Trains.com

Blocked by train for 4 hours

6988 views
60 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, November 20, 2017 11:42 AM

Overmod
Can 911 operators legally block numbers based on repeat calls like that???

Problem as I see it is that you have a cowan with no knowledge of the secret railroad number to call: I think we covered that he was at a crossing with no posted DOT number or 800-number to call.  So he calls the only number he has... and when an hour goes by with no result, he calls again to shake the tree... after four hours he might be very pissed at his ‘first responders’ doing what he sees as evidently very little meaningful responding ... 'specially if there's wobblin' water involved by that point.

 The ‘right’ answer, perhaps, is for the 911 operator to have the railroad police numbers and give them out on the first call received for something like a blocked crossing.  Then we get into wrong-railroad issues but we are sure a lot further along ... both in solving the situation and shifting aggravation off the whole energency-response system.

Depending on the area that the 911 call center covers, and with the absence of a DOT tag, that gives a contact number for the railroad involved, the 911 center may not know the proper railroad to notify and even if the proper railroad is notified there can be big difficulties in defining where 'HERE' actually is. Local authorities normally speak in 'hundred block' of a street identity, railroads speak in mile post of the line involved - it can be very difficult to reconcile the two, that was one of the reasons for the tags indicating DOT numbers on recognized road crossings.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Monday, November 20, 2017 11:54 AM

 

One thing is for sure.  The driver in this story is going to take risks the next time he is confronted with a suddenly activated crossing signal. 

 

  • Member since
    September 2017
  • 5,636 posts
Posted by charlie hebdo on Monday, November 20, 2017 12:14 PM
In the photo, one can see a non-mechanical, non-flashing crossbucks, a stop sign and a small white sign below the crossbucks. It is too far to read what the small sign says. It could be the DOT sign with a phone number or not.
  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Monday, November 20, 2017 12:57 PM

Euclid

 

One thing is for sure.  The driver in this story is going to take risks the next time he is confronted with a suddenly activated crossing signal. 

 

 

What proof do you have of that? He wasn't at a signaled crossing. Why should he now start risking his life at signaled crosssings?

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    March 2003
  • From: Central Iowa
  • 6,901 posts
Posted by jeffhergert on Monday, November 20, 2017 1:21 PM

One could always take their complaints to the local (county, city) governmental board.  They can pass on complaints.

http://www.newsrepublican.com/news/20171019/union-pacific-railroad-hears-concerns-from-council-and-residents

There's a couple of dead end roads that have some home developements.  (Some are old farmsteads, others newer homes.)  One of the residents on one of the dead ends is a doctor.  She calls the railroad direct (I don't think it's the number posted on the crossings.  It's either the local senior manager or Omaha, who then calls the local senior manager.) whenever a train blocks her crossing.    

Jeff

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, November 20, 2017 2:06 PM

jeffhergert
One could always take their complaints to the local (county, city) governmental board.  They can pass on complaints.

http://www.newsrepublican.com/news/20171019/union-pacific-railroad-hears-concerns-from-council-and-residents

There's a couple of dead end roads that have some home developements.  (Some are old farmsteads, others newer homes.)  One of the residents on one of the dead ends is a doctor.  She calls the railroad direct (I don't think it's the number posted on the crossings.  It's either the local senior manager or Omaha, who then calls the local senior manager.) whenever a train blocks her crossing.    

Jeff

Sterling, OH - late 60's - early 70's.  Farmer (who was also a County Comissioner) got his 'farm road' from one side of his property to the other side of his property, across B&O's double track Main Line as well as the Eastward Passing Siding at Sterling upgraded by county decree to be a 'real' road crossing.  The county had a 5 minute blocking law.  From the vantage point of his house, he could see every time a train was pulled into the Eastward Siding - thence he would call to the County Sheriff to initiate a citation against the B&O for blocking the crossing.  At the time the Division Claim Agent would go to court to answer the citations and pay the fines.  I don't know why the Legal Department didn't get involved to invalidate the local ordinance as undue interference in interstate commerce.  

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Monday, November 20, 2017 6:05 PM

Firelock76
 
BaltACD

My observation of 'deer hunters' at the opening of Deer Season.  The appear more interested in attacking the '6-Pack' than the '6-Point'...... 

Nah, the real reason for going hunting is the pleasure of attacking a huge cholesterol-laden breakfast at the nearest diner with the rest of the guys!  Pancakes, bacon, sausage, home fries or hash browns, buttered toast, real "heart attack on a plate" stuff. 

