Amtrak Heartland Flyer Discussion and Possible Extension

Admin note:

We will keep this at the top for a few days.

Many auto carrier trailers on the highways today have a very low clearance between the trailer and the highway, the lower they can build the lower deck means there is a lower clearance for obstacles from the upper deck of the trailer. Looking at the photo of the highway/road approaching the crossing, the highway rises at least a foot, possibly more. I can easily see a low clearance trailer getting stuck on the hill/rise/bump at the railroad crossing.
It is not up to the railroad to build a safe level crossing, it is the responsibility of the state to build a safe highway.

There is a one minute video of the crash on youtube. I do not have permission to post it. Seach YouTube for "Amtrak collides with semi Car Hauler in Oklahama".

electricron wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 6:31 pm Many auto carrier trailers on the highways today have a very low clearance between the trailer and the highway, the lower they can build the lower deck means there is a lower clearance for obstacles from the upper deck of the trailer. Looking at the photo of the highway/road approaching the crossing, the highway rises at least a foot, possibly more. I can easily see a low clearance trailer getting stuck on the hill/rise/bump at the railroad crossing.
It is not up to the railroad to build a safe level crossing, it is the responsibility of the state to build a safe highway.

Here's the area in question: https://www.google.com/maps/@33.8388482 ... a=!3m1!1e3

Lets add some more context here: This was a regular semi hauling a low-floor trailer with what looks like three cars on it. It wasn't a high-capacity hauler that would go to a dealership. (John posted the video of the crash)

Also, the crossing in question raises up from a US designated "highway" (even though the speed limit in the area is 55 MPH, it's a 2 lane road) to rail level AND has signage on the US 77 side that essentially says "your trailer will get stuck."

Is there a way around it from the opposite side? Yes, Willer Road taken south, then Hide-A-Way Road west, will get you into Thackerville and US 77. Is there signage saying so? I can't tell from Google Maps, but there's definitely not signage on ether side of the intersection on US 77 to make it more visible.

So from a liability standpoint, the state and county may say "we put signs up warning against it" but I doubt it'll fly in the courts. I also would not be surprised if the trucker had just blindly followed the GPS.

NTSB is going to be poking fingers at everyone.

electricron wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 6:31 pm
It is not up to the railroad to build a safe level crossing, it is the responsibility of the state to build a safe highway.

It is also the responsibility of the truck driver to remember when he's pulling a lowboy. The MSNBC video shows that the driver shouldn't have needed signs to tell him he wasn't going to make it, since the view makes it clear that he's going to get hung up if he tries it*. The suggestion above that he was blindly following his GPS seems likely. (I believe that GPS devices can take overhead clearances into account when plotting routes if the dimensions of the vehicle are input; can GPS also allow for low clearances of semitrailers?)

* Looking at that video, I wouldn't be too sure about taking a standard 53' dry van over it, since you can't see the other side of the crossing.

On my road trip last month to Salt Lake City, the only place I attempted to do any railviewing was Granger, WY. That is the Junction of the UP Overland Route and the OSL, or in the Antrak era, route of The Pioneer.

Nothing showed up in the half hour I was prepared to wait (starting to feel uncomfortable; what's this Lexus with Illinois tags up to?), but I did note a large sign at the X-ing for Low Boys to call the UP before doing so.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Sun Oct 17, 2021 7:35 pm So from a liability standpoint, the state and county may say "we put signs up warning against it" but I doubt it'll fly in the courts. I also would not be surprised if the trucker had just blindly followed the GPS.

The state and county probably are immune from liability, and especially so if there were warning signs. As a general principle, stemming from the many centuries old English legal principle that "the king can do no wrong", states and the federal government are absolutely immune from tort liability under the doctrine of "sovereign immunity". In the interest of fairness, many states and the feds have enacted so-called tort claims acts which allow limited liability under certain limited circumstances. See for example this official Oklahoma State presentation which contains the general statement: "A. The State of Oklahoma does hereby adopt the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The state, its political subdivisions, and all of their employees acting within the scope of their employment, whether performing governmental or proprietary functions, shall be immune from liability for torts." https://www.ok.gov/DCS/documents/2011-O ... ebinar.pdf

