Amtrak vs tractor-trailer in FL

[GaSteve]

Minor or no injuries, little damage: Story here

 

[Texan Eagle]

Minor or no injuries, little damage: Story here

Yet again? It's amazing how many road vehicles manage to find Amtrak trains to bang into inspite of the very limited number of services operated across the vast country, compared to number of passenger trains in some other countries. Either the road users in this country need serious course in understanding trains and railroad crossings, or Amtrak has some incredible luck

 

[Phil S]

Yup, and most of these are professional drivers. I thought it's against the law to even enter a rr crossing unless you can see that you have space to exit the crossing on the other side. it.Then again, even if it is the law, the driver may well not be cited. Amtrak should be aggressive in trying to recover damages. Otherwise you and I ending up paying for this stupidity via higher ticket prices.

 

[George Harris]

Yup, and most of these are professional drivers.

"Professional" in the most basic sense of getting paid for it. Just not in the sense of being competent at it. That happens in a lot of other fields, as well.

 

[GaSteve]

Minor or no injuries, little damage: Story here

Another story with a closeup pic: Here

 

[George Harris]

At least, for this one we do not have the "It's all the train's fault" mindset at play. Lifting one quote from the news article:

Gary Alberga, who works at Simply Delicious Restaurant nearby, was outside when the train plowed into the trailer.
“I saw the truck,” said Alberga. “I said, ‘Is he going to make it before that train comes here?'”

Alberga said the approaching train could not stop and collided with the trailer.

"Next thing I heard was bam!" said Alberga. "Big explosion.”

 

[Anderson]

It's amazing how many trucks Amtrak has managed to take out. The only thing that's surprising...doesn't Amtrak want to save a few for the freight RRs? I mean, I'd think CSX and so forth would want a chance to wipe out the competition...

Then again, if Amtrak takes out enough trucks, maybe they get improved preference in dispatching

 

[me_little_me]

This appears to be one of those no-win designed-by-an-idiot intersections. Looks like you have a truck which has to stop at the stop sign before proceeding. The truck may have a long wait before it can go. Or the truck driver can sit before the RR crossing and wait but by the time the driver sees it is clear and goes over the tracks, the road might no longer be clear and if it is just iffy, he'll only make it if he runs the stop sign having already stopped 30 feet back. Then he can be cited for running the stop sign or worse, running the stop sign and causing an accident. This is a little different than the jerk that is not the lead vehicle and pulls up onto the tracks waiting for the ones in front to go or the one who has a traffic light where he failed to wait behind the tracks until the light turned green.

 

[Ocala Mike]

It's Florida; people drive like ****s down here all the time. Here's a rocket scientist who couldn't get out of the way of a local freight doing some street running at about 3mph:

http://www.ocala.com/article/20110930/articles/110939973&tc=yahoo

Ocala Mike

 

[Texan Eagle]

It's Florida; people drive like ****s down here all the time. Here's a rocket scientist who couldn't get out of the way of a local freight doing some street running at about 3mph:

http://www.ocala.com...939973&tc=yahoo

The news article says-

"Carl Erwin, 63, said he had driven away from the Bank of America drive-thru when he heard a train horn.

At first, Erwin said, he thought he could get by the train."

If I hear a train horn, I purposely slow down and stop to see the train! Being a railfan is a good thing, you see.

 

[Phil S]

George - Hey, that's my line! My buddies and I in the DIY side of the construction industry are constantly joking about how little "professional" actually means. What I should have said is that these guys get paid to drive trucks. So you'd think they might just be a little better at driving than your average shmo? Sadly not.

Me- little --Good info. Suggests that maybe the bad intersection design caused the driver to lose patience. This is a lot more easily fixed than getting drivers to pay attention. Do you live near there? A talk with your local traffic engineering people might actually have some effect.

 

[Lazy Z]

We live near some tracks that are used by freight trains. They come through a few times a day. I see people MANY times with their vehicles not clear of the tracks (sort of hanging over). I think maybe sometimes people assume there are no trains or something! I saw a car get hit one time and I never forgot it!

 

[AlanB]

Minor or no injuries, little damage: Story here

Yet again? It's amazing how many road vehicles manage to find Amtrak trains to bang into inspite of the very limited number of services operated across the vast country, compared to number of passenger trains in some other countries. Either the road users in this country need serious course in understanding trains and railroad crossings, or Amtrak has some incredible luck

The reason, at least in part, is due to the fact that Amtrak trains move at higher speeds than freight trains. I think that too many people see a train, think it's a freight, and believe that they can beat it across the tracks. By the time they realize that it's an Amtrak train moving much faster than a freight train, it's too late.

