Euclid Read the rule itself rather than someone’s interpretation of the rule. The pertinent language is “sole judgment.” “Sole judgment” means the judgment of only the engineer. The rule says the engineer may use his judgment to decide whether to blow the horn IF certain conditions are present. If those conditions are not present, where is the authority to blow the horn in a quiet zone? Not blowing the horn in a quiet zone is the whole point. Sole judgment does not mean that the engineer is free to do anything he wants.
Sole judgment of the engineer, mean the Engineer, not Euclid.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
edblysard The rule leaves the sounding of the horn up to “the sole discretion of the engineer”…which means if the engineer feels the crossing itself is un safe, be it because it has blind spots, is designed in a manner he feels is dangerous, or any reason he can come up with, he can blow the horn.
Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.
tree68 ...but perhaps the engineer is basing his actions on his experience with the crossing. There may not be a drunk staggering across the crossing this time, but that doesn't mean it never happens, nor does it mean that it doesn't happen often enough to warrant the warning.
...but perhaps the engineer is basing his actions on his experience with the crossing. There may not be a drunk staggering across the crossing this time, but that doesn't mean it never happens, nor does it mean that it doesn't happen often enough to warrant the warning.
Bucky - I realize this does not square with your mantra that "the railroad is always wrong," but perhaps the engineer is basing his actions on his experience with the crossing. There may not be a drunk staggering across the crossing this time, but that doesn't mean it never happens, nor does it mean that it doesn't happen often enough to warrant the warning.
We have several trail crossings along our line, and we blow the horn for them. Vehicle access is rare (or even impossible, for several), yet there have been numerous times that hikers have popped into view as we approached. Better safe than sorry.
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...
Euclid Show me where is says that the engineer has sole discretion to blow the horn as a warning when there are no vehicle operators, pedestrians, trespassers or animals present to warn; or none of the other condtions attached to the "sole judgment" provision are present.
Show me where is says that the engineer has sole discretion to blow the horn as a warning when there are no vehicle operators, pedestrians, trespassers or animals present to warn; or none of the other condtions attached to the "sole judgment" provision are present.
The OP is not in a position to see what the Engineer sees - unless he is trespassing in the cab of the locomotive. You can look out the baywindow of your house and see nothing - but your house is not 9 feet in the air looking down the right of way. Even if you are right along the track - you may be the one that the engineer is trying to warn.
Norm48327 Euclid Hey Bucky, Before you make a federal case of this like you have done with other things, why don't you simply read the rule? Perhaps then you will understand. edblysard The rule leaves the sounding of the horn up to “the sole discretion of the engineer”…which means if the engineer feels the crossing itself is un safe, be it because it has blind spots, is designed in a manner he feels is dangerous, or any reason he can come up with, he can blow the horn.
Euclid Hey Bucky, Before you make a federal case of this like you have done with other things, why don't you simply read the rule? Perhaps then you will understand. edblysard The rule leaves the sounding of the horn up to “the sole discretion of the engineer”…which means if the engineer feels the crossing itself is un safe, be it because it has blind spots, is designed in a manner he feels is dangerous, or any reason he can come up with, he can blow the horn.
Hey Bucky, Before you make a federal case of this like you have done with other things, why don't you simply read the rule? Perhaps then you will understand.
YoHo1975 Used to live in Carlsbad. Lots of bars there. Right next to the track. Lots of open space next to the rail for people to walk along. We heard lots of horn blowing not just at crossings. Also, they often blew for the station stops.
Used to live in Carlsbad. Lots of bars there. Right next to the track. Lots of open space next to the rail for people to walk along. We heard lots of horn blowing not just at crossings. Also, they often blew for the station stops.
Not to mention not-infrequent pedestrian facilities in those communities at the front end of an Amtrak or Coaster train.
23 17 46 11
Norm'
The rule reads, "WHEN IN DOUBT, THE SAFE COURSE MUST BE TAKEN."
Are you writng, that others should be able to decide whether or not the engineer was in doubt?
It takes few trips in engine service to realize that some idiots, sober or drunk, will do something maiming or fatal to themselves or others.
Doubt?
Go to Court and be accused,'cause your engine or train chopped some people into a cannible's hamburger meat.
"WHEN IN DOUBT, THE SAFE COURSE MUST BE TAKEN."
The meaning of "doubt?"
