Impaired pedestrians and trains don't mix

[CHamilton]

A friend reports from Carpenteria, CA that a

train brushed up against an allegedly intoxicated man walking along the right-of-way. The train made an emergency stop right in front of us.

The man was trying to walk away when the conductor caught up with him. The man refused help but gave the conductor his name.

The whole thing was rather surreal. The train, Surfliner 790, was delayed about 10 minutes.

Between intoxication and suicide, are we seeing more train vs. pedestrian accidents these days, or are they just being better reported?

 

[Peter KG6LSE]

I was on the southbound CS 11 from SEA to PDX today .....

only a handfull of min after we left SEA . I heard the cafe open ( I was VERY hungy)

so I made a Bee line from car13 ( game car) to the cafe , and no sooner then I was heading down the stairs to the lower level the tran went in to full E stop . and the LSA there said " ( Ohhhhhhhhhhh great I think we hit something ) "

I replied ." THAT was a E stop ! ? I thought we hit just some nasty points on a switch . "

Now some facts......... the train on point was a normal genesis but the HEP/ 2ed loco was a FPH59 ( the cascades Locos )

I wonder If that had anything to do with how it handled the stop . .

2ed the delay was less then 10 min. the Ped whom was playing chicken from what I heard was not hit .

The train was quite bumpy after that ..... ( Ill bet we took a few lives of those wheels )

Peter

 

[Devil's Advocate]

A friend reports from Carpenteria, CA that a

train brushed up against an allegedly intoxicated man walking along the right-of-way. The train made an emergency stop right in front of us.

The man was trying to walk away when the conductor caught up with him. The man refused help but gave the conductor his name.

The whole thing was rather surreal. The train, Surfliner 790, was delayed about 10 minutes.

Between intoxication and suicide, are we seeing more train vs. pedestrian accidents these days, or are they just being better reported?

I have no idea if it's on the increase or not, although having seven billion people wandering around would seem to imply we'll see more of this in the future. It's not like the planet is getting any bigger. Anyway, the thing I'm bothered by is the focus this puts on keeping folks as far away from the tracks as possible. I had a cop come harass me the other day while I was minding my own business well away from any potential for harm. I wasn't bothering anyone or breaking any law I know of but I had to put up with him for quite a while until he got tired of bothering me or decided I wasn't a threat or whatever it took for him to give up his fishing expedition and go away. I don't know if that sort of thing bothers anyone else but it sure bothers me.

 

[NW cannonball]

I was on the southbound CS 11 from SEA to PDX today .....

only a handfull of min after we left SEA . I heard the cafe open ( I was VERY hungy)

so I made a Bee line from car13 ( game car) to the cafe , and no sooner then I was heading down the stairs to the lower level the tran went in to full E stop . and the LSA there said " ( Ohhhhhhhhhhh great I think we hit something ) "

I replied ." THAT was a E stop ! ? I thought we hit just some nasty points on a switch . "

Now some facts......... the train on point was a normal genesis but the HEP/ 2ed loco was a FPH59 ( the cascades Locos )

I wonder If that had anything to do with how it handled the stop . .

2ed the delay was less then 10 min. the Ped whom was playing chicken from what I heard was not hit .

The train was quite bumpy after that ..... ( Ill bet we took a few lives of those wheels )

Peter

When a train goes into emergency stop. It's not like in the movies with sparks and passengers thrown into the walls. It is a well-engineered maximum braking with maybe a few wheels get flat spots.

And, unfortunately, pedestrian on the tracks -- by chance -- don't think so. Suicide - probably. Most people I know know that crossing the 8-lane freeway on foot will get you dead. And also know that crossing the train tracks will do likewise.

In Japan, Tokyo, saw the English version of delay announcement -- "passenger in jury -delay at --" Just another jumper.

Not to say the rail operators should ignore people getting killed on the ROW. Far from it. Do whatever it takes to make suicide by train more difficult.

