Even if all the brakes on every car had been locked there's no way that train could have stopped in time or even slowed enough to avoid a collision.
Dr. Frankendiesel aka Scott Running BearSpace Mouse for president!15 year veteran fire fighterCollector of Apple //e'sRunning Bear EnterprisesHistory Channel Club life member.beatus homo qui invenit sapientiam
Yes, and in most crossing crashes, the stopping distance of the train is irrelevant. It is always trumpeted as the number one issue by safety advisers, but it seldom matters in grade crossing crashes. Most vehicles that are struck are in the process of driving past the front of the locomotive. So even if the train could stop in 100 feet, it would not prevent the crash.
The only time the train stopping distance might matter is for vehicles stalled on the crossing where an engineer might see the situation from a significant distance and take preemptive action. Long stopping distance matters when a danger ahead becomes obvious enough for an engineer to try to stop short of it.
I wonder what is louder, the crossing bells right at the crossing, or a train blowing its horn 1/4 mile away?
I wouldn't be surprised it it was the former (until the train got closer). So if the driver couldn't hear that, somehow I doubt that he could hear a horn blast 1/4 mile away in a well-insulated truck with police sirens nearby.
It's been fun. But it isn't much fun anymore. Signing off for now.
The opinions expressed here represent my own and not those of my employer, any other railroad, company, or person.t fun any
It may sound silly, but maybe railroad crossing should be controlled cyclically as are other road intersections. One can only cross when the way is permitted by controlling lights. Otherwise, the line waits, even if no train is within 20 miles. Light turns green, traffic enters the crossing, light turns amber, traffic clears the crossing...just like the rules of the road. The lights could be contolled by oncoming trains as they are by emergency responding vehicles to allow the timely passage of trains.
I realize it wouldn't be slick, especially where trains have to perform switching functions briefly, and that it will inconvenience the much higher density of wheeled traffic, but it may save a lot more lives. I can't see anything else beyond routing all road traffic down underpasses or up overpasses to ensure there is never an unwanted 'intersecton'. Otherwise, it should remain as it is...a sort of "caveat adscensor", or, "Let the charioteer beware."
Crandell
There are plenty of crossings that are tied in with traffic lights - so yeah, it can be pretty slick.
bucyrus- I think you're playing the *If only* game. Consider this- Somewhere along the way, a lot of folks have put in a lot of effort and study, to figure out what is a reasonable time frame for having the crossing lights coem on, the bells start to ring, and for the arms to start dropping. I'd have to believe that factors such as speed of the train, and the type of train were taken into account. After some resonable figures were worked out, those numbers were bumped up, call it margin of safety, CYA, etc... It seems to me, that there is already some *extra* built into the timing. You're suggesting that *maybe* things would have turned out differently *if only* the engineer had been able to give a little extra, extra time, on top of the normal extra ttime already built in, an on top of the reasonable time already established. Where do you stop? If you add extra time, and drivers still get in the path of trains, do you ad more extra? And when they still get hit, more yet? It seems to me, that what's needed is more education for drivers of those vehicles that are crossing railroad tracks. *If only* they'd follow the traffic rules, maybe they wouldn't find themselves needing extra, extra, resonable time.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
zugmannI wonder what is louder, the crossing bells right at the crossing, or a train blowing its horn 1/4 mile away?
It was a dark foggy night in North Dakota, the driver had stopped for this mile long coal train, but he was getting impatient. He edged his car into the left lane clearly intending to zip across as soon as the last coal car cleared. Well, he hay have "zipped" but hi did so right into the side of the trailing locomotive. The train never did stop because the head end never knew they were involved in an accident. The police were able to call the dispatcher who was able to stop the train about 30 miles away.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Murphy Siding bucyrus- I think you're playing the *If only* game. Consider this- Somewhere along the way, a lot of folks have put in a lot of effort and study, to figure out what is a reasonable time frame for having the crossing lights coem on, the bells start to ring, and for the arms to start dropping. I'd have to believe that factors such as speed of the train, and the type of train were taken into account. After some resonable figures were worked out, those numbers were bumped up, call it margin of safety, CYA, etc... It seems to me, that there is already some *extra* built into the timing. You're suggesting that *maybe* things would have turned out differently *if only* the engineer had been able to give a little extra, extra time, on top of the normal extra ttime already built in, an on top of the reasonable time already established. Where do you stop? If you add extra time, and drivers still get in the path of trains, do you ad more extra? And when they still get hit, more yet? It seems to me, that what's needed is more education for drivers of those vehicles that are crossing railroad tracks. *If only* they'd follow the traffic rules, maybe they wouldn't find themselves needing extra, extra, resonable time.
Yes that is what I am doing. But all those measures that you mention having been worked out over time were determined by people doing exactly the same thing I am doing. And the process never ends. The NTSB is doing the same thing I am doing as they look at this Texas crash.
