It's going to have to come from the federal government one way or another, more than the current feeble program. This could be a pretty good infrastructure program. Both parties claim to favor infrastructure investment, including the current occupant, but it gets short shrift. Perhaps politicians need to be shamed?
charlie hebdo Oh it's never the fault of the railroads' faulty equipment. On here it's always the fault of drivers.
Oh it's never the fault of the railroads' faulty equipment. On here it's always the fault of drivers.
Credit is usually given where credit (or blame) is due. The instances of people ignoring existing crossing protection seem to outnumber (by a large margin) the failure of crossing protection equipment, however.
charlie hebdoAnd nobody here wants to see proper separation of roads from railroads, even though conditions are very different today compared with 100-150 years ago. Oh, too much money? Human lives are what, chopped liver?
As Balt pointed out, it costs money for a grade separation - they usually take a lot of real estate that people aren't willing to give up.
Closing crossings isn't always feasible - people aren't usually willing to give up their favorite road.
I wouldn't say no one here wants to see grade separations. I seriously doubt anyone here likes to read of grade crossing incidents. But until the multitudinous issues preventing grade crossing separations are worked out, they'll continue to exist.
Try thinking of the grade crossings in your area, and consider what it would take to eliminate them on an individual basis, or collectively. How much of that cost would come out of the railroad's pocket (and become a consideration for even keeping the line open)? How much are you willing to pay out of your own pocket (property taxes or increases in rent) to see it happen?
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...
charlie hebdo It's going to have to come from the federal government one way or another, more than the current feeble program. This could be a pretty good infrastructure program. Both parties claim to favor infrastructure investment, including the current occupant, but it gets short shrift. Perhaps politicians need to be shamed?
Why should government intervene to eliminate all life's boo-boos? Has it not occured to you that, the more one looks to government to solve all of life's unpleasantness and risk, the more power you give that government? And when the government runs almost everything, it won't need you...or me...any more, neither our support nor our criticism. Our votes will be moot.
Here's a thought; do a better job teaching, and reminding, people that there is risk in life, and that sometimes the dice fall against you. This increases geometrically with each careless, uneducated, and hurried thought or action. Why we should demand that our government prevent our very living, good and bad, is beyond me.
charlie hebdo This could be a pretty good infrastructure program.
This could be a pretty good infrastructure program.
Even better than Calfornia High Speed Rail?
Wow!
Ed
The true greatness of this county was built by bold vision, huge infrastructure projects as recently as the Interstates and labor, not by timidity and folks unwilling to spend a penny not of direct benefit or profit to themselves. Nor was it built by bean counters and CEOs looking only at next quarter's report.
charlie hebdo The true greatness of this county was built by bold vision, huge infrastructure projects...
The true greatness of this county was built by bold vision, huge infrastructure projects...
Funny how all of those projects were done before there existed a word for them: infrastructure.
Cheops: "I want a big pointy infrastructure built for me when I die."
Leland Stanford: "We're gonna build us some infrastructure halfway across the country."
Goethals: "This canal is gonna be one fine piece of infrastructure."
Many people: "I sure hope the infrastructure doesn't give way, or we'll all drown."
It sure wasn't built by little naysayers.
charlie hebdo It sure wasn't built by little naysayers.
I am reminded of that every day, when I read the newspaper.
charlie hebdoThe true greatness of this county was built by bold vision, huge infrastructure projects as recently as the Interstates and labor, not by timidity and folks unwilling to spend a penny not of direct benefit or profit to themselves. Nor was it built by bean counters and CEOs looking only at next quarter's report.
That is the most relevent of statements.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD charlie hebdo Oh it's never the fault of the railroads' faulty equipment. On here it's always the fault of drivers. And nobody here wants to see proper separation of roads from railroads, even though conditions are very different today compared with 100-150 years ago. Oh, too much money? Human lives are what, chopped liver? Feel free to bankroll all the grade separation projects you want. Railroads have been working for decades to eliminate road crossings at grade. Local governments have also been working to create more road crossings at grade during the same period besides not wanting to fund grade separation projects. Local government feature their constituents are no more than chopped liver and don't want to spend what is required to protect them.
charlie hebdo Oh it's never the fault of the railroads' faulty equipment. On here it's always the fault of drivers. And nobody here wants to see proper separation of roads from railroads, even though conditions are very different today compared with 100-150 years ago. Oh, too much money? Human lives are what, chopped liver?
And nobody here wants to see proper separation of roads from railroads, even though conditions are very different today compared with 100-150 years ago. Oh, too much money? Human lives are what, chopped liver?
Feel free to bankroll all the grade separation projects you want. Railroads have been working for decades to eliminate road crossings at grade. Local governments have also been working to create more road crossings at grade during the same period besides not wanting to fund grade separation projects. Local government feature their constituents are no more than chopped liver and don't want to spend what is required to protect them.
