Hi Woodie,
May I suggest that you brush up on Federal Law....
Read and be informed:
http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/cross_chp9.pdf
Compliments of the Federal Railway Administration of the USA.
Have fun
Ghost Train hunter killed by real train....
- Thread starter aardvark1
- Start date
- Status
Hi Woodie,
May I suggest that you brush up on Federal Law....
Read and be informed:
http://www.fra.dot.gov/downloads/safety/cross_chp9.pdf
Compliments of the Federal Railway Administration of the USA.
Have fun
perry_weekley
New member
Interesting, North Caroline has no laws against trespassing. That is something that might get changed in the near future.
Actually I live in a very rural place. The local trains has only had three trains running down river around the 8:30 AM period during an year of observation I did on my way to a tech school.
As the story suggests and as from what the knowledge about rural areas says trains don't usually run along these lines. If you observe ten years of the same repetition on the same day you suddenly become part of that repetition. You get into a routine which has been pointed out was established on this line.
If a train doesn't pass a certain location, on the same day, for ten years in a row, you throw probability out the window. The chances that the train that hit the man was going to run was a slim chance.
I will continue with my dispatcher theory. Why? Because if you look at the order of things that is how it goes. The dispatcher orders the train to a location. The train follows the dispatchers order. The train makes it to the destination, on a time restraint or not.
It's natural order. Even if the dispatcher had not meant to kill a man, it was he/her that had sent out the train and ordered it's run. The engineer and crew are like pawns on a chess board here. The dispatcher moved them into a position to take the rook. The rook in this happened to be a mans life. Even tho it was the engineer and crew who hit the man, it was the dispatcher who ordered it.
Now that we have why I believe the dispatcher is at fault, even tho he couldn't help it.
Sourdough, I am into the paranormal because of experiences I have had. It helps that I live in an area where the dead don't exactly want to leave. Entertainment media has put a sour taste in my mouth. Shows like Ghost Hunters don't have much respect from me while shows like Ghost Adventures hold a ton of respect. When you can see the camera men 80% of the time it helps grounding that it wasn't them making the noises or performing the things most would call paranormal.
A train can become a ghost if there were enough people that died on it. I feel if there is a large amount of deaths on any object it can lead to haunting where the object appears well after it being destroyed. It's appearance is more of a residual memory tho. Most likely not an intelligent spirit. Meaning it will replay what happened over and over.
I wanted to end this post with explaining why I believe it was the right place, wrong time. As it says this has been going on for 100's of years. So why is it the 100th anniversary another death happened to happen. Just a little odd eh? But that isn't out main concern. Our concern is how one train just happened to be there when they were on the middle of the trestle. I am a firm believer of the butterfly theory. Butterfly beats it's wings and causes a tsunami killing hundreds.
In this case, taking from my dispatcher theory, A train was scheduled, the ghost hunting group decided to show up early, and decided to walk to the middle of the bridge.
Now disrupt the order. Dispatcher schedules train, Ghost hunting group gets stuck in traffic, arrives just as train crosses over. The man lives, or how about this, train,group,early,train is late, west side of bridge, most of them are dead now. A catastrophe that will be on the news for weeks.
I feel any way you look at it we ended up lucky with only one man losing his life. If the situation had been proper it would of ended up the first way with the ghost group having a nice hunt on the bridge after the train went through. Hence the right place at the wrong time argument.
We wouldn't be having this thread if it had happened that way tho. So in the end someone is going to take away something from this terrible tragedy be it good or bad. Maybe it was just finding out how sad humans are, or maybe it was finding out NC has no trespassing laws, it could even be finding out how childish certain users on this and other forums are. The world will keep revolving, and life will keep going, it's only sad that a man had to pay his life for others to learn a life lesson.
cascaderailroad
New member
It says: Pennsylvania has no "Specific" laws, but does have State Statutes for Criminal Trespass, and trespassing will get you arrested and fined. FRA and Fed RR police are active in Altoona, and have the power above and beyond the Pennsyvania State Police for arrest and procecution for crimminal trespass and vagrancy. One cop in Altoona will actually get out his Craftsman tape measure and measure your closeness to the tracks and RR property, and write you a citation, eject you from the property, or arrest. They receintly just stopped a freight in Cresson, searched the consist and locked up 5 hobo's in the County pokie.
Last edited:
Most places in the US it is not required; some railroads require it for "curtsey" some engineers do it for the same reason but generally speaking here it isn't required.
In most places it is illegal to trespass; and standing on an operating railroad bridge is trespassing plain and simple.
I find it funny that they say that the 'ghost' was of a train worker from the train, yet the group was looking for a ghost train.
I still think they are pretty stupid for being on a RR bridge in the 1st place. And (again in most places here) I think legally they are at fault not the RR as they were the ones breaking the law.
peter
Footnote: I do not know must of anything about the laws in that specific area; I can just speak generally about laws in the US.
cascaderailroad
New member
Some localities have "quiet" No Horn Blowing ordinances in effect.
