and lawsuits, I am curious to ask, what about Amtrak?
> 
> Does Amtrak have insurance for this, or is Amtrak basically self-insured?
> 
> If Amtrak was to collect from one of the responsible parties, wouldn't they simply get depreciated value, not replacement value? What's the depreciated value of some (most?) of those cars? I mean, that heritage baggage car is worth what, $1? Compare that to the cost of a new Viewliner baggage car to replace it.


As I understand (and I am not a lawyer) in a tort claim the injured party is supposed to be "made whole". The standard I have heard in the collector car industry is "like kind and quality". Amtraks loss should be the replacement cost of the baggage car including repainting and inspecting, and the loss of use during the time it takes to do this. If there were hundreds of used ones available in the same condition as Amtraks was before the crash it would be easy. So a good judge/jury would have to consider at a minimum:

The value (actual cash value, not the depreciated "book" value) of the baggage car at the time of the crash.

Less any scrap value.

Less any increased cash value of a replacement baggage car.

Plus the value to Amtrak to have the baggage car available.

Plus the reasonable costs of a substitute baggage car for the time period before a replacement can be placed in service.

Plus any reasonable costs to place the replacement car in service.

Plus any loss of revenue from not having a baggage car available (which could be a problem as Amtrak may not have the cash to replace it).

And thats why the Judges make the big bucks!


----------



## PRR 60 (Mar 13, 2015)

FormerOBS said:


> It doesn't really matter what is the fastest way to reach the RR dispatcher. A rig like the one that got hit should NEVER EVEN START across the track until AFTER the dispatcher has been notified, no matter how long it takes to notify him. How about avoiding the problem in the first place, rather than trying to solve the problem after you've created it? It's something like waiting till you're neck-deep in quicksand before calling for help, when you could have read the warning sign and stayed out of the quicksand in the first place. It can be hard to stop the train when it's barreling down the track in your direction. How about making sure it's NOT barreling down the track? Requires active brain cells.
> 
> Tom


I disagree in the sense that a routine crossing by an oversize load rig is no more difficult or disruptive than a crossing by any truck or vehicle. The truck and trailer, no matter how large, would simply drive across a normal railroad crossing in 10 seconds or less after the requires safety stop. There are tens of thousands of loads like this every day. If every large load had to call every single time they were crossing a railroad, the railroad dispatchers would be swamped with calls with no measurable impact on safety.

The issue here was the hard left turn required from the side road onto US 301. When these heavy, oversize load haulers set up a route, they used specialized software that takes the dimensions and weight of the rig and examines examines a route for overhead clearances, bridge load restrictions, and turning geometry issues. That info becomes the basis for the overload permit issued by the state. That permit includes the route.

If the software showed this particular turning movement to be tight and maybe requiring multiple actions to complete, then I would agree that calling CSX to advise them that the crossing might be fouled for a few minutes would be in order prior to attempting the turn. With 20-20 hindsight, once the turning movement became complex and the trailer was trapped on the tracks as they tried to extract themselves from the mess, then an emergency call should have been made.


----------



## John Bobinyec (Mar 13, 2015)

PRR 60 said:


> If the software showed this particular turning movement to be tight and maybe requiring multiple actions to complete, then I would agree that calling CSX to advise them that the crossing might be fouled for a few minutes would be in order prior to attempting the turn. With 20-20 hindsight, once the turning movement became complex and the trailer was trapped on the tracks as they tried to extract themselves from the mess, then an emergency call should have been made.


And what if the software showed that there would be no difficulties? As a software developer, I would caution that you never find all the bugs.

jb


----------



## NE933 (Mar 13, 2015)

prech786 said:


> Here is a picture of the intersection from an AP story the day after the crash. The original intent of the picture was to show the sign with the CSX Emergency Call Number which was prominently visible at the crossing. Can anyone see a problem here?
> 
> Yes, it looks like that box truck in the photo is blocking the RR Xing just waiting for the traffic light to change.
> 
> ...


Why are those trucks, and school busses, built with so much rear overhang? Maybe if the rear wheels were closer to the rear and not the center, the driver would have a better sense of the vehicle's main body being right over the tracks.


----------



## keelhauled (Mar 13, 2015)

NE933 said:


> prech786 said:
> 
> 
> > Here is a picture of the intersection from an AP story the day after the crash. The original intent of the picture was to show the sign with the CSX Emergency Call Number which was prominently visible at the crossing. Can anyone see a problem here?
> ...


So they can make turns. This way the whole truck roughly follows the path of the wheels. If the rear wheels were at the end of the box the center would overhang and cut into whatever the corner is turning around. Which would subsequently cause the inner rear wheel to hit whatever that is.


----------



## niemi24s (Mar 13, 2015)

For a vehicle of that type (not articulated) and of a given overall length, increasing the rear overhang reduces the vehicles wheelbase which decreases its turning radius. And I suspect a short turning radius is important for a vehicle used for delivery in urban areas where space is limited.


