Carolinian 80(9) Grade Crossing accident

Yeah the "it wasn't stuck" excuse won't fly. I think a good lawyer will easily make the case that being unable to clear the crossing, even if the truck was capable of movement still counts as "stuck".

The engineer is also probably quite likely that this was low trailer as it appears it allowed the engine to climb up and over a bit as opposed to hitting the trailer dead on.

The NCHP officer failed to safeguard the public (i.e. the Amtrak crew and passengers) from what was a clear and imminent danger. Even if the primary responsibility of notifying CSX was the driver's, the NCHP officer should have verified that the driver had called. On average, a CSX or Amtrak train traverses this track every 40 minutes. Even if the trailer blocked the crossing for 5 minutes -- the lowest amount of time heard from witnesses -- there was a non-negligible probability of an arrival during that 5 minutes.

That said, legal liability of the State of NC in this instance will be determined by the "public duty doctrine" that makes it difficult, although not impossible, to find the State liable.

And the trucking company will contend that the train should have swerved to avoid the truck...and the jury will buy it.

FormerOBS said:

The driver of a rig like that is not your ordinary semi driver. He was more specialized. His job was to move a very large, unconventional item to its destination safely. As part of his job, he needed to be aware of obstructions and potential obstructions, and he needed to deal with potential hazards, like trains doing what trains do. He had an obligation to be sure the way was clear BEFORE he started across the track. Looking down the track is not sufficient, especially when there is a blind curve both north and south. I think he bears the greatest share of the blame, unless this responsibility had been clearly delegated to somebody else, such as his flagman or a representative of his Company at Company headquarters.

Click to expand...

KmH said:

The driver of the truck should have had sufficient experience as to be able to see he could not make the turn, or would have difficulty making the turn, BEFORE he pulled up onto the railroad tracks. Kudos to Amber Keeter, the 19 year old who suggested notifying the railroad to the flagman (who likely worked for the escort car service).

Click to expand...

More info about the truck driver is surfacing....

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2015/03/11/courts-truck-driver-in-nc-amtrak-crash-that-injured-55-is-felon-and-repeat/

jimhudson said:

Synopsis: " It's not my job man!"

" Who's going to pay?"

The State Trooper that was working this gig probably needs to find a different line of work that wouldn't involve using common sense, Wal- Mart is always hiring!

Click to expand...

This whole thing kinda reminds me of six monkeys pointing at each other.

Wow with news about the truck driver record, the trucking company will get a few lawsuits from those on the train I am sure, even if not badly injured

If I saw him at Wal Mart, I'm not sure I'd trust him to direct me to the kitty litter dept.

PhilaBurbTom said:

I just got up to check my e-mail as I have reservations on S/B 53 today (3/11). The e-mail was sent at 12:31AM this morning I called AMTRAK as they asked me to in the e-mail and said that check-in at Lorton had been pushed back until 4pm due to the derailment. I suppose late is better than cancelled.

Click to expand...

53(11) operating crew signed up on duty at LOR 830p. Train should be departing shortly.

I'm curious about the permitting process. If I were sitting at my desk and was told to look over and authorize the plan for moving an item that weighs that much, and measures 16' x 16' x 165', I think I'd be asking some very pointed questions about turning radius, the ability of the load to stay level over undulating road surfaces, etc., etc., etc. I'd want to know every detail about how these guys were going to negotiate EVERY intersection, whether there was a railroad nearby or not. Didn't anybody consider the benefits of modular construction? Bringing the components to New Jersey in several smaller shipments and assembling the "kit" on site? The mind that came up with this "plan" is a scary mind indeed.

Tom

Well I can not find any details about the drivers record. However I would think it just a bunch of media hype. Nothing I can find gives detail other than the overweight ticket and failure to show.

A history is a history, but is it current history?

There's nothing in the rules that disqualifies a driver with a criminal record from getting a commercial license. Heck my former employer would get federal funds for each ex-con we hired.

Sorry but sounds like BS.

Got a lot of issues with the whole event but the drivers past is not on that screen.

Truck driver, trucking company, flagging service, police, the shipper, the item, the receiver and the route plan by the state. So many issues....

This wreck should of never happen. Too many points of failure. Complete preventable IMHO.

The finger-pointing will go on, the lawyers will have good revenue. Sure.

But, in the private sector -- the response will be faster, but not very fast.

Because the builder and buyer of the (probably) multimillion dollar "load center" super-specialized custom multi-hundred-ton thing that was wasted in the collision are hurting financially.

The buyer of that thing has had their construction plans set back at least several months, maybe more, and the builder is probably already working on other projects.

Whatever the buyer was planning to do with that cargo, whether building a hospital, data center, factory - whatever - they, the buyer, will also be suing everyone in sight, because all their building plans just got totally blown.

Luckily, their (probably many many million ) loss didn't also cost any loss of life. But I'd guess they will have a new person planning and scheduling transport very soon.

