Trains.com

What will be the response to the long delays at grade crossings caused by two mile long trains?

7037 views
73 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Saturday, May 7, 2016 2:26 PM

So what happens when a 2 mile train goes across a auto crossing then immediately goes into a 2 mile siding with only a restrictive signal?  15 MPH = 8 minutes  +  crossing signal lead time  ( 1 MIN ? )  not counting slowing to a stop at far end signal.                 

 

30 

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Saturday, May 7, 2016 12:20 PM

rrnut282

As trains get longer and more people experience unacceptable (to them) delays, it will foster a mindset that going around the gates will be an acceptable risk.  We all know where that will lead.  Dead

 

That mind set is already is in place - no matter the normal train length in the area.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Saturday, May 7, 2016 10:38 AM

I doubt that there is a consensus in the industry that longer trains are advantageous.  It may be truer with some management or some railroad conditions, but I doubt that the issue has ever been fully analyzed.

Regarding longer grade crossing delays encouraging more risk taking to beat the train; that would definitely be the result, however, that mindset is already well entrenched.  It does not come so much from waiting for moving trains to pass as it does from being blocked by trains stopping on crossings or conduction switching moves over them.  That driver annoyance has had 150 years to inculcate itself into the mind of the motoring public.   

 

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: MP CF161.6 NS's New Castle District in NE Indiana
  • 2,148 posts
Posted by rrnut282 on Saturday, May 7, 2016 10:25 AM

Can I state the obvious (to me, anyway) answer to the original question?

As trains get longer and more people experience unacceptable (to them) delays, it will foster a mindset that going around the gates will be an acceptable risk.  We all know where that will lead.  Dead

I hope railroads will realize that labor costs to run more trains is cheaper/better in the long run than sinking costs into longer sidings and upgrading every terminal to handle these longer trains.  But, since that most likely isn't true, they will continue to invest in the physical plant in hopes of bigger revenues later.

Mike (2-8-2)
  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Friday, May 6, 2016 10:25 PM

While in the Duluth-Superior area on business, I had the opportunity to check out Pokegama Yard. I sat at a crossing while CN ET44AC 3046 and a CN ES44AC whose number I did not catch pulled an eastbound mixed manifest freight out of town. It had to be 10,000 feet. It was very impressive - the lead units went by with exhausts barking as they headed on a slight upgrade from the St. Louis River valley. The cars kept coming and coming, gathering speed the whole time. It seemed like half of Canada was tied on. By the time the FRED went by they had the whole parade rolling about 40 mph as I was able to pace on an adjacent road. It was hands down the longest freight I have ever experienced, even longer than UP coal drags across Nebraska. Very impressive indeed.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, May 2, 2016 11:34 AM

mudchicken
Wish I had a nickel for every time I heard in county offices that the railroads don't pay taxes (usually the assessor's office on a power trip).

Given that the money goes first to the state, then back to the municipality (and probably not directly to the assessor's office), I think I can understand the misconception.  If I wasn't aware of the arrangement (maybe a new assessor), I might think that because I never saw a check from the RR, they didn't pay.

In a small village, it's more likely that one person would connect the two.  In a larger outfit, the two offices might not talk to each other...

Unfortunately, if that assessor makes a public fuss, that "knowledge" now becomes part of the public awareness, even if it is wrong.  

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    March 2016
  • 1,568 posts
Posted by CandOforprogress2 on Monday, May 2, 2016 11:25 AM

Build more underpasses and bridges and the costs of that will force the railroads to repent.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Monday, May 2, 2016 10:33 AM

State Auditor/ Manager of Disbursement/ Board of Equalization/ Tax Commissioners in each state sure know. And to take it a little further, the tax bill is something in the neighborhood of $2000 to $ 4000 a year with the states getting a hefty check every 6 months. Usually $2000 - $4000 a year (NY on the high end and ND on the low end) per AAR.

