Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
[quote user="edblysard"] But this is true, there is no perfect solution for this problem other that eliminate all at grade crossings. No matter what device you install, there will always be at least one person who tries to defeat it. Yes, you could invest in more advance technology, but the cost would be staggering, your own numbers show that. While I abhor the idea of any death, it is inevitable. You are creating a false argument by pointing out that there is a predictable response to your statement. Fact, even with the "advanced" protection in Europe, touted by a few on this forum, people still managed to get killed there. Barricades would, as Larry pointed out, at some point trap someone. Anyone who has driven more than a year has at some point crossed railroad tracks, and even the most dim witted and dumb of us realize, after the first time they try and beat a train, and win, even then they still realize that losing means death. No way can you really argue that, it only takes one close scrape to convince even the dumbest of us that if they get hit, it's over. They get it, from the tips of their toes to the top of their pointy heads, loosing means dying. Yet the same people, rational and reasonable in most circumstances, still try and beat the train. I don't buy into any of the phyco- babble, urge motivated , teen mentality, mumbo jumbo....people are just willing to gamble, period. These same people will drive on the highway/freeway to and from work for months without every driving aggressively or dangerously, and then one day the mood hits and they try and be a Nascar driver and wipe out themselves and someone else to boot. No real explainable reason other than they just felt like it. Same at grade crossings, they may be the perfect driver at every intersection they come to, polity waving others through ahead of themselves, and then on the next block down, jump a gate and plow into a train. No reason beyond a moment's flash of dumbness. To clue the casual reader in, the gates and protection devices at most public road/railroad grade crossing are chosen by the state, county or local DOT, based on auto traffic count, and political consideration. The DOT pays for roughly 25% of the initial cost of product and installation, the railroad picks up the other %75, plus any repair cost and replacement when damaged, for the life of the installation...and it has little if any say in what devices are installed, or not installed. Most DOT/PUCs are immune from civil suits, so take a wild guess who gets sued when someone gets hit? The railroad of course, they all have deep pockets. Regardless of the fact the railroad didn't want the crossing, and in fact is almost always sued by the DOT/PUC to gain the "right" to cross the tracks, they foot the bill for the crossing, any upgrade, the warning devices, the maintenance of those devices, and ends up paying the civil suits when someone manages to get tagged. For some reason, folks seem to think the" government" spends money on grade crossing protections, when in fact, it only spends the railroads money on protection, which in reality is your money, gathered by paying higher transportation cost. You read statements like, "If "they" can spend 10 billion on an aircraft carrier, "they" should be able to spend 10 million on upgrade crossing protection"... Yup, "they" do spend billions on carriers, roads, bridges, airports, monuments, all of that, because that's what the laws say they can do with the money you authorized them to spend, and thats what you authorized them to spend  it on. The DOTS install only what the law allows or instructs them to install, period. You don't like what is presently there, then change the lawmakers and change the laws, instead of arguing the finer points of a physiological study, mood swings, or the verbal minutia of some dim, dismal report filed by a office weenie who has no clue how a crossing gate works. All these "pie in the sky" solutions are meaningless unless you start at the basic root of the problem, funding, design, function and legal requirement. If the law said to install concrete barriers that raise from the road bed and two armed guards that pop out of the electrical shed to guard the crossing, then that's what will be installed....if the law only requires gates, bells, flashing lights, guess what, you get gates, bells and flashing lights....period. There is no real reason or real need, beyond the personal interest, to try and "understand" why people run grade crossings, race trains and park their Jeeps on the tracks playing "Ghost Train", even if you managed to figure it out, it would make no difference...all you have to understand is that they do, and will do these things no matter what. Trying to understand why people run through crossing gates and try and beat trains is like trying to understand why dogs chase cars....they wouldn't know what to do if they caught one, but they chase them any way...simply because that's what they do! <div style="clear:both;"></div> [/quote] Ed,  <o:p></o:p> I am not sure why dogs chase cars, but I do believe that we can learn why people run grade crossings.  In some cases, as you say, it might be just a spontaneous and arbitrary loss of reason or sanity.  That could happen, but I do not believe it is the underlying explanation for all crossing violations.  There has been over a century of probing the question of why people don’t yield to trains. They have found that people run crossings intentionally and unintentionally.  Unintentionally, they are asleep, drunk, or distracted.  Intentionally, they want to beat the train, want a thrill, or want to commit suicide.  I think it is reasonable to conclude that, of those three reasons, wanting to beat the train is the most common motivation by far.  And yes, I agree that in attempting to beat a train, they are engaging in a gamble.     <o:p></o:p> Signs, flashing lights, and bells help get people’s attention, and that helps with the unintentional crossing violation.  Gates stop traffic, and that helps with the intentional crossing violation.     <o:p></o:p> I realize crossings cost a lot of money, and I don’t expect some mass conversion of all grade crossings to the highest state of the art.  If it sounds that way, it is probably only because I am laying out an alternative to the mass replacement of crossings with grade separation because that approach was advocated earlier in the thread.  But, any case, I am not agitating for a human right of universal crossing protection.  And I am certainly not criticizing the railroads for not solving the problem.  I realize that the solution must originate with the laws.  My basic point is that there is an imperfect, but much improved solution to the problem of gate runners.  And it is not a pie-in-the-sky solution.  What it boils down to is that gates are the most effective approach to solving the problem, but only if drivers cannot go around them.     <o:p></o:p> I have no idea what credentials are possessed by the authors of the report I linked to the first post.  But North Carolina DOT took the report seriously, and they make a very convincing case why.  The report sounds extensively researched.  The study spent a lot of money gathering real data on the cause and prevention of crossing violations.  The report sounds highly credible to me.  It is by far the most useful and practical report I have ever seen on the topic.  It does, by the way, set the objective for a perfect solution, at least as a benchmark goal.  <o:p></o:p> But I agree that from a practical standpoint, there is no perfect solution.  Even the fully gated crossing is not the perfect solution.  The NC report does seek to find out what is in the minds of gate-runners by interviewing and profiling them, but the report also stipulates that obtaining this insight is not the entire remedy.  The report makes it clear that the proper action must be taken in regard to the driver habits and motivations to develop an actual solution.  But the report believes that learning driver motivations is a prerequisite to developing the solution to the problem.  It makes sense to me.   <o:p></o:p> Regarding the really good, but not perfect solution, the report says this:  <o:p></o:p> “For twenty weeks, baseline data were collected at the Sugar Creek Road crossing.  Median barriers were then installed, followed by 4-quadrant gates, and then finally, 4-quadrant gates with median barriers. Using each of these barrier enhancements, the number of gate running incidents was significantly reduced. For example, median barriers reduced violations by 77%, 4 quadrant gates reduced violations by 86% and 4-quadrant gates with median barriers reduced violations by 98%. Similar results were obtained at a second (Orr Road) crossing in Charlotte.”
Tags (Optional)
Tags are keywords that get attached to your post. They are used to categorize your submission and make it easier to search for. To add tags to your post type a tag into the box below and click the "Add Tag" button.
Add Tag