DKRickman Wrote:
=======================================================
> Ron, you may be right, but I doubt it. Consider
> that the vast majority of crossing accidents occur
> when the engineer gave MORE than the required
> minimum horn signal, and you will come to the
> comclusion that the horn apparently does not deter
> an idiot from his/her purpose. Add to that the
> fact that most accidents happen during daylight
> hours and at crossings which have lights, bells,
> and gates, and you come away thinking that some
> people are just hell bent on self destruction.
>
> The problem with making something foolproof is
> that fools are so damned ingenious. In this case,
> I doubt that the horn would have mattered. After
> all, it's not like the train was rolling around
> the curve in the middle of the night with the
> lights off. It was broad daylight, with plenty of
> visibility, the bell was ringing, and of course
> the crossing had active protection as well. The
> driver simply failed to act responsibly, and other
> people paid with their lives. As someone else
> said, I sincerely hope that the driver faces
> multiple counts of murder and attempted murder.
> At the very least, they should NEVER be allowed to
> operate a motor vehicle again. I wouldn't let him
> on my lawn mower, let alone drive a big rig.
>
> Ken Rickman
>
> Ron Keagle Wrote:
> ==================================================
> =====
> > This crash will cause a review of the use of
> quiet
> > zones.. In this crash, the locomotive horn
> could have made
> > the difference.. in this case, the horn signal
> > was too late to do any good.
I should have clarified what I said in the previous post that it depends on whether the driver realized the train was approaching and took a risk to get across ahead of it --OR-- if he or she simply was distracted, or oblivious, and did not realize the train was approaching. We might find out today after they interview the driver.
If the driver was aware of the danger, and taking an intentional risk, then all the warning devices in the world would not have made any difference.
However, for the other cause of not being aware of the danger, several warning devices are provided. Any one of them could be adequate, but they are redundant to back up each other under the theory that if one fails to get the driver's attention, another one will.
In this case, I can see a probability that the driver failed to notice the signal activation because it was nearly alongside of the truck cab. It was reported that the cops were running their sirens in celebration to the extent that witnesses wondered if it drowned out the train horn. I can see a high probability that the sirens would have drowned out the crossing bells. The gate was ineffective as a warning because the truck was past it before it lowered.
The train was visually present, but the driver may have been concentrating on the truck ahead clearing the crossing.
So all I am saying is that the full crossing horn signal may have prevented the crash. It is a different issue than whether or not the truck driver broke the law.