... and all of that stems from the fact that no one in the U.S. wants to pay taxes. You get what you pay for, and what we got is mediocre infrastructure and mostly crappy public transportation.
Ride a train in Europe and you’ll notice there are hardly any grade crossings. Ride a train in the U.S and sit anywhere near the head end, and you’ll hear the engineer whistling for grade crossings nearly continuously, even in sparsely populated states like my native North Dakota. It’s utterly ridiculous.
Dream on, friend.
There are about 200,000 grade crossings in the US.
It costs about $40 million to do a grade separation.
To eliminate all grade crossings (including North Dakota) would cost:
$8 trillion.
Obviously, money well spent. Because 2000 lives a year would be saved.
The individual cost per citizen (kids and old people and etc. included) would be about a quarter million dollars each. If we sold 30 year bonds to pay for it, then it would only cost each citizen $10,000 a year. Plus interest. So much for college, little tyke.
So. Americans! Stop yer whining and cough it up. It's fer a good cause and it's only money.
Plus. The EUROPEANS would do it. THEY love taxes. The nameless guy from North Dakota says so.
But WAIT! How much would it cost to train tax-hating Americans to safely cross railroad tracks? We could make an educational DVD (or whatever it is you kids watch, now) and mail it to everyone. We could also drastically increase traffic violation fines for being stupid with your car at a grade crossing. And make a PROFIT (take THAT, you European tax lovers!).
7j43kObviously, money well spent. Because 2000 lives a year would be saved.
Unless someone drives off the overpass...
tree68 7j43k Obviously, money well spent. Because 2000 lives a year would be saved. Unless someone drives off the overpass...
7j43k Obviously, money well spent. Because 2000 lives a year would be saved.
No, no. We'll put those rubber mats on the ground, like they do now at children's plalygrounds.
At a slight upcharge. Or is that "uptax"?
Ed, your post is misleading to a degree that's idiotic and you know it.
charlie hebdo Ed, your post is misleading to a degree that's idiotic and you know it.
Please point out the misleading idiocies.
I'll try to do the same for you, when I have the time.
Start with your straw man argument. Nobody said all crossings need to be separated. Eliminating lightly used crossings or multiple crossings close together is often sufficient and a lot cheaper. So there's a start. Perhaps you can do your own work or get a fellow graduate of the DJT school of exaggeration and prevarication to help you.
$40 million for a grade separation is way overstated, unless it's a 4-lane highway or in an urban area with lots of expensive land that's needed.
About 10 years ago I was involved with a proposed grade separation that would have raised a local road with a nasty crossing mainly serving a nearby subdivision of 200 - 300 houses (plus some folks further out in the country). It would have crossed over a 2-track NS main line with room for a 3rd track or access road. The engineer's cost estimate for a bridge with precast beams was $2 million. The developer was willing to put up his half, but the township wouldn't put up their half. This in the fastest growing township in the 2 counties that are the main portion of the Lehigh Valley. Same township refuses to start or participate in its own police force - relies on state police coverage. Draw your own conclusions.
- PDN.
charlie hebdo Start with your straw man argument. Nobody said all crossings need to be separated. Eliminating lightly used crossings or multiple crossings close together is often sufficient and a lot cheaper. So there's a start. Perhaps you can do your own work or get a fellow graduate of the DJT school of exaggeration and prevarication to help you.
"The true greatness of this county [sic] was built by bold vision, huge infrastructure projects..."
Just extrapolating from your bold vision.
Or should we just ignore your pronouncements as gaseous emissions?
Paul_D_North_Jr $40 million for a grade separation is way overstated...
$40 million for a grade separation is way overstated...
I suspect it is not. Should we perhaps examine costs for grade separations for California High Speed Rail--another example of "huge infrastructure projects" (see Hebdo, above). We're talking mostly two lane farm roads here, so we should use those numbers for the low end estimate.
Perhaps we can get a bulk discount. On the other hand, the price might go up because of scarcity of labor.
I truly believe the better way to lessen grade crossing deaths is hugely increased enforcement and fines--can you say: "civil forfeiture"? I know I can. And it makes a PROFIT (probably something way too capitalistic for some on this forum).
"Ma'am, you're stopped on a railroad track. We're taking your car." "Now."
