CSSHEGEWISCHGrade separation is quite impractical in this situation.
I-81 in Syracuse, NY, and I-40 through OKC come to mind.
Never mind the cost.
A solution there might be to upgrade the north-south line there to send the traffic south, then bend it around westerly to come back to the existing main to the west of town. The environmental study would take years, never mind the likely opposition of residents to the plan.
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...
zkr123 I don't think I was specific when I said getting rid of crossings. I'm mostly talking about ones in high dense populations, double lane highways, and ones that go through major intersection.
It would be far more cost-effective, faster, and less disruptive to hire and station 2 or more police officers, and maybe even more during the rush hours - complete with cruisers and flashing lights activated for a very visible presence - at each such crossing, 24 x 7. They would have orders to monitor the traffic, especially when trains are coming, vigorously enforce the grade crossing laws, direct/ correct lost and errant motorists, and be able to contact the railroad's dispatcher in the event anything goes wrong. Essentially a glorified version of the old crossing watchman, but with enforcement super-powers.
- Paul North.
Paul_D_North_Jr Lately I've seen or heard about several crossings where the tracks cut diagonally through an intersection of 2 (or more) major streets. To eliminate the crossing would be a massive and tremendously expensive project that either relocates several city blocks, elevates the tracks on a trestle or viaduct (typ. concrete beams these days), or goes underground in a cut-and-cover configuration.
You have 2 very near you, Mr. North. Outside Allentown and Richland.
I read in a planning book long ago, that "improving" an intersection (such as a xing like these) can make it less safe. Because if an intersection has oddball arrangements, people are said to pay more attention to what they are doing since they perceive the intersection as more dangerous, thereby making it less dangerous since everyone is more alert.
Is it true? beat me. But something to think about.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.
edblysard Safer automobiles with crumple zones that work, and safety appliances that work well, making the odds better of surviving a train/auto collision.
Safer automobiles with crumple zones that work, and safety appliances that work well, making the odds better of surviving a train/auto collision.
Today cars are thousands of times safer than the vehicles of the old days. There is a video showing a head on crash test between a 1950 Chevy Impala, and a 2013. The 2013 looked worse, but the occupants live, where those in the 1950 would have died. The problem with car-train collisons is that the difference is mass and forces is so great. Just an SD40-2 weights 368,000lbs, which is 92 times heavier than a 4,000lbs car. Now if you add some rolling stock behind that locomotive the amount of weight in that train skyrockets. If the train is going 45mph, that is a lot of force that destroys even locomotives.
Also think about the different techniques used to protect the occupants in the event of a crash. Modern locomotives have massive posts in the front of the cab. These are designed to withstand impacts and to not allow the crew to be crushed. This is because in the majority of crashes, a train will go through, or move the object it hits. Cars have crumble zones to slow down and absorb the forces of the impact because they usually are stopped in crashes by the object they hit. Both theories work well within what the are designed for. However, when the two meet, cars usually lose because of the massive amount if force involved which they were never designed for. It is impratical to design cars so they can survive a collision with a train. The best way to protect yourself is to not get into a collision in the first place. If people use common sense, and there is more public education, these collisions could just be eliminated. Unfortantley there are idiots who will never respect grade crossings, and then wonder why they get into a collision.
Asseveral others have pointed out, grade crossing collisions are a small drop in the bucket. There are many more accidents usually caused by stupidity.
Common sense is a uncommon commodity.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD Common sense is a uncommon commodity.
Johnny
zugmann[snipped - PDN.] . . .You have 2 very near you, Mr. North. Outside Allentown and Richland. . . .
A tractor-trailer of glass bottles got clobbered there a couple months ago (9:24 AM Dec. 4th, clear, sunny, dry, etc.), after the lights had started flashing (maybe the gates hadn't come down yet, though):
http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/allentown/index.ssf/2014/12/tractor-trailer_in_allentown_d.html
Only reported injury was to the conductor's arm. Coincidentally, it's right by the "Mechants Square Model Train Exhibit" (part of a flea market / antique mall operation there).
