oltmannd zugmann ... To prevent a situation like this one on Metro North (where the car was on the tracks before the crossing activated) +1 Well put. As others have mentioned.... In this case the car WASN'T on the crossing when the gates came down.
zugmann ... To prevent a situation like this one on Metro North (where the car was on the tracks before the crossing activated)
...
To prevent a situation like this one on Metro North (where the car was on the tracks before the crossing activated)
+1 Well put.
As others have mentioned.... In this case the car WASN'T on the crossing when the gates came down.
If I'm going to nitpick about zugmann saying the car was on the tracks before the gates came down I'll also have to nitpick about you saying it wasn't on the crossing. I guess this is kind of like the nitpicking about if ITS's car on crossing detection is part of PTC. In my opinion the area after the gate IS part of the crossing, so I say the SUV was on the crossing before the gate came down, otherwise the gate wouldn't have hit the SUV's back.
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
gardendance oltmannd zugmann ... To prevent a situation like this one on Metro North (where the car was on the tracks before the crossing activated) +1 Well put. As others have mentioned.... In this case the car WASN'T on the crossing when the gates came down. If I'm going to nitpick about zugmann saying the car was on the tracks before the gates came down I'll also have to nitpick about you saying it wasn't on the crossing. I guess this is kind of like the nitpicking about if ITS's car on crossing detection is part of PTC. In my opinion the area after the gate IS part of the crossing, so I say the SUV was on the crossing before the gate came down, otherwise the gate wouldn't have hit the SUV's back.
If the car had stayed put after the gate hit it, it wouldn't have been hit by the train.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I agree. I'm just nitpicking about when the gate came down you saying it wasn't on the crossing, and zugmann saying it was on the tracks. It was on the crossing, but not on the tracks when the gate came down, if there's enough space between the gate and the tracks and the witness report is accurate.
23 17 46 11
rdamon I can imagine if the end/beginning of the third rail is just a square end it would tend to impale things. I wonder if a design like this would reduce the chances of something getting under it. There could be an insulated joint that keeps them from electrocuting the worms.
This would not work for third rail. -------- but --------
Why not place this type guard rail outside of the plane of the third rail closer to the roadway ? That way the guard rail would engage any vehicle and lift it over the third rail. That might roll the vehicle but could prevent impaling the loco / cab car / MU.
Viewing this somewhat skewed crossing from an on-the-road view (Google's "Ferdinand" ?), there might be enough distance from the crossing gate to the track - or the nearest rail - for a short SUV to fit in there, with perhaps some overhang at the front end.
What seems to be under discussion here is a railroad version of "Don't Block the Box!", a well-known initiative in New York City - just 20 miles to the south (and others) - to keep drivers from creating gridlock by coming to a stop in the common/ overlapping area in the core of an intersection. See (photos are not mine):
http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/7073/dont-block-the-box-or-else/
http://s20.photobucket.com/user/Eric1218/media/blockthebox.jpg.html
So perhaps instead of "DO NOT STOP ON TRACKS", to achieve more recognition by drivers the sign should read "DO NOT BLOCK THE TRACKS".
- Paul North.
Good article.
Here is a link for the crossing: https://goo.gl/maps/OMrhp
Looks like the sign is on the other side.
https://goo.gl/maps/kFkzQ
EuclidShe 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.
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.
Paul_D_North_Jr Euclid [snipped; emphasis added - PDN] . . . The basic point that matters here is that a new system will automatically sense obstructions on grade crossings and stop trains if necessary in order to prevent collisions. And this new system will rely on PTC. Or in any other document, webpage, etc. from either the FRA, AAR, a Class 1 RR, or any organization other than an individual ? Because I'm not aware of it, and I haven't seen it here (yet). If that's denial, so be it - I'm going to deny seeing it, because I haven't. Wishes, good intentions, and/ or a fervent belief that it's a better system is simply not going to make it appear out of thin air, when no such statement or representation to that effect has been made by any organization. - Paul North.
Euclid [snipped; emphasis added - PDN] . . . The basic point that matters here is that a new system will automatically sense obstructions on grade crossings and stop trains if necessary in order to prevent collisions. And this new system will rely on PTC.
Or in any other document, webpage, etc. from either the FRA, AAR, a Class 1 RR, or any organization other than an individual ?
Because I'm not aware of it, and I haven't seen it here (yet). If that's denial, so be it - I'm going to deny seeing it, because I haven't. Wishes, good intentions, and/ or a fervent belief that it's a better system is simply not going to make it appear out of thin air, when no such statement or representation to that effect has been made by any organization.
EuclidThis is the first that I have seen a proposal to warn vehicles by an in-vehicle display. Does this mean that every vehicle will have such a display device? How will that come about?
The original proposals concerned emergency vehicles, not crossings, but it probably would not be a reach to include crossings in the capability.
I have no information on the technical specs of such a system other than it would involve low power transmitters in emergency vehicles, and corresponding receivers in all other vehicles.
Odds are it would take years to attain near 100% coverage as new vehicles replaced old. I can't see it as a do-it-now mandate, and if it were, there would certainly be a lot of push-back, at least where crossings are concerned. Emergency vehicles not so much, other than cost.
While millions of vehicles cross tracks virtually every day, millions more come no where near any tracks at all.
In addition to consumer vehicles, equipment would have to be installed at crossings - no cheap task. The same would be true of emergency vehicles.
I don't think it's a bad idea - we could have used it this morning, when a jerk whose windshield had apparently frosted on the inside failed to note our fire truck behind him despite blaring siren and flashing lights. But it's one more cost to be added to all factors involved.
It might have possibilities for blind intersections, too.
But I'm not holding my breath...
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 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.
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.
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
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.
Can you call yourself a railfan and still say "Nobody wants to get stuck waiting for a train"?
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. .
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT0zeNbNmGQ
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
gardendance 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).
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.
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
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.
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.
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.
DO NOT PROCEED
UNTIL INTERSECTION
IS CLEAR
https://goo.gl/maps/OMrhp
rdamon There was no sign in the direction that she was travelling.. https://goo.gl/maps/OMrhp
So, we need a sign to tell one what should be common sense?
Norm
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.