Mother sues CSX over trestle death of her son

[gatorback]

Stephen, the engineer was lucky that time not to have killed anybody else.  The mass behind the power is the problem in situations like this. 

Why don't we accept that there's no fault here just some facts one being a dead child.

[gatorback]

All right then.  I guess I cannot call a ambulance chaser a maggot in all fairness unless I was one then it would be OK.  But in my defense, I did say how much the maggot's, oh, excuse me, the attorney's cases have made rr gradecrossing safer.

[Driven1]

Civil, dont bother spinning your wheels. You would have more success screaming at a wall.

i can 2nd that Civil.  Wisdom is learning from the mistakes (wasted time) of others.

[Jason]

Did the train slow to a stop or did the conductor yank the e-brake?  Over what distance did this the stop occur?  If the stopping distance was greater than the distance between the point where the conductor initially recognized the child and then the point where he hit the child there would have been nothing he could have done anyways.

Also, I'm sure that a freight train CAN derail at that speed or he likely would not have been concerned about an emergency stop.

[gatorback]

It takes miles to stop a train even with just a couple of cars at 43 MPH.  Would you swerve your car at 43 MPH on a wet road to avoid hitting a deer if your kids was in the car with you Jason, or would you just take out the deer a much safer option for you at that point.  Because that's about as much traction a steel wheel has on a steel rail probably less then rubber on water on asphalt.

[Jason]

I'm taking out the deer.

[gatorback]

I'm taking out the deer.

And probably praying nobody gets hurt.  Think about what the engineer just when through.  For probably at least a mile or two, slowing down, not know if he killed that boy, then to realize that he did.  Horrible.  I blame CSX personally.  There have been cases where engineers sue for mental destress for failures on part of the RR.

[downtownparks]

Maybe we can just send antagonistic emails to the CSX board of directors and the train engineer. That'll teach 'em.

[Downtown Dweller]

This young man should not have been on the bridge period. It can not in anyway shape or form be the fault of the engineer or CSX. If he had not been there (where he wasn't supposed to be) none of this would have happened. That being said, young men (calling them little boys slants it a little I think!) doing dumb things is not new or uncommon, unfortunately this time it cost someone their life. I feel very very sorry for this young man's mother and father. I can not even imagine the pain of losing your child

[gatorback]

Doesn't work that way in Florida Downtown Dweller.

[Downtown Dweller]

I hear ya, I guess I should have phrased it “It should not be the fault of anyone, it was an accident” .Unfortunately I think grief may be effecting everyone involved. I can not imagine the pain and rage of losing your child in such a senseless accident I can imagine the parents wanting to blame someone for this, but it was an accident. It is a very sad situation.

[Driven1]

I hear ya, I guess I should have phrased it “It should not be the fault of anyone, it was an accident” .Unfortunately I think grief may be effecting everyone involved. I can not imagine the pain and rage of losing your child in such a senseless accident I can imagine the parents wanting to blame someone for this, but it was an accident. It is a very sad situation.

exactly.

[Ocklawaha]

I am addressing the simple facts and math of the argument. I certainly feel for the parents loss, but I have seen engineers carried out of the cab in such cases. Shades of Vietnam, where children were sometimes unsuspecting victims and adult men crumbled in emotional heaps. This is day to day railroading. So with that in mind, let me point out a few things:

The engineer was "driving" the train... NO he was not driving the train. The train is run/ran/operated but there is not enough control to say that one "drives" it. To run the train is as much art as it is science.

The engineer sounded the horn... Okay, but more then you think. Horns are not just noise makers but signal devices. EVERY horn sound has a meaning - Al La Morse-code. It is a language of sound. The rule book says a series of loud sharp SHORT blasts of the horn (o o o o o o o o o o o o o o) signals that man, animal or vehicle is on the track. This is the most audible warning available. Approach to a railroad crossing would be ( - - o - )
for example.

Dumping the air, or going into full emergency almost certainly is a design for a massive disaster. Such a disaster could have forever killed the crew, wiped out the trestle, killed all of the kids at play, and forever changed the ecology of Black Creek. The engineer was right in backing off the throttle (the gas) and trying to get a firm fix on the situation.

Speeding freight, "We only have the engineers word..." NO WE DON'T. The train carries a black box just like an aircraft. Every move the engineer made, every brake application, speed reduction, speed overall, measurements in feet and inches, signal indications etc. is electronic and recorded for the attorneys.

Given 200'-400' of backing off the throttle (gas) causes the train cars to bunch-up. Each coupler has a few inches of slack action between it and the car behind it. When a long train starts off, that action causes a slight jerk on the car behind the locomotive, as the slack runs out down the train (you can hear it travel) it gets more violent. By the time it reaches the last car (the old caboose position) it can be strong enough to go from zero-10mph in a fraction of a second. Enough to throw a strong man, flat on the floor (and one of the reasons cabooses are gone). Stopping a train that action is reversed as each car slams into the slack of the car ahead, as it gathers in it poses a real danger of being "hit by the train". In other words, the locomotives may stop, and a few seconds later get slammed by 100 million pounds of freight cars still moving at 43 MPH. Derailment? More like explosion.

