Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
schlimm,  <o:p></o:p> I am not sure where to draw the line with being prudent.  It would be prudent to drive slower than the speed limit even if conditions were perfect.   <o:p></o:p> With traffic lights, there is adequate warning, and with the Nevada crossing there is not enough.  So, I don’t think there is an analogy.  When you approach a traffic light at the speed limit, if it turns yellow, you know about how much time you have before it turns red.  If you are too close to stop short of the light, you know you will have enough time to make it through.  There is no reason for a driver to slow down at a green light in case it happens to turn yellow.   <o:p></o:p> If the highway has a 70 mph speed limit and allows trucks requiring 900 ft. of stopping distance, then the signals should be set up to provide that braking zone distance.  Drivers expect that and highway engineers provide it.  Drivers do not expect to have to slow down at green lights in case it turns yellow.      <o:p></o:p> The Nevada crossing is like a traffic signal with no yellow light.  The only practical effect of a yellow light that is offered by the crossing is the time between activation of the lights and the dropping of the gate.  I do not know what that time interval is.  Some have said it is 3 seconds.  So if a truck requiring 900 ft. for stopping is 3 seconds from the crossing at the speed limit, it is 306 ft. away.  So the driver will bust through the gates and stop 594 ft. after crossing the track.  But the truck won’t get hit by the train.  <o:p></o:p> I speculate that the main thing that prevents crashes between trains and these heavy trucks at that crossing is the low odds of the two showing up at the same time.
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