Gardner 1

Ryan Gardner English 2010 Instructor: Stacie Draper Weatbrook, M.A. Train vs. Car

Crossing arms down, lights flashing, bells ringing and still a driver decides to make a life threatening decision. They drive around the crossing arm. This is a far too common occurrence in Salt Lake City. Common sense tells us that this is a very bad idea, but once one daring individual successfully makes it through the crossing, the herd mentality sets in. This is what happened at the 6100 S TRAX crossing. The crossing protection was active for 14 minutes while a train was stuck at a nearby platform having trouble boarding a wheelchair passenger (Carpenter). During this 14 minute period a witness at the crossing stated that 15 to 20 impatient drivers successfully went around the crossing arms; the tow truck driver was not so lucky (Davidson). The truck was struck by a 400,000lb 4 car light rail consist, producing catastrophic damage. What was left of the tow truck was in the form of 2 separated mangled pieces of the cab and bed of the truck. The driver of the tow truck did live to tell the tale, and learned a valuable lesson about rail crossings: where there are tracks, there are trains. The cost of a collision of this magnitude is astronomical. Rob Harper, a light rail vehicle maintenance supervisor at UTA estimates the impact car of the light rail consist sustained $1.2 million in damage, and was out of service for nearly 6 months due to many unique parts needing to be specially fabricated by German companies. Crossing protection was destroyed during the collision, and needless to say, the tow truck was a total loss.

Gardner 2

Since the trains are always going to be the bigger vehicle in a collision, the train operators are often the forgotten victims. According to UTA policy, an operator involved in a fatal collision is given a mandatory 2 weeks leave, with pay, and is offered counselling. Physical injuries are rare for train operators because of the robust nature of a heavy rail car, but emotional trauma is common. When someone goes around an active crossing there is very little the operator can do. Once emergency braking has been activated, and warning devices have been sounded, all they can do is hang on. Trains cant swerve. More likely than not, operators will be involved in at least one collision during their career. UTA instructs operators to look away just before the collision, but looking away isnt always possible. KSL news had the rare opportunity to interview a train operator, Arden Howell, who was operating the train involved in a fatal collision with an SUV that went around the crossing arms. Tears of deep regret were shed as Howell stated, that was someones mother, or grandmother. While collisions with vehicles going around active crossings are never the fault of the operator, it is still something that haunts them. Just one of these collisions is one too many, a change needs to be made to keep people from going around crossing protection. What can be done to prevent people from driving in front of trains? The tow truck collision was not an isolated incident. Pat Reavy of KSL news stated, Lorna Boguslawski, 72, of Jerome, Idaho, was killed Aug. 15 when police say she made a left turn against the red light, drove around a downed crossing arm and was hit by an oncoming TRAX train at 300 West and 5900 South. Also, 2 people were killed and 2 critically injured at the 200 West 4100 South crossing when a red Chevrolet went around the crossing arms and directly in front of a train travelling 55 to 60 mph (Park, et al). The cause of these fatalities comes down to a very poor

Gardner 3

assessment of risk. I believe there are motorists who do not possess the necessary knowledge to properly weight the risk of being killed by a train with a several minute delay in their commute. If they did, Im sure no one would ever go around an active crossing. Further education is needed for motorists. The amount of media attention TRAX collisions receive helps with awareness for drivers, and I believe the knowledge of these accidents helps prevent further collisions. Pat Reavy of KSL news published an article making the comparison of Utahs light rail fatalities with other cities. In comparison with other citys light rail systems, Utah had one of the highest number of fatalities from 2007 to 2010. As an example, Denver has 72 miles of rail compared to Salt Lakes 40 miles, yet has only had 4 fatalities in the last 4 years compared to Salt Lake Citys 7 (Reavy). To provide an explanation of the figures, UTA spokesman Jerry Carpenter stated, Comparing UTA to other light-rail systems isnt completely an apples-to-apples situation; to make an accurate comparison, factors such as population density, frequency of train service and how many light-rail systems are sharing the roadway with other vehicles needs to be looked at. While the factors noted by Carpenter could certainly be playing a role in Salt Lake s higher fatalities, one major difference between Utah and other states is the amount of new light rail in Utah. I believe the large section of new higher speed (55-65mph) rail in Utah attribute to the increased number of fatalities because people are not yet used to practicing proper rail crossing safety procedures. Utahs higher fatality rate also raises the question: Is the crossing protection in place safe? In order to identify potential improvements, an understanding of the current system is necessary. Living in Salt Lake, I have noted that all of the light rail crossings are protected with