I read that in "Field and Stream" years ago, so it must be true!

Wisconsin Deer Season for guns off to a bang up start

https://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation-now/2017/11/20/deer-hunters-dead/880008001/

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 6,199 posts
Posted by Miningman on Monday, November 20, 2017 9:36 PM

Yin and Yang, what goes around comes around, Darwinism? Maybe they are "real men" now. Good grief. 

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:11 AM

Murphy Siding
 
Euclid

 

One thing is for sure.  The driver in this story is going to take risks the next time he is confronted with a suddenly activated crossing signal. 

 

 

 

 

What proof do you have of that? He wasn't at a signaled crossing. Why should he now start risking his life at signaled crosssings?

 

 

 

It is self-evident.  Studies have shown reasons people give for trying to beat the train.  One common reason is the worry about being delayed.  Obviously this worry is shaped by a driver’s prior crossing experience.  So they apply this acquired behavior to all grade crossings no matter whether they are signalized or not. 

 

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:49 AM

Self evident ? Sounds like a hasty generalization to me.

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

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 7:59 AM

zugmann
Self evident ? Sounds like a hasty generalization to me.

Seemed reasonable to me that someone who had to wait 4 hours for a stopped train might be more likely to avoid being stuck waiting for trains in general.  If schlimm were still posting he could give a more informed explanation.  Not everyone would be traumatized enough by the experience to 'extrapolate' to signaled crossings, but I suspect Euclid is justified in having the suspicion.

Of course it is pathetic that someone who has just spent a great deal of my reading time trying to assert that no objective statement about CSX service policy can be made now turns around and makes absolute statements about someone he does not know ... but that's the forumz for ya.

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 8:08 AM

He is entitled to all the opinions he wants. It's when he tries to act like they are facts because of "studies" that aren't cited is where I raise my eyebrow. 

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

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 8:52 AM

You've got the right point there: I made my wife stop using that 'studies have shown/science has settled' logical fallacy - she had fallen into bad habits.

It probably isn't that difficult to find studies, probably even objective ones, that show that people subjected to repeated severe train delays are more likely to 'run' activated crossings, or even 'panic' and behave in ways illogical even to them when traumatic circumstances threaten to repeat.  But I agree that it would be a useful life experience for Euclid to cite the studies he used as basis for his being 'sure' people would have increased tendency to run signaled crossings.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 9:13 AM

Oh, we have had this discussion in the past, and I have cited some sources, but why bother?  People who reject the premise because there are no sources cited will reject the sources just as readily.  So if you doubt it, show me your sources.  There has been lots of published information delving into why people behave as they do at various traffic situations.  There is another common belief by drivers that induces risk taking, and that is the belief that grade crossing protection is merely advisory and not regulatory.  People at the MUTCD are very interested in what influences drivers' behavior and how to compensate for it.  They are very willing to discuss this in detail with anyone who is interested. 

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 9:14 AM

Overmod
Of course it is pathetic that someone who has just spent a great deal of my reading time trying to assert that no objective statement about CSX service policy can be made now turns around and makes absolute statements about someone he does not know ... but that's the forumz for ya.

What do you mean by this?

 

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 9:20 AM

Euclid
 
Murphy Siding
 
Euclid

 

One thing is for sure.  The driver in this story is going to take risks the next time he is confronted with a suddenly activated crossing signal. 

 

 

 

 

What proof do you have of that? He wasn't at a signaled crossing. Why should he now start risking his life at signaled crosssings?

 

 

 

 

 

It is self-evident.  Studies have shown reasons people give for trying to beat the train.  One common reason is the worry about being delayed.  Obviously this worry is shaped by a driver’s prior crossing experience.  So they apply this acquired behavior to all grade crossings no matter whether they are signalized or not. 

 

 

Following that line of made-up logic, some of the train cars may have been red. Nine out of ten dentists surveyed have said that a man blocked for 4 hours by a train that may have had red cars will acquire a fear of the color red and then run red lights for the rest of his life when confronted with traffic signals. It's self-evident. Everybody knows that.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 9:21 AM

Euclid
 
Overmod
Of course it is pathetic that someone who has just spent a great deal of my reading time trying to assert that no objective statement about CSX service policy can be made now turns around and makes absolute statements about someone he does not know ... but that's the forumz for ya.

