Western Railroad Discussion > 4 Die at Poorly Marked (?) Crossing

Train Smashes Into Minivan at Poorly Marked Crossing in Wis., Killing All Four People in Vehicle
04-10-2005 6:03 PM

COLUMBUS, Wis. -- A freight train smashed into a minivan Sunday at a crossing that lacked lights or gates, killing all four people in the vehicle, authorities said.

The minivan's driver was apparently trying to cut through a highway construction area to get to Columbus when the vehicle was hit by the train and pushed about a mile down the tracks, authorities said. The train was traveling about 60 mph.

The four victims _ two women and two men _ were believed to be from southeastern Wisconsin, police said. Their identities were not immediately released.

The 39-car Canadian Pacific Railway freight train was traveling from Chicago to St. Paul, Minn., with consumer goods on board when the accident occurred, CPR spokeswoman Laura Baenen said. Two crew members were not injured, she said.

The rail crossing had only a sign marking it, but no lights or gates, said Federal Railroad Administration spokesman Steve Kulm.

According to the engineer, the minivan driver appeared to look down the tracks before the accident, then turn away as if talking to someone else in the vehicle, said Rodney Kreunen, state railroad commissioner.

Kreunen said he believes the driver went past road closure signs on a highway then turned down a dead-end street trying to get around the construction.

The crash remained under investigation.

So what makes it a poorly marked crossing? The article clearly states that the crossing was marked.

P Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> So what makes it a poorly marked crossing? The
> article clearly states that the crossing was
> marked.

Maybe "poorly protected" or "lacking lights and gates" sounds better?

SantaFeCF7 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So what makes it a poorly marked crossing?
> The
> > article clearly states that the crossing was
> > marked.
>
> Maybe "poorly protected" or "lacking lights and
> gates" sounds better?
>


There are lots of crossings across the country that don't have gates, you can thank the state for that. Of course I do feel bad for the family and the crew but, 4 people and no one saw it coming?

It also stated that the driver went around road closure signs to end up where he did - Hell, if a "Road Closed" sign won't get someone to stop, how would a RR crossing have a chance - the guy was OBVIOUSLY an idiot.

http://www.kstp.com/article/stories/S7572.html?cat=1

SantaFeCF7 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> P Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > So what makes it a poorly marked crossing?
> The
> > article clearly states that the crossing was
> > marked.
>
> Maybe "poorly protected" or "lacking lights and
> gates" sounds better?

Maybe road closed isn't good enough? Sheesh people. Then a crosssing sign like cross bucks or STOP plus the lady was gabbing to another.


(According to the engineer, the minivan driver appeared to look down the tracks before the accident, then turn away as if talking to someone else in the vehicle, said Rodney Kreunen, state railroad commissioner.

Kreunen said he believes the driver went past road closure signs on a highway then turned down a dead-end street trying to get around the construction)

Perhaps the driver thought the train appeared to be further away than it was. When you are in a conversation with someone and are suddenly distracted by something completely irrelevant to the conversation (the train), the brain doesn't respond to the immediate need for corrective action to be taken. I feel really BAD for the train crew...that is something they will have to live with.

Maybe the driver was blind?

There really isn't such a thing as a "poorly marked crossing" if the driver exercises prudent caution the same as he/she is obligated to do at all stop signs and traffic light intersections.
And there is no such thing as a "protected" or "unprotected" grade crossing. Passive or active WARNING DEVICES are just that -- warnings. They are not "protection." The only protection out there is the driver's brain.
And whether a crossing does or does not have warning devices is NOT the responsibility of the railroad. Active warning devices can only be erected by the roadway authority -- not the railway. So, whichever agency owns the road -- the city, the county or the state -- elects to spend the money for upgraded warning devices, not the railroad. Railroads are in the business of running trains and cannot instruct the motoring public what to do. That comes only from the roadway authority --- state DOT's, etc.

As this picture shows, this is a dangerous crossing. The train was heading to the left of the picture and the vehicle was almost parallel with the train when it crossed in front of the train.
Very unfortunate, my thoughts go out to the family, and train crew.

---

here's article & pic on crash from the Wisconsin State Journal:

http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/index.php?ntid=35615&ntpid=1

I live a few miles from the accident site, and the road these folks was on was really not much more than a glorified driveway. There is visibility down the tracks in both directions here.

The train actually pushed the vehicle over a RR bridge crossing the Crawfish River, then thru another gradecrossing (Ludington St. which is main N-S artery through town), past the Amtrak depot and platform on closest track to building (with #8 only a hour or so away), and finally to rest, a MILE from the impact.

The van was fully covered with tarp at the scene due to the large number of onlookers (Columbus is a town of about 5,000 and this happened on a nice Sunday morning). Rescuers then lifted it onto a flatbed and carried to fire and rescue indoors where bodies were removed.

60mph is track speed for freight here, and #199 is one of the few trains that run at that speed thru here. Accounts have it that #199 was the train involved.

These folks were identified in the Milwaukee paper today:

They are driver Gerald S. Niedzwiecki, 60; his wife, Carla J., 56, both of Hartford; and Sydney W. Elm, 58, and Betty E. Elm, 57, both of Mequon. All were in the minivan.

The minivan driver apparently was trying to cut through a highway construction area to get to Columbus but strayed onto a dead-end street, driving over the rail crossing once and then trying to go back across.

here's a link to video/story from Madison WMTV:

http://nbc15.madison.com/home/headlines/1458182.html

Bummer that the person ran the stop sign, but I put at least some of the blame on the law enforcement agencies. Have the local cops *ever* ticketed a driver running a stop sign at an "unsignalled" RR xing in their lives. If not, they share the blame. If a law is never enforced, it's not a law. And stopping before crossing "uncontrolled" RR crossings needs to be a law to keep trains from running into minivans.

I say start ticketing folks who don't come to a complete stop and look both ways, and you'll save lots of lives. A little public service message and a few news stories about how people now have to stop at RR stop signs should get the message out real fast and could have saved these four lives.

Ted in Davis

Ever made a mistake in judgement? Ever did something you regretted later? Or are you the only human I've ever heard of who hasn't? This driver did make a mistake, with horrible consequences for everyone involved. Given their ages, they're probably leaving behind children and grandchildren too. I doubt they'll remember the deceased as an idiot.
Back off a little with name-calling and a holier than thou attitude, it's offensive to those of us who are merely mortal and do make mistakes from time to time.
Kirk Orndorff
Loveland, CO