Texas Official Admits Missteps That Helped Railroads in Suits

Trains Magazine General Discussion
1

The following are the first introductory paragraphs to the story in the New York Times newspaper, Sunday, March 27, 2005.

Texas Official Admits Missteps That Helped Railroads in Suits
By WALT BOGDANICH

Published: March 27, 2005
Several months ago, the Texas official overseeing rail crossings commented in court proceedings that many in the rail industry “would consider me their friend.” That may not be surprising given what the official, Darin Kosmak, has done to help railroads fight lawsuits brought by accident victims.

At the behest of the rail industry, Mr. Kosmak on about 100 occasions over the last 11 years signed sworn statements about warning signs at railroad crossings, according to court testimony. The affidavits were mostly drafted by the rail industry, which then used them in case after case as a critical defense against claims that unsafe crossings had caused deaths and serious injury, court records show.

To read the story click here or paste into address bar.
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/27/national/27rail.html

You may have to sign up to view the page. Or find it on the Sunday edition of national stories under the title above. Maybe only good for Sunday. If not do a search by the author, title, or railroad crossing accidents.
http://www.nytimes.com/pages/national/index.html

Then there is the whole seven part series on railroad crossing safety dating back to July of 2004.

http://www.nytimes.com/ref/national/deathonthetracks_index.html

2

Will he spend his remaining years in the brig? [:p]

[quote]
Originally posted by LRSMITH

3

[quote]
QUOTE: Originally posted by spbed

Will he spend his remaining years in the brig? [:p]

Not likely. He would have to be charged with perjury. Have the good old trial. And then get off with probation? A couple of years in jail?

4

Having read the entire series of articles,
in my opinion the reporter, and the editor who allowed such biased garbarge to be published, should both go to work for the National Enquirer…

Which part of the concept that trains use railroad tracks and have the right of way at crossings does the public fail to understand?

What part of the huge, loud locomotive, with its flashing ditch lights, ringing bell, and blaring air horn did any of you not see?

Railroads are working at a tremendous rate to close crossings, in fact, more crossings were done away with last year, (2004) than in the previous 20 years combined.

Oh, I guess the reporter forgot to mention that, or the fact that most grade crossings are not designed by the railroads, but instead by city/ county/state highway designers with absolutly no training in railroad MOW and train requirements, and with no though to train/auto collision, but instead, focus on auto traffic flowing more fluid…

How many of you realize that your state DOT has an acceptable death rate for grade crossing design?

How many of your know that thecity/county/state DOT gets to chose what kind of grade crossing protection is installed, (simple crossbuck, arms, lights, bells and such) not the railroad, but that the railroad has to pay upwards of 75% of the installation cost, and 100% of the maintainance?

Placing the blame for at grade crossings accidents on anyone other than the person who drives their car onto a crossing, without first stopping, looking and listening, is stupid.

What the heck did you expect to see using the tracks?
Thanksgiving day parade floats?

Yes, there are some unsafe crossings… and if you live near one, you should stop and look first.

If you dont, shame on you…

Did your parents teach you to walk out into the street without looking?

Of course not, they taught you to stop at the curb, and look both

5

Sometimes I really wish Ed wouldn’t be so mealymouthed wishy-washy–come on Ed, can’t you PLEEEEEEEEEASE have an opinion on SOMETHING???[(-D][(-D]

For the benefit of the NYT and those of you who are non-Texans, here’s what our law says (Texas Transportation Code):

§ 545.251. OBEDIENCE TO SIGNAL INDICATING APPROACH OF
TRAIN. (a) An operator approaching a railroad grade crossing
shall stop not closer than 15 feet or farther than 50 feet from the
nearest rail if:
(1) a clearly visible railroad signal warns of the
approach of a railroad train;
(2) a crossing gate is lowered, or a flagger warns of
the approach or passage of a train;
(3) a railroad engine approaching within
approximately 1,500 feet of the highway crossing emits a signal
audible from that distance and the engine is an immediate hazard
because of its speed or proximity to the crossing;
(4) an approaching railroad train is plainly visible
to the operator and is in hazardous proximity to the crossing; or
(5) the operator is required to stop by:
(A) other law;
(B) a rule adopted under a statute;
(C) an official traffic-control device; or
(D) a traffic-control signal.
(b) An operator of a vehicle required by Subsection (a) to
stop shall remain stopped until permitted to proceed and it is safe
to proceed.
(c) An operator of a vehicle who approaches a railroad grade
crossing equipped with railroad crossbuck signs without automatic,
electric, or mechanical signal devices, crossing gates, or a
flagger warning of the approach or passage of a train shall yield
the right-of-way to a train in hazardous proximi

