Thinking along the sign-route, there are also another approach more physical. Here in Central PA, there is a sharp left ramp off Rt. 283 East for traffic to continue (1/2 up the road from the turn off is an end-of-highway 'T' type cross road with a Wendies right in the middle of the T, yes they do have a frontal tractor trailer drive through.) The sharp curve of the ramp is such it cauese loads to shift and about 3 to 4 time a year a truck will end up on its side (PennDot maintains a fine green lawn as a landing pad.)
Why I bring this up is PennDot has signs going back two mile warning trucks of the curve. At the start of the ramp they have installed a number of rumble strips, spaced wide to narrow apart so that when you go over the final trip, you are at a safe speed to continue. Has worked as before the turn over turns were a monthly occurance. The strips are cut into the pavement, not speed-bump style.
My contrubution to high-conjested grade crossing are rumble strips warning in the pavement. On the Rt 283 ramp, ignore them and reduce speed, the more the the vehical shakes and the louder the sound.
So we have the visual signes, crossing-arms (question, do cross still have bells?) and now rumble strips.
zugmann Euclid why not have the trapped vehicle detection system simply raise the gates so the vehicle can escape? You raise the gates and everyone else waiting will go through the crossing. Then we'll have several cars hit by the train instead of one.
Euclid why not have the trapped vehicle detection system simply raise the gates so the vehicle can escape?
You raise the gates and everyone else waiting will go through the crossing. Then we'll have several cars hit by the train instead of one.
I see your point. You let someone out and someone will come in.
BroadwayLion WARNING STOPPING ON TRACKS IS A CAPITAL OFFENCE ENFORCED BY THE LOCOMOTIVE NO APPEALS ALLOWED
WARNING
STOPPING ON TRACKS
IS A CAPITAL OFFENCE
ENFORCED
BY THE
LOCOMOTIVE
NO APPEALS ALLOWED
I bow to you Sir. Best one yet.
Norm
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
Euclidwhy not have the trapped vehicle detection system simply raise the gates so the vehicle can escape?
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
Now THAT is the BEST sign suggestion yet, clear, to the point, just a bit long in the wording, but in this case that is excusable.
Doug
May your flanges always stay BETWEEN the rails
And, if you're in a multi-lane situation, if you leave enough room for someone to cut in from the other lane, they will...
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 This was cited as a common reaction in the crash mentioned a few posts back. The NTSB said that many times when people did properly refrain from entering the crossing before it was entirely clear ahead, they were urged forward by people blowing their horns behind, thinking that the stopped driver was distracted and failed to see traffic pulling away ahead. So there is that peer pressure element further reinforcing the general misunderstanding the traffic principle involved.
We keep going back to "There should be a sign saying ...." You can put up any sign you want, but how are you going to get drivers to pay attention to them? As for the one that said "$50 FINE FOR FAILING TO READ THIS SIGN", I can hear the defense: "Sure, I read the sign, but I kept going anyway." You can replace "READ" with "HEED", but what good would any sign do if drivers don't bother to read.
_____________
"A stranger's just a friend you ain't met yet." --- Dave Gardner
Interesting crash video:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EuJVQgBGXw
Norm48327So, we need a sign to tell one what should be common sense?
rdamon There was no sign in the direction that she was travelling.. https://goo.gl/maps/OMrhp
https://goo.gl/maps/OMrhp
So, we need a sign to tell one what should be common sense?
blue streak 1 An accident report about one in Illinois that could have been much worse than the MNRR collidion. Afterwards many cars were observed getting trapped or at least stopping on tracks and fouling the tracks. http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HAB0803.pdf
An accident report about one in Illinois that could have been much worse than the MNRR collidion. Afterwards many cars were observed getting trapped or at least stopping on tracks and fouling the tracks.
http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HAB0803.pdf
DO NOT PROCEED
UNTIL INTERSECTION
IS CLEAR
blue streak 1 An accident report about one in Illinois that could have been much worse than the MNRR collidion. NTSB recommended that crossing be eliminated. Afterwards many cars were observed getting trapped or at least stopping on tracks and fouling the tracks. http://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/HAB0803.pdf
It really should be cross-indexed as a Railroad Accident Brief, too.
- Paul North.
NY Times article on ten worse crossings in the NY area.
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/02/13/nyregion/at-rail-crossings-in-new-york-area-a-constantly-lurking-danger.html?emc=eta1&_r=1
Maybe it is time to install red light cameras at crossings ? Of course the same complaints will occurr as now does about red light cameras.
An accident report about one in Illinois that could have been much worse than the MNRR collidion. NTSB recommended that crossing be eliminated. Afterwards many cars were observed getting trapped or at least stopping on tracks and fouling the tracks.
BaltACD https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT0zeNbNmGQ
Ought to be 'required watching' for those on this thread - some of those are pretty scary !
To paraphrase Justice Holmes: "Upon this point a video* is worth a volume of debate**."
Supreme Court of the U.S.; *="page of history", **="logic" in the original.
gardendance Can you call yourself a railfan and still say "Nobody wants to get stuck waiting for a train"?
Can you call yourself a railfan and still say "Nobody wants to get stuck waiting for a train"?
Well, there are exceptions (present company included).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT0zeNbNmGQ
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Question. Who has seen a grad crossing accident ? How many of us have not seen a grade crossing accident but have noted close calls ? This poster has seen more than one close call. There does not appear to be any way to prevent drivers from trying to beat the train.
