i met and spoke briefly this past Thursday night at the Lower Merion SEPTA meeting. As I explained my oldest son Brian Breskman was mortally electrocuted while crossing the Rt. 100 line on May 26th, 2007. He was a 19 years old, he graduated from the Episcopal Academy had just finished his freshman year at Penn State, main Campus. Brian had a life full of promise ahead of him. He died tragically and brutally on the Route 100 line. This was a horrible accident and has forever affected me and my family.
The purpose of my letter is to bring awareness to the lethal dangers that exist on the Rt. 100 trolley line that runs from 69th street to Norristown. The safety conditions along this track are deadly. This is not an exaggerated term this is not a nuisance e mail. I am a concerned citizen/ parent and needs SEPTA to recognize that more people will die on this track if safety measures are not taken. I wish to point out the relevance of my claim. I will e mail you a link to my on line photos of the Rosemont Rt. 100 trolley stop when you receive this link it is from me and has the below jpg images. Pay particular attention to the following jpg photos:
1. Picture 18
a. This is a typical section of the Rt. 100 line. The two interior raised rails are electric conductors. If one touched any part of underside rail “they will die”!
b. Note that there is no fencing, light or warning signs anywhere near these rails.
2. Picture 58
a. The 1 lone warning sign is 18 feet high, faded with 30 font lettering.
b. This warning sign is not visible at night.
3. Picture 47
a. Note the easy access from the Rosemont station to the tracks.
b. Pedestrians cross these electrified tracks all the time. This is typical for most of the Rt. 100 trolley stops.
4. Picture 50
a. The 69th street sign sits in between the two electrified rails.
b. Pedestrians step over these rails with escalating frequency.
The XL attached is a list of reported train stops on the rt. 100 line from Jan. 2003 to May 11, 2007. Note the increasing frequency of the stops as the year’s progress. On Thursday during the presentation SEPTA reported not less than 20% yearly increases in rider ship during each of the last 3 years. With transportation costs surging coupled with several universities with increasing population the Rt. 100 line will continue to increase in ridership.
My concern is so vividly obvious, and the danger is so great and imminent that I believe immediate action needs to be taken to correct this safety hazard. I have been in manufacturing during my entire 26 year career and am very familiar with OSHA standard 29CFR regarding electrical safety. Before the Lower Merion meeting started I asked Mr. Burnfield, Septa CFO what track safety standards SEPTA is held to? He answered that Septa has there own set of railroad standards and does not comply with OSHA standards. From my perspective and first hand observation of the condition of the Rt. 100 line is a death trap and is deplorable and needs immediate safety review the hazard is so obvious that there is no arguable recourse to this deadly danger. I implore you to think deeply of my first hand observation and tragedy. Please help me in generating awareness to this major safety issue. Another death on this track would be awful, it is too late for me but to have this happen to another family would be so tragic. I hope that you will help in commencing a through safety review of the Rt. 100 line. Please give special consideration to my plea. I can be reached anytime and hope to hear from you soon.
Sincerely,
Ben Breskman
IF YOU WOULDS LIKE JPG PICTURE LET ME KNOW AND I WILL FORWARD A LINK
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Delicious
Digg
StumbleUpon
Reddit
Facebook
Google
Yahoo
Technorati
RVL Mr. Breskman, my thoughts and condolences are with you and your family on the untimely and tragic loss of your son, grief is the price we all pay for love.
In 1907 the P&W ( later to become PST and finally SEPTA ) built a superb high speed railway line that ran in what was largely open countryside. I reason they choose a third rail electification as opposed to overhead trolley wire, probably because of the greater costs of hanging overhead wire over a mostly rural route.
I agree with you that SEPTA in these times may be well advised to review the R100's "private" right of way (PROW) with the objective of offering people greater protection from entering onto an electrically dangerous track zone. Let me list options, although some will be prohibitively expensive, I shall list them anyway.
A. Conversion to overhead wire operation ( prohibitively expensive )
B. Limit switches, as you suggested; third rail sections would be energized only
when a railcar was passing through that section. In theory this idea is sound,
however I am not sure there exists technology that could make limit switching
that would be 100% fail-safe. Although third rails remain constantly charged, no appreciable electric current is drawn when no cars are operating on the line. There is no financial incentive to install what would also be a prohibitively expensive limit switch system that is positively 100% failsafe and foolproof at all times and under all conditions.
C. Chain link or other fencing 5'to 6' high between the northbound and southbound tracks at station stops and extending perhaps 100 yards or so beyond the platform areas. Fencing would readily discourage crossing the tracks on foot in the vicinity of the station stops. ( probably cost effective overall )
D. More comphrehensive rail safety programs in schools as well as public service ads on television.
The R100 commuter rail line is a community asset, the line is built for high speed as is evidenced by it's high railway engineering standards and complete grade seperation from 69th st to Norristown. There is no dedicated walkway or other provision for pedestrians anywhere along the R100 right of way except of course for station stop platforms or inside of the cars themselves.
- Login or register to post comments
permalinkHello Rob,
First, thank you for your condolences, I very much appreciate the gesture.
I found the following at:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Third_rail#Conversions_from_and_to_third_rail
The new tramway in Bordeaux (France) uses a novel system with a third rail in the center of the track.
The third rail is separated into 8 m (26 ' 3 ") long conducting and 3 m
(9 ' 10 ") long isolation segments.
