>As I don't want to use guesswork, can anyone >give us Steamtown's train riding rules and their >explanation of why these are needed? We've seen >them mentioned several times, and as I've never >been there, I can't judge if they are as bad as >described.

Ron, although I generally agree with Ross Rowland's opinion that the NPS can be a difficult organization to deal with and appears to be unable/unwilling to run the park in conformity with its purpose of presenting OPERATING steam, I think the train riding rules ARE GENERALLY reasonable. From my research, Ross rides the cab and might benefit from a little backend experience in foring an opinion on this aspect of the operation.

First of all its important to note, that much of Steamtown's view of risk management was formed as a result of the hideous miscarriage of justice that followed the 1995 incident that resulted in the death of two teenagers.

For those that do NOT know, in July 1995, the 2317 was heading down grade and struck an ATV which was stuck in the guage of the rails. The two brothers were attempting to extricate the vehicle after it became lodged in the guage. The bothers were 16 and 14. The incident occurred after the teens tresspassed multiple properties and reportedly operated the ATV with an apparatus removed (by a parent) that was designed to present this exact kind problem.

The local lawfirm retained by the parents sued for something like 40 million dollars. I believe some parties sued settled, rather than risk facing a typical jury filled with unemployable, overemotive idiots fueled with Oprahesque "compassion".

As it turned out, the jury was a reasonable body and found the respondents "not guilty".

For some odd reason I've yet to had explained sufficiently, federal judges can disregard the jury at a whim (I'm still waiting for that reason) and this "JUDGE" took a particularly creative view of a concept known as a "permissive crossing" and awarded $500,000 to the plaintiffs- perhaps taking pity on the fortunes of his fellow bar members that fronted a small fortune in discovery and expert witness expenses in hope of hitting the lawsuit lottery for the 30+% of the 40 mill.

Steamtown operates under NORAC rules. In case you don't know, failing to observe rules constitutes negligence. NORAC general rule "S" can be a nasty catchall for an ambitious trial lawyer.

To that end, passengers are prohibited from moving between cars while the train is operating. If you've ridden the 1920-1930's vintage coaches at track speed you know they bounce around a bit. Its hard for crews to get their "sealegs" and one can imagine what legal colorectal exam would occur if some landlubber, even one that had no grip on the handrails, tripped and broke a tooth, let alone took a header in between the cars.

The same reasoning applies to riding the vestibules. Beyond the fact that 70 people will want to do so if one does-we once again face the possiblity of a passenger unaware of the dangers and not knowledgeable about the precautions necessary to ensure personal safety-falls off the car at 30 mph.

There is much Steamtown can improve. However, in the history of the NPS operation-there's only been one serious crew injury-and no major injuries to a passenger-that would be hard to improve.



superheater@rrmail.com

Thanks for one view of the situation. I've also had two off list replies that talk about passengers being yelled at for even getting up while the train is moving, refusal to let visitors off paved paths on the grounds to take a photo of stationary locos, and the like. So does anyone else have anything to share on this topic?

rdgoldfede@aol.com

The same set of post-911 risk avoidance guidelines that govern airlines also govern SNHS, and almost everything else. Also understand that the principle of Sovereign Immunity also is crumbling under the assault of tort (trial) lawyers.

In this hyper sensitive society where everything that befalls a citizen MUST be the result of someone else's negligence, why would a government entity do anything different?

flying is inconvenient, expensive, and a big waste of time, besides being unsafe.

mike211@yknet.ca

General aviation, generally speaking, is the quickest, cheapest, most convienant, most productive and above all, safest means of transportation. If that were not the case, railraods would make more use of their business trains and not have corporate flight departments.

awalker1829@yahoo.com