To quote in part from Overmod:
"...If part of QZ safety includes full enforcement -- and I think it does -- just what steps toward 100% integrity against crossing infringement should municipalities take?.."
I still think that the real answer is to equip Locomotives with a Klingon Disrupter, controlled by the Engineer ... Problems solved ...No need for motorists to know, or understand English; or to be paying attention while driving...Maybe, the Conductor could pass out Darwin Awards to those so 'Disrupted'.
Bumping this topic with respect to quiet zones and proper signage to make their crossings 'as safe' as they would be with horn use.
I recently came across a somewhat 'better' proposal for signage, as part of this interesting blog post (name suppressed to keep knee-jerk response neutralized). This is a modification of the $1500 fine sign that's been mentioned previously...
Seems better than hydraulic rams out of the pavement, or a harpoon system that immobilizes the car ... after it's gotten safely over the crossing, two options which were discussed in the blog comments.
If part of QZ safety includes full enforcement -- and I think it does -- just what steps toward 100% integrity against crossing infringement should municipalities take?
Patrick, have you noticed that almost every traffic light cycle, there is a vehicle that's stopped way past the "Stop here on red light" sign? Down here there are several signs next to the traffic lights that say "no turn on red" and there are cars constantly turning on red.
As for all those hands, I can't explain it, but their existence may explain how athletes are able to give 110% or 200% effort.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Murphy Siding I've never seen a sign on a stop light that said cars needed to stop when the light was red.
Paul of Covingtonwhile they drive with a cup of coffee in one hand, a doughnut in the other hand, a cell phone in the other hand, and the other hand is tuning the radio.
Will you explain all those hands in the 3rd half of the show?
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
CSSHEGEWISCHIt isn't just illegals, either. There are a fair number of drivers who have had their licenses suspended or revoked (often for DUI) but continue to drive, usually in a less than safe manner.
It never ceases to amaze me how many of the folks the cops pull over are "suspended or revoked" for some reason or another (usually failure to pay a fine). It's like they never learn!
It doesn't take external interference to become distracted. I've been known to get so involved in some mental project that I suddenly realize that I have no memory of the past several miles... Scary.
I do find that while fiddling with this device or another is momentarily distracting (and that's all it takes), having other people in the vehicle is far worse.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Paul of Covington Sam: "Railroads will have Highway/Rail Grade Crossing accidents, as long as individuals are given licenses like they were prizes in breakfast cereal boxes." Back in the early '70's when I worked at the La. Dept. of Public Safety computer center, I commented to the supervisor that the new written test they had just come out with was ridiculously simple. His answer was, "If we made it any harder, some people wouldn't be able to pass it." Going back to people being able to read, it's not that they can't read, but that they don't read. I still contend that people pre-program themselves to react to stop signs, traffic lights and other cars and maybe yield signs, then turn their minds off while they drive with a cup of coffee in one hand, a doughnut in the other hand, a cell phone in the other hand, and the other hand is tuning the radio. I can't talk any more about people's driving: my blood pressure is going up.
Sam:
"Railroads will have Highway/Rail Grade Crossing accidents, as long as individuals are given licenses like they were prizes in breakfast cereal boxes."
Back in the early '70's when I worked at the La. Dept. of Public Safety computer center, I commented to the supervisor that the new written test they had just come out with was ridiculously simple. His answer was, "If we made it any harder, some people wouldn't be able to pass it."
Going back to people being able to read, it's not that they can't read, but that they don't read. I still contend that people pre-program themselves to react to stop signs, traffic lights and other cars and maybe yield signs, then turn their minds off while they drive with a cup of coffee in one hand, a doughnut in the other hand, a cell phone in the other hand, and the other hand is tuning the radio. I can't talk any more about people's driving: my blood pressure is going up.
Paul: To what you said, and I highlighted..... I could only add a BIG "AMEN" [bow]
Preoccupation seems to be the rule for drivers these days...Too much going within, and without of automobiles. At accident scenes where one encounters a driver who has hit the middle of a rtrain at a crossing, or ignored the loud blowing of a air horn.. They usually preface their predicament, by the statement.."...I did not see, hear, the train that ran into me( or "I ran into.." ) The cars being so 'sound proofed' outside noise is inaudible within the cabin of the auto...As I previously suggested: until GE or EMC develops a Klingon-style Disrupter.. Oblivious drivers will continue to be entangled with trains...
SALfanSome of the posters are making the rash assumption that all drivers on the road actually have licenses. Ever lived in an area with a lot of illegal immigrants? No driver's licenses, definitely no insurance, and in too many cases very little or no English.