The one at Richland - about 18 miles west of Reading, PA, also on a NS line (Harrisburg or Reading ?)- is new to me. It's at Main & Race Sts., at these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 40.35911 W 76.25873
As I posted on another concurrent thread (Oxnard, Calif. train-truck collision), there's yet another one in Hazleton, PA (NS M&H branch), at S. Church and E. Chestnut Sts., at these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 40.95378 W 75.97763
There are a couple others that are 'almost' diagonals at intersections, too - SEPTA in Willow Grove, PA and at Lansdale, PA - so I'm sure we could come with quite a few more without much trouble.
I invite anyone who thinks eliminating any of these crossings would be easy or cheap to sketch up the concept and submit it to the railroad and the local municipality.
Paul_D_North_Jr zugmann [snipped - PDN.] . . .You have 2 very near you, Mr. North. Outside Allentown and Richland. . . . I've long known about the one in Allentown - at 12th & Vultee Sts., on the NS Reading Line, at about these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 40.57666 W 75.47623 A tractor-trailer of glass bottles got clobbered there a couple months ago (9:24 AM Dec. 4th, clear, sunny, dry, etc.), after the lights had started flashing (maybe the gates hadn't come down yet, though): http://www.lehighvalleylive.com/allentown/index.ssf/2014/12/tractor-trailer_in_allentown_d.html Only reported injury was to the conductor's arm. Coincidentally, it's right by the "Mechants Square Model Train Exhibit" (part of a flea market / antique mall operation there). The one at Richland - about 18 miles west of Reading, PA, also on a NS line (Harrisburg or Reading ?)- is new to me. It's at Main & Race Sts., at these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 40.35911 W 76.25873 As I posted on another concurrent thread (Oxnard, Calif. train-truck collision), there's yet another one in Hazleton, PA (NS M&H branch), at S. Church and E. Chestnut Sts., at these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 40.95378 W 75.97763 There are a couple others that are 'almost' diagonals at intersections, too - SEPTA in Willow Grove, PA and at Lansdale, PA - so I'm sure we could come with quite a few more without much trouble. I invite anyone who thinks eliminating any of these crossings would be easy or cheap to sketch up the concept and submit it to the railroad and the local municipality. - Paul North.
zugmann [snipped - PDN.] . . .You have 2 very near you, Mr. North. Outside Allentown and Richland. . . .
I've long known about the one in Allentown - at 12th & Vultee Sts., on the NS Reading Line, at about these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 40.57666 W 75.47623
The following has no connection with railroads, but it does illustrate the matter. My wife's father was born in Dayton, Ohio. Going on five years ago, my wife and I went through Dayton while traveling. Her cousin had given her the address of the house where his mother and her father had lived when they were young: the land is now occupied by an on-ramp to an interstate highway.
Paul_D_North_JrThere are a couple others that are 'almost' diagonals at intersections, too - SEPTA in Willow Grove, PA and at Lansdale, PA - so I'm sure we could come with quite a few more without much trouble.
Wixom, MI has such a crossing/intersection (N 42.52437 W 83.53596). I'm not sure that it sees the rail business it once did, but it's still an active crossing. Both roads are busy. I imagine it was really interesting back when the Ford Plant was open - shift change must have been challenging.
Newark, DE (39°40'59.47" N 75°45'23.33" W) has a crossing situation the routinely has cars ending up on the tracks - weekly if not more frequently.
That's an interesting one, too - essentially a 'K' shape on its back, with the track parallel to the back and crossing near the junction of the legs.
Better yet, there's no traffic signal within sight of it; and 1 of the roads - New London Rd. / Del. 896 North - is 1-way outbound only. Most likely the back-ups are on Del. 273 East/ W. Main St., from the traffic trying to make the 90-deg. right turn and merge into Del. 2 South. There's also a "DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS" sign to warn against that for that movement, too.
From the "Street View", that looks like a nice place to wait and watch for trains, and maybe take some photos - either of the traffic islands, which are about 250 ft. northeast of the brick single-story building that sure looks like it used to be the B&O passenger station (now a CSX C&S crew base ?) . . .
Paul_D_North_Jr That's an interesting one, too - essentially a 'K' shape on its back, with the track parallel to the back and crossing near the junction of the legs. Better yet, there's no traffic signal within sight of it; and 1 of the roads - New London Rd. / Del. 896 North - is 1-way outbound only. Most likely the back-ups are on Del. 273 East/ W. Main St., from the traffic trying to make the 90-deg. right turn and merge into Del. 2 South. There's also a "DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS" sign to warn against that for that movement, too. From the "Street View", that looks like a nice place to wait and watch for trains, and maybe take some photos - either of the traffic islands, which are about 250 ft. northeast of the brick single-story building that sure looks like it used to be the B&O passenger station (now a CSX C&S crew base ?) . . . - Paul North.
There are several watering holes that service the University of Delaware student bodies as well as the Newark Police Dept that overlook the crossing. Very interesting locale.
tree68Wixom, MI has such a crossing/intersection (N 42.52437 W 83.53596). I'm not sure that it sees the rail business it once did, but it's still an active crossing. Both roads are busy. I imagine it was really interesting back when the Ford Plant was open - shift change must have been challenging.
Probably in addition to the RR flashers, the traffic signals go red for all approaches.
I tried to sell my two cents worth, but no one would give me a plug nickel for it.
I don't have a leg to stand on.
Paul_D_North_Jr The problem with even the "farmer-only" type crossing is that his equipment might nevertheless be big and bulky enough - such as a tractor-trailer to haul grain, etc. - to derail a train, and especially a lighter-weight passenger train, as happened at Oxnard. It's fair enough to let him accept the risk of crossing the tracks at his own private crossing - but the unacceptable part is the risk he poses to the trains. - Paul North.
The problem with even the "farmer-only" type crossing is that his equipment might nevertheless be big and bulky enough - such as a tractor-trailer to haul grain, etc. - to derail a train, and especially a lighter-weight passenger train, as happened at Oxnard.
It's fair enough to let him accept the risk of crossing the tracks at his own private crossing - but the unacceptable part is the risk he poses to the trains.
The answer to that would be to install controlled access crossings similar to the ones that they have in the UK. Crossing user must phone control to get permission to cross the line. With the technology now available, there's little reason why private crossings couldn't be gated and the user required to call the dispatcher to remotely unlock the crossing. Of course, there's the ever present question as to who would pay for the equipment.
In 2014 there were 209485 grade crossings in the FRA inventoty. 129502 (61.8%) Public crossing, 79983 (38.2%) Private crossings.
There was a total of 2080 incidents at grade crossings. 1964 (94.4%) /incuding 206 that did not involve motor vehicles/ at Public crossings, 316 (5.6%) /including 17 that did not involve motor vehicles/ at Private crossings.
There were fatalities in 245 (11.8%) of the incidents.
______________
Killed/Injured
Total killed 267, injured 831 at Public + Private xings
/101 (42.4%) killed and 184 (22.1%) injured at Public + Private xings did not involve motor vehicles/
Public crossings: killed 238 (89.1%), injured 718 (86.4%) of total
/97 (40.8% killed and 71 (9.0%) injured at Public xings did not invlove motor vehicles/
Private crossings: killed 29 (10.9%), injured 113 (13.6%) of total
/4 (13.8%) killed and 5 (4.4%) injured at Private xings did not involve motor vehicles/
zkr123 With all of these accidents happening between motorists and trains, why hasn't grade separation become mandatory?
With all of these accidents happening between motorists and trains, why hasn't grade separation become mandatory?
I would have to add that many of the crossings are in less affluent areas with little political influence.
Local examples for me include several streets connecting North Richmond and San Pablo that cross the triple-tracked UP/Amtrak California and the extremely annoying single-tracked BNSF (where the trains usually creep along only slightly faster than a walking pace).
Strength in diversity!
In the Halifax, North Carolina collision that is a place that needs grade seperation.
Elevate the railroad over the road and lower the road.
Underpass for the paved road and overpass for the Railroad have to be built for this situation.
The slope of the crossing at the road is too steep.
Watch my videos on-line at https://www.youtube.com/user/AndrewNeilFalconer
Drake Road in Kalamazoo, Michigan crosses the Amtrak line at the bottom of a valley. Somebody in the Department of Transporation could figure out how to put the roads over the Amtrak line in that valley.
Regarding Drake Road, if it's the spot I think it is (N 42.27677 W 85.64829), other crossings have already been built over the line (ie, grade crossing eliminated). Unless there's a substantial dip (which doesn't seem to be the case), you have a lot of businesses that will be significantly affected by elevating the road there.
It does appear that there are traditional traffic signals there (which indicates they know they have a problem), however, the line-of-sight looks pretty good in all directions.
As for Halifax (N 36.33066 W 77.59388), this appears to be a one-off incident. It doesn't even appear that the trailer was high-centered, from what I have read. The vehicle was extremely long ("half a football field") and could not negotiate the turn. It then got blocked by traffic behind it, so he couldn't back up, either. There was a trooper with the vehicle, but it appears they simply didn't have time to clear the traffic and get him re-situated. Perhaps another five minutes and there would not have been an incident. The trooper had asked that Amtrak be notified. Apparently there just was too much lag time between the request and the arrival of the train.
It would appear, based on information in the news stories, that the truck may have been headed for I95. Inasmuch as the shipment had reportedly originated in Clayton, NC, they had several opportunities to get to I95 before that, so there may have been other clearance issues.
The incident does, however, otherwise resemble the recent incident where a trailer did get high-centered at a crossing with a similar layout (CA, as I recall). A busy highway (US301) directly next to the railroad. Doing a grade separation there would be a challenge, displacing a fair number of folks in the process.
tree68 As for Halifax (N 36.33066 W 77.59388), this appears to be a one-off incident. There was a trooper with the vehicle, but it appears they simply didn't have time to clear the traffic and get him re-situated. Perhaps another five minutes and there would not have been an incident. The trooper had asked that Amtrak be notified. Apparently there just was too much lag time between the request and the arrival of the train.
As for Halifax (N 36.33066 W 77.59388), this appears to be a one-off incident. There was a trooper with the vehicle, but it appears they simply didn't have time to clear the traffic and get him re-situated. Perhaps another five minutes and there would not have been an incident. The trooper had asked that Amtrak be notified. Apparently there just was too much lag time between the request and the arrival of the train.
Everyone:
There are several items that have been missed.
1. Why did the state trooper not call CSX ( not Amtrak as everyone keeps saying ) before a load 160+ feet long allowed to cross the RR. If CSX had been called the dispatcher could have immediately tried to call train # 80 and at the same time caused all the train's signals to go to stop.
a. As well the google link below shows the intersection is only approximately 40 - 45 ft east of the track.
b. The US 301 road is what no wider than maybe 80 feet.
c, 120 feet is not the load's 164 feet so special manuevering would be required especially if a left turn was needed.
2. If CSX was called the dispatcher could have told trooper a train in immediate vicinity and the load could have backed up if the trooper had kept following traffic back far enough to allow backing up. Note picture at another link showed private vehicles had followed to just up to crossing gates.
3. A study of the google map seems to indicate that when CSX removed the second track it was toward the US 301 side. So if the second track is needed to be replaced that will place the crossing even closer to US 301.
4. This closeness of a road to a parallel track has been cited at other crossing through out the US as very dangerous by other posters.
5. At this US 301 crossing a TT stopped at the traffic light would foul the RR track.
6. Even if the traffic lights are pre-empted by the crossing signal any stopped vehicle(s) are always potentially prone to stall.
7. The land to the east of US 301 appears vacant so at least NC DOT needs to purchase this land.
8. US 301 should be moved east so the west side of the intersection is at least 80 feet east of a possible relaying of the second track.
9. Note: This is something that needs to be addressed nation wide. There may not be money to build grade separations but this is at least as important. It might have even prevented the Oxnard collision ?
https://www.google.com/maps/@36.3307096,-77.5937943,62m/data=!3m1!1e3!5m1!1e4 r
EDIT: Note:: the west side of the intersection appears to have very large fillets so maybe other long loads have traversed this intersection ?
From my vantage point the Trooper made 2 critical mistakes.
He did not contact the railroad PRIOR to having the oversize vehicle begin it's efforts to traverse the crossing and have the carrier hold ALL traffic until he reports that the oversize vehicle has cleared the crossing.
Second, he did not keep following highway traffic back away from the oversize vehicle a sufficient distance to permit full manouvering room.
It will be interesting to find out just how 'experienced' this Trooper was. To me his actions spell his first 'real' assignment since becoming an actual Trooper.
I'm betting the trooper requested his dispatcher call the railroad. He didn't actually make the call - he had his hands full already.
The police dispatcher may or may not have made said call a priority, and may well have been pre-occupied with things that seemed to be of a higher priority at the time.
Unless the police dispatcher has a direct line to the appropriate railroad dispatcher, the call went to CSX railroad police in Jacksonville. The CSX RR police had to determine exactly where the problem was, then either had to forward the call to the appropriate RR DS, or simply called said RR DS and acted as an intermediary. Or took the report and hung up.
I have the direct numbers for the CSX dispatchers in my area - but I'm willing to offer that if I call them directly, I'll get "how did you get this number?"
It's not hard to see how a delay of several minutes could exist between the first "call the railroad" request was made and when "stop the train" was transmitted to the Amtrak train. Apparently that lapse was slightly longer than the time it took Amtrak to reach the crossing.
While it's possible the trooper was a newbie, I'd again bet that virtually none of the state troopers, sheriff's deputies, or local cops around here can tell you anything about when (or even if) trains run around here. Granted, trains aren't on a schedule here, but most run close to the same times day-to-day. But when you're patrolling 100+ square miles, the odds you'll be at a crossing when a train comes through consistantly enough to know the schedule are slim.
And if the trooper wasn't routinely assigned to that area, he'd be even less likely to know the schedule, and that assumes the train is running on time. If he did know that the subject train was due through that crossing at {name your time}, but wasn't in a position to see that it hadn't actually come through, he wouldn't know it was running late and could thusly assume that it had. Wrongly, but...
As for the signals affecting the train - the DS has no control over the automatics. If there are no control points in the area, the signals are a non-player here.
The truck's inability to make the turn reflects poor planning on the part of the trucking company, or possibly inexperience or poor judgement on the part of the driver. That the company has a trailer long enough to handle the shipment says that they should have some experience with such loads, and planning for over-anything loads should be a regular part of doing business for them. The trooper was apparently escorting the load - this wasn't a case of his responding to a report of a problem.
Again, I question "why turn there?" .
In Pennsylvania, the routes for "super-loads" like that are supposed to be checked out in advance for such issues, and a checklist form submitted with the application for the required hauling permit. However, said form does not include an item for grade crossings. See Form M-936ARS - Application - Route Survey (3-09), at:
ftp://ftp.dot.state.pa.us/public/PubsForms/Forms/M-936ARS.pdf
See also:
ftp://ftp.dot.state.pa.us/public/pdf/rrregs.pdf
http://www.dot.state.pa.us/Internet/Bureaus/pdBHSTE.nsf/infoCPHauling?OpenForm
So, a couple years ago (Sept. 2013) a large concrete beam was reduced to rubble by a NS train in the south-central PA area (New Oxford) - see:
http://cumberlink.com/news/local/one-lane-of-york-road-reopens-after-train-derailment-thursday/article_5ddfd2d4-1bd4-11e3-bd68-0019bb2963f4.html#.UjMBkRbDTDw.email
As a result of this incident, I've suggested that grade crossings be added as an item on the PennDOT form, but obviously that hasn't happened yet.
Control points are nominally 8 to 10 miles apart. The time the railroad SHOULD have been notified was BEFORE this excessive size load ever attempted to get across the crossing. Traffic is ROUTINELY held for the benefit of local authorities when they request it.
The normal request is 'Is there anything moving at MP 999.99, we need to _____________(fill in the blank). The response will be 'Stay clear until (direction) train passes; or OKay we'll block off the line there; report back when you have cleared the track.
Calling AFTER the track has become blocked is the perfect recepie for a disaster - and in this case the disaster happened.
Got my answer as to why they were where they were in this morning's paper - they were apparently doing a fair amount of zig-zagging to avoid clearance problems, including on the Interstate.
Whether the railroad was notified is apparently still up in the air. Nobody is saying.
How long the truck fouled the crossing has variously been reported to be from five to almost twenty minutes.
It does sound to me like the concept of off-site construction of buildings may have been pushed to its limit here. It's a common practice - look at the base of nearly any cell tower and you'll see one or more such shelters. They may be built to include only utilities - power, HVAC, etc, or could be completely finished, to include all required equipment. Drop it in place, hook it up, and away you go.
Some of these shelters are actually concrete, built at the factory and hauled to the site.
"they were apparently doing a fair amount of zig-zagging to avoid clearance problems"
I have a friend in Washington State who hauls oversize stuff. Route planning is paramount. Looks like the one in Halifax was not planned too well.
Norm
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.