7j43k There are about 200,000 grade crossings in the US. It costs about $40 million to do a grade separation. To eliminate all grade crossings (including North Dakota) would cost: $8 trillion. Obviously, money well spent. Because 2000 lives a year would be saved. The individual cost per citizen (kids and old people and etc. included) would be about a quarter million dollars each. If we sold 30 year bonds to pay for it, then it would only cost each citizen $10,000 a year. Plus interest. So much for college, little tyke. So. Americans! Stop yer whining and cough it up. It's fer a good cause and it's only money. Plus. The EUROPEANS would do it. THEY love taxes. The nameless guy from North Dakota says so. But WAIT! How much would it cost to train tax-hating Americans to safely cross railroad tracks? We could make an educational DVD (or whatever it is you kids watch, now) and mail it to everyone. We could also drastically increase traffic violation fines for being stupid with your car at a grade crossing. And make a PROFIT (take THAT, you European tax lovers!). Ed
Please stop making arguments up out of whole cloth and falsely attributing them to me.
First of all, I never suggested that all grade crossings should be eliminated, or that U.S. taxpayers should cough up billions of dollars in the short term to do so.
Second, I didn’t say Europeans love taxes. They do pay them, however, and in general, they get much better infrastructure in return. I realize that low tax rates are part and parcel of the U.S. mindset; I’m just pointing out that low taxes come with their own cost.
So? Your point? You seem to have serious deficits in reading comprehension. I have nothing to say to you. Suggest you cease the feeble attempt at a discussion since all you can manage is non sequiturs and insults.
7j43kI truly believe the better way to lessen grade crossing deaths is hugely increased enforcement and fines--can you say: "civil forfeiture"? I know I can. And it makes a PROFIT (probably something way too capitalistic for some on this forum). "Ma'am, you're stopped on a railroad track. We're taking your car." "Now."
Enforcement of crossing issues will always be a problem as long as the public sees the railroad as interlopers in their lives, rather than their being a visitor on railroad property.
This manifests itself daily as people walk on active ROWs, never mind crossing them wherever they find it convenient.
For that matter, try to find a news article that states the facts of a vehicle/rail collision as being the fault of the driver running the protection. It's usually "the train hit the car," not "the driver drove in front of the train and was struck."
Much of the public fails (or refuses) to accept that railroad facilities are private property.
Euclid 7j43k I truly believe the better way to lessen grade crossing deaths is hugely increased enforcement and fines--can you say: "civil forfeiture"? I know I can. And it makes a PROFIT (probably something way too capitalistic for some on this forum). "Ma'am, you're stopped on a railroad track. We're taking your car." "Now." The punishment is set to what is considered to be reasonable. Simply ramping it up to draconian levels because the violations continue would probably prove to be impractical because the legal defense of the charges would be more vigorous due to the higher stakes of getting prosecuted.
7j43k I truly believe the better way to lessen grade crossing deaths is hugely increased enforcement and fines--can you say: "civil forfeiture"? I know I can. And it makes a PROFIT (probably something way too capitalistic for some on this forum). "Ma'am, you're stopped on a railroad track. We're taking your car." "Now."
The punishment is set to what is considered to be reasonable. Simply ramping it up to draconian levels because the violations continue would probably prove to be impractical because the legal defense of the charges would be more vigorous due to the higher stakes of getting prosecuted.
Maybe. But the local cops have been using civil forfeiture against people who "perform sideshows"* for awhile, now. If it's OK to do to someone doing donuts in the road, it would seem OK to do it to someone who is endangering lives.
Consider, also, that with civil forfeiture, the car is taken immediately. The expenses for legal defense would be expended afterwards. And the return of the car might take a LONG time.
Unconstitutional? Yes. But it has been going on for decades, anyway. Might as well put the concept to good use.
*https://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Sideshow
Psychot First of all, I never suggested that all grade crossings should be eliminated, or that U.S. taxpayers should cough up billions of dollars in the short term to do so.
Sorry. I thought you might have been, when you mentioned all the grade crossings in North Dakota and that it was sparsely settled. My thought is that those grade crossings would be WAY down on the list to do. And your inclusion of North Dakota in the discussion seemed to imply that they should be done, too.
Otherwise, there would have been no point of including it at all. Maybe you, then, should have left that particular part out of your statement.
Since you do not think all grade crossings should be eliminated, might you be able to come up with which grade crossings SHOULD be eliminated? And which should remain? How did you decide?
I will note that yours is the first time in this topic it's been suggested that only SOME grade crossings should be eliminated. And it was AFTER my discussion about doing all of them. In fact, it's been suggested that we needed a "grand infrastructure vision", or some such drivel. You can't get much grander than ALL grade crossings. I guess I took that person's statement much too seriously.
The whole topic is about grade crossings in the United States. Dropping in a comment about how Europe does things better (accepting taxes, "better infrastructure") does nothing to help solve the problem in the United States unless you show something we could do here.
The United States is not Europe.
Come up with something that could be done here. Please.
If your plan is to replace low taxes with high taxes so that 2000 people who can't figure out how to cross a railroad track could live doesn't work for me.
