There is a major problem with all this tech talk.
1. people have brain farts. Attention can easily be diverted long enough to make a fatal mistake. Look at all the truck grade crossing incidents.
2. Depending on Tech causes drivers to expect the tech every where. Then you have more accidents elsewhere.
3. GPS has led some persons down a primrose path. I have argued with mine more than once. " no way" , "not now " , " I don't think so "
Between the date of the crash shown in the video (January 15, 2017) and a later video shot in 2018, it appears that CSX extended the height of the two crossing signal mounting poles, and added two signal heads each. Placement would indicate it's related to the street crossing.
I don't know how they're activated, nor what they are intended to signal. Only that they are new. I can imagine that they COULD be activated by the dispatcher, and/or the police/fire, and COULD tell a train that there's a track obstruction.
One thing that I noticed is that where the cars drive onto the tracks, the lighting is non-existant. I think "someone" should string a cable across the tracks, and suspend a downward facing (bright) light source over the tracks.
Ed
charlie hebdoThat's what I said. I fail to see what you have added except words.
Well, no. You mentioned the swinging/rotating gates on the British installation. He pointed out the use of the common US crossing gates which raise and lower. While the concept is similar, the execution is very different.
As for lighting the crossing, you'd have to be careful not to make the tracks be lit up like a street. Lighting the road and leaving the tracks dark would probably be more effective, especially given that the adjacent streets are well lit.
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...
If the gates rotate, there is no need for a 2nd set or raising and lowering. Redundant and more costly. Of course this system does not work well on heavily-trafficked rail lines.
Now if it stayed above freezing, you could have a fine mist or spray across the tracks - and project lights upon that (make a virtual wall). Kind of a neat safety/art solution. But if it got cold, that wouldn't work too well.
I saw a video of somewhere this was done for overheight vehicles (europe or asia?). haven't found it again yet.
Edit: it was Australia! https://www.dailymail.co.uk/video/news/video-1008464/Amazing-water-curtain-Stop-sign.html
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
charlie hebdo If the gates rotate, there is no need for a 2nd set or raising and lowering. Redundant and more costly. Of course this system does not work well on heavily-trafficked rail lines.
Using current technology is generally cheaper and easier than creating something new. And drivers are used to the current gates. Aside from a minor change in the internal guts of the gates, it's pretty much off the shelf stuff.
I would put yellow reflective on the gates that went across the road, facing the road, rather than red and white stripes. Drivers are used to seeing yellow in that situation.
You mentioned nothing except British-style rotating gates. Had you actually used your vaunted reading comprehension, I think you'd have seen that was only the analogy to what he was describing -- which was using an additional, common-stock OTS, crossing-gate mechanism at right angles to block rail access asynchronously without the sweep problems, more real derailment risk, etc of a British-style swing gate set at that location.
Of course you're welcome to advocate swing-gate use here or elsewhere in the United States. The problem you'll have is that no one anywhere has adopted them instead of lifting barriers. That might indicate that people with actual responsibility for crossing security have evaluated them and found them wanting.
tree68 As for lighting the crossing, you'd have to be careful not to make the tracks be lit up like a street. Lighting the road and leaving the tracks dark would probably be more effective, especially given that the adjacent streets are well lit.
If the tracks were lit up like a street, a driver would be able to see that they were tracks. Not street. As it is, what they see is something dark. Like an asphalt paved street. They WANT to see a street, and so they do.
In addition, brightly lit areas in your vision draw your attention. In this case, towards the track. Which you then will likely see, as tracks.
I do think that the crossing gate idea is pretty good, though. Might want to light them up, too.
tree68I would put yellow reflective on the gates that went across the road, facing the road, rather than red and white stripes. Drivers are used to seeing yellow in that situation.
That or some James Bond style pop-up shrubbery.
7j43kIf the tracks were lit up like a street, a driver would be able to see that they were tracks. Not street. As it is, what they see is something dark. Like an asphalt paved street. They WANT to see a street, and so they do.
But that would mean people look where they are turning. They don't always do that. Maybe light it up in bright red?
Need a traffic psychologist to weigh in. Don't think we have one.
Lithonia Operator I suppose they could create a phone line at the dispatcher's desk that is there ONLY for emergencies, and give out the number only to first responders.
I suppose they could create a phone line at the dispatcher's desk that is there ONLY for emergencies, and give out the number only to first responders.
The police, and the phone number on the blue sign, go to the railroad's public safety command center. There the person on the phone will give the location of the crossing, with the DOT number, to the PSCC rep. The rep will then call the dispatcher on a hotline, giving the milepost of the crossing. The dispatcher will then stop all trains before the crossing. That process does not take 30 seconds, more like a couple of minutes.
An "expensive model collector"
The cause of the problem is obvious. People are accustomed to making a left turn. They begin turning left immediately after passing over first lanes of traffic that carry traffic from their left to right. People know that they should turn sharp enough to enter the left side of the left-bound lanes. So exactly where they expect to drive through the left turn, they find themselves on a double track railroad instead of the left-bound lanes. Therefore, I doubt this ever happens with drivers making a right turn. They would encounter the turn prior to the railroad instead of after it.
So the obvious solution is traffic circles. Finally they would have a purpose.
n012944That process does not take 30 seconds, more like a couple of minutes.