 

What do you mean by this?

 

 

Anything you want it to mean.

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 9:48 AM

 

Murphy Siding
Following that line of made-up logic, some of the train cars may have been red. Nine out of ten dentists surveyed have said that a man blocked for 4 hours by a train that may have had red cars will acquire a fear of the color red and then run red lights for the rest of his life when confronted with traffic signals. It's self-evident. Everybody knows that.

The best way to avoid being stopped at a grade crossing for 4 hours is to get across while you still can. 

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 9:57 AM

Euclid
What do you mean by this?

Basically this: you've just been saying it was 'self-evident' that you could be 'sure' the person trapped for four hours 'is going to' be running the crossings he sees activate in front of him.  After you have gone to great lengths saying Don Oltmann can't possibly say how Hunter will behave in future because Don can't be sure how Hunter thinks.

Tell me how you know enough about the victim to be 'sure' how he will react.

You can't know.

That is what I mean.

Had you simply said something like "Bet the next time this guy has a signaled crossing suddenly activate in front of him he'll run it" it would be correctly read as both opinion and humor - most of us would be nodding agreement with the potential look on his face and how he would jerk at the wheel and other controls to git 'r dun.  Instead you make blanket statements of total assurance, backed up by arguments to authority you don't and perhaps can't now cite, and then start arguing when the absoluteness of the claim is questioned.  That wouldn't in itself call for comment except that you yourself quite recently criticized others at length for what you claimed to be the same thing.

Now let's get back to the substance of the railroading implications, including recognition that Euclid MAY WELL BE RIGHT in what the poor guy will do at the next crossing (I personally believe there is considerable likelihood that he would!) and what methods could be used to help avoid this kind of situation in future.

We have had discussions in the past about integrating differential GPS from phones into metadata in a 911 call from a phone, with the assumption (MC would rightly make me capitalize those first three letters!) that GIS will give sufficient data precision to resolve multiple railroads at a given location.  That would in the vast majority of cases produce a 'fix' suitable for direct entry into any response guidance or location software, either for railroads to determine location or responders to get cogent directions whether or not there is a DOT number or legible address near the site.

  • Member since
    June 2004
  • From: roundhouse
  • 2,747 posts
Posted by Randy Stahl on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 10:02 AM

Euclid

 

 

 
Murphy Siding
Following that line of made-up logic, some of the train cars may have been red. Nine out of ten dentists surveyed have said that a man blocked for 4 hours by a train that may have had red cars will acquire a fear of the color red and then run red lights for the rest of his life when confronted with traffic signals. It's self-evident. Everybody knows that.

 

The best way to avoid being stopped at a grade crossing for 4 hours is to get across while you still can. 

 

 

Or have a female backup plan.

  • Member since
    September 2003
  • 21,669 posts
Posted by Overmod on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 10:18 AM

Euclid
The best way to avoid being stopped at a grade crossing for 4 hours is to get across while you still can

I suspect a better way is not to go someplace where a stopped train can lock you in in the first place... "always have a second means of egress" when you are planning things.  

In my opinion, not running a crossing is up there with the wisdom in the poem that began 'Sonny, never let your gun/Pointed be at anyone' -- it's habits you're wanting to build.  Safety is not a culture, it's the individual's habits and reactions based in part on that culture that's the only thing that really matters, just like it's the behavior of the contact patch that ultimately determines vehicle guidance and control...

Do I follow that advice all the time?  Well, no: I'll jackrabbit up to a crossing before the gates start down sometimes, although I wouldn't try going around with them down.  That does not make me a hypocrite in saying we shouldn't do that, though, and I would not 'kick' if I received a ticket for having done it...

  • Member since
    September 2013
  • 6,199 posts
Posted by Miningman on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 10:44 AM

Overmod with the 20 foot 3 point jump shot.

Secondary means of egress is the law in Mining and they don't mean a manway parallel to the shaft. A second shaft, usually the exploration shaft or a ramp to surface. 

Suburban hunters with their cell phones and pick up trucks. Probably decked out in enough fashion to buy 2 years worth of steaks or in this case fowl. We call any bird in the bush chickens up here.  

Turn around, go to a coffee shop and relax or find a parallel road and maybe walk a bit? 

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 11:08 AM

Overmod
I suspect a better way is not to go someplace where a stopped train can lock you in in the first place... "always have a second means of egress" when you are planning things.

