Edit post

Edit your reply below.

Post Body
Enter your post below.
There is no doubt in my mind that a current study of would show less difference in safety between quiet zones and the non-quiet zones than the 2000 study showed between the whistled crossings with lights and gates and the non-whistled version of those types of crossings.  So, yes, a current study would tell us something that the 2000 study does not tell us, and we don’t have a current study. However, even without the current study, and setting aside the 2000 study; I assume that although the divided median and full gates must make a big difference in reducing crashes, I don’t see how they can possibly fully compensate for the removal of the horn.  I come to that conclusion without any empirical statistics from studies.         I come to that conclusion because it seems to me that the horn mitigates more crash causes than just those caused by driving around the gate.  I do not believe that my items #2-9 above can be dismissed as not being affected by the horn.  They won’t be affected in every occurrence, but they will be affected in some occurrences.  The total effect of all of them may be small relative to the effect of driving around the gate.  But if there is any effect at all from them, then it must follow that the quiet zone crossings are more dangerous than the non-quiet zone crossings.
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