How much horn blowing is necessary?

[NKP guy]

jeffhergert

I don't know how to change driver's attitudes towards crossings.

One of my students some years ago was killed in her car at a train crossing here in town and a few months later Operation Lifesaver had me on board as a representitive from the school system.  They mounted a camera on the locomotive so we passengers could see for ourselves how many cars raced over the crossings, no matter the flashing lights, in order to beat the train.  But it was seeing one or two schoolbuses doing this that really shocked me.

These days most all of the crossings around here have had gates installed to good effect.  

 

[tree68]

jeffhergert

I don't know how to change driver's attitudes towards crossings.

Going back to my own experience - 

I drove across the same crossing twice a day for years, going to and from work.  If I caught a train there a dozen times, I'd be amazed.  Granted, with three to five trains a day, the odds weren't high, but that's my point.

If I were an uninitiated member of the public, I might conclude that there was virtually no rail traffic over that crossing, so the possibility of said traffic probably wouldn't come to mind most of the time.  It's just a bumpy spot in the road.

That doesn't exempt the folks who ignore active crossing protection, but on an unprotected crossing such as the one in question, they may not understand the potential for disaster.

The following has made the rounds for some time, and is intended as humorous, but one cannot discount the possibility that similar considerations were in play, going over what was, based on photos of the scene, not the smoothest crossing:

If you rarely drive on snow, just pretend you're taking your grandma to church. There's a platter of biscuits and 2 gallons of sweet tea in glass jars in the back seat. She's wearing a new dress and holding a crock pot full of gravy.

[BaltACD]

NKP guy

 

jeffhergert

I don't know how to change driver's attitudes towards crossings. 

One of my students some years ago was killed in her car at a train crossing here in town and a few months later Operation Lifesaver had me on board as a representitive from the school system.  They mounted a camera on the locomotive so we passengers could see for ourselves how many cars raced over the crossings, no matter the flashing lights, in order to beat the train.  But it was seeing one or two schoolbuses doing this that really shocked me.

These days most all of the crossings around here have had gates installed to good effect.  

In the public psyche today railroads only exist in two ways.  Either then 'no longer run trains on that track' or they always have a train blocking that track.

Part of the problem, is that the public doesn't enough trains moving on a track segment for it register in their minds that trains are acutally running all the time.  The public can go over the same crossing hundreds of times without seeing a train and form the idea in their head that that track is not in service as they never see a train using it.  PSR in operating fewer, bigger trains has tended to reinforce the idea as fewer trains can increase that hundreds of time to thousands of times.

[charlie hebdo]

My point was that for road crossings, the benefits seem minimal, at least according to the operating personnel who posted. And it really seems unnecessary for trains meeting or passing each other to blow horns, not in the 21st century.

[tree68]

charlie hebdo

My point was that for road crossings, the benefits seem minimal, at least according to the operating personnel who posted. And it really seems unnecessary for trains meeting or passing each other to blow horns, not in the 21st century.

I would opine that the concept of trains blowing horns for crossings is quite thoroughly ingrained in the psyche of those who do experience trains on a regular basis.

Some years ago we had a fellow stop his car on a crossing right in front of us.  He managed to get off the crossing before we got there, partly due to the engineer putting the train in emergency.

His comment as we passed?  "Why weren't you blowing the horn?"  In reality, we were, except it was a Leslie Typhon "blat" horn, not a now common three or five chime horn.

But he didn't recognize it for what it was.

Despite the exceptions noted here, which represent a miniscule fraction of the total crossing interfaces occurring daily, I suspect the horn serves its purpose.

[BaltACD]

charlie hebdo

My point was that for road crossings, the benefits seem minimal, at least according to the operating personnel who posted. And it really seems unnecessary for trains meeting or passing each other to blow horns, not in the 21st century.

Minimal, NOT nonexistent.  

Why do we have Alarm Clocks (or suitable apps on our phones) to awaken us for the day ahead at a predetermined time.  Audible warnings are something that has existed since the second human observed the first human doing something that was feared to be life threatening.

