2 killed in train-car crash in Indiana

[Superliner Diner]

From South Bend, IN Tribune, 6/1/03:

2 die in van-train crashOSCEOLA -- Two people were killed Saturday night when an Amtrak passenger train carrying 150 people slammed into the side of their van at Apple Road and the Conrail tracks.

The story is here.

 

[ttrim]

Was this the Three Rivers Train?

 

[amtrakadirondack]

Was this the Three Rivers Train?

No, the train that was involved is the Capitol Limited, which is train #29 & #30, the Three Rivers is #40 & #41.

I can’t believe how many of these situations are appearing! I’m first the Silver Star, the worst one, then the Three Rivers, then the Hospital Train, then the Capitol Corridor train and now this! Amtrak dose not need anymore of this! :angry:

Ps: Thanks Superliner Diner for the link, its good to know about these things.

 

[jccollins]

"Amtrak conductor John Phelps was one of about 150 passengers on an eastbound train that hit a Chevrolet Astro van shortly after 8:30 p.m."

Since when has the conductor been considered a passenger? :huh:

"OSCEOLA -- Two people were killed Saturday night when an Amtrak passenger train carrying 150 people slammed into the side of their van at Apple Road and the Conrail tracks."

Why do these articles always make it sound like it was the TRAIN'S FAULT at the first reading???

How about "Two people were killed Saturday night when they attempted to beat an Amtrak passenger train across a fully functioning crossing by speeding up and driving around the lowered gates and past the flashing lights and bells. In the process, they not only killed themselves, but endangered the lives of 150 passengers onboard the train with their foolish maneuver."? Now, wouldn't that be much more accurate?

 

[Allen Dee]

This is typical reporting from the biased, liberal, mainstream media.

What really sets my hide on fire is when they state that the conductor was driving the train. Believe it or not, this happens quite often.

 

[Superliner Diner]

Ps: Thanks Superliner Diner for the link, its good to know about these things.

I wish it were not necessary to report things like this, but they seem to have been happening at an increased rate lately. Operation Lifesaver just cannot get through to enough of these rocket scientists that call themselves drivers.

Hit hard lately has been the NS Chicago Line. There was above incident in Osceola, IN (yes it was the eastbound Capitol Ltd, Train #30) last week, but also a few weeks ago we had that mom & 5 yr old girl killed in Ohio by the westbound Lake Shore Ltd if I recall correctly.

It's bad enough that these parents do stupid things, but as a parent myself I am sickened by their total disregard for the lives of their kids. The scary thing about the Osceola incident is that a baby's car seat was found in the wreckage -- but they found no baby. So even though the baby was spared, it's still a tragedy as the child lost both parents.

I was just chatting online tonight with a friend who is a conductor on a tourist railroad in Georgia. They had a close call last week with a car driven by a woman who also had a baby seat (not sure if it was occupied). He said the gate started to come down on her vehicle, so she rolled forward slightly, thus safe from the gate but fouling the track in front of the train. Real brilliant. Wouldn't you rather be hit by a gate than an engine? Bottom line is that if the engineer (and the conductor, who in this case was up in the engine next to the engineer) could see that there was a baby seat in the car, then obviously they were WAY too close. Another parent put herself and possibly her young child at risk foolishly.

Soapbox over.

 

[Superliner Diner]

This is typical reporting from the biased, liberal, mainstream media.
What really sets my hide on fire is when they state that the conductor was driving the train.  Believe it or not, this happens quite often.

Allen Dee,

Add to your adjectives, "uneducated". If a conductor was indeed at the throttle, then we definitely do have a problem, don't we? Where was the engineer, in the front coach collecting tickets? Then the role of the train in the incident vs. that of the car's driver increases dramatically, doesn't it? The poor crews are traumatized enough over having to first be unable to avoid the carnage, and then be the first on the scene to see who/what they hit. They don't need to be falsely accused of being in the wrong part of the train. If I had the time I would write letters to these news staffs asking them to retract the part about the conductor "driving" the train, and tell them that it's an engineer in the engine --- makes perfect sense, doesn't it? And in the article above, the conductor was a "passenger", so I wonder who collected his ticket? That poor "passenger" had to get to the van first and see what damage the driver caused to him/herself and the van's passenger.

 

[rail sale]

liberal, mainstream media.

If there were a "mainstream liberal media" I really can't see how that could have anything to do with a issue like this.

If we had a liberal media, I'd suggest we would have a lot more support for a environmentally friendly, disenfranchised supporting, sprawl limiting transportation alternative such as Amtrak.

or at perhaps a liberal media would applaud the fact that one less gas guzzling mini van is on the road

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

I am as maddened by all this as anybody, the stupdity of the drivers, the stupidity of the newspapers,TV and media terminology, playing up "Amtrak crashes" when a train hits a car trying to beat the train, etc.

But I submit it is not necessarily (or not only) the professional stupidity of the media as it is the cultural stupidity(or lack of contact or exposure) of the population as a whole.........we have generations of people who know absolutely NOTHING about a train....absolutely NOTHING....they have never ridden a passenger train, often have never seen one. Thus, people today(no matter who hires them, the media or anybody else) really, really do not know any better than to think a conductor drives the train etc.