It isn't just illegals, either. There are a fair number of drivers who have had their licenses suspended or revoked (often for DUI) but continue to drive, usually in a less than safe manner.
Time to start eliminating or upgrade grade crossings. Appears the NC DOT is identifying and doing this faster than any other state on a percentage basis ?
Semper Vaporo zardoz Euclid A crossbuck does not tell a driver to yield, so to know this, a driver has to read the laws. Nevertheless, authorities feel that the crossing signage should tell a driver directly what to do without need to refer to the law books. Therefore, authorities want to add yield signs to the crossbuck to tell drivers that they must yield. By this same reasoning, shouldn't there be signs on signalized and gated crossings telling the driver not to go around lowered gates? There is no signage at those crossings that informs the driver not to pass lowered gates. A driver might logically conclude that they are allowed to use their own discretion as to whether or not there is time to get over the crossing ahead of the train. After all, that is exactly what they are allowed to do at passive (non-signalized) crossings. You presume that the driver can actually read English. The law presumes you can read English! How did you get your license to drive if you do not know what the signs mean?
zardoz Euclid A crossbuck does not tell a driver to yield, so to know this, a driver has to read the laws. Nevertheless, authorities feel that the crossing signage should tell a driver directly what to do without need to refer to the law books. Therefore, authorities want to add yield signs to the crossbuck to tell drivers that they must yield. By this same reasoning, shouldn't there be signs on signalized and gated crossings telling the driver not to go around lowered gates? There is no signage at those crossings that informs the driver not to pass lowered gates. A driver might logically conclude that they are allowed to use their own discretion as to whether or not there is time to get over the crossing ahead of the train. After all, that is exactly what they are allowed to do at passive (non-signalized) crossings. You presume that the driver can actually read English.
Euclid A crossbuck does not tell a driver to yield, so to know this, a driver has to read the laws. Nevertheless, authorities feel that the crossing signage should tell a driver directly what to do without need to refer to the law books. Therefore, authorities want to add yield signs to the crossbuck to tell drivers that they must yield. By this same reasoning, shouldn't there be signs on signalized and gated crossings telling the driver not to go around lowered gates? There is no signage at those crossings that informs the driver not to pass lowered gates. A driver might logically conclude that they are allowed to use their own discretion as to whether or not there is time to get over the crossing ahead of the train. After all, that is exactly what they are allowed to do at passive (non-signalized) crossings.
A crossbuck does not tell a driver to yield, so to know this, a driver has to read the laws. Nevertheless, authorities feel that the crossing signage should tell a driver directly what to do without need to refer to the law books. Therefore, authorities want to add yield signs to the crossbuck to tell drivers that they must yield.
By this same reasoning, shouldn't there be signs on signalized and gated crossings telling the driver not to go around lowered gates? There is no signage at those crossings that informs the driver not to pass lowered gates.
A driver might logically conclude that they are allowed to use their own discretion as to whether or not there is time to get over the crossing ahead of the train. After all, that is exactly what they are allowed to do at passive (non-signalized) crossings.
It seems that eachPoster has made an assumption> that THE PUBLIC is able to read and understand English < [Still the "legal" language in this country
.{ --except for Lawyers who must show their 'intelligence' by spouting words and phrases in Latin.]
I can remember when the word STOP was embossed in the red lense on traffic signals...even some traffic signals that had paddles that popped out of their side with the appropriate word GO or STOP written on them, to the acomping 'bell sound' and its appropriate colored light....
Remember the old Rail/Highway Crossing, wig-wag signals? They had everything, Cross Buck, Swinging arm ,and lighted red light, along with a bell sound.. Tnose were stil; in use up until several years ago, in South East Kansas ( SK&O took them down on its old Santa Fe line between Cherryvale, Ks. and Chanute,Ks.)
And if you think the Public is still oblivious to the blatently obvious reactions of Law Enforcement Officers when they make traffic stops. The do everything possibly to prevent their getting run over or run into....One only has to watch the videos of incidents where motorists run into parked police cars( with lights blinking), vehicles stopped in the emergency strips on the roadsides....
Years ago, there was a Local ( Boston,Ma.) TV show that each week mentioned anachronistic laws that were still on the books.. One such stuck out in my mind then: "...The law required that if if a motorist met a horse drawn vehicle.. the motorist was required to stop and render the motor vehicle inoperable, and throw the parts into the roadside weeds....Got to be a heck of a story behind that one, (not to mention someone of some personal, political power to get THAT enacted as a law on the books.!
