FRA Rules Needed For Evacuating 'Hot' Trains?

It's interesting to get the impression that in New Carrollton, when EMS came on the scene they ordered the train be evacuated. That it was way too hot, way too crowded in the coaches. That there was a significant health risk. As a rider I want to know someone is monitoring the conditions and making those assessments.

I wish the NTSB would investigate one of these incidents, passengers forced to remain in non-ventilated, sealed window coaches for an hour or more during extremely hot weather.

I'd like to know-

1. Do commuter agencies have any published guidelines on how long passengers aboard stalled trains can safely be kept in closed up cars during hot weather? Is there any criteria they use to make those judgements?

2. Do crews know how to assess the health risk from rising temperatures and stale air? Are they trained in what to look for? Is there is any way for them to know what the temperature is inside the cars?

3. As the MARC rider wondered, is there any attempt to identify passengers who, because of age or existing health problems, might be at special risk?

I get the impression, that because these incidents are so rare the answers to all of the above are probably no.

Btw, as a longtime and frequent rider I am a member of **the class** affected by these incidents, whether I was unlucky enough to be in one or not. That does give me a dog in the fight.

Dutch I have to tell you, given the tone of your comments, I would not want any of my family to be dependent on you for their safety if they WERE stuck in a crowded closed up car on a hot summer day. Sorry to say -- and I'm only being honest, I am NOT trying to provoke you -- but I find your attitude to be downright scary. Especially your comment about, 'yes there could be casulaties like in a war.'

What the heck are you talking about?

[i]Baltimore Sun[/i] wrote:What's more troubling about the incident is the response and particularly the disregard shown for the health, safety and comfort of so many passengers. Surely within the first hour it must have occurred to Amtrak and MARC officials that conditions on the train had become unendurable, especially for older riders, children and those with medical conditions...Either the conductors on board 538 or Amtrak and MARC officials monitoring the system could have summoned a rescue train or buses at any time, but they no doubt hesitated because of the havoc that would cause for MARC's schedule.

The Sun also recommends rail commuters have a formal "Bill of Rights" as do airline passengers. Guidelines that would require the commuter agencies and Amtrak to provide humane treatment to passengers stranded in closed cars in very hot weather.

If you or I leave a dog in a car with the windows up on a hot day and the police happen by we can be arrested. Shouldn't railroad passengers have the same protection?

http://www.baltimoresun.com/news/opinio ... 5229.story

Moderator's Note: Reopened, with the most inflammatory remarks removed. You're lucky the New York City Transit Museum is closed on Mondays, otherwise I'd be enjoying myself there and not cleaning up the bickering here.

Play nice.

DutchRailnut wrote:Again on railroads what is safer, passengers contained on train, or let loose on right of way. its upto railroad to decide not the FRA.
every case is different, right of way changes every foot, you want FRA to make call about hanging high voltage wires near a train by issueing a blanket rule.
No its those that are in charge at site...FRA won't be able to make a blanket rule cause there simply is no blanket situation.

Dutch mentioned he had made his arguements to which I at least never responded. Can I ask this?

No one is saying in most cases of stranded trains -- almost all, for that matter -- it's not safer for the passengers to remain on the train. I have been stuck on stranded trains and was willing to sit it out. But not when the cars get hotter than 100 degrees inside. And people have no way to get relief or to at least rehydrate.

How can it be true that there could be a situation where riders can't be evacuated no matter what? What if a train breaks down and the cars fill with smoke? What if there's a fire? Then regardless of where the train has stopped the cars will have to be evacuated, right?

The other thing is the problem of a blanket rule. That it won't work. Some situations it would be prefable to keep the passengers in the cars. That's certainly possible I guess, but wouldn't the FRA consider there could be special circumstances and provide for exceptions? Plus that would put the onus on management to have to explain why a train wasn't evacuated.

We have not mentioned, however, another factor, the basic rights of a passenger. As several people have emailed and PM'd me, 'When does a rider in a sweltering coach have the right to say, "I have reached my limit, I demand you let me off this train. It's too hot, I can't take it anymore."'

Should riders have that right?

Finally, I appreciate the moderator opening this thread again. I purposefully started it here because I hoped to avoid the confrontation I was sure would ensue in some of the other forums. I want to discuss this not argue about it.

Also, and this may sound naive, there seems to be such a total disconnect between riders and crews on this issue, I kind of hoped if the issue could be discussed in a non-emotional way, maybe just maybe the railroaders that read it might be persuaded to think about it. To reconsider their position.

We know that some of them might actually find themselves in a position someday where they might be the ones to have to report conditions are very hot in the cars, the passengers are asking to be evacuated. That maybe just maybe they might be willing to consider it. That maybe they might tell their bosses, "Yeah I think we should probably get them off."

[edited for spelling]

One point no one has mentioned here. If you find yourself a passenger on a stalled train with conditions becoming unbearable, passengers can take out your cell phones and call 911. If a 911 center receives multiple calls from people stating they are trapped under unreasonable conditions and the railroad is not taking appropriate action, your calls should at least cause a police response to the scene. If you report medical emergencies onboard and the train is in a difficult location to access, it is likely that EMS and fire department units will respond. Once the local fire dept. arrives, you can be sure that lots of resources will be brought to bear. This might include ladders, elevating platfroms, and enough personnel to deal with the situation. And if rail traffic on adjacent tracks has to be stopped in order to safely evacuate a train, you can bet it will happen.

Understandably, railroads sometimes don't like it when the fire dept. arrives, 'cause it complicates matters for them they can lose control of the game to emergency response agencies. But on rare occasions, that might be what it takes to get appropriate remedial action. So keep that option in mind, should you become a victim in this kind of situation.

I don't believe anyone has said that passengers in the New Carrolton DIDN't use cell phones to call the emergency authorities. I'd be curious to find out what did finally prompt the ambulances to show up.

I'm sure the railroads don't want to lose control, but at the same time I'm sure they'd like to have some other authority to give them orders and so relive them of some of the liability if something goes wrong, or should I say if something goes worse, since we should be talking about cases where something's already gone wrong.
The railroads don't necessarily give up all power when the emergency crews show up. I remember reading sometime in the last year about fire departments along Amtrak's Philly-Harrisburg line, Lower Merion, Narberth, etc... and residents complaining that Amtrak didn't turn off the overhead electrical power during some trackside and backyard brush fires. Presumably the fire departments were worried about spraying water intended for the fires might hit the energized wires, Amtrak apparently was worried about maintaining their, and SEPTA's train service.