For this particular crash, I am not offering any remedy or suggesting anything be changed. I am just looking at how it played out to see what I can see. In the Nevada crash, however, I do believe the crossing setup is deficient and could be made much safer with no compromise. The engineer on that Amtrak train involved in the crash feels the same way.
In this Texas case, perhaps more signal time would have prevented it, but there is something very powerful working against extending the signal time. MUTCD experts have found if you make the warning times longer, drivers tend to take more risk in beating the train. They perceive excessively long warnings as overkill, and take the matter into their own hands. They may be successful in beating a particular train, but the larger issue is that they will pay less heed to future warnings.
Therefore, counter intuitively, the traffic experts shorten the warning to save lives.
Jeffrey,
Something not yet factored into this discussion is those of us with impaired hearing. I, too, have driven emergency vehicles back in the sixties and can attest to the volume of a good old Federal Q. I have my doubts the police had their electronic sirens operating. It would be too loud and annoying for most people.
Nowadays, the electronic sirens are difficult for me to hear, and I can be standing right next to the crossing and not be able to hear the bells.
Norm
Small town Nebraska: sheriff deputy sitting in a line of cars - broad daylight - waiting for a train, spotting cars at an elevator, to clear a crossing.
Deputy pulled out of line, turned on red lights and ran right into the side of the train.
Now, explain to me what he didn't see, hear, smell, taste, whatever it would take to keep from going thru that crossing at the same time as the train.
She who has no signature! cinscocom-tmw
All these pages of discussion disolve down to a single truck driver who did not see or hear all the warning devices protecting the crossing and did not have the assured clear distance for his entire rig on the far side of the crossing.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Mookie Small town Nebraska: sheriff deputy sitting in a line of cars - broad daylight - waiting for a train, spotting cars at an elevator, to clear a crossing. Deputy pulled out of line, turned on red lights and ran right into the side of the train. Now, explain to me what he didn't see, hear, smell, taste, whatever it would take to keep from going thru that crossing at the same time as the train.
Stranger things have been known to happen:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=enkh9A5jdUI
Have fun with your trains
Vic - and there he is again - in his POV!
Hi Mookie, good to see your still here
Wondering what the heck happened to my post to Ed about other MIAs on the site before replying to your post...
...I don't like being censored over remembering old friends....
Mookie Vic - and there he is again - in his POV!
jeffrey-wimberly Mookie Vic - and there he is again - in his POV! Makes you wonder. The crossing was very definitely occupied.
Its like the train was invisible in that video.
Earlier, I suggested that the quiet zone may have played a part in the Texas crash. This was resisted by some who said that the driver broke the law; so end of story. I was told that the quiet zone is irrelevant to the crash.
But the Union Pacific says they believe that quiet zones compromise the safety of railroad employees, customers, and the general public. They say that the absence of the loud horn compromises safety and increases the chance of a crash by 68%.
This is my question:
If the quiet zone was irrelevant to the crash, why would the U.P. care if quiet zones compromise safety?
Here is a reference to the U.P. statement on quiet zones:
http://www.kxan.com/dpp/news/investigations/track-side-neighbors-hounded-by-horns
BucyrusIf the quiet zone was irrelevant to the crash, why would the U.P. care if quiet zones compromise safety?
Apples and oranges.
I'm sure that UP brought the same thoughts to the table when the crossing in question was to become a quiet zone.
The incident in question, however, involved a driver who, if I remember the earlier timeline correctly, entered the crossing essentially before a normal train would have begun sounding its horn, rendering this point moot.
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...
My belief is that a Quiet Zone, fosters a belief among residents that the railroad no longer operates - they don't hear it - if they can't hear it on a continuing basis - it no longer exists.
Whether my belief is correct or not - human nature is that if you don't hear or see something - it doesn't exist. Those living directly along the tracks know it's existance, they see and hear it - up close and personal. Those living a little further away, don't see it and don't hear it, ergo it no longer exists.
BaltACD My belief is that a Quiet Zone, fosters a belief among residents that the railroad no longer operates - they don't hear it - if they can't hear it on a continuing basis - it no longer exists. Whether my belief is correct or not - human nature is that if you don't hear or see something - it doesn't exist. Those living directly along the tracks know it's existance, they see and hear it - up close and personal. Those living a little further away, don't see it and don't hear it, ergo it no longer exists.
But I believe it can work in the opposite extreme. Hearing train horns all the time can render them less effective. If a train is always blowing its horn - why pay any special attention as to why? Imagine if emergency vehicles ran around all day with their sirens on (even with no emergency). How long would people keep pulling over?
tree68 BucyrusIf the quiet zone was irrelevant to the crash, why would the U.P. care if quiet zones compromise safety? Apples and oranges. The incident in question, however, involved a driver who, if I remember the earlier timeline correctly, entered the crossing essentially before a normal train would have begun sounding its horn, rendering this point moot.