Ken W2KB wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:33 am The state and county probably are immune from liability, and especially so if there were warning signs. As a general principle, stemming from the many centuries old English legal principle that "the king can do no wrong", states and the federal government are absolutely immune from tort liability under the doctrine of "sovereign immunity". In the interest of fairness, many states and the feds have enacted so-called tort claims acts which allow limited liability under certain limited circumstances. See for example this official Oklahoma State presentation which contains the general statement: "A. The State of Oklahoma does hereby adopt the doctrine of sovereign immunity. The state, its political subdivisions, and all of their employees acting within the scope of their employment, whether performing governmental or proprietary functions, shall be immune from liability for torts." https://www.ok.gov/DCS/documents/2011-O ... ebinar.pdf

Thus why I say "Probably". They will get sued, and a lawyer is going to capture some photos as evidence. I leave proper judgement to the courts on that.

STrRedWolf wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 11:54 am Thus why I say "Probably". They will get sued, and a lawyer is going to capture some photos as evidence. I leave proper judgement to the courts on that.

Whether the State is liable or not, whether the truck driver is liable or not, the fact remains the highway crossing over the tracks is not safe for low boy trailers. It would probably cost far less that what the lawyers will get paid in the future lawsuits to fix this highway-railroad crossing for low boy trailers, imho.
If you can not make every inch of state highways safe for low boy trailers, maybe the state should ban low boy trailers?

As I have reported here at various postings, I believe that the allocation of liability between Amtrak and BNSF is essentially "no fault". If such still prevail, then Amtrak is responsible for the removal and repair of their equipment as well as any injuries to passengers and employees (the TV news reporter said none, but who knows what crawls out of the woodwork).

BNSF is responsible for restoring the track and any damage to lineside equipment or structures.

If this trucking company is small, you'd be amazed how low the minimum liability coverage is - double that statement "in Spades" in states such as OK. Their insurance very likely is "blown".

Fortunately the driver did not try to "play hero" and bailed out along with his dogs. "The music will play", but he lives to see another day.

A lot of these can be prevented IF the driver reads the signs. That being said, I've been told that some trucking companies (and truck manufacturers have been experimenting with adding data for things like this (A RR Xing that will not have clearance for a "low Boy") to GPS driven mapping systems and IF the driver properly enters the data of his load into the system, it will route around such hazards.

OK, but if the truck did not have one of these new GPS maps, and the driver DIDN'T read the signs and got stuck, an old trick that I think will still work would be to place jumper cables between the two tracks and that would usually pull the signal to a STOP indication as to if there were another train in the block. Of course, out in the "sticks" usually, the block lengths are quite long, so this wouldn't work if the train was already in the same block.

Again my knowledge of these types of things (RR Signalling systems) is about 40 years old, so I'm not sure if this will still work. At least the driver should call the phone number on the Xing signal and report to the dispatcher what had happened. IMHO... Anyone with more current knowledge on RR Signalling systems, please chime in and correct me. Thanks

n2cbo wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 9:44 pm At least the driver should call the phone number on the Xing signal and report to the dispatcher what had happened.

I suspect NTSB will focus on this in their review of the matter. Well spoken!

Note the video is found on "storyful rights management" youtube channel! What a spectacular video!

We don't know how long before the gates came down that the truck got hung up. How fast was the train moving? Looks like straight track with good sight lines, although there is a bridge shortly before which would interfere visually. Also looks like it was starting to get dark.

The one remaining gate goes up after the train clears!

I would say the engineering of the crossing was defective. Who owns the crossing, the railroad or the town? If I was the NTSB or Amtrak I would insist that the road be re-graded or closed.

As mentioned by Mr. Wolf, here is the street view of the prescient sign on the US 77 side (not the side the truck was coming from) https://goo.gl/maps/yJqXXocAny4qBmb87. I've never seen that sign before and assuming there is one on the other side of the tracks it would take a while to decode the pictograph, longer than if they just wrote the words! Tons of pavement scrapes from trucks bottoming out.

Gilbert B Norman wrote: ↑Mon Oct 18, 2021 1:15 pm If this trucking company is small, you'd be amazed how low the minimum liability coverage is - double that statement "in Spades" in states such as OK. Their insurance very likely is "blown".

Fortunately the driver did not try to "play hero" and bailed out along with his dogs. "The music will play", but he lives to see another day.

Agreed, the blame will likely shift to the driver, the insurance company, with possibly the state and county getting some knock-on effects. If I remember the reports, the driver called police for assistance and the police tried to shut down the line ASAP.

It'll get down to a court case, for sure.