Interesting points here…and I agree with the general sentiment. However, where do you draw the line? Do you still enforce trespassing laws even though you provide a ‘safe haven’ area for those who “do it anyway”? I think that’s somewhat of a grey area…but I’m not a lawyer.
Geez cry me a river, while we are at it why not set up a concession stand in the middle of the bridge so we can serve tea, soda, beer , snacks and have a lounge area so they can sit and enjoy the view. they was treaspassing and the ultimate happened. to build a walkway is just as easy as saying hey if you get caught out on the bridge just stand to the side. and its ok to be out there. they wouldnt have gave us a walk way to be safe if it wasnt ok. Or better yet look at it this way for Decades i was told not to treaspass on the railroad and for decades I have been told and been telling people to not race trains at crossing, and for decades we have been killing people who do just what we been preaching not to do. So cry your tears of JOY,HATE or SORRY and move on.
What if the crew had a emergency well if train is in emergency they walk as far as they can and then try and pull what they can, if it wont budge then if a railroad personel has walked the back half and nothing is wrong the conductor belly crawls under his train til he finds the problem fixes it and gets back out of the bridge,
The problem with a catwalk is that it condones the trespassing, and that is the root cause of this tragidy, if they had simply stayed off the bridge they would still be alive. If this was a double track bridge at one time and now a single track, the other ROW trackage could be modified into a bikepath bridge but that would have to be done thru agreememnt with the local community and the railroad, and their are not many examples of this being done as no RR wants the possible liability of a bikepath/ walkway right next to their active tracks.
Track speed across Crane Creek is 40 MPH. What I find hard to swallow about all this is that there is 0.62 mile of tangency leading to the bridge abutment from the north and eight grade crossings Train 101 would have to blow for between the curve where they’d be out of sight and the bridge. How those kids couldn’t know that a train was coming until it was right on top of them is beyond me. As tragic as this event is for everyone, it’s hardly anything unusual and really comes as no surprise to those of us who live(d) in Florida’s east coast cities. We’re all too familiar with train/pedestrian incursions, many of which result in immediate death.
It is a double track bridge with one active track, and a second track with the rails removed, but most of the ties are still in place. There is a gap, however, between the two track decks. But it does not look like it would be too difficult to jump across the gap. There is photo showing the double track bridge deck in this link:
http://www.ajc.com/news/nation-world/train-kills-3-teen-318663.html
Another reason NOT to build a catwalk or “safety area” on a trestle is that the railroads would probably be opening themselves up to more liability. It would be a de-facto admission that trespassers cross and, in a way, justify their illegal activity. Thus, when something happens like the incident with the 3 girls, the FEC would be in a worse position. MAYBE it would save lives, but I think there is a chance that the net effect would be more lives lost due to the increase in trespassing by simply making it more accessible. Again, this was a terrible tragedy, and paying your life as a penalty for a simple trespass is very steep, but it ultimately was the fault of the victims. Some things just can’t be prevented if someone wants to ignore the warnings.
No liability if the law requires it… Sure…more pedestrians might use the bridge…but none would get hit by trains…so you one might have alot of people using the bridge safely instead of a few who run the risk of getting hit or falling off. The catwalk wouldn’t be a foolproof solution of course…because fools are so ingenious especially when it comes to their own demise. As it is…it wouldn’t take a very good lawyer to credibly argue that FEC negligent and is at least in part responsible for their deaths…
Why didnt the kids hear the train?
My guess is IPod.
Ed
…Could a “catwalk” with railings, be constructed on {any} RR bridge be labled as “No tresspasing” and have signage indicating: “For RR employes only, others will be prosecuted, etc…”…be done in such a way to make the RR free of a lawsuit if any person not associated with that RR did use it and possibly be injured being on it.
Hence, if then when some tresspasser in the future might be on the bridge and tracks, and find himself in trouble, they could jump over to the catwalk and avoid being hit…saving his or their lives…
I suppose it can be agreed young people {and others}, will continue to tresspass on such structures, and the available catwalk could save their life / lives.
