Passenger dies after exiting train en route

[Crescent ATN & TCL]

If I remember correctly there are 2 doors on a single level car and the bars. The first door is the automatic push button door we are all familiar with, this door should be turned off when it is on the tail of a train. When the automatic door is off it has to be manually forced open and closed. The second door is sort of hidden when the car is mid-train. The second door is pushed into the vestibule wall and locked into place when the car is mid-train, when it is on the end of the train it is locked closed. Then you have 1-2 lateral bars that lock into place.

I would guess it is safe to assume a Superliner is set up in the same way. I don't remember specifically noticing the set-up, but assuming the set-up is the same the passenger would have needed to negotiate 3 barriers to be able to fall, jump, or be pushed from the rear of the train. Of course this also means I'm assuming that we live a perfect world where all 3 of these barriers are in place and functioning every time.

My guess is the passenger left the train through a side door, that was either left open of was opened by himself. I would also guess that "on the track" means on or near the ROW.

Of course if we consider suicide as a possibility then both the rear and side doors are likely.

A third possibility is the passenger de-trained at the prior stop. Its possible he exited the train and the train began to leave, so he grabbed onto some part of the train. Since he was a retired railroad employee, he would have known how to hold on to a train car for an extended period of time. He may have grabbed onto his departing train hoping that he could make it to a door and get back on, or that he could hold on until the next station.

Personally I don't think we will ever know for sure how he ended up outside the train.

 

[RTOlson]

I can't speak for single-level cars, but I'm fairly certain Superliners have just one door at each end of the upper level.

I've stood at the rear of the train made up of Superliners to take photos (and at the front of the cars to shoot past the locomotive). IIRC, there was only one door and there was only one window to shoot through.

Take a look at the layout of the consist from the Superliner safety card (at the top of the image). It shows the doors fairly clearly and there is only one at the end of the train.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

whats funny is that first choice it says use the upper level end doors but then it says use as a last resort so shouldn't it be last on the card.

 

[RTOlson]

It says use the End Doors … to move to another car on the train. If you use the End Door at the rear of the train, there's no car to move to (and Amtrak tells you to use that as a last resort).

It could be confusing, but I think they spell it out all right.

 

[TVRM610]

If I remember correctly there are 2 doors on a single level car and the bars. The first door is the automatic push button door we are all familiar with, this door should be turned off when it is on the tail of a train. When the automatic door is off it has to be manually forced open and closed. The second door is sort of hidden when the car is mid-train. The second door is pushed into the vestibule wall and locked into place when the car is mid-train, when it is on the end of the train it is locked closed. Then you have 1-2 lateral bars that lock into place.
I would guess it is safe to assume a Superliner is set up in the same way. I don't remember specifically noticing the set-up, but assuming the set-up is the same the passenger would have needed to negotiate 3 barriers to be able to fall, jump, or be pushed from the rear of the train. Of course this also means I'm assuming that we live a perfect world where all 3 of these barriers are in place and functioning every time.

I am about 95% sure that superliners do not have this second set of doors. The doors you are talking about on the single level amfleets swing out into the vestibules... there is no vestibule on superliner cars (or at least what I call a vestibule).

 

[TVRM610]

Seriously, let's stop with the crazy theories...

My theory isn't crazy, it makes a lot of sense. I'm not saying its right. I wasn't there watching the doofus cascade out of the train. I'm simply trying to demonstrate it as a possibility.

All I ask of you, ALC, is that you stop saying my suggestion shouldn't be considered, and that it is, in your words, "crazy". Because it isn't.

Possibility? Yeah. Probability? No.

Not to mention, it just doesn't make sense. Things that don't make sense are not true. I will not consider a suggestion that cannot be demonstrated as true. As a hypothetical if functions, but we have no proof of concept to go off of, much less any actual past experience to draw that conclusion.

How does it make sense that a computer designed to keep trains from running into each other ran trains into each other?

Sorry.. but I think GML makes perfect sense here... if the door was not set correctly, which is very very possible, the man could have pushed a button, the door opened, and off he goes... weather or not the bar was in place. Is it likely? no... but it's not likely that a man falls off a train at all!

IF the man actually fell off the moving train there are two options, both of them would have required the man to un-do or go around some sort of safety device, weather its latches on doors, or metal bars at the end of the train.

 

[the_traveler]

If I remember correctly there are 2 doors on a single level car and the bars. The first door is the automatic push button door we are all familiar with, this door should be turned off when it is on the tail of a train. When the automatic door is off it has to be manually forced open and closed. The second door is sort of hidden when the car is mid-train. The second door is pushed into the vestibule wall and locked into place when the car is mid-train, when it is on the end of the train it is locked closed. Then you have 1-2 lateral bars that lock into place.
I would guess it is safe to assume a Superliner is set up in the same way.

On single level cars, there is that 2nd door. But on Superliners, there is not.