Euclid Hey Bucky, Before you make a federal case of this like you have done with other things, why don't you simply read the rule? Perhaps then you will understand. edblysard The rule leaves the sounding of the horn up to “the sole discretion of the engineer”…which means if the engineer feels the crossing itself is un safe, be it because it has blind spots, is designed in a manner he feels is dangerous, or any reason he can come up with, he can blow the horn. The rule does not require that an emergency situation has to exists, but mentions that if one does, the engineer must sound the horn. Nothing in the rule forbids the engineer from sounding the horn, only that he must follow the applicable restrictions of that quite zone crossing. None of the contracts and agreements for quite zones I have seen forbid the sounding of the horn; only restrict it, in the same language as the rule, leaving it up to the engineer’s discretion to do so or not. What if there is no emergency situation and no vehicle operators, pedestrians, trespassers or animals present, nor malfunctioning safety device? I don’t see any authority for an engineer to sound the horn in that case. If all of these emergencies and contingencies are absent; there is the general premise that quiet crossings are more dangerous that non-quiet crossings. But I do not see anything that says an engineer has the sole discretion to sound the horn in a quiet crossing simply because of that general premise. The authority to sound the horn in a quiet crossing comes from something unusual that implies the need for extra warning. The basic bargain of a quite crossing agreement is to silence the crossing. Since there is a considerable cost to this, I would be surprised if engineers are permitted to blow the horn simply because they don’t like quiet crossings. I suggest that the OP mrdebolske call the railroad and ask them why certain trains are sounding the horn at the crossings. It seems like a fair question. Call the City and ask them.
edblysard The rule leaves the sounding of the horn up to “the sole discretion of the engineer”…which means if the engineer feels the crossing itself is un safe, be it because it has blind spots, is designed in a manner he feels is dangerous, or any reason he can come up with, he can blow the horn. The rule does not require that an emergency situation has to exists, but mentions that if one does, the engineer must sound the horn. Nothing in the rule forbids the engineer from sounding the horn, only that he must follow the applicable restrictions of that quite zone crossing. None of the contracts and agreements for quite zones I have seen forbid the sounding of the horn; only restrict it, in the same language as the rule, leaving it up to the engineer’s discretion to do so or not.
Norm
In this age of event recorders and forward-facing cameras, it shouldn't be too hard to make or break an engineer's case for blowing the horn.
It might, however, require reviewing a number of incidents, to see if there is a trend of pedestrian incursions or the like.
dakotafred dmikee I watched a neighborhood in west Denver that had the "quiet zone" established. This was on the UP main line with high speed double stacks and fast freights. The secret of their success was DOUBLE CROSSING GATES making it impossible for any vehicle to run around gates to cross ahead of a train. A simple fix that should be enforced at every grade crossing in the nation. In Europe, they have frequent trains running. In heavy traffic areas, they have a crossing guard and double sliding gates that block the tracks completely, preventing both vehicles and people from trying to cross in front of an oncoming train. You don't own any stock in a railroad company, do you?
dmikee I watched a neighborhood in west Denver that had the "quiet zone" established. This was on the UP main line with high speed double stacks and fast freights. The secret of their success was DOUBLE CROSSING GATES making it impossible for any vehicle to run around gates to cross ahead of a train. A simple fix that should be enforced at every grade crossing in the nation. In Europe, they have frequent trains running. In heavy traffic areas, they have a crossing guard and double sliding gates that block the tracks completely, preventing both vehicles and people from trying to cross in front of an oncoming train.
I watched a neighborhood in west Denver that had the "quiet zone" established. This was on the UP main line with high speed double stacks and fast freights. The secret of their success was DOUBLE CROSSING GATES making it impossible for any vehicle to run around gates to cross ahead of a train. A simple fix that should be enforced at every grade crossing in the nation. In Europe, they have frequent trains running. In heavy traffic areas, they have a crossing guard and double sliding gates that block the tracks completely, preventing both vehicles and people from trying to cross in front of an oncoming train.
A couple of things come to mind in regards to the "Quiet Zone" cconcept:
First of all: Like most "improved rail-highway crossings" Those improvements are generally a budget item for the local political juristiction. [We have had these discussions around here in the past.]
Secondly: The cost is directly representative of the situation being mitigated; at that particular crossing. Once the improvements have been paid for,installed,and are functioning; the railroad becomes the source of maintaining their good working order.
As generally known, these 'crossing improvements' can be very expensive. Locally, we have a private venue that, also sponsors entertainment shows, and wedding related shows, as well. The property is adjacent to a BNSF double- tracked segment, and is straddled by several crossig that require engineers to use their air horn warnings. The owner of the venue mentioned, investigated the concept of a 'QZ' , and found out the cost was going to be in the area of $1 to $200 K for the QZ she envisioned... That QZ has never happened.
As to the horn blowing,in some cases, the train's engineer has no control of the number of times the horn sounds. Some locomotives with the 'desk-top' style controls, all the engineer can do is to activate the horn control, and the system activates the signals(?). On locomotives with the more conventional control stands, the engineer has control of the horn sounding.
EuclidI know that with quiet crossings, the engineer has the prerogative to blow the horn if there is a reason to do so. I had always assumed that the reason had to be something unusual that adds danger and calls for the extra warning of the horn. So I would be surprised if the “safest course” rule allows railroads to simply override the principle of the quiet crossing.
So I would be surprised if the “safest course” rule allows railroads to simply override the principle of the quiet crossing.
Edblysard,
you put together what I believe is a flawless explanation for whistling through "quiet zones."
Adding 2 more explanations, I submit:
When working short of your body's need for rest, distinguishing a whistle post from one in a quiet zone, HEY!, your brain says that's a whistle post, whistle!