Railroads will have Highway/Rail Grade Crossing accidents, as long as individuals are given licenses like they were prizes in breakfast cereal boxes. At Least until GE and EMC can get Kingon Disrupters mounted on the front of their locomotives.
Time to bring back the "Death" siren crossing.
What you all are saying makes my point. Why is there a need to add a yield sign to a crossbuck because drivers don’t know that a crossbuck means yield?
Like all signage, the full meaning is spelled out in the law books. Drivers are expected to know those laws, and will be prosecuted for breaking them.
Semper Vaporo
Pkgs.
I've never seen a sign on a stop light that said cars needed to stop when the light was red.
Here is what I taught my kids when I was teaching them to drive:
A traffic light that is ON Red solidly (i.e.: not flashing) means a motorist must STOP and wait for the Red light to turn OFF before proceeding (usually meaning that a similar light for cross traffic has turned Red to stop cross traffic from the left and/or right.
A flashing Red traffic light means to Stop and then proceed when the way is clear. This is true for side roads entering a highway or at a 3- or 4-way Stop intersection. A motorist would be stuck there forever if this were not the design. If the cross traffic has no flashing Red light (it is not a 3 or 4-way Stop intersection) , then the motorist must just wait for a break in traffic before proceeding, but if the cross traffic also has a flashing Red light then all must Stop and take turns proceeding; the car to the "Right" has the Right of Way to go first and then you get to go. (Kindergarten is where one should have learned about "taking turns". Something that many motorists seem to have flunked.)
Flashing RR lights mean the same thing. They just happen to have two alternately flashing Red lights to distinguish that the "cross traffic" is a RR and not an automotive highway (and it is not a 3 or 4-way Stop intersection!). This is because the lights are controlled by sensors in the track that can be fooled into detecting cross traffic (a train) and turn the lights On when there is no real cross traffic... i.e.: so that a malfunction of the lights does not impede automotive traffic from proceeding. When the Red lights are flashing, the driver must Stop and then proceed when the way is clear to do so safely.
All the RR grade crossing gates that I have ever seen have 3 Red lights on them along the length. The middle one and the one furthest from the open end (the hinged end) flash alternately in sync with the main flashing lights on the crossbuck post by the side of the grade crossing. The 3rd Red light, on the open end of the gate, does NOT flash; it is On solidly and that means you must STOP and may NOT proceed until it turns Off.
--
Maybe that 3rd Red light on the gate needs to be bigger and have the "visor" over it like normal stop lights do?
Or maybe gated grade crossings need to also have a non-flashing Red light on the crossbuck pole that comes on when the usual RR lights are flashing? This would only be at Gated grade crossings because even a malfunction of the sensors will drop the gates and there is no provision in the law that allows a motorist to go around gates for any reason anyway. Malfunctions at gated grade crossings impose an added burden on the motorist (and the RR to promptly get them fixed!), but gates are there to protect the motoring public and malfunctions must be tolerated for safety's sake.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
Overmod EuclidTherefore, since the crossbuck is necessary at a signalized crossing why would it not be necessary to add a yield sign to clarify the crossbuck message just as it is necessary to do so at a non-signalized crossing? Or add some additional signage to reinforce the yield sign that's qualifying the crossbuck which backs up the signal lights which... Why not just use one simple sign (and some cheap enabling technology) that cuts to the chase with signage more likely to 'motivate' the average motorist... ... or figure out a more effective active crossing method with all the 'right' semantics...
EuclidTherefore, since the crossbuck is necessary at a signalized crossing why would it not be necessary to add a yield sign to clarify the crossbuck message just as it is necessary to do so at a non-signalized crossing?
Or add some additional signage to reinforce the yield sign that's qualifying the crossbuck which backs up the signal lights which...
Why not just use one simple sign (and some cheap enabling technology) that cuts to the chase with signage more likely to 'motivate' the average motorist...
... or figure out a more effective active crossing method with all the 'right' semantics...
I love it clear simple and to the point. It also gives a huge discouragement, and enforces the law. Every major city should have one of these. I would also suggest putting a picture of car that was hit by a train on a few of those boards to show the general public the result of small car playing chicken with big train.
zugmannEuclidSo the traffic control community worries that loss of driver respect for stop signs applied to grade crossings will carry over to all other stop sign applications, thus making road intersection more dangerous. Source, please?
EuclidSo the traffic control community worries that loss of driver respect for stop signs applied to grade crossings will carry over to all other stop sign applications, thus making road intersection more dangerous.