(1) The current tax method had started with the 1913 Interstate Commerce Commission ICC Uniform System Of Accounts. It's been simplified somewhat by Staggers and the advent of depreciation accounting (since 1983) which cut down the pedantic beancounting a whole bunch. After 1996, it became pretty much status quo after the ICC was phased-out and STB began.

(2) You do not want the state run systems in place prior to 1913. They were pretty much a model as to why local politicians should not be allowed to interfere with interstate commerce. The inequities were horrendous.  (The valuation sections in the system still work well today. Insomniac? - see 49CFR1201 on the current rules.)

Wish I had a nickel for every time I heard in county offices that the railroads don't pay taxes (usually the assessor's office on a power trip). The disbursement checks given to the counties by the state auditor for railroad taxes, were they to cease, would have the commissioners screaming from the rooftops over the loss of guaranteed income. It keeps some small counties out here afloat. 

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Monday, May 2, 2016 7:02 AM

dakotafred
That sounds like a worthy research project for somebody, all right.

While such information may have already been compiled by a state agency (DOT?), you can see from what I put together that it could well be a rather involved project.

Had I chosen to be much more precise, I would have had to either locate the specific tax bill for each parcel, or compute same by looking at the tax rates for each jurisdiction.  

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Monday, May 2, 2016 6:54 AM

schlimm
 
dakotafred
In any case, the railroad pays plenty in local taxes

 

Do you (or anyone else) actually know how much property tax BNSF pays in Noth Dakota?

 

That sounds like a worthy research project for somebody, all right.

  • Member since
    March 2013
  • 711 posts
Posted by SD70M-2Dude on Sunday, May 1, 2016 10:38 PM

kgbw49

In the April 2016 issue of Progressive Railroading in the MOW budget review section, it says that CN is working towards getting all passing sidings to have 12,000 feet of clear track. As the leader in driving down operating ratios it seems that they might be on the leading edge of the trend.

CN has been running 11,000-12,000' trains on a daily basis for several years already up in the great white north, and they just keep getting longer.  Recently they got an exemption from Transport Canada to run 15,000' from Prince George to Prince Rupert, BC (westbound only).

Greetings from Alberta

-an Articulate Malcontent

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Sunday, May 1, 2016 9:47 PM

Can't speak to ND, so I won't.  I just looked up a little bit of CSX here in my county in NY.  

The first parcel of ROW north of the city here is 72 acres and is assessed at $411,000.

A parcel in the next town north, 89 acres, is assessed at $1,276,000.

Moving north, 10 acres are assessed at $256.561.

Then we have 40 acres assessed at $571,000.

The next township north assessed 30 acres at $500,000.

A village assessed 18 acres at $390,000.

Back in the township for 30 acres assessed at $469,000.

Next township starts out with a 33 acre parcel at $560,775.

Another village has 10.5 acres at 192,000.

The next parcel is incorrectly listed in the rolls for some reason, so I won't guesstimate it.  Probably another $500,000, though.

But then we're back with 33 more acres at $562,441, and 15 acres at $264,000.

The county tax rate varies by township, but for our purposes, is about $7 a thousand.  Said rate does not include school taxes or local special assessments, which could easily double that number.

So just in county taxes, CSX is paying over $35,000 a year - and I only looked at half of one county!  That's around 40 or so miles of single track railroad.  

One would not be far off estimating as much as $2000 per mile in total property taxes.  

YMMV.

I would guess that the rates and assessments would be lower in the upper plains, but one never knows.

 

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, May 1, 2016 7:50 PM

dakotafred
In any case, the railroad pays plenty in local taxes

Do you (or anyone else) actually know how much property tax BNSF pays in Noth Dakota?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Sunday, May 1, 2016 7:00 PM

There have been many cases of railroads making substantial efforts to minimize effects on communities.  ROW elevation changes (up and down) usually serve to separate rail and highway traffic, which benefits both the communities and the railroad.  For the railroad, a significant benefit is the ability to run at higher speeds, and in many cases, reduce grade issues.