But-- "trespassers killed by train" - many are suicides. Like one-car freeway accidents. "Drove into retaining wall at 80 mph"

Any reasonable way to make the ROW less available to suiciders and spacey fools is good by me.

 

[WICT106]

It is events such as the one in the original post that make me think that it is past time we should fence off railroad rights-of-way that pass through residential areas, or anywhere else inside city limits. Make the fence one story ( 12 feet ) tall.

 

[afigg]

Between intoxication and suicide, are we seeing more train vs. pedestrian accidents these days, or are they just being better reported?

The number of vehicle-train collisions and fatalities have dropped significantly over the past 30 years from over 9000 collisions and 700 fatalities in 1981 to around 2000 collisions and circa 270 fatalities in the past several years. Operation Lifesaver stat sheet. So efforts to improve grade crossing safety have paid off.
The trends for the stats for trespasser incidents and fatalities are not as positive.The FRA website has a huge amount of data under Safety Analysis that can be looked up with inquiries. Over the past 10 years, the number of trespasser fatalities not at highway-rail grade crossings varies widely from year to year, but with not much of a pattern. From 2003 to 2012, the worst year was 511 trespasser non-HRC fatalities compared to 430 in 2012. Keeping people from doing really stupid things on railroad tracks is difficult.

 

[MrKenFL]

As a brilliant person, Forrest Gump, once said in a movie !

"Stupid is as stupid does".

 

[gmushial]

I wonder, and really, not trying to be cold/hard hearted, but in such cases if there is any value in stopping or trying to stop a train? Yes, I fully understand the "we might have just killed a human being" aspects... but if they're dead, is there much that can be done for them? Would not radioing the authorities a mileage location and let them deal with it have the same effect/results? And if they're injured, if not really, then is there something that can be performed by the train staff what would better their chances vs again, calling the authorities? And if they're seriously injured, is there anything on the train that could help them... other than standing around and watching them die? On the otherhand, isn't there a greater combined risk to the passengers/crew doing the full-on E-stop? It seems that the common response to these collisions is: somebody is dead, and the train comes to an E-stop... but in all the posting I've read here over the months, I haven't read of a single case of some benefit to anyone coming from these stops... and what I fear is: a now stationary train, which was small enough to e-stop, being hit by a 100 car freight, somehow failing to see a change in the signals, or simply not being able to stop in time, plowing into the stopped train, and really killing a lot of people.... donning his asbestos boxers and awaiting the responses.

 

[me_little_me]

It is events such as the one in the original post that make me think that it is past time we should fence off railroad rights-of-way that pass through residential areas, or anywhere else inside city limits. Make the fence one story ( 12 feet ) tall.

Big money to install and maintain.

Have to fight local owners over environmental and other issues.

Fights over the exact land ownership.

Can be cut through.

Looks ugly.

Gathers trash from winds.

Doesn't stop the dedicated suicide.

Makes it harder to see and take pictures of things from the train.

The last of which is most important to me

 

[MattW]

I wonder, and really, not trying to be cold/hard hearted, but in such cases if there is any value in stopping or trying to stop a train? Yes, I fully understand the "we might have just killed a human being" aspects... but if they're dead, is there much that can be done for them? Would not radioing the authorities a mileage location and let them deal with it have the same effect/results? And if they're injured, if not really, then is there something that can be performed by the train staff what would better their chances vs again, calling the authorities? And if they're seriously injured, is there anything on the train that could help them... other than standing around and watching them die? On the otherhand, isn't there a greater combined risk to the passengers/crew doing the full-on E-stop? It seems that the common response to these collisions is: somebody is dead, and the train comes to an E-stop... but in all the posting I've read here over the months, I haven't read of a single case of some benefit to anyone coming from these stops... and what I fear is: a now stationary train, which was small enough to e-stop, being hit by a 100 car freight, somehow failing to see a change in the signals, or simply not being able to stop in time, plowing into the stopped train, and really killing a lot of people.... donning his asbestos boxers and awaiting the responses.

If the freight already isn't following the signals, there's not much that could be done really. When the train stops, the block was already occupied so the preceeding signal should already be at stop so there isn't any "change of signals" when the train makes an emergency stop.

 

[AlanB]

To follow-up on Matt's excellent response, going into emergency doesn't have any effect on the signals. As long as they're already obeying the signals, the freight train would be far enough behind Amtrak to safely come to a complete stop long before plowing into the rear of an Amtrak train.

Furthermore, unless they're fearing for their own life as in the engineer sees a big truck that he's about to hit, generally the first thing that an engineer does is hit the mushroom (big red switch that activates the emergency brakes). The second thing that they generally do is to get on their radio and annouce to all that their train has applied the emergency brakes. So any trailing train behind Amtrak would hear that transmission and know that they're going to encounter a red signal very shortly. And any train on a parallel track coming towards Amtrak would similarly start applying their brakes (even though they won't have a red signal) just in case Amtrak has derailed and is fouling the other track. Or for that matter, just in case the person hit is now lying on the other set of tracks.

 

[George Harris]

It is events such as the one in the original post that make me think that it is past time we should fence off railroad rights-of-way that pass through residential areas, or anywhere else inside city limits. Make the fence one story ( 12 feet ) tall.

In areas with fences and people who want to cross tracks it is usually not to long before someone goes after the fence with bolt cutters. A good high fence is at best a temporary solution. People either go through, over, under, or around. Plus there are always those nearby that squawk about ugly, blocks view, etc., etc. Talk to those that operate urban transit systems, although they usually have less problems due to being grade separated in the most populated areas.

 

[gmushial]

I wonder, and really, not trying to be cold/hard hearted, but in such cases if there is any value in stopping or trying to stop a train? Yes, I fully understand the "we might have just killed a human being" aspects... but if they're dead, is there much that can be done for them? Would not radioing the authorities a mileage location and let them deal with it have the same effect/results? And if they're injured, if not really, then is there something that can be performed by the train staff what would better their chances vs again, calling the authorities? And if they're seriously injured, is there anything on the train that could help them... other than standing around and watching them die? On the otherhand, isn't there a greater combined risk to the passengers/crew doing the full-on E-stop? It seems that the common response to these collisions is: somebody is dead, and the train comes to an E-stop... but in all the posting I've read here over the months, I haven't read of a single case of some benefit to anyone coming from these stops... and what I fear is: a now stationary train, which was small enough to e-stop, being hit by a 100 car freight, somehow failing to see a change in the signals, or simply not being able to stop in time, plowing into the stopped train, and really killing a lot of people.... donning his asbestos boxers and awaiting the responses.

If the freight already isn't following the signals, there's not much that could be done really. When the train stops, the block was already occupied so the preceeding signal should already be at stop so there isn't any "change of signals" when the train makes an emergency stop.

To follow-up on Matt's excellent response, going into emergency doesn't have any effect on the signals. As long as they're already obeying the signals, the freight train would be far enough behind Amtrak to safely come to a complete stop long before plowing into the rear of an Amtrak train.

Furthermore, unless they're fearing for their own life as in the engineer sees a big truck that he's about to hit, generally the first thing that an engineer does is hit the mushroom (big red switch that activates the emergency brakes). The second thing that they generally do is to get on their radio and annouce to all that their train has applied the emergency brakes. So any trailing train behind Amtrak would hear that transmission and know that they're going to encounter a red signal very shortly. And any train on a parallel track coming towards Amtrak would similarly start applying their brakes (even though they won't have a red signal) just in case Amtrak has derailed and is fouling the other track. Or for that matter, just in case the person hit is now lying on the other set of tracks.

