UP Kills Norma Povey Age 74

The ped had no responsibility in this? Why is this UP's fault?

-John

*You are nothing until you have flown a Douglas, Lockheed, Grumman or North American*

Whoa - you're jumping to incorrect conclusions. Neither the article nor Bruce's comments make any reference to "fault."

So I guess our question to you is... why do you think that people are implying that it's UP's fault?

Its not. Probably the other 28 were not either. I understand that 28 of the

29 pedestrians killed on the tracks in Salem since 1993 have all been in the same location. Apparently the UP recently took some safety measures at that location. Maybe after running over 25 or 26 pedestrians at the same spot they thought it might be a good idea to do something. A personal injury lawyer might take the view that the UP knew of the situation but neglected do an adequate job securing the area for pedestrian safety. Maybe not. I only know what the article says and it did not assign blame to anyone. Bruce

I don't know your source of that. The article doesn't say "same location," it uses the phrase "the same Union Pacific tracks." It's hard to guage the authors exact intent, but I would take that to mean 29 deaths along that railroad route through town -- certainly not 29 deaths all in the same location.

With just the basic level of information in the article it's hard to draw much of any conclusions -- although it's very likely that this particular rail line probably has some of the highest levels of service in Salem, and it probably passes through a part of town where pedestrain/rail crossings are also highest.

I also don't know your source for that.

The article reports that "pedestrian improvements have been made along the railroad corridor in Salem in recent years." There is no mention of safety measures in the article. What measures did the UP take?

The pedestrain improvments probably had the intended effect of encouraging more pedestrian traffic, but it sure seems like it may have had the effect of more pedestrian/train conflicts, and the unfortunate side effect of more pedestrain fatalaties.

Regardless of who is "at fault," 28 pedetrain/train deaths in a dozen years would seem to indicate that the situation needs to be looked at, and a better solution implemented.

The Thread Title states it not implies it so maybe from that title?

Fencing and a walk over bridge seem in order.

The same old story--trying to beat the train. Either being a pedestrian or in a car, the train will always win. You NEVER try to beat a train. I know. My Dad worked for the UP from 1953-1994 but never had an accident. But he always told me to look more than twice when crossing train tracks. It's not the UP'S fault. Sometimes it can take a mile to completely stop a train, so when I see a person at 50 yards, they had better get the hell out of the way. And you should also be able to HEAR an approaching train.

Shawn

in article snipped-for-privacy@posting.google.com, oztrainman at snipped-for-privacy@hotmail.com wrote on 7/9/04 7:22 AM:

That may be the conclusion if you are a trial lawyer trying to win a lawsuit. My conclusion is that if there is a grade crossing there with signals, visual and audible, that enough has been done. It is up to each of us, 74 years old or 10 years old to be somewhat aware of our immediate environment and take reasonable precautions. Crossing the street or train tracks without looking or heeding the oncoming traffic is not healthy. We should have liberty with responsibility: you can try to cross where ever you want, but YOYO (You're On Your Own).

If the ped. Crossed the tracks outside of a grade crossing, the UP likewise is not at fault even without fencing. We here in Northern Cal have Caltrain with fencing all along the route from SJ to SF, and almost as soon as the fence is repaired, some knuckle-head opens up a hole to save walking a block or so to cross the tracks. But a larger number get killed at marked, signaled grade crossings with lights, pedestrian barriers, etc. Darwin wins again.

Yeah, I can see that in the title.

A walk over bridge (pedestrain overpass) is rarely the best solution.

What about a walk-under-pass? There is one of those in Buford, GA near where I once lived. No stairs, just a gently sloping ramp at both ends. Seniors, disabled people in wheelchairs and children can use it with no trouble at all. It doesn't have to be tall enough to clear a train and it doesn't require any protection to keep people from dropping things on the trains or jumping off in front of one.

Captain Handbrake

All other things being equal, a pedestrian underpass is usually a better solution than a pedestrian overpass.

