Train Track Pictures

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
zepherdude

zepherdude

OBS Chief
Joined
Sep 9, 2008
Messages
564
Location
Redding California
http://news.yahoo.com/video/dangers-taking-photos-train-tracks-080734918.html

This is a very sad Nightline Clip of a boy and girl friend taking pictures on a Maryland track when an Amtrak train doing 70 ended the shoot. This must be a new craze to be pictured on a train track.

The Jim Availa report touched me so much as the boys Mom sleeps in her sons bed to be close to him and remember his touch and feelings.. So much sorrow and grief. It so could have been avoided. She realized she should have just said No. There are other pictures of toddlers and families on tracks. Professionals that take pictures on train tracks.

This was a disturbing clip for me. I post this for visitors here that love to walk on tracks. For young dudes and duddetts that think its cool to rock out with headsets on and cruise the train tracks with tunes blaring.

Please don't think I am just an old worry fart. These deaths are happening guys. Train track deaths are up 500 for this year alone. Think of your body all spread over the tracks, think of your family wishing you were still here, think of the engineer that can't stop a fast moving train. This is a 7 minute clip. Its really worth the time folks.

Young and Old track walkers check this out!
 
The comments in the comment sections are pretty cruel. Good ol' arm around the shoulder sympathy is obviously a thing of the past.
 
Train track pictures aren't really a new trend; they're simply increasing in popularity thanks to social media and the easy spread of photo ideas.

Many of my classmates took their senior pictures along an unused, abandoned rail line that ran through town**. There is something to be said for the romance of the rails, as railways suggest the future, possibilities, running away, etc.

That said, even though using an unused track is safe and does not pose any danger in and of itself, it does cause others to think, "That's so cool!" and then take photos on LIVE tracks. I really wish people were smart enough to either use unused tracks or none at all.

** Nobody was trespassing. No signs were posted, and it was extremely common for people to walk/bike along the rail line, as it was a direct route through downtown. I even went so far as to check with the city since I walked along the tracks to my job every summer.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Like you did, always check to make sure they're actually abandoned. There's some lines that are still there but used very rarely...but they are used sometimes.

One could also contact a local railroad museum that has their own tracks and see if they would be willing to let you use their tracks for a photo shoot. That's probably easier than trying to work with a larger railroad.
 
I did smirk when someone commented on the photographer's early warning system: a penny on the tracks. :wacko:
 
andersone said:
The train always wins
Click to expand...
But the problem is, that's not actually the case. If everybody who posed for a photo on a track was run over and killed, then no one would do it. The simple fact is that the vast majority of people who pose on tracks do so with no harm to themselves. Essentially people are playing the odds, and it doesn't take much intelligence to stack the odds in your favor. That's the heart of the problem here...it's easy to get away with it...until the day you lose.
 
fairviewroad said:
That's the heart of the problem here...it's easy to get away with it...until the day you lose.
Click to expand...
IMHO, the problem is that people sometimes do foolish things. Foolish things that are fatal. Been doing that for thousands of years. Will be doing that for thousands of years to come. And nothing you, I or anybody else can do will change that - IMHO.
 


** Nobody was trespassing. No signs were posted, and it was extremely common for people to walk/bike along the rail line, as it was a direct route through downtown. I even went so far as to check with the city since I walked along the tracks to my job every summer.
Click to expand...
Does ** mean it was said in the video?

The typical railroad right-of-way (ROW) is 100 feet wide for a single line (50 feet perpendicular each way from the center line between the rails), or 50 feet from between the 2 rails on either side of several rail road lines.

In some places the ROW is 150 feet wide.

There is no requirement to post "NO TRESPASSING" signs, and just because lots of people trespass on a ROW does not make it legal for everyone to trespass.

What city office was consulted? It's quite possible 'the city' gave wrong information regarding the railroad ROW and trespassing.

A person would probably find restating the city provided info ineffective for defense in court.

The city office to check with in the hopes of getting accurate info would be the City Attorney office.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree with KimH. Railroad right of ways, whether active or abandoned, are private property and walking on or along them is trespassing. Any city employee telling you that it is OK to walk along them is misinformed. People using rail lines as a walkway are subject to arrest.
 
The asterisks at the end of my post were the beginning of the footnote. I was not quoting the video. If I had, I would have used quotation marks and cited the video.

If you had noted the ** at the end of one of my sentences, that would have led you to the footnote. This is a common use of asterisks and footnotes.

I consulted the proper city office. I worked at the library at the time and asked the librarians for help with consulting the proper authority. I would be happy to show you the documentation the city office showed me, but it was over 20 years ago, and I don't live there anymore.
 
KmH said:
** Nobody was trespassing. No signs were posted, and it was extremely common for people to walk/bike along the rail line, as it was a direct route through downtown. I even went so far as to check with the city since I walked along the tracks to my job every summer.
Click to expand...
Does ** mean it was said in the video?

The typical railroad right-of-way (ROW) is 100 feet wide for a single line (50 feet perpendicular each way from the center line between the rails), or 50 feet from between the 2 rails on either side of several rail road lines.

In some places the ROW is 150 feet wide.

There is no requirement to post "NO TRESPASSING" signs, and just because lots of people trespass on a ROW does not make it legal for everyone to trespass.

What city office was consulted? It's quite possible 'the city' gave wrong information regarding the railroad ROW and trespassing.

A person would probably find restating the city provided info ineffective for defense in court.

The city office to check with in the hopes of getting accurate info would be the City Attorney office.
Click to expand...
Railroad rights-of-way vary in width. In the west, the rights-of-way tend to be wide. In the east, there are some pretty narrow areas. There are some in my area where the legal property line is no more than 15 feet from centerline of track. That is even true on the NEC.

The definition of criminal trespass varies by state. In the state of Maryland, posting of signs, or being told not to enter by the owner or agent of the owner, is a requirement for the charge of criminal trespass. That does not make it "OK" to enter the right-of-way. but it also means it is not a criminal issue unless confronted, told to leave, then refusing to do so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
If there is valuable steel rail there, it is probably owned by the railroad, although I understand there may be exceptions. Giving up the railroad right of way usually means taking up the rail, tie plates, spikes, copper signal wires, etc. and selling them for scrap or reusing them elsewhere. If you have guaranteed up to date confirmation of the line's current legal status, you are safer. Relying on verbal information from a County official may get you incorrect information that the official believes to be correct.

If the weather has been dry for some time and the rails are coated in rust, that tells you that there hasn't been a train in a long time. But are you sure you feel safe concluding that there won't be one today?

By the way, I chose not to read those comments. Stupid, insensitive, callous, judgmental nitwits like to use those media to show off their idea of wit. This was a bright kid with a bright future, and he made a terrible mistake. I can think of many times in my life when I've had terrible lapses in judgment. I just happen to have survived, so far.

Tom
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I am really, really unsympathetic to people who decide to play on railroad tracks. The last one I was sympathetic to was this one:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/William_Huskisson

He had an excuse: nobody really understood trains at the time. After 15 September 1830, people should have known better. No sympathy.

This was not a bright kid. This was an idiot. He did not have a bright future, or at least I hope not, because idiots in power have caused us a lot of trouble over the centuries. Crossing the tracks is one thing; hanging out on them is crazy recklessness.

I am honestly more sympathetic to people who play in the road, which is actually a legal place to walk where pedestrians have the legal right to be.

There's an Australian safety campaign which shares my attitude:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dumb_Ways_to_Die
 
Last edited by a moderator:
FormerOBS said:
If there is valuable steel rail there, it is probably owned by the railroad, although I understand there may be exceptions. Giving up the railroad right of way usually means taking up the rail, tie plates, spikes, copper signal wires, etc. and selling them for scrap or reusing them elsewhere. If you have guaranteed up to date confirmation of the line's current legal status, you are safer. Relying on verbal information from a County official may get you incorrect information that the official believes to be correct.

If the weather has been dry for some time and the rails are coated in rust, that tells you that there hasn't been a train in a long time. But are you sure you feel safe concluding that there won't be one today?

By the way, I chose not to read those comments. Stupid, insensitive, callous, judgmental nitwits like to use those media to show off their idea of wit. This was a bright kid with a bright future, and he made a terrible mistake. I can think of many times in my life when I've had terrible lapses in judgment. I just happen to have survived, so far.

Tom
Click to expand...
I think the issue is with the term "owned." In real estate, "owned" usually refers to fee ownership - actually having a deed to the property. Many railroad rights-of-way are not like that. Many are easements - rights granted by the actual land owner to the railroad to occupy a defined portion of their land for the purpose of constructing, operating and maintaining the railroad. The practical result of having an easement is the about same as fee ownership - the railroad controls that portion of the property. However, the railroad does not "own" the land in the legal sense of the term.
 
I agree. Maybe I shouldn't have said "owned" because tracks can be present, and in use, without actual ownership of the land. But the important point is not ownership of the land; it is whether a train is going to show up. Poorly maintained track, or track that looks to be abandoned, may give the impression that no train is coming. It may tell you that any train on that track is likely to be moving slowly enough that you will have time to get clear. But one should always remember the admonition that railroad employees hear early in their training: "Always expect a train at any time, on any track". Look both ways. Don't dawdle. Get clear quickly. Don't waste time.

If the rails are highly polished from frequent use, with tracks maintained very straight and well ballasted, LOOK OUT!

Tom
 
When I reached page 68 and 69, in my November copy of Car and Driver, perhaps the largest circulation auto magazine in existence, I was stunned to see they posed the article subject, a red Audi TT right on the ballast between tracks of a very active looking railway, close enough to a turnout that a train would hit it.....

While I am assuming (?!), they got permission from the RR to set up the shot, I still am bothered by the implication that it is a 'cool' thing to do...... :angry:

I don't know if there is a way to link to that photo online.....
 
Just between you and me, I doubt that any large railroad would give permission for that shoot because of the message it sends. I'm tempted to conclude this was more guerrilla photography B.S. like the thing that resulted in the death of Sarah Jones, and landed Randall Miller in the slammer for a well-deserved (arguably too lenient) two years.

Tom
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I agree that it is unlikely (or certainly should be), that a 'Class I' road would allow that shot.....it would go against all the 'Operation Lifesaver' message they wish to convey.

But I rather doubt also, that a magazine like Car and Driver would take a chance and do it 'guerrilla' style. I believe it is more likely that they found some cash-starved shortline to make the arrangement with, but who knows?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top