Railroad crossing accident prevention

Four firefighters from Cardinal, Ontario (Canada) were killed some years ago when they drove around the gates enroute to a call.  One train had just passed the crossing and they apparently assumed that even though the gates were down, it was safe to pass. 

It wasn't.

Another train, running in the opposite direction, occupied the crossing at the same time they did.

Bottom line - if the gates are down and the lights are flashing, assume that there is a train coming, unless you can conclusively prove that there is not (ie, clear line of sight for a considerable distance in both directions). 

Crossing protection equipment does malfunction, which is not terribly surprising given the method of activation.  If that is the case, a driver is only allowed to pass over the crossing at the direction of a police officer or railroad employee. 

There are many crossings with permanent physical obstructions to vision.  The parked train is a non-player here.  The driver gets the blame.

Your key word is ASSUME

As we all know it makes an A$$ U ME - in this case with fatal results.

The driver broke the law by passing a lowered gate, which is not permitted even if there is no train in the area.  Some law allows a driver to pass the red flashing lights (after stopping) if it is safe to do so.  Conditions rendering it safe to pass against the red lights would be a train stopped, or moving very slowly a good distance away, or signals that are falsely activated with no train present.  But it is up to the driver to make sure it is safe, including making sure that a second train is not coming and hidden by a first train.  So the driver was clearly at fault.   

I have never seen a grade crossing that does not have a small sign, usualy just below the crossbucks, that has a number and the word, "Tracks", telling the driver how many tracks there are at that crossing. This is so the driver will know there is the possibility of other trains to be aware of.

I have been surprised by how many people I have talked to that have never seen the sign and could not figure out why it would even be posted.

Maybe for some people it should be larger and have more words... Something like:

HEY! YOU! STUPID!

Yeah! YOU!

There are 2 tracks here,

Don't forget that there might

be a train on the 2nd one

that will KILL you if you

get in front of it.

But I suppose that is too many words for many drivers to read.

Yes, there should have been a sign marking the number of tracks, but the overriding issue is that the driver was not permitted to cross with the gate down even if he could see that the only train was the stopped train. 

Bucyrus

Yes, there should have been a sign marking the number of tracks, but the overriding issue is that the driver was not permitted to cross with the gate down even if he could see that the only train was the stopped train. 

That is also very true.

I have always considered that any fashing red light (regardless of the number or configuration) means to come to a complete stop and only proceed when cross traffic (automobile or train) is clear enough to do so safely.

Thus at a highway entry, a flashing red stop light means to stop and wait for a safe time to cross (or enter the flow of traffic).  Same is true for a RR grade crossing that does not have gates.  If the lights are flashing, you must stop and may proceed when it is safe to do so... BUT, you must know when it is "safe" to do so, meaning have clear visibility in both directions for approaching cross traffic.

If you look at a grade crossing gate there are three lights, two of them flash, but the end one is on solid (i.e.: not flashing) and that means you may not pass it until it goes out.  You would basically be "running a red light" if you drive around the gates.

If you combine these circumstances with those of a driver proceeding immediately upon the rear of a train clearing a crossing thus getting in front of a second train, I suspect this is a common accident senerio.  How many people know precisely what crossing associated lights mean?  I've had a driver license in several states, and I do not recall ever seeing the subject in the study book nor on the examination itself.   

There are 2 streets that have more than 2 tracks crossing..Rectory St and Egarton St....both are at least 5 tracks...trainyard...

blownout cylinder

There are 2 streets that have more than 2 tracks crossing..Rectory St and Egarton St....both are at least 5 tracks...trainyard...

I hope my example of using 2 didn't make you think I meant all signs should say "2", they should, and do, list the actual number of tracks (even if one of them is just an abandoned set in the street that have not been removed after all the track leading to it have been removed... the idea being to indicate to the driver to count the tracks and be aware of the fact that a train might be on another track and obscured by one that has just passed the crossing).

Not knowing what other countries might use for signage, I just used Google Earth's Street View to check on the crossings at Rectory and Egarton in London Ontario.  I am glad I checked because I see that in Canada (on these signs anyway) the sign is a number on top and a drawing of  tracks under it instead of the word "Track".

Rectory St. has two marked crossings.  At the single track crossing I cannot get the Street view image to show a clear image of the sign on either side of the crossing, so I cannot tell what it reads, but the the 3 track crossing clearly shows the sign is a "3" with the track graphic below it.

Egarton St. shows "4" and the track graphic below it.

Both of the signs I can see are correct for the number of tracks guarded by the crossbucks.

Semper Vaporo

 

If you look at a grade crossing gate there are three lights, two of them flash, but the end one is on solid (i.e.: not flashing) and that means you may not pass it until it goes out.  You would basically be "running a red light" if you drive around the gates.

i'm looking at a crossing gate on a four lane road over one track, covering only two lanes and no center barrier.  It has  two side flasher lights with the cross buck and overhead two lights, not three.  

Dakguy201

How many people know precisely what crossing associated lights mean?  I've had a driver license in several states, and I do not recall ever seeing the subject in the study book nor on the examination itself.   

There have been studies on this matter, and some of them get right down to the fundamental core of the problem.  Fixing that problem would require changing the ingrained collective mindset of drivers approaching grade crossings.    

It has been widely observed that many drivers believe the crossing protection devices are advisory as opposed to regulatory.  Advisory means the activated crossing protection signals and gates tell a driver that a train is nearby and that they should act according to the potential danger of the train.  Regulatory means that the activated crossing protection signals and gates tell a driver to stop and wait until the protection system deactivates. 

In terms of the laws, crossing protection systems are a confusing blend of advisory and regulatory, with a tradition of historical precedent of crossing protection being 100% advisory.  Today, it is only the lowered gates that are 100% regulatory.  

Part of the reason for blending advisory with regulatory is that grade crossing protection is activated by approaching trains, and this can send a false signal if a train does not actually intend to cross.  It can also send an unnecessarily long warning if the train is approaching very slowly.  Sometimes the signals are false-activated and prohibiting traffic when no train is present. 

So drivers naturally feel a need to decide for themselves whether an activated crossing signal is actually indicating a danger from an approaching train.  And if there are no lowered gates, that is exactly what the law permits drivers to do.  Moreover, because of this deep historical background culture of the crossing protection being advisory, most drivers do not realize that the lowered gates are 100% inviolable, or 100% regulatory.   

Approaching a grade crossing with the mindset of deciding whether it is safe to cross is looking at grade crossing protection through the advisory lens.  That does not mean that these drivers think the warning does not need to be heeded if there is danger.  It is just that they believe it is up to them to decide if there is danger.  So they approach activated crossings with the conscious consideration of whether or not they should stop.  If they think there is time to get across, they may go around the gates.  In their minds, they are proceeding when it is safe to do so. 

Many of the grade crossings I am familiar with have grade crossing predictors that record the speed of the train and how long it will take them to reach the crossing. As you may suspect, those times are higher for Amtrak than for freight.

That's no excuse for jumping the gates though. Your life depends on obeying the signals unless told by a crew member it is safe to cross.

schlimm

Semper Vaporo:

 

If you look at a grade crossing gate there are three lights, two of them flash, but the end one is on solid (i.e.: not flashing) and that means you may not pass it until it goes out.  You would basically be "running a red light" if you drive around the gates.

 

i'm looking at a crossing gate on a four lane road over one track, covering only two lanes and no center barrier.  It has  two side flasher lights with the cross buck and overhead two lights, not three.  

I was talking about the gate bar itself.  I have never seen one without lights at all, and they always have 3 lights on the bar itself... the 2 closest to the side of the road alternately flash and the one at the outer end is on solid (not flashing) while the gate is down (actually come on when it starts down and don't turn off until the gate is in the full stowed, upright position.  These lights are in addition to the standard two lights on the mast by the side of the road or any on a gantry over the road.

I guess there may be gates that do not have lights on them or do not have 3, but I have never seen them, so I have assumed they all have 3 lights configured the same way.

I see.  However, I don't think most people would interpret the non-flashing light to mean the same as a red light at an intersection.  And I am not certain that is its legal meaning, although Bucyrus might know.

Considering the people cannot seem to interpret the meaning of the flashing lights in the first place, it is not surprising that the gate lights are also subject to random interpretation at the time they are encountered.

And I don't have proof that my interpretation is the legal definition, today.  I was just told it by the Driver's Ed teacher 50 years ago.  I thought it made sense back then and I have since taught my kids the same thing.

BaltACD

Your key word is ASSUME

As we all know it makes an A$$ U ME - in this case with fatal results.

I've always wondered why it is that if the proverbial "you" assumes something it somehow makes an$1***$2of me too.

Wow.  When did the word a-s-s become a naughty word that has to be censored???

PigFarmer1

Wow.  When did the word a-s-s become a naughty word that has to be censored???

   Maybe it was just considered the gentlemanly thing to do.

It's not as though I was calling anyone a name.  I dunno, just seems kind of silly that a word that is not a curse word is censored.  Oh well...

It is interesting that there is no yellow light warning phase at grade crossings as there is at traffic light intersections.  Grade crossings signals go from clear to stop with no warning to give time for drivers to slow down. 

This seems like a design defect.  Authorities preach to drivers that they must stop for the flashing lights, and then install systems that can make it impossible to do so. 

would it be better if we just had warning signs up to 2 miles from the crossing warning of impending RR crossings? 

Oh..then put the signs with flashing yellow lights every block or two until you reach the crossing?

Where I live, just outside of London ON we are prone to seeing all kinds of tractors going along the road up here...and in all the years we've lived up here did we see only one accident involving somebody trying to pass a tractor that was on the shoulder of the road...spin out and slam into another vehicle. And the tractor did have a big slow moving vehicle sign. 

Drivers are aware of this inexplicable lack of a slow-down warning phase at grade crossings.  So they make up their own rules. 

Surveys show that many drivers believe that the time interval between the activation of the flashing lights and the lowering of the gates is equivalent to the yellow light phase of a traffic signal.  This means that they believe that they don't have to stop for the red flashing lights if the gates are still up. 

It is a very logical conclusion, but then it waters down the meaning of the red flashing lights per se. 

Methinks that drivers tend to interpret situations in a way that is most advantageous to them.

Witness what happens when the power goes out and the stoplights stop working.

Most drivers know (and comply with) the concept that an intersection with a non-working traffic light becomes a four-way stop.

Other drivers interpret the situation as "no stoplight - no stop".  Which, of course, sets up some interesting meetings at ground zero...

These are most likely the same drivers who run the gates at crossings...

mmmm...I don't know...I always assumed that whenever I was on any road up here that crossed either the CP or CN like that I was prepared to stop.

Given the large number of drunk/high/stupid drivers out there, I don't think there is any amount of warning that would cause folks to heed grade crossings. The only reason they stop at stop signs is that everyone else does. No one heeds a grade crossing and slows down.

Problem with 2 mile warning is that for most intersections you would have to put dozens of warning signs on all of the roads that lead to the grade crossing. Leave the warning system as it is: marks on the street, circular RR sign ahead of the crossing and the crossbucks/gates/lights at the crossing and just tell people they are going to die if they don't pay attention. Dead victims should be shown on TV news.

Yes there is a component of gate runners who are incorrigible.  However, there is a larger component who are simply confused by the illogic of all the lights and admonitions.   

blownout cylinder

mmmm...I don't know...I always assumed that whenever I was on any road up here that crossed either the CP or CN like that I was prepared to stop.

Yeah, but you are probably just like most of us on the forum... we often slow or stop whether the lights are on or not, just in the hopes that we might see a train anyway.! 

   I think Bucyrus may be on to something with his yellow light suggestion.    Many crossbucks-only crossings around here have had standard octagonal STOP signs added to them, probably on the theory that people are conditioned to stop when they see them.  (Well, most people.)    Maybe we should try some variation of the standard red-yellow-green traffic signals at crossings.

   And yup, semper, I am one of 'em--I always hope for a train at crossings.

Semper Vaporo

 

blownout cylinder:

 

mmmm...I don't know...I always assumed that whenever I was on any road up here that crossed either the CP or CN like that I was prepared to stop.

 

 

Yeah, but you are probably just like most of us on the forum... we often slow or stop whether the lights are on or not, just in the hopes that we might see a train anyway.! 

 

Hah!! Caught red handed!!

One can hope....

Actually, as far as the green-yellow-red idea goes I'm not so certain that is going to solve anything really. We have a few intersections that are pretty close to crossings here that I can see will only cause untold grief if they cluttered up the lighting with yet more lights.

If some of my own observations are correct, there are probably a few drivers that will get further distracted by even more lights than we already have ...

ADD anyone?