Signs will not be read. A new crtossing protection is required. The kind used to protect Federal Buildings, it comes up out of the ground and can stop a tank.
If a car is on top of it when it comes up, the car will just stay there until it goes back down again. Naturally it has to be much further away from the tracks so that if it does lift a car it will not be half on the tracks. It will need good warning lihgts to let people know to STOP AND WAIT RIGHT THERE!
Oh well, ideas of LION might not be practicle, but what the heck do you expect from a LION.
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
.
Since the engineer made it out through the center aisle, I suspect that those killed where killed by the third rail and not the fire.
As for the third rail, the difference in height is (I think) closer to an inch difference in height. While the support system may be a little weaker, I am not convinced that overrunning third rail would have done anything different, though the ramp at the end of the rail may have helped.
Euclid I mentioned the need for a better sign. Here it is: In Slow Road Traffic— Wait Here Until Clear to Pass Completely Through Crossing
No offense, but if people can't comprehend signs like DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS, STOP, YIELD, NO TURN ON RED, NO PASSING ZONE, SPEED LIMIT X, and NO TURNS FROM SHOULDER, I doubt your sign will make much difference.
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
EuclidSo, in that case, the police should have anticipated the heightened danger and protected the crossing. It’s just common sense.
The gates acted as the flagmen. They did their job. There's detours all the time, and the cars have to follow the signs and lights of the detour route. They shouldn't need the police to hold their hands.
Now an argument over under running 3rd rail and over running. Am not to argue. This is for the TTC at Pueblo to do scientific testing. Lets face it the SUC picked up the third rail. ~ 4" difference should not have make much difference but that is for TTC to determine.
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/did-the-electrified-third-rail-make-train-wreck-deadlier/ar-AA95eqD?ocid=DELLDHP
None of this discussion matters. In the coming world of smart driverless cars, trucks, trains and planes, nobody will have to think or do anything. A perfect utopia!
As a small scale example of this utopia, have you seen someone whose smart-phone battery has died and doesn't have his charger available?
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
jeffhergert understands the points I was trying to make (I'd forgotten about JKG's philosophy, but jeff's recollection matches mine).
I don't mind the engineer being notified - he can then decide what to do, including approaching the crossing at Restricted Speed (prepared to stop short of the obstruction). But having the PTC system then automatically slow or stop the train is too much. In such cases, there also ought to be automatic notifcation to the local or railroad police, to cite or arrest the cause of the obstruction.
Then again, Euclid claims it was the police who failed to respond to this dangeous situation. And his point that the police should have dealt with it - with no PTC now operating - undercuts the rationale for having PTC involved in any way with these kinds of situations. So which way is it ?
- Paul North.
The following might be of interest?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zEtXX1V3QfQ
Thank You.
Ya know. It's safe to assume Americans have become so dumbed-down they are no longer capable of making a decision so simple as not stopping on the tracks. Yeah, I guess the cops should protect them from themselves.
Sarcasm intended.
Norm
Euclid Paul_D_North_Jr All that says is "warning the locomotive engineer" - absolutely nothing about affecting train operations. Paul, I don’t see how you can conclude that a system that warns the engineer of vehicles fouling grade crossings will not affect train operations. What is the point of warning a train if you don’t intend to affect its operation?
Paul_D_North_Jr All that says is "warning the locomotive engineer" - absolutely nothing about affecting train operations.
All that says is "warning the locomotive engineer" - absolutely nothing about affecting train operations.
What is the point of warning the Engineer - since idiots will create Warning Situations at every crossing. You can't outwit the true idiot.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Just think, teenagers playing "chicken" could then bring rail traffic to a halt. Advocacy groups unhappy with some aspect of railroads could do the same.
Unless they do what JGK said once in one of his columns. Something along the lines that if the detected object was small enough that it wouldn't derail the train, to let the train continue along without stopping. That IIRC, was for completely automated train operation, no one on board.
I always had the impression that private autos, including most SUVs, would be deemed too small to stop rail traffic in JGK's take on things.
Jeff
It'll be a cold day in He-l-l before railroad managements will voluntarily agree to such an arrangement on a broad scale.
EDITED TO ADD: If the road traffic is that heavy, then the solution is to eliminate the grade crossing by building a bridge - either under or over - not to leave the risk "as-is", or to interfere with train operations every time some goof stops on the tracks (or decides to stop the train for political, social, or environmental reasons . . .). Might also get people out of their cars and onto trains or other mass transit (not necessarily public), but that isn't always feasible.
jeffhergert Euclid With the coming PTC, grade crossings will get smarter. They will monitor road traffic, and if there is stop-and-go heavy congestion of traffic, the system will slow down or stop rail traffic. And you heard of this feature where?
Euclid With the coming PTC, grade crossings will get smarter. They will monitor road traffic, and if there is stop-and-go heavy congestion of traffic, the system will slow down or stop rail traffic.
And you heard of this feature where?
Intelligent Grade Crossings
The result is a system that would have the capability for getting advance warning of approaching trains through interconnected information systems that link the motorist to the traffic management and rail operations systems. It also allows for the capability of warning the locomotive engineer of obstacles or trapped vehicles at grade crossings, and potentially for trespassers along the right-of-way.
…These standards will be the basis for projects that will tie grade crossing warning systems to local traffic management systems and will include communication to the PTC systems now being developed to increase safety for both motor vehicle users and rail passengers and crewmembers.