There are crossings on the NYC "Water Level Route" across New York State, but not as many as one might expect.  The St Lawrence Sub, running from Syracuse to Massena, on the other hand, has plenty of grade crossings.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Sunday, May 1, 2016 6:37 PM

schlimm
 
dakotafred

Towns of any size had better have fire stations on both sides of the tracks. Period.  

 

 Most do.  In your opinion, do the railroads have any responsibilities to the communities?

 

Well, sure. (In many cases, the railroad is responsible FOR the community -- as in, the reason the community is there.) However, I don't think it's a fair burden on the railroad to expect it so fashion its operations that they inconvenience not a single community among the hundreds it passes through. I don't know how such a design could be contrived.

In my experience, the railroad tries to be responsive to local complaints. In the matter of crossings, for instance: Up here, at least until the recent oil and ag slowdowns, people are always after BNSF for new ones.

BNSF says, happy to oblige, but show us another that can be closed, so there's no net increase. (There are plenty of crossings that have only marginal use, but are worth as fierce a fight as the new crossing.)

In any case, the railroad pays plenty in local taxes (usually doled out by the state) that the subdivisions could apply to railroad-related problems, if they didn't choose to spend the money elsewhere. And the money doesn't even get the railroad representation on the local governing board. 

  • Member since
    July 2009
  • From: San Francisco East Bay
  • 1,360 posts
Posted by MikeF90 on Sunday, May 1, 2016 3:08 PM

One trend I think I've noticed is that during a capacity increasing project, a siding may be relocated completely. Originally a town may have grown around a (shorter) siding which also acted as a team track, not a good situation today.

In some rural areas longer sidings are almost impossible to build due to existing grade crossings, see the BNSF 'funnel' between Spokane, WA and Sandpoint, ID. Only 2MT CTC is likely to keep longer trains moving and not blocking important crossings.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Sunday, May 1, 2016 12:46 PM

kgbw49

In the April 2016 issue of Progressive Railroading in the MOW budget review section, it says that CN is working towards getting all passing sidings to have 12,000 feet of clear track. As the leader in driving down operating ratios it seems that they might be on the leading edge of the trend.

Once upon a time 2.5 miles of 2 tracks was considered double track - how times change.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Sunday, May 1, 2016 11:54 AM

There was definitely a trend toward loner trains that was brought on by dieselization and its capability for M.U. locomotive operation.  I see distributed power as being a second milestone offering the same advances in train length offered by M.U. capability.   

But regardless of the physical ability to increase train length, I get the impression that not all railroad management agrees that longer trains are better as part of a business model.  The benefit is that you can move more tonnage with less labor cost.  The downside is that longer trains tend to produce larger delays when they have problems, in addition to requiring longer sidings and other track changes.  Perhaps the longer trains also produce longer running times in general. 

 

  • Member since
    January 2015
  • 2,678 posts
Posted by kgbw49 on Sunday, May 1, 2016 11:31 AM

In the April 2016 issue of Progressive Railroading in the MOW budget review section, it says that CN is working towards getting all passing sidings to have 12,000 feet of clear track. As the leader in driving down operating ratios it seems that they might be on the leading edge of the trend.

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Sunday, May 1, 2016 11:29 AM

Comments and posts here over time, as well as the occasional news item, seem to show a trend to longer trains.  One consistent problem holding the practice back is the lack of sidings (and yards) that will handle those trains.

I would suppose that one could blame technology for this.  Wheel slip prevention and remote control of locomotives have both matured, allowing practices that would have been unheard of in the past, except in the occasional publicity stunt.

It would have taken six first generation Diesels to match the HP of two modern locos, and one could probably argue that advanced traction technology makes that ratio even greater.  Similarly, mid- and rear train locomotives would have been helpers, not remote control, requiring additional crews.

If some folks had their way, that two mile plus train would be run by one person...

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Sunday, May 1, 2016 8:51 AM

So, going back to the point of the original post: What are the details of this supposed trend to longer trains?  While trains have trended longer over the years, is there some reason to believe that they will just keep getting longer and longer?  Is there some plan afoot to suddenly increase the lengths to some new common practice?

