At least six people are dead after a crowded Metro-North
commuter train hit a vehicle on the tracks north of White
Plains, New York, Tuesday night, sparking a fire that gutted the
lead car of the train, according to the MTA.
Among the dead were five passengers on the train and the driver
of the black Jeep Cherokee that was struck. The Metropolitan
Transportation Authority said the gates came down on top of the
SUV at the crossing, which was stopped on the tracks. The driver
got out to look at the rear of the car, then she got back in and
drove forward and was struck.
The Metropolitan
Transportation Authority said the gates came down on top of the
SUV at the crossing, which was stopped on the tracks. The driver
got out to look at the rear of the car, then she got back in and
drove forward and was struck.
On Tuesday, February 3, 2015 at 10:29:07 PM UTC-6, De Bladder wrote:
At least six people are dead after a crowded Metro-North
commuter train hit a vehicle on the tracks north of White
Plains, New York, Tuesday night, sparking a fire that gutted the
lead car of the train, according to the MTA.
Among the dead were five passengers on the train and the driver
of the black Jeep Cherokee that was struck. The Metropolitan
Transportation Authority said the gates came down on top of the
SUV at the crossing, which was stopped on the tracks. The driver
got out to look at the rear of the car, then she got back in and
drove forward and was struck.
Since she was driving a Mercedes SUV, she likely was a friend of Adolph.
Most rail wrecks around Chicago have been caused by woman drivers this year to
On 2/3/15 11:27 PM, De Bladder wrote:
The Metropolitan
Transportation Authority said the gates came down on top of the
SUV at the crossing, which was stopped on the tracks. The driver
got out to look at the rear of the car, then she got back in and
drove forward and was struck.
Obviously, it was the inattention of the woman that caused the wreck.
She paid for it, but unfortunately took 5 others with her.
I've never seen a crossing with flashers and gates at which the flashers >didn't begin flashing a few seconds before the gates began to descend.
This woman certainly ignored the flashers (which were already on), and
the fact that the gates were (at least) beginning to drop in front of her.
Unfortunately, this is a dangerous crossing to begin with, located only
a few auto lengths before a traffic light.
My guess is that it will now be closed permanently, too late to do any
good, of course.
John Albert <j.albert@snet.net> wrote:
On 2/3/15 11:27 PM, De Bladder wrote:
The Metropolitan
Transportation Authority said the gates came down on top of the
SUV at the crossing, which was stopped on the tracks. The driver
got out to look at the rear of the car, then she got back in and
drove forward and was struck.
Obviously, it was the inattention of the woman that caused the wreck.
She paid for it, but unfortunately took 5 others with her.
It was absolutely NOT inattention. Why would you even say such a thing?
It was sheer wreckless behavior, and if she had lived, she should have
faced felony charges. I'll buy inattention for the initial violation of
the grade crossing, but that wouldn't have created disaster. It was her subsequent, deliberate action that led to the loss of life and serious trauma.
In fact, the O.P. mis-characterized her action. Because of the acute
angle of the grade crossing, there was extra room between the gate and
the first main. She stopped her vehicle between the gate and the first
main. The gate struck the back of her vehicle. She was not yet on the
track, or if she was, the front of her vehicle would have been clipped
by the train and it wouldn't have caused a disaster or death or even
any serious trauma.
Instead, after getting out of the driver's seat and trying to shake the
gate loose, she returned to the driver's seat AND THEN drove her vehicle directly into the path of the approaching train.
I've never seen a crossing with flashers and gates at which the flashers >>didn't begin flashing a few seconds before the gates began to descend.
This woman certainly ignored the flashers (which were already on), and
the fact that the gates were (at least) beginning to drop in front of her.
Unfortunately, this is a dangerous crossing to begin with, located only
a few auto lengths before a traffic light.
Well, there was room beyond the grade crossing in which a couple of
vehicles
could have been accomodated, so that's really not so terrible, but her
exit from the grade crossing wasn't blocked and that wasn't a factor.
My guess is that it will now be closed permanently, too late to do any >>good, of course.
There are much worse grade crossings out there. Despite the lack of clear sight lines approaching from the road, the fact that the gate was so far
back from the first main actually made it safer.