In due time I'm sure the PSCC will be able to light up the xing in the PTC system directly.
EuclidSo the obvious solution is traffic circles. Finally they would have a purpose.
I didn't use to get traffic circles, either. But then I've been on some that actually work. I don't know if there'd be room there for a proper one.
Actually; Ashland probably stumbled across the resolution earlier this year when they closed the southbound lanes to vehicular traffic to allow the restaurant and other businesses more space for social distancing.
The street on the far side of the tracks is now pedestrian only for the first block south from the crossing by the camera.
To my knowledge, there haven't been any left turns onto the tracks since the street was closed.
Looking at the Ashland north camera today... at 7:14p (local time) someone backs their car from the parking lot right into the DO NOT ENTER sign. Kept them from backing onto the tracks, I guess?
zugmannBut that would mean people look where they are turning. They don't always do that
In this case, the driver apparently turned when the GPS said to turn. I have my doubts he looked before turning the wheel...
Overmod charlie hebdo That's what I said. I fail to see what you have added except words. That's not at all what you said, and you've added too many words in having more than two in your second sentence. You mentioned nothing except British-style rotating gates. Had you actually used your vaunted reading comprehension, I think you'd have seen that was only the analogy to what he was describing -- which was using an additional, common-stock OTS, crossing-gate mechanism at right angles to block rail access asynchronously without the sweep problems, more real derailment risk, etc of a British-style swing gate set at that location. Of course you're welcome to advocate swing-gate use here or elsewhere in the United States. The problem you'll have is that no one anywhere has adopted them instead of lifting barriers. That might indicate that people with actual responsibility for crossing security have evaluated them and found them wanting.
charlie hebdo That's what I said. I fail to see what you have added except words.
That's not at all what you said, and you've added too many words in having more than two in your second sentence.
Yeah you're probably right, using your vaunted knowledge. It was just a thought. Sorry to get you so riled up.
tree68In this case, the driver apparently turned when the GPS said to turn. I have my doubts he looked before turning the wheel...
Could reflective yellow and red lane markers have a desireable effect ?
the state here uses them with many placed on I-85. Heard they cost about #$ 7.50 a piece ? A couple thousand would be somewhat expensive.
The problem with using lane markers would be that they would be below your field of view as you entered the intersection. You might see them as you approach, unless you're busy looking at your GPS, phone, or other distraction.
On the Interstate, you're seeing them well ahead of you and they form a trend.
That's not to say they would be useless. The approaches to the crossing look pretty flat and the red might catch ones eye.
The MUTCD calls for white for edge lines and yellow for centerlines. I'm not sure that red is defined for highway marking. The standard curb marking for fire hydrants is yellow. Remember that red tends to turn black in the dark, save reflective properties.
Another issue in snow country is that they have to be recessed into the pavement or constructed such that snowplows won't clear them off the road.
I think they need large signs that have a simple diagram of the situation. It would show the road, with an arrow (placed like a car on the road) on it pointing in the direction of travel. The sign would show the first cross-street, then two distinct RR tracks, then the second cross-street. Below the diagragm would be the words: "For Left Turn, First Cross Railroad Tracks." Hang the sign over the road, and make it orange with white reflective lettering.
Lithonia Operator Hang the sign over the road, and make it orange with white reflective lettering.
Lithonia Operator I think they need large signs that have a simple diagram of the situation. It would show the road, with an arrow (placed like a car on the road) on it pointing in the direction of travel. The sign would show the first cross-street, then two distinct RR tracks, then the second cross-street. Below the diagragm would be the words: "For Left Turn, First Cross Railroad Tracks." Hang the sign over the road, and make it orange with white reflective lettering.
I'm not a traffic engineer - but took a peek at the MUTCD manual. Closest thing readily available is the R15-7 sign. Normally for light rail, would it be allowed in this situation? Would it help?
https://store.hallsigns.com/R15-7-Light-Rail-Divided-Highway-Symbol_p_5562.html
zugmann Lithonia Operator I think they need large signs that have a simple diagram of the situation. It would show the road, with an arrow (placed like a car on the road) on it pointing in the direction of travel. The sign would show the first cross-street, then two distinct RR tracks, then the second cross-street. Below the diagragm would be the words: "For Left Turn, First Cross Railroad Tracks." Hang the sign over the road, and make it orange with white reflective lettering. I'm not a traffic engineer - but took a peek at the MUTCD manual. Closest thing readily available is the R15-7 sign. Normally for light rail, would it be allowed in this situation? Would it help? https://store.hallsigns.com/R15-7-Light-Rail-Divided-Highway-Symbol_p_5562.html
That's very similar to what I was thinking!
Is there some type of law regarding signs? I mean, could Asland have a custom sign made?
I just looked at Google Streetview of the crossing - there are already reflective pavement markers where the vehicle went off the road...
Putting the sign where it will be seen may be a challenge.
One could probably make a similar sign in the yellow diamond format.
something like this on the centerline of the road even with the crossing arms on both sides may keep drivers to the right long enough to allow them to start their turn later.
rdamonsomething like this on the centerline of the road even with the crossing arms on both sides may keep drivers to the right long enough to allow them to start their turn later.
Remember - Idots can outflank any attempt to idiot proof anything.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
Silly me ..
I am sure Ashland, VA has a few file cabinets full of cases where this has happened before and what they have tried.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.