Tragic News Story

John Fladung · 02-02-2006, 08:30 PM

http://www.startribune.com/462/story/220022.html

I thought I would pass this along from the Minneapolis Star Tribune. I was not the one to find it, the link was provided from a rail e-mail list that I belong to and posted by a member.

VirginiaSouthern · 02-02-2006, 08:35 PM

Tragic yes, but its stupidity like this that many times makes things difficult for the rest of us railfans. There are ways to get good shots w/out getting that close to the rails.

I feel sorry for his family, but in a sense, he kinda got what he deserved for not being aware of his surroundings.

BNSF_SD40-2B · 02-02-2006, 08:37 PM

Yeah, I heard about this earlier today. That's pretty sad

. When I read the topic title on another site, I thought is was some dumb railfan trying to get the perfect photo of a train, or at least i would assume he wasn't a railfan, they said he was trying to get a photo of the snow covered trees.

What I'm wondering is what was he doing out at 1:15 AM photographing trees?

John Fladung · 02-02-2006, 08:38 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BNSF_SD40-2B

What I'm wondering is what was he doing out at 1:15 am photographing trees?

I missed that the first time I read the story. That's a good question.

cmherndon · 02-02-2006, 09:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BNSF_SD40-2B

What I'm wondering is what was he doing out at 1:15 AM photographing trees?

You've never done night photography?

fuente1 · 02-02-2006, 09:28 PM

Sad story, but people need to realize where they are and quit watching trains thru viewfinders. I cant even begin to explain how many morons I have encountered during photo runbys in a controlled situation. We had a guy in Salisbury that was sleeping under a bridge and a train came thru and a stray piece of freight came off a car and killed him. Like an old boss once told the train crew..."Trains wont hurt ya.....trains will KILL ya."

hoydie17 · 02-02-2006, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BNSF_SD40-2B

What I'm wondering is what was he doing out at 1:15 AM photographing trees?

Have you ever been outside in the winter in the pitch dark? Ever notice how the snow seems luminescent, especially if the moon is out? Or if there is a distant source of ambient light? Such as the lights from a city skyline or in this case Minneapolis.

With about a 2 or 3 minute exposure on about F5 you can make a very dramatic nightime image, especially if it's composed well.

There's alot more to photography than trains and sunny days.

Sean

BNSF_SD40-2B · 02-02-2006, 11:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoydie17

Have you ever been outside in the winter in the pitch dark? Ever notice how the snow seems luminescent, especially if the moon is out? Or if there is a distant source of ambient light? Such as the lights from a city skyline or in this case Minneapolis.

With about a 2 or 3 minute exposure on about F5 you can make a very dramatic nightime image, especially if it's composed well.

There's alot more to photography than trains and sunny days.

Sean

Now I see what you're talking about, I guess that blew my mind.

I havn't cared much for night photography, I've tried it, but not worth the wait, especially in the winter.

Frederick · 02-02-2006, 11:43 PM

Trains go very fast there. It'd be pretty easy to miss if the lights were on the dim setting, which I've seen before.

hoydie17 · 02-03-2006, 12:15 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BNSF_SD40-2B

Now I see what you're talking about, I guess that blew my mind.

I havn't cared much for night photography, I've tried it, but not worth the wait, especially in the winter.

Choice is yours, but know that you're missing out on a very interesting part of the hobby.

I take more nighttime stuff now than I do daylight photos.

Sean

busyEMT · 02-03-2006, 12:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by hoydie17

There's alot more to photography than trains and sunny days.

Sean

Now I know you are pulling my leg.

4kV · 02-03-2006, 12:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BNSF_SD40-2B

What I'm wondering is what was he doing out at 1:15 AM photographing trees?

Probably the same thing I am doing at 1:15 in the morning when I am out shooting trains.

4kV · 02-03-2006, 12:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by BNSF_SD40-2B

I havn't cared much for night photography, I've tried it, but not worth the wait, especially in the winter.

I've always found the wait well worth it, especially when that wait is approximately 30 seconds compared to 1/500 of a second. That's only 29 and 499/500 seconds more. I can usually fit that into my schedule.

As for the snow, well, yes, it sure does make a nice scene at night. Now, if we could get some snow here in STL, rather than living in our tropical climate that has dominated this winter, that would be great.

And weather extremes make for the best photography in my opinion. I get more upset at my situation when I can not railfan during a heavy snow than when I am unable to do so on a perfectly sunny day.

hoydie17 · 02-03-2006, 01:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by busyEMT

Now I know you are pulling my leg.

You left it within my grasp.

bnsfnut4924 · 02-20-2006, 03:01 PM

Wouldn't the engineer have seen him an at least blown the horn? Wouldn't he also hear the rumbling of the loco? Also if he lived by the tracks wouldn't he know where the tracks were and to stay off of them?

