The above is a post from the “Semi-trailer plowed into an Amtrak train …” thread on this forum.
I agree that it is so true – so many possible factors. The final report will indeed be most intersting. And yet …
I find these posts, pointing out all of the possible mitigating factors, and all of the discussions about possible improvements that might/could/should have been made to the crossing, very interesting in and of themselves. Not because I don’t agree, because generally I do.
No, what I find so interesting is the completely different tone in the discussions from those that are shared when the “incident” is caused by a pedestrian or other trespasser.
Isn’t that, in effect, what we have here? Someone illegally and unsafely enters the ROW, in spite of clear warnings contra-indicating such action (w
Mechanical failure is hardly a factor in pedestrian deaths. But it can be a variable (cause) is some motor vehicle crashes… and this particular wreck is calling that variable into definite question.
Interesting post. I asked the same question, though not so pointedly. Perhaps the answer lies in attribution theory from social psychology. When something befalls others, particularly those we have little in common with, such as a teen or young adult in the case of rail crossing and RoW accidents, there is a strong tendency to make an internal attribution of responsibility/blame. When it is a case of ourselves or people we know or people we have something in common with or can at least identify with, such as an engineer, truck driver or a railfan, we make an external attribution: the crossing safeguards, weather, visibility, signage, equipment malfunctioning, etc.
I’m only interested in determination the fault if it leads to a program of upgrading to more foolproof crossings and the elimination of the many lightly used crossings.
Thank you schlimm – interesting observations from social psychology.
And I agree on the role of “fault” in its potential to encourage safety improvements. It just feels like we can intelligently discuss such improvements to reduce crossing accidents involving truck drivers on rural roads, but seem to have more difficulty doing so when it comes to reducing pedestrian/trespasser deaths (though, as zugmann points out, mechanicals do have less of an influence on pedestrian/trespasser incidents).
Well, there certainly is a template among railroaders and railfans that every grade crossing victim is a moron, idiot, stupid, and deserves the Darwin Award. Such deaths are celebrated as a victory in the war of weeding out the stupid and thereby improving society. The reason for the crash can never be that the driver simply made a mistake. Instead, the death is celebrated as fitting punishment, and the only regret is that the victim is dead and cannot be punished further. This template arises from the frustration over the fact that trains always have the right of way, but nevertheless railroads are forced to deal with trespassers and crossing violators on a routine basis.
However, blaming every pedestrian or driver death on the stupidity of the victim leaves no room to look for solutions to the problem. I doubt that we will arrive at the day where all the stupid people have been killed off by the trains, and crossing deaths will therefore come to a permanent end as the Darwin Award hopes.
Pedestrian accidents are even more problematic, in terms of difficulty of prevention and more tragic when children are involved, although even then, the Darwin Award seems to get mentioned by some.
Pretty clearly, the primary objective should be accident prevention. Finding blame and delivering punishment, although necessary, does not seem to be a fruitful means of prevention.
The inconsistency in responses on this forum which seems best explained by attribution theory. A good example was the young, alleged railfan who claimed to have been falsely arrested for trespass and suspicious activity at a crossing on the Metro North line. There was generally a quick judgement that he may have been abused by the police, or at least that the police had reacted improperly. Some of us (zugmann and myself) were (and remain) skeptical. I wonder what the response would have been if he were not a railfan?
The long (very) range solution as put forward by Henry, Phoebe Vet and others is start replacing grade crossings by flyovers, underpasses, along with some grade crossings closings. To me that is a good use of stimulus funds that will eventually save lives. Surely a formula based on # vehicles crossing, # trucks, school buses, angles of incidence, visibility restrictions, accidents & near accidents, etc could be implemented?? I would think that the Fed Highway Administration already has a good formula? Now that is a good use of federal highway funds that helps both the highway folk and RRs
I would ask though, with a large (very large) percentage of bridges that have (or will have very soon) reached the end of their original “lifespan”, is it a good idea to start adding more until the older ones are addressed?
If money was unlimited - then yeah, get rid of every crossing out there. But since it isn’t, choices will have to be made. I don’t want to see anyone hurt or killed by a train (of course), but yet we still have to be rational as long as real money is involved. Money vs. life is one of those moral arguments that can tear a person in half, but it is what it is.
As far as pedestrians… a train is very limited of where it can travel (usually). 2 sidesteps and you are out of the way. I just can’t fathom how people can walk around public roads, and yet get hit by a train.
PS. I see the 1-star bandit is out and about. Who are you, mysterious bandit? Don’t hide behind that button…