Or, you're zoned...the next train handling problem,...how to encounter it? Whistle post....obey it.
Or,...a person or vehicle is way too close, will it stop, might it?
The rule says (When in doubt, the safe course must be taken), would it be safer to stay silent?...or sound your M-5, your S-5 or your K5-LA?
When ypu decide the safe course is:
That judgement lives.
Euclid I know that with quiet crossings, the engineer has the prerogative to blow the horn if there is a reason to do so. I had always assumed that the reason had to be something unusual that adds danger and calls for the extra warning of the horn. But it has been suggested here that the engineer simply has the prerogative to blow the horn if he thinks that is safer than not blowing it. I would think that would be a rule violation. I know there is the rule to take the safest course when in question, but surely this has limits. If the speed limit is 50, can you run at 30 because that is safer? What if the engineer stopped his train before each crossing? That would be safer yet. So I would be surprised if the “safest course” rule allows railroads to simply override the principle of the quiet crossing.
From the GCOR Rulebook used by BNSF, UP and a lot of other railroads.
.
5.8.4 Whistle Quiet Zone
Within designated whistle quiet zones, whistle signal (7) must not be sounded approaching public crossings at grade except when:
• Necessary to provide warning in an emergency.
• Notified automatic warning devices are malfunctioning.
• Notified automatic warning devices are out of service.
or
• The whistle quiet zone is not in effect during specified hours.
BNSF Amendment—Add the following: A locomotive engineer may sound the train horn to provide warning to crews on other trains in an emergency situation, vehicle operators, pedestrians, trespassers or animals if, in the locomotive engineer’s sole judgment, such action is appropriate to prevent imminent injury, death, or property damage. Train crews are not restricted from sounding the horn when: • There is an emergency situation. • A wayside horn is malfunctioning. • Active grade crossing warning devices malfunction. • Grade crossing warning systems are out of service. • Supplemental or alternative safety measures are not compliant. • Needed for purposes other than highway-rail crossing safety, for example, to announce the approach of a train to roadway workers. All other whistle requirements remain in effect.
Proper term is four quadrant gates. (Barrier gates are a newer version of this.)
Part of the issue with QZ's is the site assessment team that determines minimum requirements for QZ's is made up principally of non-railroaders that are more into a cheap fix than a safer x-ing. Politicians are trying to make rules on QZ's less expensive than the current costs that they claim are excessive (for things like 4-quadrant gates or barrier gates, median dividers and raised curbs)....They want the benefits with immediate gratification without paying for the safety infrastructure.
Three of the eleven quiet zones in Colorado are all clustered in Arvada which is what dMikee saw.
I suspect that all of the quiet zone crossings on the LOSSAN corridor have the double crossing gates. An example is where Red Hill crosses the line in Tustin, where there is a seperate set of gates for the pedestrians.
On the territory where I run, a quiet zone has been established for a major road crossing within the past couple of months. I've been blowing for that crossing for 34 years and just can't get it in my head not to! Approaching the whistle posts (they're still in place), I start saying, out loud "don't blow" and then watch my conductor crack up as my right hand instictively reaches up and commences to blow anyway! Old habits are hard to break.
Better to be safe than sorry.
Two more good posts. I moved into this area from LA, a bonus was being near the RR tracks and to be able to watch the passing parade of trains. So, I shouldn't be complaining. Thanks folks.
CShaveRR...whether it's an issue with the location or the engineer telling his wife he'll be home soon...
Could be he's upset that he's on the graveyard shift and figures if he can't sleep, neither will anyone else...
That said, he does have "safe course" to fall back on if challenged. We all strive to take the safe course, but as always, there are ways to "work to rule" and abuse the system in the process. A supervisor in the weeds would probably know in short order.
Or, we can hope, it's for a purely legitimate (if annoying) reason, many of which have been mentioned.
Notifying wife: Reminds me of a situation in Detroit in the 60's where someone wrote to the paper (Free Press) that they seemed to hear a siren about the same time every day. The paper investigated and found that an ambulance crew would visit on crewmember's home each morning for coffee. Said home was a short distance from a freeway exit, and the driver would hit the siren as they hit the exit, warning the wife that they were on their way...
In case of doubt - the safe course must be taken.
Most people here seem to think that the engineer's horn-sounding falls within acceptable guidelines. Normally, I'd agree that they should be given the benefit of the doubt. But this sounds like one train, possibly one crew, doing its thing. If it's consistent, and if it can be shown that it's one person doing this, it should be brought to the attention of the railroad--and hope that they have a reasonable discussion to find out what's going on, whether it's an issue with the location or the engineer telling his wife he'll be home soon, or whatever. It sounds to me like the intent of the quiet zone is being compromised.
Carl
Railroader Emeritus (practiced railroading for 46 years--and in 2010 I finally got it right!)
CAACSCOCOM--I don't want to behave improperly, so I just won't behave at all. (SM)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.