Perhaps this sounds like encouraging people to cross the bridge…I don’t know…But wouldn’t it have a real possibility of preventing those {who seemingly can’t be kept off such structures}, from being hit, hence saving lives and the RR’s money from resulting lawsuits, etc…[2c]
I believe that at least some of FEC’s grade crossings in Melbourne/Eau Gallie are “silent.”
Two thoughts:
-
Why didn’t they hear the train? iPod
-
In the TRAINS News Wire story “Train severs leg of subway vandal,” (February 15, 2010) it states, “snip…The three were standing in boxes where maintenance workers stand to let trains pass. Juarez was struck by the train’s third-rail shoe,…snip.” If the catwalk is put there to “save lives” and doesn’t, where does that put the railroad, law or no law requiring catwalks?
Quentin,
I think the addition of a catwalk could cut both ways. It is hard to predict how things could be spun to justify a lawsuit. A lot of trestles do have walkways with railings, coupled with no trespassing signs. Oddly enough, the one in Melbourne does have a second track deck already in place alongside the active track. Adding planking and a railing would encourage trespassing. But it would also have the potential to save lives, and that would go a long way to reduce the potential for lawsuits.
There are no quiet zones or silent crossings anywhere on the FEC. There were some years ago, but they didn’t last long. Grade crossing collisions and pedestrian strikes increased sharply so FEC discontinued the practice.
Here’s an interesting news clip about Saturday’s tragic event:
[quote user=“Bucyrus”]
Quentin,
I think the addition of a catwalk could cut both ways. It is hard to predict how things could be spun to justify a lawsuit. A lot of trestles do have walkways with railings, coupled with no trespassing signs. Oddly enough, the one in Melbourne does have a second track deck already in place alongside the active track. Adding planking and a railing would encourage trespassing. But it would also have the potential to save lives, and that would go a long way to reduce the potential for lawsuits.
It is going to be interesting to
If you notice the bridge is not to long. I agree with your comment about the teenager maybe were using their I-Pod and they were able to hear the train. Does the NTSB investigate this type of accident or its left to our local police to investigate?
the investigation will be by the local police and the fra.
I like the first sentence. They put the blame squarely where it belongs.
[quote user=“Awesome!”]
[quote user=“Bucyrus”]
Quentin,
I think the addition of a catwalk could cut both ways. It is hard to predict how things could be spun to justify a lawsuit. A lot of trestles do have walkways with railings, coupled with no trespassing signs. Oddly enough, the one in Melbourne does have a second track deck already in place alongside the active track. Adding planking and a railing would encourage trespassing. But it would also have the potential to save lives, and that would go a long way to reduce the potential for lawsuits.
It i
Interesting. I am surprised though that the bridge lacks a catlwalk, or at least certain standings points you see on some large bridges. You’d think they’d have those for crews anyhow. And I wonder how the girls didn’t knwo about the bridge on the other side. You’d think they could’ve jumped onto it.
I still think adding anything in way of a catwalk would NOT help the railroad from a liability standpoint and NOT reduce the numbers of deaths. Adding a catwalk would be providing a means for trespassers to cross, and I can almost hear the attorney for the plaintiff arguing that the RR placed an inviting means of crossing. “After all, if the railroad didn’t want people to cross, then why did they have an obvious pedestrian bridge parallel to the tracks?” Second, I don’t know if the numbers of deaths would be reduced. By adding a pedestrian crossing, you will naturally increase the number of trespassers. You MAY see a reduction in train-pedestrian collisions, but I bet that there will be an increase in falls, slips and other types of potentially deadly events. Crime could become a problem; after all, what better place to meet up for a little drug swap than on a remote bridge crossing? Vandalism may also increase. In short, I think that the railroads simply need to continue to be diligent in using signage and attempt to reduce access to bridges and trestles. Prosecute trespassers to demonstrate that it will not be tolerated. And, when the occasional tragedy occurs, find a good lawyer to defend your business and demonstrate that you attempted to reasonably limit deaths and injuries.