Sight lines weren't an issue. Clearly once she violated the grade
crossing,
she could damn well see the train bearing down upon the crossing.
The one thing that would have made the grade crossing safer would have
been providing street lights. Studies show that well-lit grade crossings
in
rural areas greatly reduce collisions and grade crossing intrusion, even
if otherwise the rural road wouldn't be lit.
The one thing that would have made the grade crossing safer would have
been providing street lights. Studies show that well-lit grade crossings in rural areas greatly reduce collisions and grade crossing intrusion, even
if otherwise the rural road wouldn't be lit.
"conklin" <nilknocgeo@earthlink.net> writes:
The woman was obviously confused. Her cafr was dinted, so she looked at the >>damange and then decided to go forward rather than back. Or stay put. And >>why was that third rail traveling along the roof the cars where you could >>see it as it went between car 1 and 2?
There are highwaye grade crossings on railroad tracks with third rail
power? As in anyone can walk right up to the third rail and get fried?
umar
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
The woman was obviously confused. Her cafr was dinted, so she looked at the >damange and then decided to go forward rather than back. Or stay put. And >why was that third rail traveling along the roof the cars where you could
see it as it went between car 1 and 2?
866013149e <866013149e@interpring.com> wrote:
"conklin" <nilknocgeo@earthlink.net> writes:
The woman was obviously confused. Her cafr was dinted, so she looked
at the damange and then decided to go forward rather than back.
Or stay put. And why was that third rail traveling along the roof
the cars where you could see it as it went between car 1 and 2?
There are highwaye grade crossings on railroad tracks with third rail >>power? As in anyone can walk right up to the third rail and get fried?
Easiest to do in Chicago where there is no protective cover on the
third rail. Ride the Pink, Brown (Ravenswood), Yellow (Skokie) or
Purple (Evanston) lines to the first station on ground level and walk
to the nearest street with a grade crossing. Warning, this could
hurt.
"conklin" <nilknocgeo@earthlink.net> writes:
The woman was obviously confused. Her cafr was dinted, so she looked at the >> damange and then decided to go forward rather than back. Or stay put. And >> why was that third rail traveling along the roof the cars where you could
see it as it went between car 1 and 2?
There are highwaye grade crossings on railroad tracks with third rail
power? As in anyone can walk right up to the third rail and get fried?
umar
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
There was a crossing on PATH just west of Journal Square until the early 70's, and I think the last crossings on the Canarsie Line were closed in
the late 60's or early 70's.
On 2/13/2015 6:17 PM, 866013149e wrote:
"conklin" <nilknocgeo@earthlink.net> writes:
The woman was obviously confused. Her cafr was dinted, so she looked
at the
damange and then decided to go forward rather than back. Or stay
put. And
why was that third rail traveling along the roof the cars where you
could
see it as it went between car 1 and 2?
There are highwaye grade crossings on railroad tracks with third rail
power? As in anyone can walk right up to the third rail and get fried?
umar
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
There are dozens of such crossings on the LIRR and Metro-North. Also,
as mentioned, CTA in Chicago.
There was a crossing on PATH just west of Journal Square until the early 70's, and I think the last crossings on the Canarsie Line were closed in
the late 60's or early 70's.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
When the NTSB spokesman first talked about the under-running contact
third rail for the MNRR as unique, I said, Philadelphia's
Market-Frankford line has that system too. Then I realized that the
MFSE line has no public grade crossings.
On 2/15/2015 9:06 PM, Michael Finfer wrote:
On 2/13/2015 6:17 PM, 866013149e wrote:
"conklin" <nilknocgeo@earthlink.net> writes:
The woman was obviously confused. Her cafr was dinted, so she looked
at the
damange and then decided to go forward rather than back. Or stay
put. And
why was that third rail traveling along the roof the cars where you
could
see it as it went between car 1 and 2?
There are highwaye grade crossings on railroad tracks with third rail
power? As in anyone can walk right up to the third rail and get fried?
umar
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
There are dozens of such crossings on the LIRR and Metro-North. Also,
as mentioned, CTA in Chicago.
There was a crossing on PATH just west of Journal Square until the early
70's, and I think the last crossings on the Canarsie Line were closed in
the late 60's or early 70's.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
When the NTSB spokesman first talked about the under-running contact
third rail for the MNRR as unique, I said, Philadelphia's
Market-Frankford line has that system too. Then I realized that the
MFSE line has no public grade crossings.
