CZ Train Truck Collision In Nevada (2011)

shop deals on amazon
Advertise with us
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.
There seems to be a key difference between this crash and the near miss. With the crossing at such a shallow angle, it looks like the near miss came when the train was approaching "over the shoulder" of the truck driver. This crash it appears as the truck and train were in more of a head on geometry.

I don't have any idea on the numbers, but high speed limits (on the road) and grade crossings don't seem to mix. 25 seconds might be enough to stop a car at "normal" speeds, but a truck traveling much faster is going to need more warning.
 
A little bit of digging into Nevada DOT information finds that the AADT (annual average daily traffic count) for US 95 at this location is 870 vehicles per day. That was for 2009, but for the entire 10 year period in the record found the count has been near constant, with the highest being 920 in 2000 and the lowest being 780 in 2002 and 2003. For comparison, the theoretical capacity of a two lane highway is between 1500 and 3000 vehicles per hour, depending on terrain and other factors.
 
All due respect to our eastern members, but you have to have driven in rural Nevada to understand how vast it is. I have driven several trips on US. #50 between Ely and Fallon (a two-lane highway with a 70mph. speed limit) and could count a total of 10-15 vehicles in the entire 240 mi. run.

I sure wish I knew how to post a couple photographs to show how truly wide open and beautiful rural Nevada is.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
George Harris said:
A little bit of digging into Nevada DOT information finds that the AADT (annual average daily traffic count) for US 95 at this location is 870 vehicles per day. That was for 2009, but for the entire 10 year period in the record found the count has been near constant, with the highest being 920 in 2000 and the lowest being 780 in 2002 and 2003. For comparison, the theoretical capacity of a two lane highway is between 1500 and 3000 vehicles per hour, depending on terrain and other factors.
Click to expand...
NDOT will be conducting a saftey audit of the crossing to determine if the current setup is safe. The article I read also stated that there are 3 grade crossings in NV where the speed limit is 70mph and 3 more where the speed limit is 65mph.

Something seems intuitively wrong to me to have an at grade crossing on roads with speed limits that high.
 
Based on sight distance standards, there was plenty of sight distance for this crossing.

Here are the numbers from the California Highway Design Manual:

Sight Distance Standards

Design....Stopping.....Decision

Speed....Sight Dist...Sight Dist

(mph).....(feet).......(feet)

..20.......125.......not given

..25.......150.......not given

..30.......200.........450

..35.......250.........525

..40.......300.........600

..45.......360.........675

..50.......430.........750

..55.......500.........865

..60.......580.........990

..65.......660.......1,050

..70.......750.......1,105

..75.......840.......1,180

..80.......930.......1,260

Stopping sight distance includes a component for reaction time and considers less than perfect road conditions.

Decision sight distance is the distance that is “desirable to allow drivers time for decisions without making last minute erratic maneuvers”

For those that want to know more, the Cal DOT Manual references Chapter III of AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.

I am not trying to say that leaving this as a grade crossing is a good idea. I believe that there should be 100% seperation of railroads and highways. However, given traffic volume and sight distances, it is very understandable that this particular crossing would not be near the top of the list of problem crossings that urgently require work.
 
All these statistics and analyses are fine, but the bottom line when driving a vehicle of any kind on any highway in any location is maintaining situational awareness....if everyone done that and reacted accordingly, the accident rate would decline rapidly......
hi.gif
 
George Harris said:
Based on sight distance standards, there was plenty of sight distance for this crossing.

Here are the numbers from the California Highway Design Manual:

Sight Distance Standards

Design....Stopping.....Decision

Speed....Sight Dist...Sight Dist

(mph).....(feet).......(feet)

..20.......125.......not given

..25.......150.......not given

..30.......200.........450

..35.......250.........525

..40.......300.........600

..45.......360.........675

..50.......430.........750

..55.......500.........865

..60.......580.........990

..65.......660.......1,050

..70.......750.......1,105

..75.......840.......1,180

..80.......930.......1,260

Stopping sight distance includes a component for reaction time and considers less than perfect road conditions.

Decision sight distance is the distance that is “desirable to allow drivers time for decisions without making last minute erratic maneuvers”

For those that want to know more, the Cal DOT Manual references Chapter III of AASHTO, A Policy on Geometric Design of Highways and Streets.

I am not trying to say that leaving this as a grade crossing is a good idea. I believe that there should be 100% seperation of railroads and highways. However, given traffic volume and sight distances, it is very understandable that this particular crossing would not be near the top of the list of problem crossings that urgently require work.
Click to expand...

Your comments are inline with what the NDOT person mentioned in the article. He said the sight distance for the crossing was 2,000 ft. and was within Federal standards for safe grade crossings.
 
PetalumaLoco said:
So apparently you can get from a Superliner to a Viewliner (single level) baggage car? Didn't know that.
Click to expand...
That's what the transition sleeper is for.

(Also, the current baggage car fleet is Heritage cars. There are no Viewliner baggage cars yet)
 
Speed limits are only a good as observed. So are crossing gates. So the safest, though most expensive, way is a total grade separation. A lower cost option to slow traffic and get attention is to create an artificial "S" curve in the road prior to the crossing. For a low traffic, high speed crossing such as this one with lots of low cost land available it may be the most cost effective safety improvement available.

When we consider grade crossings there are several factors, road use and speed, and rail use and speed. High use and speed of both road and rail quickly justifies the costs of a grade separation. Low road speed will usually confine injuries to the road vehicle ("law of lugnuts"), Burbonase an exeption. The recipe for disaster is high road speed with high train speed, though with low road use they will be infrequent.
 
IIRC, once Amtrak started to carrying firearms in checked baggage there would not be access from the transition sleeper anymore so the door would normally be locked. I thought it was mentioned here in this forum a while back, but I can't find the thread. Does anyone else remember recall seeing that?
 
hessjm said:
IIRC, once Amtrak started to carrying firearms in checked baggage there would not be access from the transition sleeper anymore so the door would normally be locked. I thought it was mentioned here in this forum a while back, but I can't find the thread. Does anyone else remember recall seeing that?
Click to expand...
Here is a transcript that said Amtrak had to use Locked bagge cars from Dec 1 2010

cnn transcript on fire arms

ROBERTS: And the weapon has to be unloaded and has to be in checked luggage which goes into a locked baggage car, right?

CHETRY: On some cars, so hopefully.
 
Wouldn't the OBS be aware that the baggage car is locked? At least the ones working in the transdorm?
 
Even if the OBS was aware that the baggage car was supposed to be locked, it does seem like potentially a safety/fire hazard to not have any egress from the train that way. I wonder if this was considered before the decision was made to accept firearms as checked baggage?

Moreover, and I know someone here knows it, how did amtrak arrive at the decision to allow firearms in the baggage car? Was it mandated by congress? Did someone just decide to do it? If it was mandated by Congress, than it seems like amtrak should not be culpable here.
 
amamba said:
Even if the OBS was aware that the baggage car was supposed to be locked, it does seem like potentially a safety/fire hazard to not have any egress from the train that way. I wonder if this was considered before the decision was made to accept firearms as checked baggage?

Moreover, and I know someone here knows it, how did amtrak arrive at the decision to allow firearms in the baggage car? Was it mandated by congress? Did someone just decide to do it? If it was mandated by Congress, than it seems like amtrak should not be culpable here.
Click to expand...
I agree that it would be a safety/fire hazard to have it locked. And, of course, the OBS could have been confused as to which way she was headed, etc.
 
Aren't the firearms in a separate, locked container in the baggage car? If so, locking access to the car itself would not be necessary to secure the firearms.

I believe locking the car is a general security measure that is not associated with the firearms locker.
 
jis said:
Besides there are all those removable windows to provide egress in an emergency. So I doubt that a locked baggage car counts for much as a safety hazard.
Click to expand...
The cars were standing up right,, try to get out of a 2nd floor superliner
 
john h said:
jis said:
Besides there are all those removable windows to provide egress in an emergency. So I doubt that a locked baggage car counts for much as a safety hazard.
Click to expand...
The cars were standing up right,, try to get out of a 2nd floor superliner
Click to expand...
Aloha

Even at my age if my choice is between being charbroiled or jumping from the second story, I am jumping!
 
john h said:
jis said:
Besides there are all those removable windows to provide egress in an emergency. So I doubt that a locked baggage car counts for much as a safety hazard.
Click to expand...
The cars were standing up right,, try to get out of a 2nd floor superliner
Click to expand...
You can't get to the Baggage Car from the second floor without coming down to the first floor anyway. So I don't see the relevance of this comment to the present discussion.
 
jis said:
john h said:
jis said:
Besides there are all those removable windows to provide egress in an emergency. So I doubt that a locked baggage car counts for much as a safety hazard.
Click to expand...
The cars were standing up right,, try to get out of a 2nd floor superliner
Click to expand...
You can't get to the Baggage Car from the second floor without coming down to the first floor anyway. So I don't see the relevance of this comment to the present discussion.
Click to expand...
Actually, the only way is a stairway at the transition end of the car that leads down from the second floor to single level doorway. So if someone were downstairs in the transition sleeper and wanted to get to the baggage car, they would have to go up to the second floor then down the stairway to the single level doorway.
 
One would think that OBS would have what used to be called "coach keys," which are keys that can open coach door locks, and locks into say, a baggage car. That is such a simple "workaround" I would be surprised -- but not astonished -- if OBS did not have those keys. And I know there are automatic doors on Superliners (and the East fleet) but I don't think that is the case on a Heritage baggage, which would be an old school door. The baggage cars I've seen on Lake Shore, Crescent, and the Silvers are old school. So if the baggage car access door is locked, simply insert key, unlock, and open door.

Suing attendant Lana Dickerson of Worth, Ill, reported to have a 2009 seniority date, may not understand Murphy's Law during emergencies or combat.

However her lawsuit vs. Amtrak (and John Davis Trucking Company of Battle Mountain) alleges that Amtrak also did not properly train its employees for how to respond in the case of a collision at a grade crossing. Now that, if proven, could be of concern to all PAX.

The suit also claims Amtrak did not properly inspect, maintain or repair its equipment, and did not provide “a crashworthy railroad car.”

That's a two-part allegation: Part 1 may have merit (albeit maybe not directly affecting this axy, but rather Amtrak's overall inspection/maintenance/repair processes; Part 2 would have to be something similar to an M1A2 tank,,,

Regarding escaping a burning Superliner, I, too, would jump, even from the roof. Some reports and videos indicated some Zephyr surviving PAX lamenting a victim who would not jump, or drop down, from the flame-ridden sleeper.

And as I noted in an earlier post in this thread,

The Chief said:
This is a good time for us to reflect on our own emergency plans and possible contributions on board Amtrak (or commuter rail) in event of any emergency, or catastrophe -- God forbid -- during our future travels. To those who much has been given, much is expected. With our familiarity, insight, interest and intelligence, many of us on this site could really help during an on-board situation when seconds count.
Click to expand...
The Chief note: FOX News did not contribute to this post.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top