6

Thanks drephpe for having the patience and typing that out. You don’t mind if I print that do you so I can read it later?

7

Junctionfan–

I have absolutely no problem with you printing it. The statute is a public document that you can get from the state, but this will save you some time. The Transportation Code is a lot bigger, so hopefully I got all the relevant parts to provide on an informational basis to interested readers.

All the Texas statutes, codes and regulations are directly or indirectly available through:

www.state.tx.us

This will also allow you to get to the individual state agencies.

Based on my experience (but I also don’t have specific records dating back to 1977 to use as evidence), accessibility of state laws, codes and regulations via the internet is true with every other state I’ve ever had to research in some form or fashion.

8

Well darn,
I guess I will have to take a definitve stand somewhere on something…any ideas?

Ed

9

I had a friend who was killed crossing a double track main. The situation occurred like this: He stopped for the signal as a train on the near track passed over. The train slowed down and then stopped just past the side of the street. Although the warning lights continued to blink, a car opposite him went ahead and proceeded to cross the tracks and drove on past him. He apparently thought that the lines were clear and it was only the stopped train that was making the signals blink, so he proceeded to cross the tracks. As you have probably figured out by now, there was a train coming on the far track at that very moment, and because my friends view was blocked by the stopped train he did not see the other train coming, and he was killed instantly. The family proceeded to file suit against the railroad, and the case was settled out of court.

To play devil’s advocate for a moment, was not the railroad at fault for having a train stop just off the street in such a manner that it blocked the view of the drivers? The attorneys in the case apparently thought so, and it was supposed that if the case had gone to trial, a jury would have sided with the family.

The Texas statute makes reference to a train actually blocking a crossing for more than ten minutes, but it does not address the issue of driver visibility when a stopped train blocks the drivers views of multiple tracks. Technically, drivers are supposed to wait until the signals stop blinking, but as most of us know it is common practice for drivers to proceed once a train has cleared the street even if the signals are still blinking. This is a problem with the way signals are triggered, and though it may seem a minor point, it may be a safety issue that the signals should be configured to stop blinking the very second a train clears the street even if the train stops. To often, signals keep blinking if a train happens to stop just off the side of the street, until a crew member comes along and disables it. Because of that, dri

10

How bout gumbeaux???[:D][C=:-)][(-D]

11

If the lights wre flashing red the law requires drivers to stop.

Period.

I am sorry that your friend was killed. But then again he “ran a red light”. The warning device told him to stop. He chose to disregard it and violate the law. Regardless of where the other train was, he was required to stop and remain stopped.

Dave H.

12

Not so. See 545.251(a)(1), 545.251(a)(5)(C), and 545.251(b). It may be common practice to ignore the signal and some drivers may claim to be “conditioned” to such an unsafe practice, but it’s not legal in Texas, and any prosecutor or TX DPS trooper (highway patrol) will likely tell you that’s an easy conviction.

How does the driver running the signal know whether or not that stopped train might back up?

13

Wouldn’t have a clue, Ed.

But then, you might consider crossing safety.
[banghead][censored][oops]

14

Dave,
I am sorry about the death of your friend, short of drowning, I cant think of a more horrible way to die, the last second of your life filled with terror…

But the excuse that most people are conditioned to break the law isnt valid.

If you routinly run a stop sign at a cross street, and one day get t boned…would you use the defense that “I always run that stop sign”?
Or, “I ran that sign so many times I was conditioned to ignore it, so it must be the other drivers fault because he should have seen me run the stop sign”?

I am pretty sure if your friend had been on foot, instead of in his car, he would have walked to the edge of the stopped train, and carefully leaned over and peeked around the end of the train, instead of blindly walking past it and on to the next set of track.