The media situation will only get worse because today's reporters will be tomorrows editors and they, (when they become editors or other bosses) will not know to correct tomorrows reporters, etc.

What I am trying to say.....I think....in this instance, the persons working in the media are merely a reflection of the persons in society, few of whom know the first thing about trains.

Answer to the stupidity? (aside from letters to the media) If more people rode trains, if trains got into our national bloodstream once again..Oh yes.....I submit that the word "crash" really should just apply to to planes. I think trains(and cars and buses) have "wrecks" not "crashes".

 

[Viewliner]

This is typical reporting from the biased, liberal, mainstream media.
What really sets my hide on fire is when they state that the conductor was driving the train.  Believe it or not, this happens quite often.

Allen Dee,

Add to your adjectives, "uneducated". If a conductor was indeed at the throttle, then we definitely do have a problem, don't we? Where was the engineer, in the front coach collecting tickets? Then the role of the train in the incident vs. that of the car's driver increases dramatically, doesn't it? The poor crews are traumatized enough over having to first be unable to avoid the carnage, and then be the first on the scene to see who/what they hit. They don't need to be falsely accused of being in the wrong part of the train. If I had the time I would write letters to these news staffs asking them to retract the part about the conductor "driving" the train, and tell them that it's an engineer in the engine --- makes perfect sense, doesn't it? And in the article above, the conductor was a "passenger", so I wonder who collected his ticket? That poor "passenger" had to get to the van first and see what damage the driver caused to him/herself and the van's passenger.

Don't forget, if the conductor was driving the train, then technically you had a passenger driving the train.

 

[Allen Dee]

I would like to respond to all of your posts individually, but I don't have time.

I am presently employed in the newspaper business, on the technical side (I am an industrial maintenance mechanic). There are basically two types of employees who work for newpapers, the journalists and the non-journalists. Many of us that work in the latter category refer to the journalists as "URINALISTS!"

I can't tell you how many times I have gone up to the newsroom and asked reporters, "What is the job title of the person who drives the train?"

Nine out of ten of them would answer, "Conductor!" When I told them that the correct answer was "Engineer", they did not believe me.

They always seem to blame the Conductor whenever there is an accident involving a train and a vehicle at a grade crossing or a trespassing pedestrian.

I've also cornered a number of reporters and told them, "I can write as well as you can, but let's see you go up on the roof and fix the air conditioning!" No comment from them.

The recent scandals at the NY Times involving the resignations of several reporters and editors are just the tip of the proverbial iceberg. Expect many more in the near future.

 

[amtrakadirondack]

"Amtrak conductor John Phelps was one of about 150 passengers on an eastbound train that hit a Chevrolet Astro van shortly after 8:30 p.m."
Since when has the conductor been considered a passenger? :huh:

"OSCEOLA -- Two people were killed Saturday night when an Amtrak passenger train carrying 150 people slammed into the side of their van at Apple Road and the Conrail tracks."

Why do these articles always make it sound like it was the TRAIN'S FAULT at the first reading???

How about "Two people were killed Saturday night when they attempted to beat an Amtrak passenger train across a fully functioning crossing by speeding up and driving around the lowered gates and past the flashing lights and bells. In the process, they not only killed themselves, but endangered the lives of 150 passengers onboard the train with their foolish maneuver."? Now, wouldn't that be much more accurate?

I don't know!?! The people who write the articles need to know that a train like the Capitol Limited takes about 1/2 mile to fully stop (I Think, sorry if wrong) AND THAT IT'S NOT THE TRAIN'S FAULT! Plus it gives Amtrak a bad reputation, when you are much safer on a train!

Two people were killed Saturday night when they attempted to beat an Amtrak passenger train across a fully functioning crossing by speeding up and driving around the lowered gates and past the flashing lights and bells.  In the process, they not only killed themselves, but endangered the lives of 150 passengers onboard the train with their foolish maneuver."?

by jccollins.
I think we should write the reports up, it would look much better. :lol:

 

[battalion51]

I agree tha there are many myths involved with who is in control of the train. While the Conductor is the one responsible for the movement of the train, the Engineer is the executor of the movement. Engineers have a tough job, and must deal with the associated stress of near misses and so on. Also one note, folks Conrail doesn't exist (unless you are speaking of CSA).

 

[Amtrak Watcher]

Have you ever noticed how inaccurate and strange any kind of published news sounds (printed or electronic) when you are familiar with the details? Makes you wonder about every piece of news you read, watch, or hear. It’s amazing how difficult it is to accurately communicate simple facts to others.

 

[Superliner Diner]

I can't tell you how many times I have gone up to the newsroom and asked reporters, "What is the job title of the person who drives the train?"
Nine out of ten of them would answer, "Conductor!" When I told them that the correct answer was "Engineer", they did not believe me.

I can tell you that my love and knowledge for trains is not hereditary. When my family rode the TECO trolley in Tampa in April, my own mother called the motorman a "conductor". I tried to set her straight, but one should not argue with mom!