As for fencing off the right-of-way, or signs, I know this area. It is very remote, and the railroad has great signs on all sides and on all approaches to that narrow bridge. It shouldn't be the railroads job to protect us from ourselves, after warning us that this is DEADLY PRIVATE PROPERTY. If the teens hop one fence do we need two? If they pass one light or camera, would two work better? A few years ago the federal railroad administration passed a rule that all locomotives MUST HAVE a flashing strobe light on the roof. It would prevent 1% of all FATAL accidents at grade crossings. Or so they said. A railroad executive went on record in Washington, suggesting that 100 strobe lights would prevent ALL FATAL accidents.

Had this been Amtraks Silver Meteor, rather then a slow CSX freight, the kid would have been scattered from Black Creek to Ortega. One can join the military at 17, go into battle, drive a tank, fire a rocket, or fly a $80 MILLION dollar jet... So being a star high schooler, I would think playing in the middle of the CSX mainline would not be in his game plan. Victim? Yes, he AND the train crew. Sad? Certainly something those involved will live and re-live forever. Stupid? It's not mommy or daddy or CSX or Floridas job to think for him.

think logically about the facts.

1.  By his own admission, he blew the horn on sight, but decided not to brake.

2.  He then realizes that its kids, but assumes they will jump, and decides not to brake.

3.  He realizes that one isnt jumping and then decides to brake.

We only have the engineer's word to the cop as to how fast the  train was travelling.  There is no other evidence that the train was moving at the lawful speed.

At the relatively slow speed that he claimed he was going, he would not necessarily have taken 'miles to stop', as obviously it did not when he eventually did decide to brake.  And there was no derailment.

The Railroad Engineers View:[/color][/b]

A Typical Grade Crossing Analysis

An example of a time distance analysis follows. In this case a train was approaching a road crossing at 29 M/H. The sight distance available to the engineer was 484'. The question posed is how much could the engineer have delayed the train's arrival at the crossing by placing the train in emergency? That analysis follows.



Total Available Distance = 485'

Initial speed = 29 M/H (42.5 ft/sec)

Estimated reaction time = 1.5 Seconds

TRAIN DATA

Number of units (Locomotives)
= 2

Length of units (Locomotives)
= 136.66 feet

Weight of units (Locomotives)
= 350.5 tons

Number of cars
= 18

Length of cars
= 902 feet

Gross weight of cars
= 980 tons

Empty weight of cars
= 540 tons

Train length
= 1038 feet

Gross weight of train
= 1330 tons

Empty weight of train
= 890 tons

Brake pipe pressure
= 90 psi

Emergency propagation
= 1.128 sec.

Emergency braking efficiency
= 0.736

Grade
= -.00173


First lets determine the Engineer's reaction distance using an average reaction time of 1.5 seconds.

Reaction distance = (Reaction Time) x (Velocity)

Reaction distance = (1.5 seconds) x (42.5 ft/second) = 64 feet.

Subtracting this reaction distance from the total distance of 485' leaves 421' feet for the train to slow.

Next let's determine how long it would take the train to arrive at the crossing if the engineer did not act.

Distance/Rate = Time

(421 feet) / (42.5 ft/second) = 9.89 seconds

Next, we must calculate the actual slowing for the train. This is not a simple calculation. Recall we must account for the time for the air to propagate the length of the train. Next, the actuation time of the brakes for each car must be considered. We must also determine the weight of the train then compare it to brake force. The results of these calculations will be presented in the table below without support.

Initial Speed (mph)
Stopping Distance (feet)
Time to Stop (sec)

29
712.1
25.89


 

The first thing that is apparent is that the available stopping distance of 421' is well less than the 712.1' feet required for the train to stop. The conclusion: The train can't stop before it gets to the crossing. But perhaps more interesting is the comparison of the time it takes the train to reach the crossing with and without braking. Again, this involves detailed calculations beyond the scope of this treatment. The result will be presented for purposes of comparison. Given the 421' brake distance the train arrives at the crossing at 24.14 M/H. The time it arrives is 10.46 seconds after the point the brakes were first applied. This time should be compared to the time required to reach the crossing if no action was taken. That time calculated above was 9.89 seconds. The difference is .57 seconds. This difference in time is not much, but perhaps sufficient for a car to clear the crossing.

Conclusion

When compared to other modes of ground transportation trains have some unique characteristics that require special analytical consideration. The length of a train and its associated pneumatic brake systems, determining the train weight and calculating brake force are all variables that appear in stopping distance calculations. While running steel wheels on steel tracks greatly increases a train's load-carrying capability, these materials limit the ground forces available so that speed changes in trains occur relatively slowly.

These problems notwithstanding, this truly massive vehicle travels thousands of miles daily with infrequent incident.

Ocklawaha

[Driven1]

Ock...you got a cliff notes version?  What does all this research reveal to you?

[Jason]

Here here!!