Gardner 4

street lights and designated signals for trains in the street running section of track down town, and crossing arms in the high speed (55-65mph) areas further south. Safety regulations must be adhered to when constructing this type of alignment. The current crossing protection has many fail safes integrated into the design. I had the pleasure of interviewing Mike Brooks, a UTA Line and Signal Technician, about the functionality of current crossing protection. Brooks described safety features that are integrated into crossing protection. As a failsafe, gates are in an energized state to keep the crossing arms in the upward position (Brooks). This is important because in the event the crossing loses power or malfunctions, the crossing arms drop (Brooks). This makes the crossing arms difficult to bypass even when the gates are malfunctioning, providing protection for motorists. There is a special signal on the crossing which is unique to light rail, called a GCI, which notifies train operators of the state of the crossing (Brooks). The GCI will let the train operator know if the gate is malfunctioning, or simply has a car underneath the crossing arm (Brooks). This light is visible at a distance that allows the train to come to a stop before proceeding safely through the crossing (Brooks). Train operators are required to radio in a malfunctioning gate, and UTAs Maintenance of Way is dispatched to repair the gates and direct traffic (Brooks). It is important that they get there quickly, because traffic will be backing up due to the crossings arms being down. A response time of 5 minutes is average (Brooks). Despite the numerous accidents over the years, Rail travel is one of the safest forms of transportation. UTA notes rail travel is more than 70 times safer than traveling by car in the safety section of their webpage. Although light rail is already quite safe, any fatal high speed collision with a car is unacceptable.

Gardner 5

J. Peter Cunliffe proposed a new standard for rail crossings. Cunliffe says, A dynamic positive prevention method that cannot be defeated, such as a high security barricade, should be installed (25). Cunliffe believes that crossing protection that cannot be bypassed should be the new standard. In addition to the security barricades, a new high tech signal which detects cars in the crossing are placed at a distance that would force the train to come to a stop when a car is stuck in the crossing (26). This new signal differs from the current system in that the GCI is only monitoring the gate, if a car is past the gate it will not be detected. Also, heavy rail does not recognize a GCI as a real signal; this is because a fully loaded locomotive has a stopping distance of over 1 mile, and would not be able to come to a stop even if there was a problem (Brooks). Heavy rail would be taken into consideration when constructing this proposed system, because the light rail tracks are used at night to haul freight. Currently, trains have absolute right of way, meaning that cars have the sole responsibility of being clear of rail crossings. These proposed changes to crossings place the responsibility of accident avoidance entirely on the train. In order for this type of signal to work for all trains, the time a crossing is active would be increased dramatically, and as we have seen in the example of train vs. tow truck, motorists do bad things when they are stopped at a crossing for too long. I do not believe high security barricades are the solution to our problem of cars being hit by trains at active rail crossings. It would be extremely expensive to update signals, and install barricades at every crossing; that cost would come from tax payers pockets. The current system is quite comprehensive, it just requires drivers to follow overwhelming visual ques. I believe educating motorists, and increasing the consequences of bypassing safety devices would substantially decrease the likelihood of drivers going around an active crossing. Salt