I did a very quick check of MNRR's lines and couldn't find any grade crossings on the ex-NYC lines south (railroad east) of Croton-Harmon and White Plains. Is that correct?
If that's so, all of the crossings are relatively new compared to the original electrification. What is the accident history of the "new"
parts? I know there were two incidents where drivers following GPS instructions turned onto MNRR tracks rather than the street just on the
other side of the crossing.
On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 1:51:18 PM UTC-5, Joseph D. Korman wrote:
When the NTSB spokesman first talked about the under-running contact
third rail for the MNRR as unique, I said, Philadelphia's
Market-Frankford line has that system too. Then I realized that the
MFSE line has no public grade crossings.
"I ride the harlme line" says under-running third rail is newer and superior.
Anyone know for sure?
iridetheharlemline.com
On 2/20/2015 7:41 PM, hancock4@bbs.cpcn.com wrote:
On Friday, February 20, 2015 at 1:51:18 PM UTC-5, Joseph D. Korman wrote: >>> When the NTSB spokesman first talked about the under-running contact
third rail for the MNRR as unique, I said, Philadelphia's
Market-Frankford line has that system too. Then I realized that the
MFSE line has no public grade crossings.
"I ride the harlme line" says under-running third rail is newer and
superior. But I think it's reversed--overrunning is newer.
Anyone know for sure?
iridetheharlemline.com
Under running third rail dates from the original PRR electrification,
circa 1910. The New York Central began phasing in its electrification
in 1906.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
I did a very quick check of MNRR's lines and couldn't find any grade crossings on the ex-NYC lines south (railroad east) of Croton-Harmon and White Plains. Is that correct?
If that's so, all of the crossings are relatively new compared to the original electrification. What is the accident history of the "new"
parts? I know there were two incidents where drivers following GPS instructions turned onto MNRR tracks rather than the street just on the other side of the crossing.
On 2/13/2015 6:17 PM, 866013149e wrote:
"conklin" <nilknocgeo@earthlink.net> writes:
The woman was obviously confused. Her cafr was dinted, so she looked
at the
damange and then decided to go forward rather than back. Or stay
put. And
why was that third rail traveling along the roof the cars where you
could
see it as it went between car 1 and 2?
There are highwaye grade crossings on railroad tracks with third rail
power? As in anyone can walk right up to the third rail and get fried?
umar
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
There are dozens of such crossings on the LIRR and Metro-North. Also,
as mentioned, CTA in Chicago.
There was a crossing on PATH just west of Journal Square until the early 70's, and I think the last crossings on the Canarsie Line were closed in
the late 60's or early 70's.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
On 02/15/2015 09:06 PM, Michael Finfer wrote:
On 2/13/2015 6:17 PM, 866013149e wrote:
"conklin" <nilknocgeo@earthlink.net> writes:
The woman was obviously confused. Her cafr was dinted, so she looked
at the
damange and then decided to go forward rather than back. Or stay
put. And
why was that third rail traveling along the roof the cars where you
could
see it as it went between car 1 and 2?
There are highwaye grade crossings on railroad tracks with third rail
power? As in anyone can walk right up to the third rail and get fried?
umar
--- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: news@netfront.net ---
There are dozens of such crossings on the LIRR and Metro-North. Also,
as mentioned, CTA in Chicago.
There was a crossing on PATH just west of Journal Square until the early
70's, and I think the last crossings on the Canarsie Line were closed in
the late 60's or early 70's.
Michael Finfer
Bridgewater, NJ
There is a grade crossing on PATH near the Harrison service center, but
that crossing is not open to the public. It gives access to Amtrak-owned vehicles to the sidings along the NEC tracks. Last year there was an
accident on that crossing when a PATH train hit an Amtrak truck that got stuck in the crossing.
| Sysop: | DaiTengu |
|---|---|
| Location: | Appleton, WI |
| Users: | 910 |
| Nodes: | 10 (0 / 10) |
| Uptime: | 220:26:53 |
| Calls: | 12,116 |
| Files: | 186,504 |
| Messages: | 2,226,854 |