Apples and oranges. The incident in question, however, involved a driver who, if I remember the earlier timeline correctly, entered the crossing essentially before a normal train would have begun sounding its horn, rendering this point moot.
Yes, that is exactly what happened. The driver entered the crossing when the normal horn signal would have been blowing had the crossing not been in a quiet zone. Had the driver been warned by the horn during this critical point, he very well might have backed off and avoided the crash. The point is certainly not rendered moot. Quite the contrary, the point is critically relevant.
But did he hear the crossing bell? If he did, and he ignored that audible signal, well.....
Bucyrus tree68 BucyrusIf the quiet zone was irrelevant to the crash, why would the U.P. care if quiet zones compromise safety? Apples and oranges. The incident in question, however, involved a driver who, if I remember the earlier timeline correctly, entered the crossing essentially before a normal train would have begun sounding its horn, rendering this point moot. Yes, that is exactly what happened. The driver entered the crossing when the normal horn signal would have been blowing had the crossing not been in a quiet zone. Had the driver been warned by the horn during this critical point, he very well might have backed off and avoided the crash. The point is certainly not rendered moot. Quite the contrary, the point is critically relevant.
The crossing in Midland was apparently set for a 20 sec. warning before the train enters crossing. Is that a fixed time regardless of speed of approaching train or variable? Today I timed two crossings on the UP West line. In the case of a freight, it was about 40 seconds. In the case of an slowing scoot, it was 50 seconds.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Union Pacific safety brochure for professional truck drivers:
http://www.uprr.com/customers/attachments/truck/prodriver.pdf
And available from the UP for the sun visor:
http://www.uprr.com/customers/attachments/truck/visor.pdf
Greyhounds,
The prodriver pdf is nicely done, the "If it won't fit, don't commit" wasn't followed in this accident.
I wonder if Operation Lifesaver has anything about special events (e.g. parades, marathons, bike races) that cross RR tracks. If they don't, then this accident shows that such a document would be useful.
- Erik
zugmann BaltACD My belief is that a Quiet Zone, fosters a belief among residents that the railroad no longer operates - they don't hear it - if they can't hear it on a continuing basis - it no longer exists. Whether my belief is correct or not - human nature is that if you don't hear or see something - it doesn't exist. Those living directly along the tracks know it's existance, they see and hear it - up close and personal. Those living a little further away, don't see it and don't hear it, ergo it no longer exists. But I believe it can work in the opposite extreme. Hearing train horns all the time can render them less effective. If a train is always blowing its horn - why pay any special attention as to why? Imagine if emergency vehicles ran around all day with their sirens on (even with no emergency). How long would people keep pulling over?
In my area, they aren't pulling over for the emergency vehicle sirenes, they pull over when (if) they see the lights. In metro areas, between police, Fire Depts and Ambulances - emergency vehicle sound are very frequent.
On the highway, you, if you pay attention both forward and in your mirrors, rarely here the sirens until the vehicle is in relatively close proximity - you see the lights long before you hear the audible warning.
Durand, Michigan has been a grandfathered quiet zone for many years. There are no highway dividers or four quadrant gates. Two of those crossings are on the CN mainline and two cross city streets leading to the yard. There is even one that is protected by only a cross-buck.
Speed on the mainline is 45. The natives are well aware of the fact no horns are blown. TTBOMK there has never been a crossing accident there.
schlimm The crossing in Midland was apparently set for a 20 sec. warning before the train enters crossing. Is that a fixed time regardless of speed of approaching train or variable? Today I timed two crossings on the UP West line. In the case of a freight, it was about 40 seconds. In the case of an slowing scoot, it was 50 seconds.
The "20 seconds" is the minimum activation time required by the Federal Railroad Administration.
The activation time can be set to more than 20 seconds, The downside of setting it longer is that people become impatient and will seek to beat the train or go around the gates if they have to wait too long. 20 seconds is plenty of warning time unless there is a special circumstance requiring a longer warning interval. Such as the highway vehicles traveling at a high rate of speed. (Remember, the truck in Midland entered the crossing 8 seconds after the crossing activated and would have made it across without impact had it not been blocked by the vehicle ahead of it. And that was with a tractor-trailer.)
Having said that, a decelerating train will logically produce an activation interval longer than the set timing at the crossing. Taking your example of the suburban passenger train, if the train was traveling at 60 MPH when then circut first measured its speed the crossing would activate with the train 1/3 mile away in order to provide a 20 second warning. But the train didn't stay at 60 MPH. It was decelerating. It seems impractical to activate the crossing, then turn it off and on as the train's speed changes.
So a decelerating train will logically lengthen the amount of time a crossing is activated. And those scoots decelerate at a fairly rapid rate.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.