After watching this woman stumble away from her car which was on the tracks and eventually hit by an Amtrak train, does anybody wonder (as I am wondering) if she was “on something” or had a few “pops” at the local watering hole?
http://www.cnn.com/video/#/video/us/2007/10/16/vo.sc.train.hit.car.wyff
Fixed link for you, Jim.
Don’t judge her too harshly, Jim.
Remember, as her defense attorney will point out, it’s a disease.[xx(]
It doesn’t seem she was drunk since no charges were filed. The cops say that talking on the cell phone was a factor… http://www.wyff4.com/news/14353866/detail.html
Amazed at how quickly the train was able to slow down [:O]
And glad to see the crossing was not blocked, the gates went up [:D]
The woman said she was unaware she turned onto railroad tracks? Huh?
Her inability to walk normally is now evidence on the tape. The police may be in no rush to file charges until the DA sees the results of her blood tests. The way she walked on camera is pretty good evidence toward a DUI, too. Even if she wasn’t drunk, she has no business behind the wheel of a car.
Lets see… maybe drunk, and so jaw-flapping on a cell phone that she didnt even realize she drove onto railroad tracks? Well regardless of whether she gets a DUI charge, I’ll bet a dollar after the insurance agent sees this tape, she gets laughed right out of the insurance office. Serves her right…pretty stupid behavior.
Just my perception, but it sure seems like the train made no attempt to slow down until long after it had hit the car.
…I personally don’t know how much set up time it takes for the brake pipe to exhaust and the brakes really start grabbing the wheels and slow the train…But I suppose as the engineer saw the obstruction on the tracks he would have moved to the emercency braking condition and at the speed he seemed to be moving…perhaps they {brakes}, were just getting their full force against the wheels as it neared the crossing and was still at speed…79mph…??
If the train was even close to the 79 mph speed limit and was able to slow down as much as he seemed to do after hitting the car, he must have had his brakes in full emergency long before the actual collision.
Thanks Brian [:)]
The train was going 72mph when it hit the car. (track speed here is 79mph) The car burst into flames shortly after impact charbroiling the front of the lead engine. I’m very amazed the train didn’t derail given the way the car was situated on the tracks. And for the record, most engineers I know are told not to put the train into emergency until just before or after impact; the reason being that if you do, the bunched up cars from slack run-in near the head end is sandwiched in between the rear of the train (where the brakes haven’t begun to set) and the non-moving obstruction on the track. The result is lots of twisted metal and bodies. And if you put an Amtrak train into emergency, you’re going to have more than damaged goods; your gonna wind up with broken bones and more. With 180 people on board, that’s alot of potential trips to the morgue. (two people were treated for inhalation of gasoline/smoke fumes, and another was treated for a broken knee) Frankly, they should charge this stupid woman with the attempted murder of every person on that train!
Mass of auto is nothing against a train. But it is better to absorb the hit and THEN stop the train.
In fact, if done right, some slack action will absorb the collision and run in a little bit anyhow.
If your the engineer, then your responsibility is the the passengers, crew & train. If you know that you cannot stop the train prior to impact, then the safety of all those on board the train takes precedent. If you go into emergency you may:
Cause people to get injured as they are tossed around during the sudden stop
Stop in the middle of a pool of flaming gasoline & have people get injured as they
panic & try to escape the car.
Rob
That was scary and we were in the police car! Now - why did the crossing arms go back down? Obviously the train had passed out of range of the signals since the gates did go up.
This and a write up of the circumstances once they are known, would make a great safety message.
Mookie
If the Engineer was paying attention (and judging from the sound of the horn, he was), he saw the emergency lights on the cop car and likely already had the brakes set (not emergency–just a service application), and then, upon realizing that an impact was inevitable, THEN placed the already-set brakes into emergency.
FYI: I believe some of you attribute way too much slack action to a passenger train. They all have the loc-tite couplers, and have very little slack in them.
It’s too bad that the police didn’t have more time to make an attempt to knock the womans car off of the tracks.
Are Amtrak engineers able to make annoucements over the train intercom to warn passengers of emergencies and let the passengers know that they should hold onto something?
CC
There is an article in the Dallas paper today about a guy who hit a UP train in Oregon. He was texting, speeding, and DUI when he looked up and saw the train and tried to stop. He hit it somewhere in the middle of the train. When the cops arrived he was pinned in the car but evidently unhurt.
NBC had the cop on the news this morning. After NBC tried to spin the story (and failed miserably, claimed to have talked to the woman [only had the cop, who was parked and witnessed the whole chain of events]), it sounds like this gal was not drunk (more like the naive blonde stereotype in unfamiliar country) and needed to be culled from Darwin’s herd.
Local PD called the railroad to stop the train, but the relay was too late. Another nearby officer warned of the approaching train. (My guess is that the train had mere seconds to react to a darkened car in the woods and curves of the Carolinas from what I know of that part of the country.) Kudos to the officer for his part.
This person is allowed to keep her driving priviledges? (having “guardian angels” does not entitle one to the rights and priviledges that come with an operator’s permit.) Hang up & drive!
…“After Impact charbroiling the front of the lead engine”…If the condition would have allowed it…{In engine cab}, would it have been permissable if the engineer could have backed the engine away from the burning car, hence getting the train out of the fire range…?
Even if so though, I’m thinking perhaps if the train did go into emergency, it would take time to revive the brake line pressure to even back the train away and with a burning vehicle impacted on the front no one should stay in the locomotive cab.