But sadly, for some reason, humans assume that their automobile offers some type of protection and power against things like this.
It dosnt, but they still feel pretty safe inside one.

As for signals being wired differently, well, they work pretty good right now, and most have a failsafe system, if they lose power, the gates drop, and most have a battery back up good for 48 hours…still, machines, even the best designed ones, fail.
Ask the Challenger crew’s widows, a few pounds of styrofoam destroyed a billion dollar STS, and killed the entire crew…
I know, the sonic boom from its destruction work me up that morning…

Point is, unless you find a way to erect a solid barricade, the public will find a way to defeat any grade crossing device.

The former head of the FRA had a great quote, she said “The safest grade crossing, is the one that isnt there”

Underpasses work, as do over passes.

We would perfer you not cross our tracks at grade, ever.

Oh, and trust me, if a DPS trooper catches you running a crossing, you will be fined, they do not issue warning, by policy.

15

Stupid Zones:

(1) At-grade crossings
(2) The New York Times
(3) Housing tracts around airports
(4) Certain lawyers offices
(5) Florida around hurricane season
(6) New homes in flood prone areas
(7) anywhere where “it can’t happen to me”
(8) Freeway on-ramps/ merge areas (especially Denver)
(9) roadway construction zones

[}:)][}:)][}:)]

16

I read an article that I thought to be about one officials civic failure to testify truthfully as a witness. I read that his conduct kept some victims from a more advantaged hearing of their complaint.
That’s not what you read, or wanted to read, of course. You’re all too ready to slap leather and spray the forum with the "victim stupidity’ cards you play so well. It’s like the NYT is your “daddy”.
Don’t hurt yourselves backslappin’ each other and enjoy your choir practice.

17

Not wanting to get to particular, I think some of you have missed the point. Take a single track crossing. The train passes, but the lights keep flashing for a few more seconds. This may seem like an inconsequential point, but all of us (railroaders, state troopers, et al) will proceed to cross immediately after the last railcar has cleared the street, regardless of if the lights are still flashing. We can see that the train has passed, so we logically go forward with our business. That is the conditioning to which I refer.

Now, take that conditioning and apply it to the multiple track crossing situations, and the potential for accidents is easy to envision.

It would make more sense for the lights to stop flashing exactly when the last car clears the street, but the way the relays are set up, it takes a few more seconds after the train has cleared before the lights stop flashing. If the train happes to stop just off the street, the lights will continue to flash until a crew member disables them or he/she waves the traffic over. In other words, there are inconsistencies with the way crossing signals are activated and deactivated that do not segue with normal traffic signals. I’m suprised that this seemingly minor issue has not been addressed.

18

Just to add if I may

10/ Mainlines and railyards where schools are near

19

ps…The term is not mine, it comes from Denver Post Op-Ed columnist Ed Quillen, who actually has his head on straight and takes on others like Bodanovich when common sense gets corrupted by an agenda or political slant.

20

Maybe, but take the example you stated, your friend drove on when the last railcar passed his position, and yet, there was another train on the other track…
which he drove his car in front of…
Now, if the people who design the devices set it to stop the instant the last car passes, and someone drives in in front of the train on the next track, where does the liability rest?
By turning off the device at that instance, the designers invite you to proceed…and become liable for whatever happens.

By leaving the circut closed for a distance, both approach and departing distance, they at least attempt to modify the behaviour of the drivers, you have to drive around the gates or ignore the lights…

Now, I dont want this to become a “hot” topic, we (this forum) had this hashed over quite well before…
That said, I can tell you that even before I went railroading, I was not conditioned to take off the instant the last railcar cleared, and I was very aware of the hazzard of double tracks…

and djjoe…
You go right on believing what the NY Times publishes…I guess it escapes you that newspapers do not print the truth, but print what they think and hope their readers will want to read, slanted or biased to fit that market…
Just because it is written and printed dosnt mean its true or factual…what the reporter wrote was his opinion, laced with inferences and suppositions, light on fact…

Remember, this is the same newspaper that ran a article on crop circles, and gave some credence to aliens having created them…

Ed