 

[Lazy Z]

Minor or no injuries, little damage: Story here

Yet again? It's amazing how many road vehicles manage to find Amtrak trains to bang into inspite of the very limited number of services operated across the vast country, compared to number of passenger trains in some other countries. Either the road users in this country need serious course in understanding trains and railroad crossings, or Amtrak has some incredible luck

The reason, at least in part, is due to the fact that Amtrak trains move at higher speeds than freight trains. I think that too many people see a train, think it's a freight, and believe that they can beat it across the tracks. By the time they realize that it's an Amtrak train moving much faster than a freight train, it's too late.

I agree! The freight trains by my house are pretty slow, so the bells come down and you can hear the train coming. In another town, the arms came down and I waited and waited and did not hear a train...was thinking, what the heck and then SWISH!! FAST FAST train! If I had started across I would have been dead (Would not have crossed, but I was wondering if a train really was ever going to come!)

 

[George Harris]

The reason, at least in part, is due to the fact that Amtrak trains move at higher speeds than freight trains. I think that too many people see a train, think it's a freight, and believe that they can beat it across the tracks. By the time they realize that it's an Amtrak train moving much faster than a freight train, it's too late.

By now most crossings have a form of track circuit that is supposed to provide a fixed time before the train gets there, instead of a circuit with a fixed distance. That could have hardly been the excuse in Nevada where the track was near level and the freight train speed limit is 70 mph.

 

[AlanB]

The reason, at least in part, is due to the fact that Amtrak trains move at higher speeds than freight trains. I think that too many people see a train, think it's a freight, and believe that they can beat it across the tracks. By the time they realize that it's an Amtrak train moving much faster than a freight train, it's too late.

By now most crossings have a form of track circuit that is supposed to provide a fixed time before the train gets there, instead of a circuit with a fixed distance. That could have hardly been the excuse in Nevada where the track was near level and the freight train speed limit is 70 mph.

Oh, very much agreed George.

I was talking more about those who would be willing to run around gates and do other things that risk their lives. They're the one's thinking slower freight, I don't want to wait, so let me skate around the gate.

And if it's indeed a freight, then they safely make it. If not, they get creamed by an Amtrak train.

 

[Texan Eagle]

The reason, at least in part, is due to the fact that Amtrak trains move at higher speeds than freight trains. I think that too many people see a train, think it's a freight, and believe that they can beat it across the tracks. By the time they realize that it's an Amtrak train moving much faster than a freight train, it's too late.

By now most crossings have a form of track circuit that is supposed to provide a fixed time before the train gets there, instead of a circuit with a fixed distance. That could have hardly been the excuse in Nevada where the track was near level and the freight train speed limit is 70 mph.

Oh, very much agreed George.

I was talking more about those who would be willing to run around gates and do other things that risk their lives. They're the one's thinking slower freight, I don't want to wait, so let me skate around the gate.

And if it's indeed a freight, then they safely make it. If not, they get creamed by an Amtrak train.

If such species breeds in the country, in addition to gates, blinking lights and audible bells, we need one more thing at railroad crossings- a photo of Amtrak's P42 locomotives

with the following text:

WARNING: This is what an Amtrak train looks like. It travels faster than freight trains. If you see this blue-silver thing coming towards the crossing, STOP RIGHT NOW away from the tracks!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I remember when I was a kid crossing gates didn't seem nearly as responsive as they are today. If a local switcher was approaching very slowly they might go down a long time before the train arrived or was visible or audible to blocked motorists. If the train stopped prior to actually entering the crossing the gates seemed to take a long time to respond to the lack of movement or even reverse movement. Back then it was common to see motorists pass through blocked crossings. Dangerous, yes, but still common nonetheless. Today I've noticed that most crossings in my area seem to be far more precise than in years past. They drop later in the approach process and rise quicker after clearing. This fits what George wrote above and I presume the intent is to be more responsive to the interests of motorists. Perhaps the problems we see today are an unintentional consequence of older motorists having seen so many clunky and aggressive crossing gates in the past that they don't take today's more precise mechanisms as seriously as they should?

 

[SarahZ]

If I hear a train horn, I purposely slow down and stop to see the train! Being a railfan is a good thing, you see.