That outcome was implied by the 2010 test of the U.P. train, but I have not heard of any decisions to make that a common practice.  Nevertheless, the mere public mention of the test and the implication of it becoming common practice was enough to raise a ruckus among the regulating community.

 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, May 1, 2016 8:08 AM

dakotafred

Towns of any size had better have fire stations on both sides of the tracks. Period.  

 

Most do.  In your opinion, do the railroads have any responsibilities to the communities?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Sunday, May 1, 2016 7:39 AM

dakotafred
Towns of any size had better have fire stations on both sides of the tracks. Period.

Rantoul, IL parked a truck or two on the "other side of the tracks" temporarily when ICG rebuilt the overpass that otherwise allowed unfettered access across the tracks.  That was in the early 1970's.

That particular situation was made worse because trains had to slow for the shoofly trestle that was built around the bridge site while it was being reconstructed.

AFAIK, they're back to having all the trucks in one station...  Barring an incident involving the bridge itself, there wouldn't be a problem, and if necessary, there's always mutual aid.

Milford, MI has two railroad overpasses and other roads that will allow them to get around normal train-blocking-crossing issues.  For them, a bigger access issue is the 120,000 people they get in for an annual festival that closes down most of the main drag for about five days.  A fire in a downtown building would be a nightmare.

 

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Sunday, May 1, 2016 7:22 AM

Towns of any size had better have fire stations on both sides of the tracks. Period.  

  • Member since
    January 2007
  • From: Mobile Alabama
  • 694 posts
Posted by carknocker1 on Saturday, April 30, 2016 9:37 PM
10,000 foot trains are common now . I have worked a many a 10000 foot train on the Bnsf in Joliet around 2007 . I have also worked them in Atlanta on the CSX as late as 2014 . The railroads tend to keep them moving and everything else sit in the sidings
  • Member since
    October 2003
  • 7,968 posts
Posted by K. P. Harrier on Saturday, April 30, 2016 9:29 PM

Saw a few hours ago a southbound auto-rack train (some cars full, some empty) going I estimate at about 40 M.P.H. uphill approaching the north slope of Cajon Pass (CA) on UP’s Palmdale Cutoff.  It was unusually long, possibly 10,000 feet.  It had three big units on the head-end, and one on the DPU end.  The people stopped at one grade crossing didn’t seem to adversely react. After pondering what was seen, it has to be wondered how such a long train made it up the Tehachapi Mountains without mid-train helpers.  Anybody have any ideas?

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- K.P.’s absolute “theorem” from early, early childhood that he has seen over and over and over again: Those that CAUSE a problem in the first place will act the most violently if questioned or exposed.

  • Member since
    June 2003
  • From: South Central,Ks
  • 7,170 posts
Posted by samfp1943 on Saturday, April 30, 2016 9:22 PM

n012944
 
Norm48327

 

 
Firelock76
Watch what happens the first time a monster train blocks some emergency vehicles, police, fire, or EMT, especially in this lawsuit-crazed society where the ambulance-chasers are always circling like sharks.

  

The train had nothing to do with the slow response time, and the mayor should investigate before getting "screaming mad".

 

http://www.wxyz.com/news/fire-chief-stopped-train-didnt-play-role-in-firefighters-response-to-new-boston-house-fire

 

"The chief said the reason it took so long to respond is because they have one person on duty all the time, and he was on the other end of the township doing inspections when the fire started."

 

Referencing the highlighted Thread segment[by n012944]

Mudchicken had stated[in part] "...Back to the county & town fathers raising a ruckus: How many of them have suspect planners and traffic engineering bubbas that are a bigger threat to traffic flow than a train. Here in Colorado, "Home Rule" local government creates a whole new level of stupid. (like trying to run a main track through one quadrant of a traffic circleHuh?) ..."

