From: djmurphy@wam.umd.edu (Dave Murphy)
Newsgroups: rec.railroad
Subject: Crossing Accidents (long)
Summary: Article from Washington Post
Keywords: US Statistics Causes Counter-measures
Date: 16 Apr 92 21:25:31 GMT
Organization: Hobbes & Bill in '92
Originator: djmurphy@rac2.wam.umd.edu


 
 
From the Washington Post, Monday 13 April 1992, page A4.
(w/out permission)
 
MOTORISTS AT RAIL CROSSINGS NATIONWIDE STILL TAKE THAT 
5,000-TON-TO-1 CHANCE
by Don Phillips, Washington Post Staff Writer
 
(Hammond, Indiana)   Like thousands of railroad engineers, Nor-
folk Southern's Gary Pirtle has watched helplessly from his
locomotive as motorists have driven through flashing lights or
around lowered gates into horrible deaths.
   "The first one bothered me quite a bit," he said, recounting
an early tragedy in his 25-year career. "I remember him looking
up at me just before I nailed him."
   Running a 5,000-ton, mile-long freight train through this
industrial city several weeks ago, Pirtle saw dozens of others
take the same chance. As Pirtle sounded the freight's horn at one
notorious crossing, a sedan bolted and zig-zagged around the
lowered gates. Then, as the train bore down on them, another car
and another and another screeched around. A passenger in the
seventh and last car to cross in sight of the train made an
obscene gesture as the car cleared the crossing just ahead of
the blaring locomotive.
   The phenomenon is one that railroads and governments seem
unable to control or understand: About half the deaths at rail-
road crossings each year involve motorists who ignore flashing
lights or drive around gates into the path of trains. And most of
them do it on sunny days when they could have seen both ways down
the track.
   "For some reason, people don't have the respect or fear for
trains that they do for other things," said David Cobb, Norfolk
Southern assistant superintendent in Chicago.
   The victims do not seem to fit the stereotypes. Federal
statistics show that alcohol is sometimes a factor, but somewhat
less than in highway traffic deaths. Sometimes the drivers seem
to be trying to beat the train to the crossing, but train crews
say that often the motorists do not look up until it is too late.
Some crashes occur when the motorist is trying to avoid a wait
for a slow-moving freight train, but railroad crews report that
many motorists try even harder to cross ahead of a fast-moving
short train that would be out of the way in a few seconds. Trains
of one to nine rail cars are involved in more accidents, deaths
and injuries that trains of any other lengths.
   Adding to the mystery, more accidents take place on clear days
than at any other time or in any other weather conditions. Some-
what fewer occur on clear nights. Far fewer take place in the
rain, and only a minuscule number occur in snow, sleet or fog.
More than 95 percent of accidents occur where the view is
unobstructed.
 
[table from graphic accompanying story:]
1990 figures, Number of Accidents
 
                  {          Time of Day          }
WEATHER            DAWN     DAY    DUSK    DARK
clear                83   1,850     110   1,251
cloudy               39     511      43     427
rain                  7     215      15     251
fog                  12      26       1      58
sleet                 1       8       3      12
snow                  2      40       7      45
not reported          -       2       1       2
 
[other graphics indicate that the top 5 states, with 32% of acci-
dents are: Texas, Louisiana, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio.  These
states, together with ten more--California, Oklahoma, Missis-
sippi, Alabama, Georgia, North Carolina, Tennessee, Iowa, Wis-
consin, and Michigan--are the site of 66% of rail crossing acci-
dents.  Finally, another graphic shows that accidents have
dropped from 6359 in 1985 to 5233 in 1990, but fatalities have
risen from 537 in 1985 to 648 in 1990. (The fatalities graph
shows ~750 in 1989 so the 1990 figure actually a reverse of a
trend--although it probably won't last)  The figures are from
the US DOT, FRA, Office of Safety.]
 
[...and now to resume the text of the article.]
 
   Deaths at railroad crossing are still few compared to highway
deaths. In 1990, there were 5,233 accidents and 648 deaths at
grade crossings, compared to around 45,000 deaths on highways.
Cooperative industry-government programs have helped cut the num-
ber of accidents at rail crossings, but the number of deaths has
generally continued a slow rise over the last several years.
   Partly because grade crossing accidents are such a small
proportion of the national highway carnage, no comprehensive
studies have been made of why motorists die even when they have
adequate warning.
   "We've looked at it at times, but we've never been able to get
a handle on it," said Bruce F. George, chief of the Federal Rail-
road Administration's highway-rail crossing and trespasser
program division.
   "Analysis of accidents reveals that in most cases there was a
clear warning of the train's approach and adequate visibility,"
Pennsylvania State University Professor H.W. Liebowitz wrote in a
1985 study. "But for some unexplained reason, the driver of the
vehicle chose to cross the track and was killed or seriously
injured. Conversations with train crews reveal that this behavior
is not unusual."
   Some physical factors are obvious to railroad workers,
although apparently not to most motorists. For one thing trains,
even short ones, cannot stop quickly. A train can require 1.5
miles or more to stop, depending on speed and weight. An
approaching train also appears deceptively slow, especially at
night, just as a jumbo jet appears to be moving slowly on
approach to landing although it may be traveling nearly 200 mph.
   Familiarity may breed laxness. Motorists who have crossed a
track near their homes hundreds of times and have seen no trains
or only slow trains may assume they always have time to cross.
Because crossing signals and gates are designed to be "fail-safe"
and operate full-time if they develop a mechanical or electrical
problem, motorists may assume the signal is broken when a train
is approaching.
   "They're given a false sense of security," said Dennis S.
Morgan, director of safety and rules for Metra, the Chicago com-
muter train operator.
   Morgan also theorized that many adults developed attitudes
about trains in an era when railroads were going through bad
financial times and often were in poor physical shape. "I think
you have a generation of people today who grew up when trains
were things that just chugged along at low speeds," he said,
"That's not the case today."
   Impatience and anger are also factors. "As motorists we are
typically impatient," Liebowitz wrote. "... We expect the
automobile to save time in our daily lives, and we drive accor-
dingly."
   A round-trip ride from Chicago through Hammond and Gary
Indiana on two Norfolk Southern freight trains illustrated some
of that impatience. At least 100 cars and trucks were driven
around crossing gates, many of them when the train was moving
slowly but more than two dozen in circumstances that were clearly
dangerous. In many of the more dangerous situations, one car
would break around the gates, then others would follow.
"Some of them don't even look; they just blindly follow the
car ahead of them," Cobb [NS's ass't superintendent] said of
motorists.
   Conductors and brakemen, who must be on the ground during
switching moves or when inspecting a stopped train, often are the
objects of motorist anger.
   Conductor Jeff Bodkin said that in a short 15-month career, he
had been threatened and had learned to stand clear of roads when
attempting to control traffic at grade crossings. "Some days
people get out and yell at you," he said. At other times they
will refuse to cross when signaled it is safe. "they do just the
opposite of what I tell them," he said.
   To help reduce collisions, railroads and government agencies
are experimenting with new types of crossing signs, new locomo-
tive lighting systems, and motion sensors for crossing signals
that prevent them from blocking crossings when a train is moving
slowly or stopped.
   One of the main problems at grade crossings is lax law
enforcement. That was clear on freight train rides through Ham-
mond, where police cruisers seemed to take no note of the scof-
flaws.
   "Where enforcement improves, infractions go down," said the
FRA's George.
   That was true in Jonesboro, Arkansas, where the local police
department, at the suggestion of Burlington Northern Railroad
tried something new: a video camera that records the license
plates of cars that go around gates at a major highway crossing
and then counts the seconds until a train passes. A $137 summons
is issued if a train was in the area.
   Since the camera was installed, infractions have dramatically
decreased. "We have people who will call and turn themselves in,
even at locations where there is no video camera" in an effort to
explain why they drove around the lowered gates, said Police Cpt.
Mike Washburn.
   But Washburn is realistic. Someday, he said, "we will have a
video of a car being struck by a train."
 
 
--30--

-- 
 dave murphy     university of maryland, department of history
djmurphy@wam.umd.edu    uunet!haven!wam.umd.edu!djmurphy  (NeXT)
**********        VOTE the Feline Party Ticket        **********
       Hobbes for President          Bill for Vice-President