  I would in no way blame the driver for crossing the tracks on a dead end road.  It is a marked public crossing, and the fact that the road dead ends does not grant the railroad the right to block it, thus trapping drivers on the dead end side for unreasonably long periods of time.   What is the point of the public crossing if it comes with such a disagreeable string attached?

  • Member since
    January 2014
  • 8,221 posts
Posted by Euclid on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 11:14 AM

Overmod
 
Euclid
What do you mean by this?

 

Basically this: you've just been saying it was 'self-evident' that you could be 'sure' the person trapped for four hours 'is going to' be running the crossings he sees activate in front of him.  After you have gone to great lengths saying Don Oltmann can't possibly say how Hunter will behave in future because Don can't be sure how Hunter thinks.

Tell me how you know enough about the victim to be 'sure' how he will react.

You can't know.

That is what I mean.

Had you simply said something like "Bet the next time this guy has a signaled crossing suddenly activate in front of him he'll run it" it would be correctly read as both opinion and humor - most of us would be nodding agreement with the potential look on his face and how he would jerk at the wheel and other controls to git 'r dun.  Instead you make blanket statements of total assurance, backed up by arguments to authority you don't and perhaps can't now cite, and then start arguing when the absoluteness of the claim is questioned.  That wouldn't in itself call for comment except that you yourself quite recently criticized others at length for what you claimed to be the same thing.

Now let's get back to the substance of the railroading implications, including recognition that Euclid MAY WELL BE RIGHT in what the poor guy will do at the next crossing (I personally believe there is considerable likelihood that he would!) and what methods could be used to help avoid this kind of situation in future.

 

 

 

Well, I also said this:  “One thing is for sure.”  Of course, I can’t be sure what the driver will do next.  But that is not really the point.  The point is that a four hour crossing delay would be enough to have a radical influence on a person that is likely to affect his or her future behavior. 

In any case, I don’t think the objectors are objecting because I failed to make the comment in perfect contract language.   If I did that, they would object anyway.  That is another thing that is for sure.

What you had said about my objecting to Don is not accurate.  Here is my point in non-contract language:

You are driving down the road with a passenger, and he says “You are making nice time.”  Then you say, “Yes my speed is perfectly consistent.  It has not changed for 30 minutes.  The needle has not moved.”  Then somebody in the back seat says, “Yes we all know that to make good time, your speed has to be consistent." 

So what I asked Don is this:  “What does the needle point to?”  And then others jump in and say, “The needle points to BAD!

  • Member since
    May 2005
  • From: S.E. South Dakota
  • 13,569 posts
Posted by Murphy Siding on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 11:55 AM

Euclid
   What is the point of the public crossing if it comes with such a disagreeable string attached?

 

 

Laugh

Well, the world isn't perfect. Do you think every public crossing that comes with disagreeable strings attached should be closed?

 

Thanks to Chris / CopCarSS for my avatar.

  • Member since
    May 2003
  • From: US
  • 25,292 posts
Posted by BaltACD on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 12:15 PM

The railroads really should revoke the easments that have been granted for road crossings.

Never too old to have a happy childhood!

              

  • Member since
    December 2001
  • From: Northern New York
  • 25,023 posts
Posted by tree68 on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 1:47 PM

Euclid
The best way to avoid being stopped at a grade crossing for 4 hours is to get across while you still can. 

That only works if you get there before the train...

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: Sunny (mostly) San Diego
  • 1,920 posts
Posted by ChuckCobleigh on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 3:51 PM

Randy Stahl
Or have a female backup plan.

So at least someone can ask for directions out of the backup?Whistling

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 4:39 PM

Murphy Siding
Well, the world isn't perfect. Do you think every public crossing that comes with disagreeable strings attached should be closed?

Hope he doesn't drive on limited access highways.  One accident ahead of you, and you may sit for a bit.  

 

But this guy wasn't really "trapped".  His truck was.  But in an emergency, he could have crawled across the train (although illegal and dangerous), and called for a pizza, an uber, or something.

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

  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Canterlot
  • 9,575 posts
Posted by zugmann on Tuesday, November 21, 2017 4:42 PM

Euclid
Oh, we have had this discussion in the past, and I have cited some sources, but why bother? People who reject the premise because there are no sources cited will reject the sources just as readily.

" I reject your reality and subsititute my own!"  - Adam Savage.

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

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