Tractor VS Train

[cowboy357]

To me, there is an "X" at every crossing. It is formed when the rails cross the road. This "X" wakes me from my cranial slumber and makes me look to see if the train is coming, AND look long enough to judge the speed.E

I,m not sure what You are reffering to The Haymaker , I,m guessing paved or concrete roads .

I,m beggining to wonder if Kansas is the only place that has the narrow dirt back roads with no lights or crossing signals I,m referring to , as well as the one lane narrow bridges where only one vehicle can cross at a time . . Bob

 

[Midsouth]

What he is saying is that if you could look at it from overhead the tracks and the road make an X where they cross.

 

[Gardening]

Thats very nice news, that a little hurt only done to the driver. If we follow the road safety rules correctly then no need to panic at any place in the roads. Follow the road rules be happy always.

 

[chh]

I just finished a CDL course. The phrase to remember for all rail crossings was "Look, Listen, and Live".
Of course driving over the same crossing on a regular basis and not seeing trains until you get used to one not being there is a sure way to build the habit of not thinking about it. That can easily be the recipe for disaster.

 

[tallyho8]

I,m beggining to wonder if Kansas is the only place that has the narrow dirt back roads with no lights or crossing signals I,m referring to , as well as the one lane narrow bridges where only one vehicle can cross at a time . . Bob

No, Kansas isn't the only place yet. This is a one lane bridge on Hwy 123 in the Ozarks in Arkansas not far from my property. They did pave this road a few years ago though. There are many unpaved roads in the area but no train tracks. The next county over, Newton County, is the only county in Arkansas with no railroad tracks.

 

[GreenLawnFarm]

the crossing does not have crossing arms. i read this as here comes a lawsuit and then some crossing signal lights and arms. and i have a hard time finding fault with the train engineer, even if they were going too fast. it's a train and it's not stopping for anything.

 

[cowboy357]

the crossing does not have crossing arms. i read this as here comes a lawsuit and then some crossing signal lights and arms. and i have a hard time finding fault with the train engineer, even if they were going too fast. it's a train and it's not stopping for anything.

I dont quite understand how You could not find fault if the engineer was in fact traveling above the set speed limit . That May or not been the case .

But it makes one heck of a difference at even 5 or 10 MPH faster to a slow moving vehicle . Maybe its just Me , But IMHO , Its upto the railroad to make sure the crossings are well marked with either lights or crossing arms . Depending on how much the road is traveled .

At the very least They should make sure all trees & crossings are clear because afterall it is their easement . Much like the utilitys companys have to do . Which at least out here The RR do not .

Yes You need to pay attention , no doubt . Which maybe in this case the tractor operator was not . But its not allways the case .

The RR makes a lot of money using those train tracks & very few people had a choice wether to sell the property in the last 50 years at least .

Most derailments & some train accidents are in fact due to negligence of the RR , doing regular maintenance to the tracks & crossings .

Being retired from the trucking & grain hauling buisiness I,ve made a fair amount of money doing cleanup & hauling grain from train wreck sites , Which included several fatalitys . In this type of accident its really hard to forget .

They dont care what they have to pay at that time as they have to clear the tracks NOW & most times settle out of court before any lawsuits are brought on . So if it takes a few lawsuits to make them accountable , I have no problem with that . Makes more sence then suing Mcdonalds For spilling hot coffe in your lap .

But once again it May have nothing to do with this accident . I just think its time the big companys to step up & take responsability, like all the smaller companys are forced to. Just My opinion , As I,ve had a few close calls myself & I was paying attention .



No one expects the train to stop for traffic Bob

 

[aczlan]

I dont quite understand how You could not find fault if the engineer was in fact traveling above the set speed limit . That May or not been the case .

But it makes one heck of a difference at even 5 or 10 MPH faster to a slow moving vehicle . Maybe its just Me , But IMHO , Its upto the railroad to make sure the crossings are well marked with either lights or crossing arms . Depending on how much the road is traveled .

I know nothing about this case (other than what I read in the linked news article), but if the state law says that you need to stop and look/listen before crossing a unsignaled (ie: no arms or lights) railroad track than it is your fault if you get hit by a train at a unsignaled crossing(unless the engineer is speeding and not sounding his horn for the crossing) a signaled crossing on the other hand, I can see the RR being liable if it was malfunctioning.
My rule of thumb is that if I can see the train at a unsignaled crossing (this is in upstate NY, so sightlines are short in relation to how they are in some other ports of the country) I will not cross. It is better to wait 5-10 mins for the train to pass than have to explain to my wife that I will be in a wheelchair for the rest of my life because I was in too much of a hurry to wait for the train to pass.

At the very least They should make sure all trees & crossings are clear because afterall it is their easement . Much like the utilitys companys have to do . Which at least out here The RR do not .

I think you are comparing apples and oranges here.

• Yes, the RR should have to keep the sightlines clear at rail crossings (that is a safety issue and you might be best served by writing your state public safety commission and/or your state representatives about the matter if they are not doing so).
• But as I understand it, the utility companies are not required to keep their lines clear, they clear them for 2 reasons
  1. So that trees/tree limbs don't fall on the lines/poles (cheaper to keep them trimmed than have someone come in on an emergency basis when a ice storm or what have you strikes)
  2. So that they can get in when they need to perform maintainance on their lines/poles

Yes You need to pay attention , no doubt . Which maybe in this case the tractor operator was not . But its not allways the case

If the engineer was sounding his horn and going withing the speed limit for that section of track, the tractor operator was at fault. If they do not already have them, trains should have a "black box" data recorder that tells how fast the train was traveling, if the horn was blowing, etc it could perhaps even include a video taken from the front of the train, that way there could be no doubt what had happened when things like this happen.

The RR makes a lot of money using those train tracks & very few people had a choice wether to sell the property in the last 50 years at least

True.

Most derailments & some train accidents are in fact due to negligence of the RR , doing regular maintenance to the tracks & crossings .

Derailments are a separate issue, the case in point is someone who was driving a tractor that was hit by a train.

Being retired from the trucking & grain hauling buisiness I,ve made a fair amount of money doing cleanup & hauling grain from train wreck sites , Which included several fatalitys . In this type of accident its really hard to forget
They dont care what they have to pay at that time as they have to clear the tracks NOW & most times settle out of court before any lawsuits are brought on . So if it takes a few lawsuits to make them accountable , I have no problem with that . Makes more sence then suing Mcdonalds For spilling hot coffe in your lap .

They are losing thousands of dollars (or in some cases tens of thousands of dollars or more) per day by having the lines closed due to a derailment/accident, not only are they not able to make money off of a closed line, but they have contracts that probably have stiff penalties if they do not get the goods shipped and they lose money by having locomotives and rolling stock sitting idle (depreciating) rather than working. So, I am not surprised that they are willing to pay whatever it takes to get the lines reopened ASAP.
On the MacDonalds coffee lawsuit, there was some merit to her case... see Wikipedia for more info.

Aaron Z

 

[cowboy357]

Once again Aaron , You make very valid points & say them much better then I can . I certainlly cant argue with that , so i wont .

Also thanks for the link on the law suit, there was some points I was not aware of . It does sound like , as You say there was some merit to her case . The facts may not have been what the media fed to the public . So thanks for that as well .

I guess My opinion of the RR , stems from personall experiences with them, & I compare them to the other large companys that do what they do when they want to do it , With not much thought about the general public , let alone how they take care of their own & throw them under the bus when they need a scapegoat . Much like the postal service, oil & insurance companys do. But thats just my opinion. . Bob