Each conducting segment is attached to an electronic circuit which will make the segment live once it lies fully beneath the tram (activated by a coded signal sent by the train) and switch it off before it becomes exposed again.
This system (called "Alimentation par Sol" (APS), meaning "current supply via ground") is used in various locations around the city but especially in the historic centre:
elsewhere the trams use the conventional overhead lines.
I am investigating this further as a possible alternative for the Rt. 100 line. I think this is the most intellegent aproache because it eliminates the hazard completely. It is not yet determied weather this will generate a savings although I am of the oponion that it will. There is significant current leakage with precipitiation which we get in regular intervals. A study will be needed to determine electric demand for this line.
Fencing and sinage will surely help but there are issues with this in that:
1. Fencing restricts track workes from safe egress while dooing maintanince.
2. Most accidents do not happen at the platform, theey are generally between stations.
Your points are well advised but the fact remains that the 3rd. rail lines continue to operate substandard to current safety codes that apply to the rest of the private sector. As shown in France there are safer alternatives. It is my imparitive to seek out this technology and if it makes sense be an advocate for change. I would welcome your comments on this.
- Login or register to post comments
permalinkBen, thanks for updating everyone!
- Login or register to post comments
permalinkHello Ben, thanks for your response - I am aware of the Bordeaux tram with it's APS current collection system, a modern day technological improvement over the conduit electrical distribution system as used by DC Transit company streetcars in Washington DC until the early 1960s.
DC Transit conduit trackage: http://images.nycsubway.org/i46000/img_46021.jpg
I believe the only deployment of the APS system at this time is the Bordeaux, France city tram system. I am curious to know if this system could be adapted for use on open track and at high speed between stations that typifies the SEPTA R100 operation.
The city conditions in Bordeaux are significantly different than the challenges of the R100 route.
The Bordeaux tram system:
A. lower speeds, probably not in excess of 40-45 mph.
B. Girder rail is the standard rail cross section called for in paved areas where streetcars/trams usually operate**. Girder rail is seldom, if ever, used on open non paved rail lines.
** notes on girder rail: Girder rail has a special cross section compared to the more standard (T) rail. Girder rail has a "lip" that provides a flangeway to better guide and protect the wheel flanges; in pavement it is easier on rubber tired traffic and it even looks better. All railcar trucks (trucks are the wheel assemblies underneath locomotives, freight cars, trolleys etc.) to continue, all railcar trucks "hunt" or oscillate from side to side, and oscillations increase appreciably at higher speeds. The use of girder rail is critical to optimum wheel steerage and alignments through special trackwork such as conduit trackage as well as alignment on the APS ground collection systems.
girder cross section: http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/d/d5/Szyny_G%C5%82ogowska_RB2.JPG
two APS foreground tracks in gravel: http://www.railfaneurope.net/pix/fr/trams/Bordeaux/Citadis302/Bordeaux_Tram_2190.jpg
Perhaps the R100 could be retrofitted with APS but at what price I cannot even guess.
There is another type of third rail that is the safest; I believe the Market St./ Frankford line uses it; it was also used by the New York Central in it's Manhattan tunnel electrifications leading into Grand Central Station. This third rail type is the underrunning type: it employes an inverted U shaped insulating housing fitted with an inverted power rail cross section. The sides and top of the housing are safe with only the slightly recessed inverted power railhead being dangerous to the touch if accidently accessed from the bottom upwards.
Read this page: http://books.google.com/books?id=ygKio-Ks0doC&pg=PA130&lpg=PA130&dq=underrunning+third+rail&source=web&ots=AG57lAvhxo&sig=zfWWS1LtOsFa-EZXA9OlJX4GW7s&hl=en&sa=X&oi=book_result&resnum=6&ct=result
Ben, good luck on your research. I am glad to help you as much as I can.
Rob
- Login or register to post comments
permalinkBen, I've been doing a bit research on my own. You may or may not have knowledge of the following websites which I found as a result of my searches.
Please peruse the PDF file: "Light Rail Without Wires; A Dream Come True?" by John D. Swanson of Parsons Brinckerhoff Quade & Douglas, Inc.
Let me call your attention to pdf file page 6 (p734); note the photo "ballasted track".
This is encouraging as it appears the system can be assembled on open railroad type trackage; I did note the rail cross section is girder rail however.
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/circulars/ec058/15_02_Swanson.pdf
More encouraging, however, is the photo (fig. 10) on pdf file page 9 (p737) which pictures a test track section on standard (T) rail tracks such as on the R100.
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/Onlinepubs/circulars/ec058/15_02_Swanson.pdf
Parsons Brinckerhoff: http://www.pbworld.com/
Parsons Brinckerhoff Philadelphia Agent
4 Penn Center
1600 JFK Boulevard, Suite 700
Philadelphia, PA 19103, USA
215-561-1900
Fax: 215-561-9525
Ben, I hope this is useful to you.
- Login or register to post comments
permalinkRob,
This is very good information, thank you! I will be forwarding some of this information to Septa. Some of the hurdles that need to be addressed are:
1. Cost.
2. Train speeds.
3. Maintenance requirements.
If you want to discuss this I can be reached at I will probably post my letter to Septa on this site. It would be great if we could get feedback or create a dialog directly with them (Septa).
Thanks again for the information; I really appreciate your input.
- Login or register to post comments
permalink