The state of North Carolina holds ultimate responsibility for this one in my opinion.

NC should require oversize load permit holders to notify the railroad of their moves in advance, so that the railroad can appropriately protect the crossings. The warning time for this crossing was probably only 20 seconds, and oversize loads often take longer than that to clear even when everything goes perfectly. Likely the only safe way for this load to have safely cleared the crossing is if the RR was able to protect it before the load entered it.

X said:

The state of North Carolina holds ultimate responsibility for this one in my opinion.

NC should require oversize load permit holders to notify the railroad of their moves in advance, so that the railroad can appropriately protect the crossings. The warning time for this crossing was probably only 20 seconds, and oversize loads often take longer than that to clear even when everything goes perfectly. Likely the only safe way for this load to have safely cleared the crossing is if the RR was able to protect it before the load entered it.

Click to expand...

Instead of simply notifying the railroad, they should be required to get permission at the time they want to cross it.

jb

With the decisions of liability and lawsuits, I am curious to ask, what about Amtrak?

Does Amtrak have insurance for this, or is Amtrak basically self-insured?

If Amtrak was to collect from one of the responsible parties, wouldn't they simply get depreciated value, not replacement value? What's the depreciated value of some (most?) of those cars? I mean, that heritage baggage car is worth what, $1? Compare that to the cost of a new Viewliner baggage car to replace it.

John Bobinyec said:

X said:

The state of North Carolina holds ultimate responsibility for this one in my opinion.

NC should require oversize load permit holders to notify the railroad of their moves in advance, so that the railroad can appropriately protect the crossings. The warning time for this crossing was probably only 20 seconds, and oversize loads often take longer than that to clear even when everything goes perfectly. Likely the only safe way for this load to have safely cleared the crossing is if the RR was able to protect it before the load entered it.

Click to expand...

Instead of simply notifying the railroad, they should be required to get permission at the time they want to cross it.
jb

Click to expand...

Roger that -- schedule date, time risks assessment, pay the risk fee to to railroad and insurers, not kidding.When my neighbors need to cross my property for tree-trimming, utility installation, whatever, they ask me what they want, we agree what they need, we agree who's responsible for what, and we show each other and the contractors insurance people the agreement.

Why can't railroads and road owners do this seemingly obvious care?

Who do you think would be able to get in touch with CSX sooner? A 911 dispatch center? Or a guy driving a guide car who doesn't know to look at the grade crossing for a number to the dispatcher for that segment of track. 911 dispatch centers have more phone numbers at their disposal then you can imagine.

Here is a picture of the intersection from an AP story the day after the crash. The original intent of the picture was to show the sign with the CSX Emergency Call Number which was prominently visible at the crossing. Can anyone see a problem here?

Yes, it looks like that box truck in the photo is blocking the RR Xing just waiting for the traffic light to change.

Anyone care to guess/estimate how often this happens each day here?? That box truck could just as easily be a school bus.

Around where I live in Florida where there are numerous grade crossings across the FEC main line, in situations where a traffic light is adjacent to a railroad crossing, usually the stop line for the traffic light is painted on the side of the grade crossing away from the traffic light, thus indicating that traffic should stop short of the grade crossing while waiting for the light to change. Well, in Halifax NC, there is is a stop line thus painted at the right place. I suppose what is needed in addition is cross hatch painting across the rial indicating "do not foul when red". Stupidity can possibly be addressed to some extent by making it too obvious what is stupid to do.

It doesn't really matter what is the fastest way to reach the RR dispatcher. A rig like the one that got hit should NEVER EVEN START across the track until AFTER the dispatcher has been notified, no matter how long it takes to notify him. How about avoiding the problem in the first place, rather than trying to solve the problem after you've created it? It's something like waiting till you're neck-deep in quicksand before calling for help, when you could have read the warning sign and stayed out of the quicksand in the first place. It can be hard to stop the train when it's barreling down the track in your direction. How about making sure it's NOT barreling down the track? Requires active brain cells.

Tom

Normal design for a traffic signal adjacent to a railroad grade crossing is to synchronize the signal with the crossing protection. When a train activates the grade crossing protection, the traffic signal should change to provide a green aspect to the approach road crossing the tracks in order to clear any stacked traffic off the tracks. That is traffic signal design 101.

Whether this crossing is designed like that, I do not know. At least in Pennsylvania, a signal permit would not be issued for an intersection like that without the railroad/traffic synchronization. Given that, the simple fact that a truck is shown fouling the crossing at a red light, although wrong, should not end up being an issue with the safety of a properly designed crossing. If the crossing is not properly designed then, in my opinion, the fault is divided between the driver and the improper signalization design.

Guest said:

With the decisions of liability and lawsuits, I am curious to ask, what about Amtrak?

Does Amtrak have insurance for this, or is Amtrak basically self-insured?

If Amtrak was to collect from one of the responsible parties, wouldn't they simply get depreciated value, not replacement value? What's the depreciated value of some (most?) of those cars? I mean, that heritage baggage car is worth what, $1? Compare that to the cost of a new Viewliner baggage car to replace it.

Click to expand...

As I understand (and I am not a lawyer) in a tort claim the injured party is supposed to be "made whole". The standard I have heard in the collector car industry is "like kind and quality". Amtraks loss should be the replacement cost of the baggage car including repainting and inspecting, and the loss of use during the time it takes to do this. If there were hundreds of used ones available in the same condition as Amtraks was before the crash it would be easy. So a good judge/jury would have to consider at a minimum:

The value (actual cash value, not the depreciated "book" value) of the baggage car at the time of the crash.

Less any scrap value.

Less any increased cash value of a replacement baggage car.

Plus the value to Amtrak to have the baggage car available.

Plus the reasonable costs of a substitute baggage car for the time period before a replacement can be placed in service.

Plus any reasonable costs to place the replacement car in service.

Plus any loss of revenue from not having a baggage car available (which could be a problem as Amtrak may not have the cash to replace it).

And thats why the Judges make the big bucks!

FormerOBS said:

It doesn't really matter what is the fastest way to reach the RR dispatcher. A rig like the one that got hit should NEVER EVEN START across the track until AFTER the dispatcher has been notified, no matter how long it takes to notify him. How about avoiding the problem in the first place, rather than trying to solve the problem after you've created it? It's something like waiting till you're neck-deep in quicksand before calling for help, when you could have read the warning sign and stayed out of the quicksand in the first place. It can be hard to stop the train when it's barreling down the track in your direction. How about making sure it's NOT barreling down the track? Requires active brain cells.

Tom

Click to expand...

I disagree in the sense that a routine crossing by an oversize load rig is no more difficult or disruptive than a crossing by any truck or vehicle. The truck and trailer, no matter how large, would simply drive across a normal railroad crossing in 10 seconds or less after the requires safety stop. There are tens of thousands of loads like this every day. If every large load had to call every single time they were crossing a railroad, the railroad dispatchers would be swamped with calls with no measurable impact on safety.

The issue here was the hard left turn required from the side road onto US 301. When these heavy, oversize load haulers set up a route, they used specialized software that takes the dimensions and weight of the rig and examines examines a route for overhead clearances, bridge load restrictions, and turning geometry issues. That info becomes the basis for the overload permit issued by the state. That permit includes the route.

If the software showed this particular turning movement to be tight and maybe requiring multiple actions to complete, then I would agree that calling CSX to advise them that the crossing might be fouled for a few minutes would be in order prior to attempting the turn. With 20-20 hindsight, once the turning movement became complex and the trailer was trapped on the tracks as they tried to extract themselves from the mess, then an emergency call should have been made.

PRR 60 said:

If the software showed this particular turning movement to be tight and maybe requiring multiple actions to complete, then I would agree that calling CSX to advise them that the crossing might be fouled for a few minutes would be in order prior to attempting the turn. With 20-20 hindsight, once the turning movement became complex and the trailer was trapped on the tracks as they tried to extract themselves from the mess, then an emergency call should have been made.

Click to expand...

And what if the software showed that there would be no difficulties? As a software developer, I would caution that you never find all the bugs.

jb

prech786 said:

Here is a picture of the intersection from an AP story the day after the crash. The original intent of the picture was to show the sign with the CSX Emergency Call Number which was prominently visible at the crossing. Can anyone see a problem here?

Yes, it looks like that box truck in the photo is blocking the RR Xing just waiting for the traffic light to change.

Anyone care to guess/estimate how often this happens each day here?? That box truck could just as easily be a school bus.

Amtrak Truck Crash-1 sign.jpg

Click to expand...

Why are those trucks, and school busses, built with so much rear overhang? Maybe if the rear wheels were closer to the rear and not the center, the driver would have a better sense of the vehicle's main body being right over the tracks.

NE933 said:

prech786 said:

Here is a picture of the intersection from an AP story the day after the crash. The original intent of the picture was to show the sign with the CSX Emergency Call Number which was prominently visible at the crossing. Can anyone see a problem here?

Yes, it looks like that box truck in the photo is blocking the RR Xing just waiting for the traffic light to change.

Anyone care to guess/estimate how often this happens each day here?? That box truck could just as easily be a school bus.

Amtrak Truck Crash-1 sign.jpg

Click to expand...

Why are those trucks, and school busses, built with so much rear overhang? Maybe if the rear wheels were closer to the rear and not the center, the driver would have a better sense of the vehicle's main body being right over the tracks.

Click to expand...

So they can make turns. This way the whole truck roughly follows the path of the wheels. If the rear wheels were at the end of the box the center would overhang and cut into whatever the corner is turning around. Which would subsequently cause the inner rear wheel to hit whatever that is.