Gents - thank you for your reasoned replies. And maybe I didn't articulate my concerns well enough: but let me boil it down to simply this: most trains on most days follow a schedule, and over time people (engineers, staff, crew) fall into that pattern... when you have an unexpected change in that pattern, you have the situation that bad things have an opportunity and tend to happen. Yup, I have agree, that signals should be red warning following trains that a block is occupied. But what I'm thinking of is: on a freeway, were everyone is running along at the speed limit (or over), as long as "delta V" is zero, then problems tend not to happen... but as soon as you have a stopped car, then everyone behind has to come to a stop... and if anyone isn't paying attention, then that's when you end up with tail-enders (and when it's two equal mass vehicles, then at least it's a fair fight)... but when a megaton hundred car freight get surprised and meets a 10 car Amtrak consist, then it's not going to be pretty. Beyond that: I'm not sure what the minimum spacing btwn trains is, but I wonder if there isn't a situation where an Amtrak train can e-brake, immediately upon entering a block, yes, marking that block occupied to those following, but where a tailing freight, which under normal circumstances could be following at "a safe distance," but be in a situation and at a distance when it becomes necessary for it to e-brake, that simply it's mass would preclude it from doing such. Maybe FRA rules foresee such situations and "preclude" such... bottom line: it seems a risk with little benefit to have a small train motionless on a mainline just waiting to be a target of an unsuspecting (though if they were listening to their radio, as pointed out, maybe less unsuspecting) megaton freight (which have the reputation of being able to decelerate about as well as the Queen mary). ... but again, thank you for the reasoned responses.

greg

 

[jis]

You also have to remember that the signal protecting an occupied block is red, the signal protecting the following block is usually yellow (approach). So even the train in the following block is not running at full speed. It is running at 30mph or so as it approaches the red signal. So if the rules are followed there is very close to zero chance of a rear end collision happening. Of course if the track is cab signal or PTC protected then the probability becomes even closer to zero. The bootm line is that the risk that you are thinking of is infinitesimally small because of the way block signals work. Typically a train following a train would not have to e-brake because of the first train e-braking. A railroad is not like a highway at all in this respect.

 

[NW cannonball]

[...]. A railroad is not like a highway at all in this respect.

Right it's not comparable. Brake-locked pileups don't seem to happen on railroads (I'm sure someone here will provide a counterexample)

The "delta-V' the difference in speed - not the problem - it's the "delta-P" the momentum difference - taking into account the masses of the colliding objects. As mentioned upthread.

When a 10 K-ton train (not M-ton) hits a tiny motor vehicle at a grade crossing- we all know and fear the result for the tiny 2-ton automobile. When the collision is a multi-K-ton train with a 0.1 ton living person - well, this has been discussed here and elsewhere, and it is horrible.

 

[NW cannonball]

It is events such as the one in the original post that make me think that it is past time we should fence off railroad rights-of-way that pass through residential areas, or anywhere else inside city limits. Make the fence one story ( 12 feet ) tall.

In areas with fences and people who want to cross tracks it is usually not to long before someone goes after the fence with bolt cutters. A good high fence is at best a temporary solution. People either go through, over, under, or around. Plus there are always those nearby that squawk about ugly, blocks view, etc., etc. Talk to those that operate urban transit systems, although they usually have less problems due to being grade separated in the most populated areas.

Yes, and I thank the people with the wire-cutters, cause I wouldn't do it myself, but having a short-cut across the main line is really convenient. Saves me 20 minutes walking sometimes. :wacko:

Yes, it's trespassing, yes it's dangerous, -- but :unsure: I'm real careful and take my earplugs out before I cross the busy tracks.

And I never, ever, have nor will ever - try crossing through between the cars of a standing train on that main line. But I've seen people do it.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

It is events such as the one in the original post that make me think that it is past time we should fence off railroad rights-of-way that pass through residential areas, or anywhere else inside city limits. Make the fence one story ( 12 feet ) tall.

That's going to be one very ugly fence. We can turn the whole country into an even bigger nanny state if we really want to, but it's probably not going to stop people from getting hurt on the tracks. I'm tired of bad apples getting all the attention. How about we stop worrying about the needs of the idiots among us and start concerning ourselves with the desires of the intelligent? In the future I'd prefer a society that makes it much harder to harm someone else while making it easier to harm yourself through blatant stupidity. Anybody else agree?