Gandalf0444
FVRR member
Yes, a lot do. However when it means for safety(seeing someone standing on a bridge, or a car stuck on a railroad crossing) Then they are allowed to do anything needed to get the attention of the person/people that are in the path. By then of course it would still have been to late for the people on the bridge.
Regardless the railroad has absolutely no way in hell at fault for anything. Standing in the middle of tracks at grade is stupid enough, but to stand on a bridge with no way to escape other then jumping or trying to out run a train makes no sense what so ever. The people in a sense deserve what they got. Although the family and the crew that now have to deal with this for the rest of their lives because of stupidity don't deserve anything.
cascaderailroad
New member
Several years ago I believe it was 7 teenagers on a dare, (I believe it was the same State) lay horizontal in the center of the gauge, testing out the urban myth that a speeding coal train had enough clearance to pass over top of you. On guy chickened out and jumped out of the way, another may have paniced and moved, and the whole bunch got all balled up in the running gear...7 hours later, in the daylight, they found the missing head of one. That one survivor that resisted the dare, (and the loco crew), have to live with the loss of his friends lives, for the rest of their life. Stay out of the gauge. Even dragging broken steel banding straps can catch hold of you, and drag you into the gauge. Railfanning is better from 50' -100' distant anyway, I don't know why evryone wants to get up close and personal with a moving train.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MyVUJPmmO8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1YbKp3Yhko&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k53tMD43PDA&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfChJw92Sts&has_verified=1
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2MyVUJPmmO8&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1YbKp3Yhko&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k53tMD43PDA&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VfChJw92Sts&has_verified=1
Last edited:
I didn't say that any particular person working for the railroad was at fault, I cannot see how that was taken from what I said, I said the railroad must take some blame for the horn not being blown, as stated there is no rule/law requiring it to be blown, so no individual is to blame, but had the railroad required it to be blown this person would probably be alive, think about it.
I also did not say those people were in the right, they were not only trespassing they were doing it in a stupid place, does this make them stupid, no it only means they did a stupid thing.
The intolerance I am seeing in this thread is alarming, even to the extent of defending a company by stating that they were entirely innocent, when in fact that horn should of been used and that is the responsibility of said company, not its workers.
And as for the people that think he deserved to die, that is a very callus attitude that speaks volumes to the inhumanity and narrow mindedness of some of the members here.
Cheers David
I also did not say those people were in the right, they were not only trespassing they were doing it in a stupid place, does this make them stupid, no it only means they did a stupid thing.
The intolerance I am seeing in this thread is alarming, even to the extent of defending a company by stating that they were entirely innocent, when in fact that horn should of been used and that is the responsibility of said company, not its workers.
And as for the people that think he deserved to die, that is a very callus attitude that speaks volumes to the inhumanity and narrow mindedness of some of the members here.
Cheers David
norfolksouthern37
what's a normal map?
this is not even arguable, how can you say the reason they died was because the horn did not blow? how in the hell would you know that? i think it is silly to think a horn was not used... ' oh look people on the tracks... id better not stop and not warn them at all' blowing a horn for the bridge might have also been pointless, even if there was a whistle post for it, several people had to get out of the way from a location only big enough for the train.
you have heard that stupid is as stupid does right?
the only thing that caused any of them to deserve it was the fact that they were doing something stupid. if i walk out into the busy freeway or if i grab hold of an electric powerline that would be an act that i would expect to not survive. gathering on a railroad bridge is no different. it is just as careless. i hope there was SOMEONE around who recognized this and told them, but i can no more know that than i would know that the horn was blowing on the train.
Ok after viewing the posts I have to step in now.
Yes the Train Co. is totally innocent there really isnt any argument for this. Its there property there train, Its saying that its the NS fault for owning the bridge and operating on the line. Judging from the article the train had no reason to use its horn, why should it, you dont expect people to be on a train trestle. It probably wasn't until the train was on the trestle that it notcied the people on it, depending on how early Friday it was. Its a tragedy for sure but the railroad company did nothing wrong.
hert:wave:
Trespassing is trespassing...and especially by trespassing on an active rail bridge, doing so you assume any responsibility for what may happen to your own life.
I'm sorry that trains can't stop on a dime and can't see more than a mile in front of them at 2 o' clock in the morning and be able to react accordingly.
Maybe you sir do need to step outside for a little while and possibly take a common sense course while you're at it.
I'm sorry that trains can't stop on a dime and can't see more than a mile in front of them at 2 o' clock in the morning and be able to react accordingly.
Maybe you sir do need to step outside for a little while and possibly take a common sense course while you're at it.
ChutePilot
New member
Morons. Every one of them. Some luckier than others, but still morons.
If they were actually going to see a ghost train, or the ghost(s) of the original passengers, they'd have seen them from the safety of the road - no need to go so far onto the trestle. It's too bad it took the death of someone for them to learn this lesson, but learn it they did.