 

[RailFanLNK]

I am a very sound sleeper, even though I do have trouble falling asleep on Amtrak due to the excitement and the difference of "not being in my own bed". With that said, I can get up in the middle of the night and have no clue that I was up. I also sometimes use sleep aids on Amtrak (downers) and can sympathize with someone who may have been disoriented or on medication. Just recently my girlfriend had taken a sleep aid and we were in a remote and rustic cabin in the edges of the wilderness in Northern Minnesota, something jogged me awake when I heard her walking about in the cabin at 3am. I fully knew she could easily just walk right into the forest or lake and never been seen again.

 

[DowneasterPassenger]

I'm on California Amtrak 718 thinking about this scenario. I'm sitting in the rear car. We are in push-mode so the locomotive is behind me. Between me and the locomotive is a standard Amtrak button door. There is also a single safety rod outside the door at about waist height. No second door. If I could somehow open that door then I might fall onto the locomotive, and off of it. But California cars are not the same as Superliners, the Southwest Chief probaably wasn't being pushed, so my story doesn't make sense, and therefore probably isn't true.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

The rear door of a consist is locked with a key. The switch crew that puts cars together to build a consist would put up the safety bars and lock the door and turn it off. The train crew, or conductors would then check the condition of this door before the train departed to ensure it was secured. If the door is locked then you must have a coach key to unlock it.

So you would agree that it is, indeed, possible that if the crew was being negligent that what I was proposing could happen?

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

The rear door of a consist is locked with a key. The switch crew that puts cars together to build a consist would put up the safety bars and lock the door and turn it off. The train crew, or conductors would then check the condition of this door before the train departed to ensure it was secured. If the door is locked then you must have a coach key to unlock it.

So you would agree that it is, indeed, possible that if the crew was being negligent that what I was proposing could happen?

The level of negligence you suggest is beyond the realm of possibility. Remember, this has to go unnoticed since the train was hooked up in the yards...

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Entirely possible. The only way you'd actually notice is the lack of bars on the back of the train, or actually trying to open the door. The Conductor could easily not get around to pushing the button, and might not happen to look in that area when he's supposed to. We're not talking about a misplaced neon light here.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

So never, during all of the crew changes, never when any pax looked back to see the track rolling by, nobody notices anythign wrong?

Hell I've seen many SAs or ACs sit back right next to the door for periods of time in between rounds.

Your only problem is that you got so much crap to go wrong that it is a house of cards. In theory, yes you can build one. In practice-- it never happens.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

The bars are on the outside of the bleedin' train. You can't see them from the inside!

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Yeah but you can see them from the back quite easily.

 

[tp49]

The rear door of a consist is locked with a key. The switch crew that puts cars together to build a consist would put up the safety bars and lock the door and turn it off. The train crew, or conductors would then check the condition of this door before the train departed to ensure it was secured. If the door is locked then you must have a coach key to unlock it.

So you would agree that it is, indeed, possible that if the crew was being negligent that what I was proposing could happen?

Crew doesn't have to be negligent, through I agree it is quite possible. The door switch itself could fail. Switch could give all appearances of working properly but it's not.

 

[MattW]

If you're talking about passengers seeing the bars and noticing something wrong, I didn't even know about the bars until reading this thread. As for a crewmember, unless they were supposed to, would they even look out the back of the train?

 

[JasonVG]

wow I never heard anything about that. I was on that train.

 

[caravanman]

You guys have created 4 pages discussing the means of a poor mans demise. I wonder if members of the forum could show a liitle more sensitivity, and perhaps also consider this quotation:,

"The term anal-retentive (or anally retentive, anal retentive), commonly abbreviated to "anal", is used to describe persons with such attention to detail that the obsession becomes an annoyance to others".

Ed (not, for once, feeling cool after reading this post)

 

[jackal]

You guys have created 4 pages discussing the means of a poor mans demise. I wonder if members of the forum could show a liitle more sensitivity, and perhaps also consider this quotation:,
"The term anal-retentive (or anally retentive, anal retentive), commonly abbreviated to "anal", is used to describe persons with such attention to detail that the obsession becomes an annoyance to others".

Ed (not, for once, feeling cool after reading this post)

Thank you for finally being brave enough to say it! (I don't know why I kept reading this topic after it degenerated so.)

We'll find out what happened eventually. Idle armchair speculation does nothing to further the investigation, and, as the person quoted from the comments on the original article, can even lead to additional pain to the victim's family.

 

[RTOlson]

You guys have created 4 pages discussing the means of a poor mans demise. I wonder if members of the forum could show a liitle more sensitivity, and perhaps also consider this quotation:,
"The term anal-retentive (or anally retentive, anal retentive), commonly abbreviated to "anal", is used to describe persons with such attention to detail that the obsession becomes an annoyance to others".

It's an interesting couple of thoughts. I would hasten to point out that this is a discussion board. Why are we here, if not to discuss things?

You could post that definition for "anal retentive" on every single thread that has more than three pages. Many of the posters here are train/Amtrak enthusiasts and tackle discussions with the same zeal that they have for trains. Thankfully, you and others have the option to _not_ read this thread (just as we have the option to keep discussing the matter).