I wonder, and really, not trying to be cold/hard hearted, but in such cases if there is any value in stopping or trying to stop a train? Yes, I fully understand the "we might have just killed a human being" aspects... but if they're dead, is there much that can be done for them?

In the case of an intentional suicide or general stupidity there might not be much to be gained from stopping the train for an extended duration, but in the case of foul play stopping the train and investigating the scene could prove critical to understanding what happened and why. The only person who knew what happened might be dead, so it's kind of a catch-22 in that regard.

 

[jis]

In general if the Engineer has any knowledge of a possible hit s/he has to stop and stay that way until the investigators release the train. On the NEC there have been cases where at night time the Engineer was completely unaware of having hit anything and carrying on and only later on the results of the hit was discovered. At which point one of the gruesome things that has to be done is figure out which train was involved, which means inspecting the underside of several trains for evidence.... not a pleasant thing to do at all.

 

[gmushial]

In general if the Engineer has any knowledge of a possible hit s/he has to stop and stay that way until the investigators release the train. On the NEC there have been cases where at night time the Engineer was completely unaware of having hit anything and carrying on and only later on the results of the hit was discovered. At which point one of the gruesome things that has to be done is figure out which train was involved, which means inspecting the underside of several trains for evidence.... not a pleasant thing to do at all.

I can imagine so (inspection).... but this is exactly my concern about a sitting train, and things happening that aren't suppose to be possible... your other posting http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/57549-amtrak-crew-rule-violation-on-8016/

 

[jis]

If signals are turned off and people stop following rules then all bets are off and there is nothing left to discuss. There is no point in making rules assuming primarily that they won;t be followed.

 

[Ryan]

It is events such as the one in the original post that make me think that it is past time we should fence off railroad rights-of-way that pass through residential areas, or anywhere else inside city limits. Make the fence one story ( 12 feet ) tall.

That's going to be one very ugly fence. We can turn the whole country into an even bigger nanny state if we really want to, but it's probably not going to stop people from getting hurt on the tracks. I'm tired of bad apples getting all the attention. How about we stop worrying about the needs of the idiots among us and start concerning ourselves with the desires of the intelligent? In the future I'd prefer a society that makes it much harder to harm someone else while making it easier to harm yourself through blatant stupidity. Anybody else agree?

A-FREAKING-MEN.

I wonder, and really, not trying to be cold/hard hearted, but in such cases if there is any value in stopping or trying to stop a train? Yes, I fully understand the "we might have just killed a human being" aspects... but if they're dead, is there much that can be done for them?

In the case of an intentional suicide or general stupidity there might not be much to be gained from stopping the train for an extended duration, but in the case of foul play stopping the train and investigating the scene could prove critical to understanding what happened and why. The only person who knew what happened might be dead, so it's kind of a catch-22 in that regard.

In addition to this, and the safety non-concern, there's also the matter of the extra time gained before the collision - if the engineer dumps the air and lays on the horn, that gives the potential victim a valuable few seconds to pull their heads out of their @$$es and get out of the way.
Won't help someone trying to kill themselves, but it will give clueless trespassers a little more time to correct their errors.

 

[gmushial]

If signals are turned off and people stop following rules then all bets are off and there is nothing left to discuss. There is no point in making rules assuming primarily that they won;t be followed.

Is it really that binary... or: do sometimes, "things" just happen? Maybe in the world of PTC such will be more unlikely, but again, still non-zero.

 

[gmushial]

It is events such as the one in the original post that make me think that it is past time we should fence off railroad rights-of-way that pass through residential areas, or anywhere else inside city limits. Make the fence one story ( 12 feet ) tall.

That's going to be one very ugly fence. We can turn the whole country into an even bigger nanny state if we really want to, but it's probably not going to stop people from getting hurt on the tracks. I'm tired of bad apples getting all the attention. How about we stop worrying about the needs of the idiots among us and start concerning ourselves with the desires of the intelligent? In the future I'd prefer a society that makes it much harder to harm someone else while making it easier to harm yourself through blatant stupidity. Anybody else agree?