Gardner 6

Lakes new light rail lines have placed grade crossings in areas which never had them before. Previously, motorists with poor driving habits, such as running red lights, had less severe consequences. Running a stale red left hand turn arrow on North Temple may have resulted in a citation before the opening of the Airport TRAX line, but now they run the risk of turning in front of a 200 ton train running down the center median. This is a very real problem, as it is exactly what I personally witnessed just west of the Power Station on North Temple when the driver of a Lexus SUV ran a red light. Motorists should be required to pass a basic examination on rail safety at the time of drivers license renewal covering things such as the meaning of a trolley indicator, and where to find the phone number to call on the crossing when crossing arms are down for an extended period of time. Just the fact that a person has been driving previously does not mean they possess the necessary knowledge to drive safely around trains. Safety campaigns already exist, such as Train for Safety, and Operation Lifesaver, but I do not believe these campaigns have the proper amount of exposure. A required safety exam ensures every motorist licensed in Utah understands potentially lifesaving information. Ensuring a lack of ignorance from motorists is only half of the equation. Going back to the previous example of the tow truck that intentionally went around the gates, if they had made it through successfully and been cited by an officer, the fine would have only been a few hundred dollars. Considering the fact that the motorist going around the crossing is putting their life, as well as the life of others in danger, this fine should be raised substantially. A minimum fine of $2000, or more depending on income, needs to be assessed to anyone who drives around an active crossing. Some people believe a fine of $2000 dollars is too much, but

Gardner 7

when you consider the $1.2 million repair bill for the collision with the tow truck, and the number of lives put at risk, a $2000 fine is getting off easy. A couple hundred dollar fine is far too low for another reason, it could be viewed as a toll road. Small fines help people rationalize their decision to go around a crossing from a monetary perspective. A very large fine for bypassing crossings removes the monetary aspect of rationalization. The solution to the issue of crossing safety is not one that lies in absurd amounts of money being thrown at the problem in the form of impassible security barriers at every crossing. The solution is at the individual level. Education helps people properly assess the risk involved at crossings, and improves societys decision making skills as a whole. Implementation of mandatory education of the basics of rail crossing safety is critical. Those who are already proficient in rail crossing safety will be able to easily pass the safety quiz, and those who do not possess the essential knowledge will be provided the necessary study material, or instruction through a drivers education course. A small quiz for drivers every 5 years, and large fine to violators of safety regulations, is a small price to pay in exchange for saving lives of mothers, fathers, sons, and daughters.

Gardner 8

Works Cited

Brooks, Mike. Personal Interview. 6 Sept. 2013. Cunliffe, J. Peter. Rail/ Highway Safety: The Advent of High-Speed Rail Systems. Professional Safety 44.2 (1999): 24-26. Academic Search Premier. Web. 6 Sept. 2013. Davidson, Lee. Video Released Today: Crossing Guard Gate Was Down 14 Minutes Before TRAX Crash sltrib.com. The Salt Lake Tribune, 4 Nov. 2011. Web. 9 Sept. 2013. Park, Shara, et al. 2 Killed 2 Seriously Injured in TRAX Accident. KSL.com. KSL News, 15 Mar. 2010. Web. 10 Sept. 2013. Piatt, Richard. Fatalities From TRAX Accidents Give Operators Emotional Trauma. KSL.com. KSL News, 23 Aug. 2012. Web. 10 Sept. 2013. Reavy, Pat, and Devon Dolan. "UTA Hopes Video of Fatal TRAX Accident Will Save Lives. Ksl.com. KSL News, 25 Feb. 2013. Web. 9 Sept. 2013. Reavy, Pat. Many TRAX Accidents, but Utahs Light Rail is Unique Compared to Others. Ksl.com. KSL News, 4 Nov. 2011. Web. 9 Sept. 2013. Unknown Author. UTA Makes Safety Statement. http://www.letsrideuta.com/tag/safety/. Utah Transit Authority, 16 Nov. 2011. Web. 13 Sept. 2013.