Jeff,
This goes to your points too.
The following is quoted from NCHRP REPORT 470. It contains some very interesting ideas about driver behavior and perceptions regarding traffic control signage. What I find particularly interesting is that stop sign compliance is lower than usual at grade crossings. Apparently this is due there being less driver respect for stop signs at grade crossings where drivers feel that they are capable of judging whether a train threatens without drivers needing to stop at a crossing. And then as the stop sign authority is diminished by applying it in a way were drivers have lower respect for it; that loss of authority will extend to all stop sign applications. Thus, using stop signs at grade crossings will damage the effectiveness of stop signs in all applications. From the report:
Among the issues of current interest for passive crossings
is the use of Stop or Yield signs. Part of this interest has been
spurred by a recent report by NTSB (8), which recommended
much broader use of Stop signs at railroad-highway grade
crossings. The literature evaluation found a great deal of controversy
but questionable empirical basis on this issue. There
are differences of opinion regarding the use of Stop signs at
passive grade crossings: don’t use at all (9), use only under
certain conditions (10–12), and use at all passive crossings
unless hazardous (8). The primary reason for nonuse or limited
use appears to be concern over the high level of noncompliance,
which is indicated by a high percentage of drivers
failing to come to a complete stop. Three independent
studies observed that the percentages of drivers not coming
to a complete stop were high and higher than the percentages
found at highway intersections. This high level of noncompliance
is equated to disrespect for the Stop sign that might
increase and carry over to other locations if the Stop sign is
used indiscriminately. NTSB apparently did not share that
concern because it recommends use of the sign unless the
usage is deemed unsafe by an engineering study. The primary
reason for using a Stop sign appears to be limited sight
distance. Some feel that if there is a limited corner sight triangle
as the driver approaches the crossing, a Stop sign
should be used so that the driver—recognizing that there is
a need to stop—will at least slow down significantly, allowing
him or her to come to a stop safely if necessary. Others
will argue that a Stop sign should not be deployed merely to
achieve this driver behavior. Other concerns remain with the
use of Stop signs—for example, the anticipated higher incidence
of vehicle-vehicle crashes, notably rear-end types.
Research evaluating this concern is very limited. Any further
evaluation of the Stop sign should examine this issue
comprehensively.
In summary, despite the selective practice of using Stop
signs at some grade crossings for many years and despite
several field studies, the effectiveness of Stop signs for general
use appears unresolved and controversial. Existing data
do not support firm recommendations.
In contrast to Stop signs, Yield signs have not been frequently
deployed at rail-highway grade crossings, and field
data are minimal. However, with regard to the use of the standard
Yield sign or incorporating a Yield message into sign systems
for a passive grade crossing, there appears to be a growing
feeling that this Yield usage may be desirable. Nearly all who have written on this topic have concluded that the cross
buck does not convey the intended message. Although drivers
associate the crossbuck with a grade crossing, too many do
not understand what is required of them. Because what is
required of the driver is to yield to an oncoming train, many
feel a Yield message should be provided. Existing studies
indicate that the Yield sign conveys this message more effectively
than does a crossbuck, although the studies are seriously
flawed. What remains to be more thoroughly examined
is how the Yield sign should be incorporated at passive grade
crossings to achieve long-term improved driver behavior.
The traffic community is concerned about both Stop- and
Yield-sign use at rail-highway grade crossings because it is
feared that widespread use at rail crossings may diminish
respect for these signs at roadway intersections. This diminished
respect will be an extremely difficult hypothesis to
evaluate empirically, and the outcome may be influenced
by enforcement and education strategies that accompany
implementation.
The link:
http://onlinepubs.trb.org/onlinepubs/nchrp/nchrp_rpt_470-a.pdf
Also look at page 22 & 23 of this book. This is apparently tied with Report 470 quoted above, but seems to be stated somewhat differently. Start at page 21 with paragraph named: 2.3.2.1 Yield Sign or Yield Message.
http://books.google.com/books?id=Q83xC9y7vA8C&pg=PA21&lpg=PA21&dq=why+add+a+yield+sign+to+grade+crossings?&source=bl&ots=v6ul9Gb8QJ&sig=6B5XATq-0LM2L_dPwUevjF9m2Xk&hl=en&sa=X&ei=OPohVIP5BcmLyAS9pYLYCw&ved=0CEAQ6AEwBQ#v=onepage&q=why%20add%20a%20yield%20sign%20to%20grade%20crossings%3F&f=false
While some may not understand what a cross buck sign means, many seem to have trouble with the concepts of "yield" and "right of way" anyway, I think many just look at a crossing differently than they do a road intersection. I've seen a driver pull around lowered gates in front of me, then stop at a 4-way stop sign at 2am with nothing (not even a cop to write a ticket) in sight.