A-FREAKING-MEN.

I wonder, and really, not trying to be cold/hard hearted, but in such cases if there is any value in stopping or trying to stop a train? Yes, I fully understand the "we might have just killed a human being" aspects... but if they're dead, is there much that can be done for them?

In the case of an intentional suicide or general stupidity there might not be much to be gained from stopping the train for an extended duration, but in the case of foul play stopping the train and investigating the scene could prove critical to understanding what happened and why. The only person who knew what happened might be dead, so it's kind of a catch-22 in that regard.

In addition to this, and the safety non-concern, there's also the matter of the extra time gained before the collision - if the engineer dumps the air and lays on the horn, that gives the potential victim a valuable few seconds to pull their heads out of their @$$es and get out of the way. 

Won't help someone trying to kill themselves, but it will give clueless trespassers a little more time to correct their errors.

Those are absolutely important points, and I'd absolutely support such a point of view. But in the case of: "I think we just hit something" etc - then the deed has been unfortunately done.

I wonder how many of those that are struck as you say, have their heads stuck where the sun don't shine, and how many intended such. I know in one case here in RDD we had the iPod listener that probably was wondering what that strange new tone in his favorite song was, ie, the engineer of the freight layed on the horn the whole time from when he saw our iPod'er until he ran him over... and the iPod'er continued to talk down the rails until he was hit. On the otherhand it seems that we had someone here that just sat on one of the rails until they got hit - somebody that saw this from a distance and tried to run and get them off the rail, said that they even looked at the train and then look away, but never moved. Also, don't we now have video cameras on the front of the locos nowadays? Wouldn't they ultimately prove to be the best, most accurate witnesses? [actually I still think those feeds should be processed in real time for obstruction detection, but that's a different discussion.]

 

[SP&S]

I wonder, and really, not trying to be cold/hard hearted, but in such cases if there is any value in stopping or trying to stop a train? Yes, I fully understand the "we might have just killed a human being" aspects... but if they're dead, is there much that can be done for them? Would not radioing the authorities a mileage location and let them deal with it have the same effect/results? And if they're injured, if not really, then is there something that can be performed by the train staff what would better their chances vs again, calling the authorities? And if they're seriously injured, is there anything on the train that could help them... other than standing around and watching them die? On the otherhand, isn't there a greater combined risk to the passengers/crew doing the full-on E-stop? It seems that the common response to these collisions is: somebody is dead, and the train comes to an E-stop... but in all the posting I've read here over the months, I haven't read of a single case of some benefit to anyone coming from these stops... and what I fear is: a now stationary train, which was small enough to e-stop, being hit by a 100 car freight, somehow failing to see a change in the signals, or simply not being able to stop in time, plowing into the stopped train, and really killing a lot of people.... donning his asbestos boxers and awaiting the responses.

I understand where you're coming from but that does sound cold to me.

Consider the operating crew. I know if you're an engineer it's only a matter of time before somebody gets in the way but this still has to be disconcerting. Disconcerting enough that work rules allow the crew to stand down. Being involved up close in a death, even though you've done everything you could, gets to you. Would you want your train's engineer to be distracted by traumatic events? Would you want him punchy at every shadow he sees?

Also, I don't want to ride in a train when there are human remains splattered across the front of the loco. Perhaps I'm soft but that vision is too ugly for me. And can you imagine being a passenger on a platform as that pulls in? Wanna get on that train?

Additionally, I want to show respect. Drunk, dumb, despondent, careless and unlucky, whatever; it doesn't matter. That's still a human life that was lost. When we loose respect for that, we've lost something important.

Legally, I believe the engineer has a responsibility to try to stop the train and avoid hitting the individual. Just as I, when driving a car, I can't just mow down a jaywalking pedestrian. Trespassing and jaywalking are both illegal, but the fact that they are in the wrong doesn't give me the right to hit 'em with impunity. Just because an idiot in front of me is texting and doesn't see the green light I can't rear end them and claim they're to blame.