All I've ever heard is that advanced PTC, not the current version being deployed, will monitor the "health" of the warning devices. If there is any indication of a malfunction of some sort, then it will slow or stop rail traffic.
If you think PTC will slow or stop rail traffic because of heavy auto traffic, I have a question. In the first paragraph of this original post (which I didn't quote) that when you say police should have flagged the crossing because of heavy auto traffic, do you mean they should have stopped autos or trains? Because the second paragraph seems to indicate the latter.
If PTC stopped rail traffic because of heavy auto traffic, some lines would be closed for hours at a time during certain parts of the day.
Euclid In the case of the New York accident, a detour created a large flow of congested traffic over the crossing that normally does not experience that situation. The police should have anticipated the danger and had officers there to flag that crossing during the detour. With the coming PTC, grade crossings will get smarter. They will monitor road traffic, and if there is stop-and-go heavy congestion of traffic, the system will slow down or stop rail traffic.
This is not an intent or function of PTC!
As soon as you make something considered 'idiot proof'. The world creates more idiotic idiots.
The photo in the Daily News link shows the North bound train on the nominally South bound track.
I heard on NBC news tonight (I think it was an NTSB spokesman) that the crossing did not have a bell because there was no pedestrian crossing.
Euclid Norm, I think people are plenty smart enough to read and understand the sign.
Norm,
I think people are plenty smart enough to read and understand the sign.
I wouldn't be so optomistic.
Reports/comments indicated that one reason for the backed up traffic was that they had been redirected onto this street as the result of an accident elsewhere. If you look at the road leading to the crossing (N 41.08637 W 73.78800), you'll see it winds through a cemetary. It doesn't appear to me to be a road people would use unless they had a reason, as it runs parallel to the Taconic State Parkway - a four lane road easily accessed at an intersection (not limited access, ie ramps) at the south end of Commerce Road.
Taking those points into consideration, one might conclude that the driver of the SUV was at least frustrated and distracted by the delay to her trip home. She was probably paying more attention to the vehicle in front of her (and wishing traffic would move faster) than an 18" square sign at the side of the road. And it was after dark.
Add to that frustration the gate coming down on her luxury SUV, and she was likely distracted enough not to realize the danger she was in. In addition, if she did not frequent that crossing (or any crossing - much of that line appears to be grade separated), she may not have understood the circumstances.
She certainly should have been aware of all of those factors. But it appears she may not have been (we'll never know), and as a result we are mourning six people.
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...
Do you think people would actually read and comply with your sign? If yes, it's wishful thinking.
The TV news shots of the crossing show a "DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS" sign just before the crossbuck, light, and crossing gate unit. The sign was very visible on the video footage. Simply driver error: Don't go past the crossing gates, even if up, unless you can clear the crossing on the other side of the tracks. Too many drivers are in the habit of creeping along in heavy traffic even at intersections; that's a good way to get a hefty ticket in California if you are caught blocking an intersection.
Kurt Hayek
zardoz zugmann Euclid I would suggest a better sign to cover the issue of getting trapped on the track by traffic congestion. If someone is dumb enough to stop on railroad tracks, what are the chances that they will comprehend the sign?
zugmann Euclid I would suggest a better sign to cover the issue of getting trapped on the track by traffic congestion. If someone is dumb enough to stop on railroad tracks, what are the chances that they will comprehend the sign?
Euclid I would suggest a better sign to cover the issue of getting trapped on the track by traffic congestion.
If someone is dumb enough to stop on railroad tracks, what are the chances that they will comprehend the sign?
EDITED TO ADD: A quick look at this crossing via Google Maps shows that it did indeed have "stop bars" on the pavement.
A R10-6 "STOP Here On RED" arrow sign (see MUTCD Fig. 2B-27. at: http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/htm/2009/part2/fig2b_27_longdesc.htm ) could be added as well, but now we're getting ridiculous - more signs are not going to cure the basic problem, which is the quality of the drivers.
And as David Schanoes has pointed out, no signage or signal changes is going to solve or prevent the problem of a driver who gets onto the tracks after the train has gone past the point of not being able to stop in either time or distance - see the last half of his blog/ column of Feb. 5, 2015, at: http://www.ten90solutions.com/say_hello_to_my_little_friends .
EDITED TO ADD: Then again, see the critical comment (only one so far) by "horseswaggled" at the end of this article: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory/apnewsbreak-safety-work-ny-rail-crossing-28781090
rdamonMaybe if the crossing gates were more like elevator doors and would momentary raise and then return. This may help with “Driver Paralysis”
As I understand it, crossing arms lower by gravity and are raised under power. This is a failsafe - if the power is lost to the crossing, the arms will drop.
So they're counterbalanced to be heavy on the gate, but no so much that a heavy duty motor is needed to raise them and hold them in position.
As such, if someone is caught with the arm on their hood, or trunk, the arm will either move up or will pivot on the mount.
Adding a sensor like that on garage doors would simply add a level of complexity (and possible failure) to a simple system that's been working for years.
Methinks much of the problem is that people either can't appreciate the speed and size of the oncoming train, or when faced with said oncoming train, freeze - just as they might under any number of scary circumstances.
While such instances certainly garner a lot of attention, I have to wonder just what percentage of potential car vs train incidents actually involve this problem?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.