I feel sorry the man died and I have no disrespect for the family. I would also point out that no apparent family member has posted on _this_thread. Comments that happened off the site are just that — comments off the site that have no direct bearing on this specific discussion.

If family members had posted to this thread, I would hope that we would be considerate of their comments. However, that doesn't mean that we should dismiss all the possibilities, just that they should continue to be discussed in a respectful manner.

You are right that a lot of this thread is speculation (and the thread was slowly dying out because we've exhaustively gone over many of the theories). I've chimed in on this thread because some statements needed clarification and some were eager to assign blame when it may be too early to make that determination.

I appreciated this thread being open and my being allowed to post factual information to it while it was still ongoing.

 

[jackal]

You guys have created 4 pages discussing the means of a poor mans demise. I wonder if members of the forum could show a liitle more sensitivity, and perhaps also consider this quotation:,
"The term anal-retentive (or anally retentive, anal retentive), commonly abbreviated to "anal", is used to describe persons with such attention to detail that the obsession becomes an annoyance to others".

It's an interesting couple of thoughts. I would hasten to point out that this is a discussion board. Why are we here, if not to discuss things?

You could post that definition for "anal retentive" on every single thread that has more than three pages. Many of the posters here are train/Amtrak enthusiasts and tackle discussions with the same zeal that they have for trains. Thankfully, you and others have the option to _not_ read this thread (just as we have the option to keep discussing the matter).

I feel sorry the man died and I have no disrespect for the family. I would also point out that no apparent family member has posted on _this_thread. Comments that happened off the site are just that — comments off the site that have no direct bearing on this specific discussion.

If family members had posted to this thread, I would hope that we would be considerate of their comments. However, that doesn't mean that we should dismiss all the possibilities, just that they should continue to be discussed in a respectful manner.

You are right that a lot of this thread is speculation (and the thread was slowly dying out because we've exhaustively gone over many of the theories). I've chimed in on this thread because some statements needed clarification and some were eager to assign blame when it may be too early to make that determination.

I appreciated this thread being open and my being allowed to post factual information to it while it was still ongoing.

Valid points, but it has happened a time or two since I've been a member where we were discussing a situation (including making some slightly disparaging remarks about the person involved in the situation) only to have a family member stumble across the thread while searching the Internet and post that they were quite offended and/or our discussion opened up raw wounds. As a public forum, we must keep in mind that what we say may get back to the object of the discussion.

My point, and the point that Ed was also alluding to (I assume), was that the discussion was proceeding ad nauseum, with a few members getting extremely hot and defensive about extremely minor points. I kept saying to myself as I was reading the thread, "What the heck does it matter?" If it were some major issue that were a tremendous danger to everyone that needed addressing in order to prevent it from happening, that would be one thing, but this was a random, isolated incident. So what if the guy opened the side door? So what if the yard crew that made up the train forgot to lock (or disable the opening mechanism or whatever they do) the end door? All we needed here was one person to point out that it was possible, but for people to argue back and forth a dozen times that one or the other is absolutely impossible and there's no way the victim could have fallen out of either door because of or in spite of his state just seems a bit...excessive.

It's one thing to discuss something. It's another to beat a dead horse.

Oh, and I know why I kept reading this thread...strictly to see if anyone else were going to comment on my pictures!

 

[tony]

It says use the End Doors … to move to another car on the train. If you use the End Door at the rear of the train, there's no car to move to (and Amtrak tells you to use that as a last resort).
It could be confusing, but I think they spell it out all right.

Before the emergency, there could have been another car on the other side of the End Door, but due to the nature of the emergency, there isn't another car anymore. I mean, a derailment isn't an unheard of type of emergency.

 

[Tony]

Just to add my own spin to this long thread, let me mention that most of us here are experienced Amtrak passengers. We have a really good idea of what it normally takes to open a door. And if it took an unusual set of operations to open, we would all realize something was wrong.

However, I could envision a first-time passenger being unfamiliar with what it takes to open a door, and think that all the (overriding) operations is simply normal (and certainly annoying and troublesome). I mean, isn't a 12-step procedure normal when one wants to go between cars on a moving train?

 

[VentureForth]

My two (or three or four) cents:

1) DB Cooper exited the aircraft after giving explicit instructions to the crew to fly below 12,000 feet and unpressurized (this is very possible, and and FAA regulations don't require pressurization at 12,000 feet). That made it: a) Possible for the door to be opened, whether manually or mechanically; b) allowed him to breathe at the beginning of the jump.

2) If ANY door was opened during a train ride, upstairs, downstairs, front, back, etc., someone would notice. Even in the middle of the night. It's hardly silent. Shame on any pax not reporting it, and for any SCA/SA/OBS/etc., for not noticing.

3) I don't think it mentioned anywhere that this happened on double or single track. A lot of the SWC is double. Therefore, exiting the side could have landed him on the tracks that he wasn't travelling on.