Ken Carr · 02-20-2006, 03:21 PM

I to prefer night photography, it's a lot more fun and exciting than day shooting for me. As to the death of the photographer, I'm unfamiliar with the location, but trains can sneak up on you even when you are paying attention for them. i've had it happen to me. So as the saying goes Any time is train time.

busyEMT · 02-20-2006, 03:33 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnsfnut4924

Wouldn't the engineer have seen him an at least blown the horn? Wouldn't he also hear the rumbling of the loco? Also if he lived by the tracks wouldn't he know where the tracks were and to stay off of them?

It is a well known fact that people walking the tracks don't hear trains to their backs. Not sure if this has anything to do with the doppler effect (I am not a sound scientist) or not. If you think about it, your ears are better designed to hear things infront of you, not behind. The locomotive, especially at track speed, is "out travelling" its sound... and for someone not paying attention.

For instance, with sirens: the fast the ambulance is travelling, the shorter the distance the sound goes forward (i.e. surprising motorists on a 65mph highway when I am driving 85).

Ask any railroader.

4kV · 02-20-2006, 03:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by busyEMT

It is a well known fact that people walking the tracks don't hear trains to their backs. Not sure if this has anything to do with the doppler effect (I am not a sound scientist) or not. If you think about it, your ears are better designed to hear things infront of you, not behind. The locomotive, especially at track speed, is "out travelling" its sound... and for someone not paying attention.

Ask any railroader.

The train would not be out travelling the sound, or you'd hear a sonic boom when it went by. The speed of sound is approximately 740 miles per hour, so I doubt a train would be going that fast, varying on different things like atmospheric density and composition, but negligible in this context. It's hard to say what was happening here. Perhaps the train was coasting downhill, and in the moment of concentrating on the photo, this guy was tuning out the train. As mentioned above, a train from behind would be harder to hear, too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnsfnut4924

Wouldn't the engineer have seen him an at least blown the horn? Wouldn't he also hear the rumbling of the loco? Also if he lived by the tracks wouldn't he know where the tracks were and to stay off of them?

Maybe the train crew did not see him in time, perhaps there was a curve. Locos don't always rumble, sometimes they make little sound at all, especially if coming down a grade where the throttle and dynamics may not be applied. As for him living near the tracks, yes, you'd think he'd know better, but hundreds of people every year prove otherwise.

busyEMT · 02-20-2006, 05:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 4kV

The train would not be out travelling the sound, or you'd hear a sonic boom when it went by. The speed of sound is approximately 740 miles per hour, so I doubt a train would be going that fast, varying on different things like atmospheric density and composition, but negligible in this context.

Let's see... carry the one. Move the decimal point, and HA! 743 miles per hour. It was breaking the sound barrier. No, really, I claimed not to be a space/time/sound continuum knowledgable guy. I did a poor job of stating my idea. While speed does have something to do with difficulty hearing sound ahead of a moving object, sitting at a crossing 90 degrees to the tracks, the horn will be heard better. And not peeping through a viewfinder focusing all of one's attention to composition helps as well.

EDIT:I found this at Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Doppler_effect:

Quote:

[caption:Sound waves emanating from an ambulance moving to the right. The perceived frequency is higher on the right, and lower on the left.]

Everyday Applications

[Caption:A stationary microphone records moving police sirens at different pitches depending on their relative direction.]

The siren on a passing emergency vehicle will start out higher than its stationary pitch, slide down as it passes, and continue lower than its stationary pitch as it recedes from the observer. Astronomer John Dobson explained the effect thus:

"The reason the siren slides is because it doesn't hit you."
In other words, if the siren approached you directly, the pitch would remain constant (as vs, r is only the radial component) until the vehicle hit you, and then immediately jump to a new lower pitch. The difference between the higher pitch and rest pitch would be the same as the lower pitch and rest pitch. Because the vehicle passes by you, the radial velocity does not remain constant, but instead varies as a function of the angle between your line of sight and the siren's velocity:

where vs is the velocity of the object (source of waves) with respect to the medium, and θ is the angle between the object's forward velocity and the line of sight from the object to the observer.

fuente1 · 02-20-2006, 06:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by busyEMT

It is a well known fact that people walking the tracks don't hear trains to their backs.

Its also a well known fact that walking on railroad tracks is trespassing. Stay off the tracks and you wont get run over by trains.

Frederick · 02-20-2006, 06:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by bnsfnut4924

Wouldn't the engineer have seen him an at least blown the horn? Wouldn't he also hear the rumbling of the loco? Also if he lived by the tracks wouldn't he know where the tracks were and to stay off of them?

It was 1:15AM, and the train was traveling at almost 60mph. Keep in mind this place is out in the country, and the low light levels make it almost pitch black...