The 'Battle' between small town politicians and their Firefighters is as old time in small [money straqpped] communities.   Particularly, if they operate with minimum 'paid' staffs.   Some communities use Police as back up firefighters, and others use the paid on duty firemen with 'other' duties... When there is a fire call, and delays are incurred, the finger points starts....    

Long trains and delays will be a whole new wrinkle  in that 'dance' of not enough personnel allocated for the duties to be performend. My 2 Cents 

 

 


 

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,022 posts
Posted by tree68 on Saturday, April 30, 2016 9:19 PM

Huron Township fire stations one and two might have had an issue.  Station three didn't have to cross the tracks, by the looks of it.

HTFD is a "combination" fire department - one paid FF (who was away from the station at the time, per the chief), the rest are "paid on call" - functionally volunteers who respond from home or work.  Given the time of day, an extended (and limited) response would not be surprising.

Flat Rock FD (ladder truck, per story) had a clear shot, but they are also mostly paid on call.

The house was lightweight construction.  After fourteen minutes, they were lucky it was even standing.  "Toothpicks and cardboard" don't take long to burn...

The rail line is the CSX Saginaw Sub, running north from Toledo through Plymouth and on to Saginaw.

LarryWhistling
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...

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Denver / La Junta
  • 10,820 posts
Posted by mudchicken on Saturday, April 30, 2016 7:14 PM

Electroliner 1935

I am wondering what push back will occur in response to grade crossings being blocked for long times by the new trend to longer trains. Mny cities already have laws about how long a RR can obstuct a crossing (which requires trains to be split if stopped). If a two mile long train has to go through a town and because of a crossover or a connecting track, its speed is twenty mph, a crossing can be blocked for over seven minutes or more. Or if it has to wait for an opposing train for a meet, are there enough locations where a two mile long train can fit between crossings? As in the case of the CSX mess in Richmond, VA.

 

Fellow Baldwin Hall denizen: The local towns can write all the rules and laws they want to (they are toothless and unenforceble in most states)...As long as the train is moving, the issue is moot. The railroad operating departments might run a test train or two to test the theory, but then the  AFE (capital) budget had better be applied to the plant where these monsters will roam and you better invest in your people to keep them moving. Even multi-track transcons would need serious upgrades to make the concept work and operating management would need to keep the faith (discipline) to make it work. I cringe at the thought of building a MAJOR set of holding tracks to send and receive these things (and keep the local traimaster and yardmaster on the straight and narrow to keep the yard fluid without caving-in to the urge to stuff other trains on those tracks) A couple key screw-ups and the whole house of cards collapses, especially in a busy terminal. 

Back to the county & town fathers raising a ruckus: How many of them have suspect planners and traffic engineering bubbas that are a bigger threat to traffic flow than a train. Here in Colorado, "Home Rule" local government creates a whole new level of stupid. (like trying to run a main track through one quadrant of a traffic circleHuh?) ...

Mudchicken Nothing is worth taking the risk of losing a life over. Come home tonight in the same condition that you left home this morning in. Safety begins with ME.... cinscocom-west
  • Member since
    August 2004
  • From: The 17th hole at TPC
  • 2,283 posts
Posted by n012944 on Saturday, April 30, 2016 6:16 PM

Norm48327

 

 
Firelock76
Watch what happens the first time a monster train blocks some emergency vehicles, police, fire, or EMT, especially in this lawsuit-crazed society where the ambulance-chasers are always circling like sharks.

 

That happened just a few days ago in New Boston, MI. It wasn't a monster train, just one working TDSI. House is a total loss and the town mayor is screaming mad.

 

The train had nothing to do with the slow response time, and the mayor should investigate before getting "screaming mad".

 

http://www.wxyz.com/news/fire-chief-stopped-train-didnt-play-role-in-firefighters-response-to-new-boston-house-fire

 

"The chief said the reason it took so long to respond is because they have one person on duty all the time, and he was on the other end of the township doing inspections when the fire started."

An "expensive model collector"

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy