Login
or
Register
Home
»
Trains Magazine
»
Forums
»
General Discussion
»
Are Quiet Zone Crossings Less Safe Than Regular Crossings?
Edit topic
Updated your discussion topic below.
Subject
Enter a subject for your topic. Maximum 150 characters.
Post Body
Enter your post below.
<p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;">The horn silencing effect of the quiet zone may or may not have played a role in the Texas crash, but the effect matters. And if the effect is found to have played a role this crash, it may be cited as part of the cause, regardless of the fact that the driver violated one or more laws. But many seem to insist that the quiet zone effect does not matter, whether it played a role in this crash or not. They say that the quiet zone effect is beside the point because crashes are always caused by drivers breaking the law. And the law violation is all that matters. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;">Furthermore, many would have us believe that quiet zones are just as safe as non-quiet zones. That is what I previously believed to be the case. I cannot believe they would allow quiet zones unless they were just as safe as non-quiet zones. </span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;">So it really surprises me to read this on the linked reference dated 5/18/12:</span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;"><a href="http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/investigations/track-side-neighbors-hounded-by-horns">http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/investigations/track-side-neighbors-hounded-by-horns</a></span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;">Quote from the link regarding waiting for U.P. to approve quiet zones for South Austin, TX:</span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="color:#0000ff;font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:medium;">It is a waiting game for the city. Since Union Pacific owns the tracks, the railroad giant sets the schedule -- one where caution is a priority.</span></p> <p><span style="color:#0000ff;font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:medium;">The <a href="http://www.up.com/" target="_blank"><span style="color:#0000ff;">railroad’s website</span></a> says: "Union Pacific believes quiet zones compromise the safety of railroad employees, customers, and the general public."</span></p> <p><span style="color:#0000ff;font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:medium;">But Schatz said the absence of the loud warning of an approaching freight train compromises safety.</span></p> <p><span style="color:#0000ff;font-family:verdana,geneva;font-size:medium;">"It's known that, if the train does not sound its horn at the crossing, the chance of a crash occurring increases 68 percent,” he said.</span></p> <p> </p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;">I wonder if U.P.’s viewpoint on this is shared by other authorities involved in setting up quiet zones, and by cities asking for quiet zones. With all the worry about railroad safety, how can they countenance quiet zones if they increase the hazard by 68 percent?</span></p> <p><span style="font-family:verdana,geneva;">Is the railroad relieved of crossing liability as part of the deal to put in a quiet zone? If so, who assumes that liability?</span></p>
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
E-mail Subscribe
Check the box below if you want to receive e-mail notifications when replies are made to this thread.
Receive notifications
Update Discussion Topic
Join our Community!
Our community is
FREE
to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.
Login »
Register »
Search the Community
Newsletter Sign-Up
By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our
privacy policy
More great sites from Kalmbach Media
Terms Of Use
|
Privacy Policy
|
Copyright Policy