Although very expensive the only good grade crossing is an extinct crossing. .
Patrick Boylan
Free yacht rides, 27' sailboat, zip code 19114 Delaware River, get great Delair bridge photos from the river. Send me a private message
Countdowns tend to be more dangerous than plain traffic lights - the drivers now know how much they have to rush to clear the intersection before the light changes. It's bad enough with just the amber light.
One early design of traffic lights had both directions going to amber before going to red or green. This lead to some interesting situations, as the driver trying to beat the light before it turned red oftimes collided with the driver who was trying to get a jump on the upcoming green light...
So it may well be if motorists are given more than the current warning time at crossings. Nobody wants to get stuck waiting for a train, so if they get a longer warning, they're just going to floor it so they beat it, which brings problems of its own.
The ITS dedicated short-range communications system looks to be an interesting topic - the plan being near-constant communication between cars and between cars and the infrastructure, which obviously includes railroad crossings. Range is limited - about 300 meters.
The concept has been in the works since at least the late 1990's.
Euclid 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? I have heard about this feature in every description I have read about PTC. Generally, it is described as a feature that will give advance warning to trains if a vehicle is obsructing a crossing ahead. It would have saved some lives in the New York incident. https://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0309 Quotes from the link: Intelligent Grade Crossings Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) is the application of new communications, computer, and sensor technologies to highways and transit systems and the careful integration of system functions to provide more efficient and effective solutions to multimodal transportation problems. [i.e.: highway traffic at grade crossings] Highway-Rail Intersection (HRI) User Service #30 The ITS Architecture provides for the integration of the railroad operating systems with the traffic management systems and was developed… 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.
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.
Your link may no longer be active. It gave me "page not found" on the FRA site. Here's another link. http://www.fra.dot.gov/Page/P0309
In reading the page. It says it's capable of warning the engineer. I don't really see where it says PTC will take action if an obstacle is detected at a crossing if the engineer doesn't.
My reading of the page is that with PTC and "intellegent" grade crossings, PTC will communicate with the warning devices to give better notice of trains approaching the crossing. Possibly not just to warning lights and gates, but to advisory displays to give more advance warning or alternative routes to avoid the crossing. I'm thinking something like the countdown feature being added to stop lights or signs that say "Prepare to stop at light when flashing." Something that give advance warning to road traffic that the grade crossing protection will start in X number of seconds/minutes.
Jeff
Euclid oltmannd Euclid She was in an unusually heavy flow of congested traffic because it was being detoured over the crossing due to an accident on the nearby artery road. Ordinarily, the crossing would have very light traffic. Read the USA article. Yes, it was detour traffic, but the road through the cemetary is kind of a "sneaky back way". Normally, it would have no commuter traffic at all - it is just one of many access roads to the massive, Gate of Heaven cemetary. It obviously didn't have the entire flow of the Taconic Pkwy on it as the guy behind her said there was no one behind him, and he backed up quickly to give her room. Don, I did read the article and every other article that I have found since the accident. Generally, they all refer to unusually heavy traffic due to the detour. Some articles have said that the effect of this unusually high traffic flow will be looked at to see if it was a factor in the crash. I have no idea what the traffic was on or near the crossing at the time of the accident. However, without knowing otherwise, I assume that when the gate lowered on the vehicle, it was stopped. And I assume that the reason it stopped was because the car ahead of it stopped because it was stop-and-go traffic. I do not think that the driver simply stopped at the crossing for some other reason.
oltmannd Euclid She was in an unusually heavy flow of congested traffic because it was being detoured over the crossing due to an accident on the nearby artery road. Ordinarily, the crossing would have very light traffic. Read the USA article. Yes, it was detour traffic, but the road through the cemetary is kind of a "sneaky back way". Normally, it would have no commuter traffic at all - it is just one of many access roads to the massive, Gate of Heaven cemetary. It obviously didn't have the entire flow of the Taconic Pkwy on it as the guy behind her said there was no one behind him, and he backed up quickly to give her room.
Euclid She was in an unusually heavy flow of congested traffic because it was being detoured over the crossing due to an accident on the nearby artery road. Ordinarily, the crossing would have very light traffic.
Read the USA article. Yes, it was detour traffic, but the road through the cemetary is kind of a "sneaky back way". Normally, it would have no commuter traffic at all - it is just one of many access roads to the massive, Gate of Heaven cemetary. It obviously didn't have the entire flow of the Taconic Pkwy on it as the guy behind her said there was no one behind him, and he backed up quickly to give her room.
The point is, for this to happen, it took a whole calamity of low probability errors - including the bizzare way the SUV caught the third rail and directed it into the car. The likelihood of a similar repeat are so low that it'll swamp any possible technological remedy (NTSB not withstanding...they don't do cost/benefit)
The Harlem Line and surrounding roads have been in place, mostly unchanged since the late 1940s.
The local population along the line has been fairly static.
The only change has been some increase in the number and size of rush hour trains to accomodate growth further to the north (generally not served by the roads in the area of the crash). This has been accompanied by improvements to highway crossings on the line. (none of the access roads to Gate of Heaven had gates prior to electrification, that I can recall)
The bottom line is that there is no "gee whiz" technological fix needed for this because the odds of it happening again are near zero.
Just because you can, doesn't mean you should.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.