Just consider the vertical geometry - an underpass needs 10' clearance for bikes, plus about 1.5' for a top slab on the tunnel and another 2.5' for ballast, ties and rail. So it's a total of about 14' from the walkway to the rail. On the other hand a pedestrian overpass needs 23' clear over tracks by

23' plus about 2' structure depth, or 25' vertical height.

Then consider that typical Americans with Disabilities Act standards require

30' of ramp at 1 vertical to 12 horizontal and also a 5' level resting area to go with each length of ramps, and you'll see that the horizontal distance required to go over the tracks is 350' versus 200' to go under. And then double that length for the other side.

There are drawbacks with the underpass option -- drainage is an obvious one. Often a pump system is required to get stormwater runoff into the local sewer system. And that is an operation and maintenance issue that many municipalities would rather avoid.

Pedestrian access becomes an issue for both the overpass and the underpass solutions. There is no additional pedestrian access to the sidewalk (700' for an overpass or 400' for an underpass) along the distance required to ramp a sidewalk up and then back down. And if there is an intersecting street near the track (which is often the case -- how many cities in America have a railroad track with a parallel "Depot Street" next to it), then what do you do? You can't get back to grade at the parallel street -- how do you handle pedestrian traffic on those streets? Things start to cascade, unless you elevate/depress the rail line, which is an extreme measure.

This is especially acute when you consider that the locations which have high pedestrian/train fatalities are in locations where there is a lot of pedestrian traffic. An under- or overpass solution is counterproductive to that. Think about the lengths of ramps required, and how that would affect the surrounding area.

Consider the situation in Salem, which is where the fatalities are occurring - the news article says "pedestrian improvements have been made along the railroad corridor in Salem in recent years." Putting an over- or underpass will limit access to the walkway (putting the problem of railroad conflicts aside for the moment) -- so this seems counterproductive to what the overall plan for this area is. It seems like Salem is trying to improve pedestrian use, either because there is a lot of existing pedestrian use, or because it is beneficial to promote it in the future.

Either way, an overpass bridge is counterproductive to pedestrian use. Not to mention that an overpass structure can run about $2000-$3000 per foot, or $1.4 million to $2.1 million to construct. That opportunity cost can provide a lot of incentive to look at other solutions to the problem. (That's why few FRN's are city planners.)

That is why increased protection at grade (gates? speed limit? better visibility?) is often a better solution than just separation. There often is land use near the tracks which benefits from pedestrian access.

Still, 28 deaths on a single rail line through town over a dozen-year time span seems like it needs to be studied and a suitable remedy implemented.

- Mark

There I fixed the title to reflect reality.

It would be valuable to see a picture of the area to better guage the situation. Bridges are expensive yes. My thought was that the city would build it not the railroad. Other areas around the world have done that will some success.

What is an FRN Mark?

The human brain is incredibly adaptive. Persond who live along RR tracks seldom notice the noise of the trains after a few years. If the tracks are particularly busy, the brain's ability to ignore the noise is more likely to be heightened. Furthermore, if the engineer has throttled back and is coasting through town at 35 mph modern trains are uncannily quiet. I was recently at a station inspecting a caboose on display there. I was about 100 feet from the tracks. A string of locomotives and about 120 covered hoppers cruised to a stop behind me and I never heard it.

Bob

Anyone who can should see yesterday's NYT for an article about UP shenanigans in accident investigations.

(by juries, any way) that we must punish corporations.< Of course this image doesn't fit UP. I'm curious if a juror sitting on this jury (if it occurred, etc.) would be influenced by articles about UP getting a pound of flesh from modelers but probably passed by a defense attorney in questioning because the subjects are totally non-related. In other words UP could get a loaded jury of modelers in a civil case involving a death. Think UP would get hung?

So then it comes down to: hmmm, can I beat the train, or should I take a chance with tunnel thugs? Amazing....

Chris

Greg Pavlov wrote: