Flangeway Danger to the Public

[Convicted One]

Euclid

How many fatalties does it require to be concerned about it?

How many dragons did Don Quixote eventually slay?

As callous as I am sure that it sounds, there need be an acceptable level of risk.

And I just don't see the cost of retrofitting every grade crossing in America with your "frying pan" solution to be justfied by the handful of incidents that might be prevented.

[Convicted One]

Perhaps a more practical solution might be to develop a "quick release" function for the wheels, so that in the rare occurrence where such a stranding actually happens, the chair operator can reach down and slide a lever, and jettison the stranded wheel, saving the users life while saving the taxpayer tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars? for a remedy that only scarcely would ever be needed?

[Overmod]

Convicted One

Perhaps a more practical solution might be to develop a "quick release" function for the wheels, so that in the rare occurrence where such a stranding actually happens, the chair operator can reach down and slide a lever, and jettison the stranded wheel,

This would manifestly not work on a Hoveround, for a couple of fairly obvious engineering reasons.  In the New Brunswick incident, jettisoning the 'anti-tip' apparatus might have allowed recovery, but there is no guarantee the chair would still be able to recover onto pavement, particularly if the battery charge were low; it would make no sense to jettison any other wheel as it would make the chair less drivable and more prone to jam on obstructions.

I think the principal problem I have with the idea, though, is how you prevent unintended actuation of the 'quick disconnect', perhaps involving a failure under load.  If a chair were to release a front wheel when 'raised and castering' (as described for a different Canadian incident) and the wheel were to drop out or jam, this might conceivably cause tip over and injury -- without much recourse in the subsequent court action for damages.  There is also a fair history in aviation of issues like hands-free ejection seats or 'cutting off the wrong engine' that bode ill for user-controlled wheel release.

In the short run, I think the simplest correction for 'scooters' is to implement the kind of extended wheel and yoke I described.  There are practical retrofit solutions for other power chairs along similar lines, one possibility being jacks that can lift a jammed wheel combined with an arrangement to rotate or lock the caster in a straight line or other angle to ensure it won't promptly low-center again.  Another alternative would be an air-bag arrangement that would lift the vehicle to allow it to be laterally dragged free.

The arguments in Australia and other places that adding width to the wheels may not always be possible is a valid one, but it applies only very peripherally to Hoveround or other 'zero-turn' scooters, where the outside wheels are already reasonably fat and the 'casters' entirely under the skirt of the device at all times.

What i think is the 'ultimate' solution is to establish a better rule for crossings: make them clearly to cross rails at a right angle; clearly provide reflective stripes defining the path to follow, even in dark or rain for users without mandatory vision correction; do not tolerate masts or other equipment from one type of mandated protection from interfering with free passage on sidewalks.  And, not incidentally, use the 2.75" 'close' or Euclid-style frying-pan fillers, or full fillers where agreeable, just in the pedestrian-crossing 1.5m or equivalent and, as at Ashland, try to ensure that falling off the outside is 'recoverable'.

Then establish a combination of funding sources and enforcement that gets that done ... and also establishes the necessary ADA or comparable waiver that allows crossings to be marked closed to certain types of traffic until remediated.

Something else that hasn't been discussed is a variant of the 'I've fallen and I can't get up' that would be able to send an unspoofable signal to an 'automated crossing' warning system along with whatever monitoring system it used.  A proper camera system would rapidly identify a stuck wheelchair; the railroad would get highly specific warning of an issue (or recourse for a false alarm); appropriate dispatch of first response could be near-immediate.  (Note the interesting Canadian discussion of cell-phone emergency calling...)

[Euclid]

Convicted One

 ...saving the users life while saving the taxpayer tens if not hundreds of billions of dollars? for a remedy that only scarcely would ever be needed?

 

The solution is right there now, ready to purchase and install.  It will probably make a profit with all the money the railroads will save in flangeway cleaning and prevented derailments.  The only issue I see is the care and attention to detail needed in the installation.  This is evident in the manufactuer's installation video.  I think neither the cities nor the railroads will want to make the required effort during installation, so trained, certified installers will needed.  They will not only install correctly, but also install at less cost than the railroads or the cities.   

The product is an idea who's time has come. 

[tree68]

The Pinto Principle would seem to apply here.

And - we've discussed this before with other issues - who is ultimately responsible?  The encroaching municipality, or the railroad?

I would suggest that a bit of an impasse might well ensue.  The municipality saying it's the railroad's responsibility, the railroad saying it's the municipality's responsibility, with the railroad ultimately saying if it's so dangerous, we'll just close the crossing.

 

[Convicted One]

Overmod

This would manifestly not work on a Hoveround, for a couple of fairly obvious engineering reasons.  In the New Brunswick incident, jettisoning the 'anti-tip' apparatus might have allowed recovery, but there is no guarantee the chair would still be able to recover onto pavement, particularly if the battery charge were low; it would make no sense to jettison

 

If we could harness the creativity you expend in determining why potential solutions won't work, instead upon workable alternatives.....we might already be on the downhill side of this dilemma? 

Standardize the ejectable wheels, and include a workable spare with each chair, such that there was a field expedient method of installing the spare after the incident?

Perhaps even add two wheels and mount the at-risk wheels in two-wheel span bolster type configuration, thus giving the operator "drive-off" capability for the initial escape?  

Or alternately perhaps even installing a ball-and-socket 5th wheel centered between the two at-risk wheels that NORMALLY isn't in contact with the ground,  only coming into  service once one of the primary wheels had already been jettisoned? (to prevent the chair from bottoming out after the jettison)

Regardless, I firmly believe that the correct solution will be one specific to the chair, not the grade crossing.

Updating 3 million chairs has gotta be cheaper than retrofitting 20,000+ grade crossings.

(I'm watching  a James Bond  marathon today, and I've gotta believe that "Q" could crack this nut   ) 

[Convicted One]

Euclid

The solution is right there now, ready to purchase and install.  It will probably make a profit with all the money the railroads will save in flangeway cleaning and prevented derailments

Updating 3 million chairs has gotta be cheaper than retrofitting 20,000+ grade crossings

[tree68]

I believe you could mass produce signs that say "Cross Tracks at Right Angles" for under $20 each.  Maybe include a simple graphic illustrating the concept.

Might have to replace a sign from time to time.

Problem solved.

[Overmod]

Convicted One

If we could harness the creativity you expend in determining why potential solutions won't work, instead upon workable alternatives.....we might already be on the downhill side of this dilemma?

Oh, I did that on 'workable alternatives' years ago, which is why I say what I say about unworkable ones or worse.  When you come up with workable solutions believe me, I'll praise them on their merits.

Standardize the ejectable wheels, and include a workable spare with each chair, such that there was a field expedient method of installing the spare after the incident?

Or, more likely in most of these accidents, just put the ejected wheel back on -- it wouldn't be damaged.  

Perhaps even add two wheels and mount the at-risk wheels in two-wheel span bolster type configuration, thus giving the operator "drive-off" capability for the initial escape?

I'm beginning to think you don't comprehend how zero-turn works.  Is this the outer traction wheels in fore-and-aft span-bolstering?  Tag or all four driven?  Not saying it couldn't be done but it might be hell to retrofit... and it's not really the drive wheels that are the issue in most of these accidents.  

Or alternately perhaps even installing a ball-and-socket 5th wheel centered between the two at-risk wheels that NORMALLY isn't in contact with the ground,  only coming into  service once one of the primary wheels had already been jettisoned? (to prevent the chair from bottoming out after the jettison)

OK, now I'm sure you don't know how zero-turn works.  All a rational engineer would need is a ... what is a 'ball and socket 5th wheel' in this context anyway ... jack arrangement outside the track of an inside caster that would raise the chassis far enough to unlock the jam of a non ejected, properly-built caster, together with some means to keep the caster from promptly going right back in the flangeway when the jack is released.  No Mickey Mouse tinkering under a 200+lb machine its rider is almost certainly unable to lift in order to restore mobility ... or perhaps you hadn't quite thought that far ahead.

I firmly believe that the correct solution will be one specific to the chair, not the grade crossing.

I believe I've said that nearly from the outset, and with what I think are likelier solutions than emergency demountable wheels.

Updating 3 million chairs has gotta be cheaper that retrofitting 20,000+ grade grossings.

Depends entirely on who pays... and you are forgetting the other users, notably bicyclists, who would benefit from some of the improved-crossing options.

Retrofitting all Hoverounds to make them grade-crossing "friendly" is likely to require a change in the medical reimbursement that made so many of these chairs used in the first place (watch a Scooter Store ad carefully if you want details).  This complicated by all the users who never go near a crossing, but smell class-action in the offing and request conversion of their unit plus perhaps damages for having sold them an unsafe and unsuitable product... (which of course it was, just not so much to them).  The real issue is replacing every single caster and wheel assembly on every Hoveround, even the ones bought out of thrift stores or through private trades.  

As Euclid points out, the cost to install flexible flange fillers in the sections of crossings that require them fir this purpose is likely not that great, nor is the cost of periodic replacement, or monitoring for damage or wear, on the part of railroads contracting with municipalities or states.  I'd be prepared to see the cost of this as a legitimate crossing-safety line item for funding -- whereas fixing scooters in a non-bankrupting fashion involves just as much ultimate taxpayer "contribution", just more indirectly and not benefiting anyone but a select few scooter owners.

Having said this, a 'first best solution' is to implement the wider yokes and 'lifting-flank' tire profiles for casters I described, and make those mandatory for new manufacture and provide a 'retrofit kit' for older examples -- that just slots into the existing caster mount. This regardless of what people might do with grade-crossing-safety retrofitting in the field... 

[Euclid]

Convicted One

 

Euclid

The solution is right there now, ready to purchase and install.  It will probably make a profit with all the money the railroads will save in flangeway cleaning and prevented derailments

 

 

Updating 3 million chairs has gotta be cheaper than retrofitting 20,000+ grade crossings

 

I come up with $200,000,000. for the flangeway fillers with installation and $600,000,000 for the chairs.  This is contingent on review of your ejection wheels drawings. 

[Overmod]

tree68

I believe you could mass-produce signs that say "Cross Tracks at Right Angles" for under $20 each.  Maybe include a simple graphic illustrating the concept. Might have to replace a sign from time to time. Problem solved.

Except that there are already signs like it that are already ignored.  And I might add that in many of the documented cases there was little evident way to actually cross at right angles ... hence the suggestion (for many years now) that sidewalks and bike routes be restructured to cross even 'skew' railroad tracks at right angles with the full unrestricted clearance distances.  (Note the implication for the California crossing in the original accident post.)

A proper sign really has to add the important concern, which is "don't stop or try to turn around no matter what once you start across" (I'll let y'all figure out what that should be in terse English) perhaps with the added note "trains move faster than scooters and faster than they appear".  

Keep in mind that we still might be able to lobby FRA for specific exemptions from the nothing-above-railhead mandate permitting 90-degree crossing 'rails' or even ribbing in the crossing plates to enforce wheels-straight...

[Euclid]

I don't think that crossing at right angles will necessarily solve the problem.  Casters are squirrelly.  They could hit the flangeway perpendicular to it and instantly flip around by 90 degrees and drop right into the flangeway.   

[Overmod]

Euclid

I don't think that crossing at right angles will necessarily solve the problem.  Casters are squirrelly.  They could hit the flangeway perpendicular to it and instantly flip around by 90 degrees and drop right into the flangeway.

This precise concern is mentioned in the New Brunswick incident report, as I recall in conjunction with the accident that involved 2 wheelchairs at the turn of the century.  If the frame is loose or out of alignment, momentary weight transfer can indeed cause one caster to revolve, similar to the situation with some shopping carts you may have seen, and if unlucky this will come down right on the gap at a bad angle and drop preferentially in far enough not to come out by rocking back.

One cure for this is to detent and spring the casters on any wheelchair so they take up fore-and-aft alignment if unloaded -- this might ease stowage and transport.

It occurs to me that far before explosive-bolt demountable casters begin to make sense, simple drop-in ramps combined with savvy wheel dimensioning and design might provide the necessary extraction assistance in many mishaps where merely lifting the chair out is not possible and no jacking capability is available.  I think if you have differential drive motors this would always let you out.