Others have said it better than I but I don't see any particular danger in being stopped on the tracks. Signals and other safety procedures, even without PTC, seem to work quite well. A couple of years ago I was on 14 when we came to a very quick stop. We were told that there was a signal problem. Sure was, 11 had run a red was stopped either in our block or just one block away. The point being that even when a mistake was made - one that could have had horrendous consequences - the entire system worked and we were all safe. Delayed a few hours while they changed crews on 11, but none the worse for wear.

 

[gmushial]

I wonder, and really, not trying to be cold/hard hearted, but in such cases if there is any value in stopping or trying to stop a train? Yes, I fully understand the "we might have just killed a human being" aspects... but if they're dead, is there much that can be done for them? Would not radioing the authorities a mileage location and let them deal with it have the same effect/results? And if they're injured, if not really, then is there something that can be performed by the train staff what would better their chances vs again, calling the authorities? And if they're seriously injured, is there anything on the train that could help them... other than standing around and watching them die? On the otherhand, isn't there a greater combined risk to the passengers/crew doing the full-on E-stop? It seems that the common response to these collisions is: somebody is dead, and the train comes to an E-stop... but in all the posting I've read here over the months, I haven't read of a single case of some benefit to anyone coming from these stops... and what I fear is: a now stationary train, which was small enough to e-stop, being hit by a 100 car freight, somehow failing to see a change in the signals, or simply not being able to stop in time, plowing into the stopped train, and really killing a lot of people.... donning his asbestos boxers and awaiting the responses.

I understand where you're coming from but that does sound cold to me.

Consider the operating crew. I know if you're an engineer it's only a matter of time before somebody gets in the way but this still has to be disconcerting. Disconcerting enough that work rules allow the crew to stand down. Being involved up close in a death, even though you've done everything you could, gets to you. Would you want your train's engineer to be distracted by traumatic events? Would you want him punchy at every shadow he sees?

Also, I don't want to ride in a train when there are human remains splattered across the front of the loco. Perhaps I'm soft but that vision is too ugly for me. And can you imagine being a passenger on a platform as that pulls in? Wanna get on that train?

Additionally, I want to show respect. Drunk, dumb, despondent, careless and unlucky, whatever; it doesn't matter. That's still a human life that was lost. When we loose respect for that, we've lost something important.

Legally, I believe the engineer has a responsibility to try to stop the train and avoid hitting the individual. Just as I, when driving a car, I can't just mow down a jaywalking pedestrian. Trespassing and jaywalking are both illegal, but the fact that they are in the wrong doesn't give me the right to hit 'em with impunity. Just because an idiot in front of me is texting and doesn't see the green light I can't rear end them and claim they're to blame.

Others have said it better than I but I don't see any particular danger in being stopped on the tracks. Signals and other safety procedures, even without PTC, seem to work quite well. A couple of years ago I was on 14 when we came to a very quick stop. We were told that there was a signal problem. Sure was, 11 had run a red was stopped either in our block or just one block away. The point being that even when a mistake was made - one that could have had horrendous consequences - the entire system worked and we were all safe. Delayed a few hours while they changed crews on 11, but none the worse for wear.

Attempting to stop: absolutely, no question about it - beyond a moral responsibility, probably also a legal one. But leaving a stopped train on the line, possibly putting n others at risk, that was my point. ... and yes, the image of a splattered human being glued to the front of the loco: yes, rather ghoulish - but I wonder how often that's the case: my impression is that they either get punted to the side, or run under the train... actually from all the human vs train threads here, that was my general impression; had never considered the splattered and glued there (ugly/sad) image.

W/re signaling and the protection it should offer... all I can say is: "should" offer... and when possibly n others are at risk, then one might think about risk/reward cost benefit etc. ... but then again, the Ricky Gates incident "should not" have happened... but it did and how many others died? ... when driving a race car, counting on things that shouldn't go wrong, is a good way to die - maybe I'm just projecting from one world unjustly onto another. But as you point out: human lives are valuable and must be respected: hence my comment about not putting others at risk.