----------



## west point (Mar 13, 2015)

There are some misconceptions here. Having followed ( misnomer ) some oversize rigs often go slower than 5 MPH.. This rig probably was going about 3 - 5 MPH. That means 3-1/2 - 7 feet per second. No way the rig would ever clear in the 25 seconds of a normal crossing circuit. It had 164 feet + another 25 - 30 feet to clear any fouling of crossing gates. 195 feet = 27 - 54 seconds to cross CSX if the rig was going straight. Add in maybe maneuvering around crossing gates. Add in the maneuvering to make the left turn? As a driver I would anticipate it taking as long as 10 minutes.


----------



## west point (Mar 13, 2015)

There are some misconceptions here. Having followed ( misnomer ) some oversize rigs often go slower than 5 MPH.. This rig probably was going about 3 - 5 MPH. That means 3-1/2 - 7 feet per second. No way the rig would ever clear in the 25 seconds of a normal crossing circuit. It had 164 feet + another 25 - 30 feet to clear any fouling of crossing gates. 195 feet = 27 - 54 seconds to cross CSX if the rig was going straight. Add in maybe maneuvering around crossing gates. Add in the maneuvering to make the left turn? As a driver I would anticipate it taking as long as 10 minutes.


----------



## FormerOBS (Mar 13, 2015)

Yes, I concede that these high, wide, & long loads can make turns. But the placement of the wheels at the center of the load means that a 150' load has a 75' "tail" from the pivot point to the rear. On a 2- or 3-lane road, that long tail can't swing freely if the road is lined with telephone poles, street signs, traffic signs, fire hydrants, mailboxes, etc. West Point's math is probably about right. Ten minutes sounds like a nice, practical minimum for a movement of this kind. I have no idea what the maximum would be. I doubt that there is a railroad crossing in this country where the train normally trips the circuit ten full minutes before it reaches the crossing. Therefore I repeat, the call must be made before any attempt is made to pass into the grade crossing limits.

If there is no legal requirement that a call must be made in advance, then the legitimacy of the whole permitting process is in question. How can any State official certify that such a move can be made safely without a requirement that the railroad be notified in advance?

I suspect the manufacturers of these oversized loads must have an awful lot of political clout in their States. However, this movement must have been permitted for NC, VA, MD, PA, and NJ. Surely somebody in at least one of these States must have looked at the permit application with some misgivings.


----------



## Acela150 (Mar 15, 2015)

prech786 said:


> Here is a picture of the intersection from an AP story the day after the crash. The original intent of the picture was to show the sign with the CSX Emergency Call Number which was prominently visible at the crossing. Can anyone see a problem here?
> 
> Yes, it looks like that box truck in the photo is blocking the RR Xing just waiting for the traffic light to change.
> 
> ...


That phone number will call the dispatcher for that section of track. He or She can call all trains and tell them of the situation.


----------



## john h (Mar 15, 2015)

prech

school bus drivers should be stopping before the tracks and only crossing once they can clear the tracks


----------



## KmH (Mar 15, 2015)

The same goes for a tractor/trailer being operated by a driver that has a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) even if it's not an oversize load,


----------



## Ryan (Mar 15, 2015)

That's somewhat ridiculous and completely unnecessary.


----------



## jis (Mar 16, 2015)

KmH said:


> The same goes for a tractor/trailer being operated by a driver that has a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) even if it's not an oversize load,


No. It doesn't! They don't have to stop if they have enough space on the other side to clear the tracks.


----------



## Acela150 (Mar 16, 2015)

john h said:


> prech
> 
> school bus drivers should be stopping before the tracks and only crossing once they can clear the tracks


It's actually a federal law that busses stop at grade crossings open the door listen, look both ways, then proceed.


----------



## GG-1 (Mar 17, 2015)

jis said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > The same goes for a tractor/trailer being operated by a driver that has a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) even if it's not an oversize load,
> ...


Aloha

Probably no longer true, but when I had my Class 7 DL in Hawaii, before they adopted the CDL license provisions all vehicles longer that 28 feet had to stop at all railroad crossings.except for the one on the Maui Tourist RR, that had a swivel gate. this gate at the terminal end blocked the tracks and a worker would turn it to block the road when the train left the station. I suspect the rules changed around 85.


----------



## KmH (Mar 17, 2015)

jis said:


> KmH said:
> 
> 
> > The same goes for a tractor/trailer being operated by a driver that has a CDL (Commercial Drivers License) even if it's not an oversize load,
> ...


Which is what the post above mine I was replying to was saying - if they have enough space on the other side to clear the tracks.




john h said:


> prech
> 
> school bus drivers should be stopping before the tracks and only crossing once they can clear the tracks


----------



## jis (Mar 18, 2015)

School buses have to stop, even if there is space. Trucks don't.


----------



## Just-Thinking-51 (Mar 18, 2015)

Truck hauling Hazmat loaded do have to stop.

Also truck are not allow to change gears while crossing railroad tracks.

If you look at photo from the day after, you will see the bigger issue is that the traffic light is just on the other side of the tracks. A set up which is just dangerous. Even with the traffic lights set up to be override by the railroads crossing. You got 20 to 30 seconds before the train goes by. Simple placing the traffic light before the grade crossing, and not permitting right on red. Much safer crossing.


----------