Me too! The Wolverine and Blue Water pass my neighborhood several times per day. Sometimes, I run to the end of the street so I can watch and wave. You can hear the crossing gates/bells if our windows are open.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

This appears to be one of those no-win designed-by-an-idiot intersections. Looks like you have a truck which has to stop at the stop sign before proceeding. The truck may have a long wait before it can go. Or the truck driver can sit before the RR crossing and wait but by the time the driver sees it is clear and goes over the tracks, the road might no longer be clear and if it is just iffy, he'll only make it if he runs the stop sign having already stopped 30 feet back. Then he can be cited for running the stop sign or worse, running the stop sign and causing an accident.

When I travel on the Silvers, there appears to be many such intersections in the south. Yep, "designed-by-an-idiot intersections". hboy:

The highway parallels the tracks. A vehicle on a perpendicular side road, has to cross the tracks, and then immediately has the road intersection's stop sign. If the vehicle is long enough, its tail-end (its trailer) would still be back on the tracks as its waits at the stop sign.

The "gap" between the highway and the tracks needs to be wide enough, to allow all of any potential vehicle to be clear of the tracks, when stopped at the stop sign. That should also include these double trailer trucks.

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

I thought it's against the law to even enter a rr crossing unless you can see that you have space to exit the crossing on the other side.

Nice law, but not very practical.

As mentioned, the distance between the crossing, and the immediately following stop sign, isn't large enough to accommodate a long vehicle, like truck with a trailer in this case.

For that law to be practical, someone would need to move either the highway, or the railroad track, to be far enough apart to always accommodate any vehicle length in between them.

 

[Texan Eagle]

The highway parallels the tracks. A vehicle on a perpendicular side road, has to cross the tracks, and then immediately has the road intersection's stop sign. If the vehicle is long enough, its tail-end (its trailer) would still be back on the tracks as its waits at the stop sign.

The "gap" between the highway and the tracks needs to be wide enough, to allow all of any potential vehicle to be clear of the tracks, when stopped at the stop sign. That should also include these double trailer trucks.

It might be difficult to increase the "gap" between the highway and the tracks without substantial realignment. Wouldn't it make things somewhat better if the STOP sign is removed from the intersection and placed before the railroad crossing? That way everyone needs to stop at the RR crossing, and if the gates are open, you just need to stop there, look ahead* for clear road and merge into the highway in one shot, without stopping again.

*This is for those crossings only where there are no obstructions between the railroad track and the highway, so one can look at the highway traffic from across the RR crossing too. There would be several such crossings. If there is no clear line of sight from across the tracks, the STOP sign can be replaced by a traffic light, again placed across the tracks, so when you get green light, you can safely merge into the highway without the need to stop again right after crossing the tracks. That could surely prevent accidents like this one.

 

[VentureForth]

I don't think a stop sign in front of the crossing would work here. The driver needs to turn to get over the tracks and it is very hard to see in the direction he needs to go before crossing. Really, what this crossing NEEDS is a light activated prior the crossing (not activated if the crossing is activated by a train), so that the driver is protected from auto traffic to clear the intersection no matter which way he decides to go when given a green light (as seen parallel to the tracks on the warehouse side).

 

[Phil S]

This appears to be one of those no-win designed-by-an-idiot intersections. Looks like you have a truck which has to stop at the stop sign before proceeding. The truck may have a long wait before it can go. Or the truck driver can sit before the RR crossing and wait but by the time the driver sees it is clear and goes over the tracks, the road might no longer be clear and if it is just iffy, he'll only make it if he runs the stop sign having already stopped 30 feet back. Then he can be cited for running the stop sign or worse, running the stop sign and causing an accident.

When I travel on the Silvers, there appears to be many such intersections in the south. Yep, "designed-by-an-idiot intersections". hboy:

The highway parallels the tracks. A vehicle on a perpendicular side road, has to cross the tracks, and then immediately has the road intersection's stop sign. If the vehicle is long enough, its tail-end (its trailer) would still be back on the tracks as its waits at the stop sign.

The "gap" between the highway and the tracks needs to be wide enough, to allow all of any potential vehicle to be clear of the tracks, when stopped at the stop sign. That should also include these double trailer trucks.

Choo-Choo - Excellent point. I stand corrected. All the crossings I can think of near my home have a stoplight on the other side, not a stop sign. One, maybe two cars, fit on the far side of the crossing. There are big signs saying the obvious and 95% of drivers (and 99+% of truck drivers) respect the reality here. Plus we get one maybe two trains a day, all very slow freights. I can see now that maybe the truck driver in this case had little choice and is not to be blamed. Nor is the RR. It's the city. county, or state DoT that has to fix this.

Folks --But where do we draw the limit? Make room for double trailers? Triples? We actually have them on the Interstates in Oregon. Why not quadruples? They're starting to look more like trains every day. . -- Phil