It's not always not knowing what to do at a crossing, but thinking you don't have to apply traffic laws to a crossing the same as at an intersection. Or maybe thinking you can get away with ignoring traffic laws at railroad crossings.
I don't mind placing yield or stop signs along with cross bucks. However, until drivers give a railroad crossing the same respect as a road intersection, all the signage won't make a bit of difference.
Jeff
PS. Since some jurisdictions think they need to add yield or stop signs to cross bucks at passive crossings, those in charge themselves may not equate a cross buck with a yield sign. Instead they may think it just signifies that a roadway crosses railroad tracks. Not how to act at said crossing.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
Many have suggested that the application of stop signs to passive (non-signalized) crossings would be a sure way to improve safety. By forcing vehicles to stop, they are brought down to low speeds where they are more likely to yield if a train is approaching.
However, it has been found that stop sign compliance is lower than usual at grade crossings compared to use at road intersections. Apparently this is due there being less driver respect for stop signs at grade crossings because drivers feel that they are capable of judging whether a train threatens without the need to stop at a crossing.
So the traffic control community worries that loss of driver respect for stop signs applied to grade crossings will carry over to all other stop sign applications, thus making road intersection more dangerous.
I understand your point. The crossbuck is definitely explained in the rule books. So I do not know why they feel that a yield sign must be added just because drivers do not realize that a crossbuck means yield. It is the responsibility of drivers to know what a crossbuck means. And as I said earlier, I think that adding the yield sign to a crossbuck is wrongheaded for other reasons as well.
EuclidThis issue of the crossbuck being perceived to simply mark the location of a railroad without explaining what a driver should do has been addressed before this latest idea using the yield sign.
There are dozens of signs along our roads that indicate a situation without explaining how to deal with it.
Take a four-way (or "all-way) intersection with stop signs. Why are there no instructions posted as to who can go first if two cars arrive at the same time?
Or a "road narrows" sign that is just a symbol. No instructions there, either.
Or the "school bus stop" signs. In some states you have to stop regardless for a stopped bus. In others, you can pass under certain circumstances. None of that is spelled out with the sign.
So how do you know this stuff? It's in the V&T laws, driver handbooks, and very likely on the written test you take to get your license.
And so it is with the crossbuck.
This issue of the crossbuck being perceived to simply mark the location of a railroad without explaining what a driver should do has been addressed before this latest idea using the yield sign. The earlier message telling drivers what to do was the phrase, “LOOK OUT FOR THE CARS.” This message often accompanied the crossbuck just as the yield sign does today.
But in the still earlier times, LOOK OUT FOR THE CARS was used without the crossbuck, apparently before the crossbuck had been invented. Sometimes the phrase, “RAILROAD CROSSING” was used in the earlier times as well, often presented as a horizontal signboard with both words on one line
Likewise, the phrase, LOOK OUT FOR THE CARS was often presented as a horizontal signboard with all words on one line, and sometimes the signs were quite large, for example, a foot high and 12 feet long.
Sometimes both phrases were combined in a sign.
Today the phrase, LOOK OUT FOR THE CARS seems odd because the greater threat would seem to be the approaching locomotive rather than the trailing cars. Indeed, there was a minor adoption of the phrase LOOK OUT FOR THE LOCOMOTIVE as an apparent correction of the perceived mistake of warning driver to look out for the cars.
But the real explanation is that the term “The Cars” was an alternate term for “The Train” in the 1800s. So LOOK OUT FOR THE CARS meant look out for an approaching train so as not to get struck by it.
http://modelingthesp.blogspot.com/2013/04/streets-roads-and-all-that-part-3.html
My only problem with the re-signage of RR grade crossings is that it replaced all the old nostalgic signage.
At the time all the signage was being updated around here, I was in the process of making a sign for my Garden RR like I remembered seeing as a kid and wanted to verify the font and layout of the sign. I was told of places where there might still be the old signage on various streets and highways, but by the time I got to them, they had all been replaced and I could not get a photo of what I wanted. A web search was not fruitful either.
Adding yield signs to passive (non-signalized) crossings is fascinating to me. This is very widespread, and will probably become universal practice.
I can’t think of any other case where a road sign has been deemed to be so ambiguous that it requires another sign next to it to explain the ambiguity.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.