I'd far rather try:
better and more visual education about what happens when a train hits YOU
better traffic enforcement
nothing--better things to do
I would opine that eliminating all grade crossings is, indeed, a noble goal. There is nothing wrong with having that as the ultimate goal. Simple economics tend to render that goal as unachievable, though. I think we've rather discussed that.
As for a criterion for eliminating crossings (by whatever method), I believe that process is already in place.
At the top of the list are those crossings with poor records (collisions).
Next would be those that have a high probability of collisions (busy streets/roads) or where rail operations have a high impact on vehicle traffic (ie, busy main thoroughfare or heavy/constant rail traffic).
There will be varying degrees of the above, and eliminating those crossings would have to be prioritized by impact, and to some extent, price.
At the bottom of the list would be those crossings with very limited vehicle/rail interface - a crossing with a hundred cars a day and two trains doing 10 MPH. Country/rural situations.
In the basement would be private crossings - farm lanes, driveways, etc. In many cases, an alternate route isn't really possible, and grade separation would be prohibitively expensive.
It's all a matter of degrees.
That certainly makes sense.
Then we have to decide how much to spend annually. From that, you can figure how many per year you can do.
Probably, the first ones will cost a good bit more than $40 million, since they'll be in the high usage areas, where land prices are high, among other things.
Later, as you get out towards North Dakota, prices will be a good bit less, and the pace will pick up.
Since the price will be higher (at first), let's say it is $50 million. If we allocate $1 billion a year, we'll take care of 20 per year, at the beginning. Or, to satisify some people's needs for giant infrastructure projects, we could spend $100 billion a year. That will take care of 2000. Now we're getting somewhere.
Then, as we work through the 200,000, the price will start dropping. By the time we get towards the end (in about 100 years, if I can divide properly), the price will be low, indeed.
Or. We could spend $100 billion dollars on something else. Per year. Can YOU think of something? And tell the relatives of the 2000 dead people that they should have been more careful crossing railroad tracks.
Tough call, eh?
7j43k Psychot First of all, I never suggested that all grade crossings should be eliminated, or that U.S. taxpayers should cough up billions of dollars in the short term to do so. Sorry. I thought you might have been, when you mentioned all the grade crossings in North Dakota and that it was sparsely settled. My thought is that those grade crossings would be WAY down on the list to do. And your inclusion of North Dakota in the discussion seemed to imply that they should be done, too. Otherwise, there would have been no point of including it at all. Maybe you, then, should have left that particular part out of your statement. Since you do not think all grade crossings should be eliminated, might you be able to come up with which grade crossings SHOULD be eliminated? And which should remain? How did you decide? I will note that yours is the first time in this topic it's been suggested that only SOME grade crossings should be eliminated. And it was AFTER my discussion about doing all of them. In fact, it's been suggested that we needed a "grand infrastructure vision", or some such drivel. You can't get much grander than ALL grade crossings. I guess I took that person's statement much too seriously. Second, I didn’t say Europeans love taxes. They do pay them, however, and in general, they get much better infrastructure in return. I realize that low tax rates are part and parcel of the U.S. mindset; I’m just pointing out that low taxes come with their own cost. The whole topic is about grade crossings in the United States. Dropping in a comment about how Europe does things better (accepting taxes, "better infrastructure") does nothing to help solve the problem in the United States unless you show something we could do here. The United States is not Europe. Come up with something that could be done here. Please. If your plan is to replace low taxes with high taxes so that 2000 people who can't figure out how to cross a railroad track could live doesn't work for me. I'd far rather try: better and more visual education about what happens when a train hits YOU better traffic enforcement nothing--better things to do Ed
I brought up North Dakota as an example of a sparsely populated state that still has a lot of grade crossings. Hell, the ranch I grew up on has its own—completely unprotected—grade crossing over the former NP (now BNSF) main line. I was riding the Empire Builder once when it clipped a gravel truck at a similarly unprotected rural grade crossing near Williston ND.
I don’t have a magic solution for the grade crossing problem. I was merely pointing out that we have so many grade crossings in the first place because we, as a society, have decided that low taxes are more important than good infrastructure. And these grade crossings are a problem in other ways - stopped trains cut municipalities in half, and the proliferation of them means we can never have true high-speed rail.
Personally, I would prefer somewhat higher taxes and better public services, but I understand that the low tax/small government mentality in America precludes such a thing. As a result, we’re probably stuck with all the grade crossings whether we like them or not.
There is no “solution.”
There’s not enough money to eliminate grade crossings.
And there are too many stupid or drunk or distracted people.
The best one can hope for is that a significant number of the most dangerous crossings (and among those, the busiest) will be eliminated.
When I was a kid we we were told that by the year 2000 the power and phone lines would all be underground. How are we doing on that?
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.