Trademark (On the side of those blue/yellow/gray shiny toys that make noise)
And:
“Meddin Studios’ Creative Director said today’s shoot on the trestle was coordinated with CSX Railroad and Raynioner. The Sheriff’s Office confirmed that the crew had both companies’ permission to film.”
Two contradictory statements: Where is the CSX statement you reference? Who said it? The sheriff’s office confirmed means the sheriff’s office checked with both Rayonier and CSX and found both had given permission.
Why don’t we just wait till the facts are provided?
Two different statements from the news articles:
“CSX has also stated they were aware of a film crew in the area, but they had no authority to be on the property or fouling the track.”
“Wayne County Sheriff’s office was able to confirm that the film crew had permission from CSX to shoot “in that general vicinity.””
I wonder if the general vicinity included the railroad tracks. And if CSX told them that they could film in the general vicinity, I wonder if they told them they could not be on the railroad tracks. It may very well be true that the film crew did not have authority to be on the track. But if this was not stated by CSX, and if CSX gave permission to be in a general vicinity that included the track, then that authority to be on the track could have easily been inferred by the film crew.
It sounds to me like CSX gave them permission to be on CSX property. Then either the film crew violated some provision of that permission, or the permission was misinterpreted by the film crew. I have a feeling that somebody from CSX is going to be on the hot seat.
Agreed Norm and I’ve been suggesting that all along.
As for the overbearing wannabe that can’t leave well enough alone:
“CSX has told me they were aware they were out there, but they did not have permission to be on the train tracks,”* Gardner told reporters. (Gardner = a sheriff’s investigator for the county)
(*) This is what annoys those of us who are railroaders and those like Ty who have the training to be properly allowed out on the property. Poor judgement got somebody killed. I find it interesting that this disappeared from the national media after it started to become clear that CSX most likely was not at fault and the film media was.
If CSX had been aware the film crew would be on the tracks, they would have insisted on a flagman and lookout, after all, CSX knows when they are going to run their trains.
Having permission to be on property does not necessarily mean having permission to foul live tracks….we have several contractors who perform lots of different functions who have permission to be on property, but not allowed to come within 15 feet of the centerline of any tracks.
They are made aware of this when they sign the service contract, it’s in there, and are reminded all the time by employees.
Unless some underling at CSX gave verbal permission without checking with the proper officers, I can’t imagine the carrier allowing the film crew unlimited access everywhere, including a trestle or bridge on an active main.
We, on occasion, allow photographers to be on property, but the no foul clause is part of the release they have to sign, and they have to initial beside that particular clause….and I have never seen one of them unescorted, even on my small railroad.
The official BNSF photographer was here a few weeks ago, and he had to sign a release also, and this guy takes train photos for a living for a class 1 carriers.
Can’t see CSX giving official unlimited access.
I’ve never been allowed on railroad property (at least since about 1960) without a signed release in hand.
John Timm
From your same source: "A CSX spokeswoman, Kristin Seay, declined to comment further and would not confirm that film crew had no permission from the railroad to be working on the train tracks."
Pretty clearly there is a lot of contradictory information out there as well as folks doing a CYA. Too early for any valid conclusions as to blame, but it sure sounds like poor communication.
Thanks MC. For 35 years in aviation I had to put up with others speculating on the cause of accidents. It always galled me to hear those who knew better than the investigators.
You are not an investigator of this accident. You know no more than what you have read, which has many contradictory statements that don’t add up. We all need to wait, neither condemning either group involved or defending them.
My brother-in-law frequently works close to live CSX tracks (always with CSX’s knowledge and permission), and from what he says CSX is hardcore about safety and having flagmen on site. I can’t imagine CSX not having a flagman and probably other staff on site if this film crew really had permission to be on the bridge. For over two years I drove past this trestle/bridge twice every workday, and I wouldn’t want to be on it even with permission. The river is probably close to 100 yards wide there, and the tracks may be 30 feet above the water.
Didn’t say I was. Just relating what goes on in aviation. Speculation is rampant there too and there are far too many self appointed ‘experts’.
Before attending to the mote in thy neighbor’s eye….
Politely suggesting you take your own advice.
“Sounds like poor comunications” sounds a lot like speculation…
My comment. The train involved appears to be a double stack. Can’t imagine CSX allowing a film crew unsupervised access without escort. See the pic from LA Times http://touch.latimes.com/#section/-1/article/p2p-79400105/ Rgds IGN
This description of advice from CSX does not seem like it could possibly have come from the company on an official basis from the proper authority within the company:
“The crew, including director Randall Miller, had been warned to expect two trains on the local bridge, one in each direction, and waited until after those two trains had passed to set up their shot, which involved placing a bed on the tracks. The railroad had also told the production that if any additional trains came, they’d hear a whistle about a minute before the train would reach the bridge.
A third train did arrive unexpectedly, blowing its whistle while the crew was on the bridge and the bed was on the track.”
“If CSX had been aware the film crew would be on the tracks, they would have insisted on a flagman and lookout, after all, CSX knows when they are going to run their trains.” sounds like blatant speculation on your part. Perhaps you need to see an ophthalmologist?
I don’t see the problem with speculation. People occupying a busy railroad trestle would be well advised to speculate.
Here we go again.
Maybe see Dr. Wadu?
You know, the fellow that runs “Wadu Eye Care”. [:o)]
Has anyone read or heard anything about a written authorization by CSX to the movie crew about filing on the tracks? The way I see it, the burden of proof is on the production company to show that they were authorized to film on the tracks, other wise they are fair game for speculation on civil or criminal charges.
I did find it interesting in that several of the reports on this incident stated that the production crew did not have authorization to be on the tracks.
- Erik