If they were actually going to see a ghost train, or the ghost(s) of the original passengers, they'd have seen them from the safety of the road - no need to go so far onto the trestle. It's too bad it took the death of someone for them to learn this lesson, but learn it they did.
cascaderailroad
New member
The real story: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HALtqfNh4y4
Oh for crying out loud, will you lot stop taking what I say and twisting all out of shape, I did not say the railroad were guilty of anything, what I said was they were not totally innocent, there are gray area's its not pure black and white.
As I used to work on the footplate I am fully aware how long it takes to stop a train, and sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
Why do I need a course of common sense, I have not claimed that those people were innocent, I said that they did a stupid thing and its not me saying he deserved to die.
I beg to differ, there has just been a man killed on a trestle, and he is not the first to be killed on a bridge or in a tunnel, and not just trespassers, rail workers have been killed too.
Here we go again, please read what I post properly, I did not say he died because the horn was not blown, I said he possibly could of lived if it had been blown, I know it was not blown the same way you know what happened, from the news article linked to at the beginning of this thread and again sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
I fully agree, walking across a busy freeway is stupid, but how about a very quiet freeway, common sense tells you to look both ways and if you see no traffic at all it would be ok to cross then, yes? and if a car that you didn't notice hit you, would you suddenly be stupid?
The railroad company must take some (not a lot) blame for not having a policy of sounding the horn when approaching bridges/tunnels and anywhere else a person can be trapped.
These people did a stupid thing yes (and must take most of the blame), but deserve to die for it, if every one who does a stupid thing died as a result of it the human race would be extinct.
Cheers David
ps, that has to be the longest post I have ever made anywhere
As I used to work on the footplate I am fully aware how long it takes to stop a train, and sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
Why do I need a course of common sense, I have not claimed that those people were innocent, I said that they did a stupid thing and its not me saying he deserved to die.
I beg to differ, there has just been a man killed on a trestle, and he is not the first to be killed on a bridge or in a tunnel, and not just trespassers, rail workers have been killed too.
Here we go again, please read what I post properly, I did not say he died because the horn was not blown, I said he possibly could of lived if it had been blown, I know it was not blown the same way you know what happened, from the news article linked to at the beginning of this thread and again sarcasm is the lowest form of wit.
I fully agree, walking across a busy freeway is stupid, but how about a very quiet freeway, common sense tells you to look both ways and if you see no traffic at all it would be ok to cross then, yes? and if a car that you didn't notice hit you, would you suddenly be stupid?
The railroad company must take some (not a lot) blame for not having a policy of sounding the horn when approaching bridges/tunnels and anywhere else a person can be trapped.
These people did a stupid thing yes (and must take most of the blame), but deserve to die for it, if every one who does a stupid thing died as a result of it the human race would be extinct.
Cheers David
ps, that has to be the longest post I have ever made anywhere
Last edited:
perry_weekley
New member
There is only a creek/steam at the bottom, no road. So it was either stand at one side of the bridge or the other, or, while not the smartest idea, go across it.
After watching the video I personally think If the man and his girlfriend, knowing they couldn't make it, laid on the very outskirts of the bridge and stayed down, they might of lived. He might of still lived but there is the 3% chance he could of lived.
You sir are wrong. It is the highest.
Food for thought (on a slightly different note):
If they were out looking for a ghost train & the real train did blow its horn. I'm sure some of them went: "ooh the ghost train!" not "Oh Crap its a train!"
peter
TweetsieDude
Back Woods Narrow Gauge
NC does have laws against trespassing, but don't shoot me in the forehead if I'm worng. I believe that our law says we must have a sign saying it's trespassing.
I'm in the trenches, caught between cross fire lol.
Rock On!
~Dusten
I'm in the trenches, caught between cross fire lol.
Rock On!
~Dusten
What does that have to do with anything I said. In your mind the train should have stopped and the engineer got out and checked the bridge before they crossed. This is why everything has to be written down or on large signs. What used to be common knowledge/sense now has to be spelled out, in laws.
The TRESPASSERS should have assumed that the bridge could be active at any time and be prepared for it. Let alone know that they were trespassing and shouldn't have been on the bridge in the first place. Not that the engineer should assume that people would be on the bridge.
Also trains cross bridges everyday and I bet most dont use there horns when crossing and they dont kill people everytime. Its the same as saying if someone opens the emergency exit on a plane while the airplane is in mid-flight. Saying its the airlines fault for have an emergency exit its an invalid argument. And Perrock is right if they did hear a horn they would have said ghost train not real train.
/rant.
hert:wave:
Yeah, I have been known to be wrong, but just once or twice
As to the second half of you post, you sir are responsible for putting a rather large smile on my face, egads you should be taken out and shot :wave:
No-one is denying that they were knowingly trespassing, there should be no need for a sign as it is widely known that being on the right-of-way is tresspassing, and 'the right-of-way is from one fence to the other, presuming there is a fence but if you are on ballast you most definitely are tresspassing.
Cheers David
- Status