[charlie hebdo]

Our various percerptions are evolved to detect changes in the environment and unusual events. Thus routine horn blowing at crossings may actually go by unregustered. 

[charlie hebdo]

BaltACD

 

 

charlie hebdo

My point was that for road crossings, the benefits seem minimal, at least according to the operating personnel who posted. And it really seems unnecessary for trains meeting or passing each other to blow horns, not in the 21st century.

 

 

Minimal, NOT nonexistent.  

Why do we have Alarm Clocks (or suitable apps on our phones) to awaken us for the day ahead at a predetermined time.  Audible warnings are something that has existed since the second human observed the first human doing something that was feared to be life threatening.

 

A more appropriate analogy using your alarm clock metaphor would be if your alarm went off randomly multiple times day and night. Eventually you wouldn't even notice it.

Hornblowing at crossings should occur only when needed to alert a driver or pedestrian to get off the tracks.  And the sequence of _  _ - _ could be modified to multiple long blasts to get the miscreants' attention. Like so many things with US rails, things are done a certain way "because that's the way we have always done it" to paraphrase Don Oltmann.

[BEAUSABRE]

BaltACD

From those conversations, I would venture railroads have never killed old or inferior livestock.  Every animal has been at least a County Champion for its class if not a State Champion.  Railroad only run over the best.

I'm a retired Army Officer and did several tours in Germany -  which was Armor Branch's Home Away Fom Home back in the day (An Armor Master or First Sergeant or Sergeant Major without a German wife was letting the side down). Anyway, we would have to road march from home station to a major training area (Grafenwoehr, Hohenfels) several times as year and in the Fall (after the harvests were in - Fall maneuvers was a German tradition that dated back to Imperial times), we would maneuver cross country as part of the annual Autumn Forge exercises. For such occasions, we would be given a German speaking reserve officer to act as the battalion S5 (Civil-Military Affairs Officer). His vehicle would trail the unit and he would instantly settle, on the spot, any damaged property or dead animal claims. During my day, he was armed with a checkbook, but our Squadron Commander and Sergeant Major could remember back in the Fifties when he had a briefcase stuffed with Deutsch Marks! And, of course, the US taxpayer paid through the nose for each "champion" cow, pig and chicken that died (I felt we should at least be able to give the carcase to the cooks since we had bought it). To make it worse, the US and German governments had worked out an agreement that we would pay for all the offspring it would have had in its lifetime. And maybe their offspring's lifetime. The German people may not have liked having US troops stationed on their soil, but they sure loved our money! 

[BaltACD]

charlie hebdo

A more appropriate analogy using your alarm clock metaphor would be if your alarm went off randomly multiple times day and night. Eventually you wouldn't even notice it.

Hornblowing at crossings should occur only when needed to alert a driver or pedestrian to get off the tracks.  And the sequence of _  _ - _ could be modified to multiple long blasts to get the miscreants' attention. Like so many things with US rails, things are done a certain way "because that's the way we have always done it" to paraphrase Don Oltmann.

My daughter uses the alarm function on her phone to sound multiple times during the day in arranging the daily schedules for her children - getting up for school, bed time and  other time sensitive moments in her children's daily lives.

Sometimes NOTHING can penetrate the fog between a individuals ears to warn them of impending doom.

Another thing to remember - locomotives are 'Alerter' equipped where the tools used in operating a trains, throttle, brake valves, horn must be operated within a defined time frame or a specific 'button' activated or the train will experience a Penalty Application of the brakes which will bring the train to a stop, before the device can be reset and the train continue on its way.

[tree68]

charlie hebdo

And the sequence of _  _ - _ could be modified to multiple long blasts to get the miscreants' attention.

Already in the rules...

That said, what's your objection to blowing for crossings?

[Gramp]

I equate this stuff to the decision to use your seatbelt when you drive. If you look at it from the perspective of taking a single trip, the likelihood of being killed is something like one in 3.5 million trips. Becoming disabled because of a car accident is one in 100k trips. Can seem like a pretty low risk.  But if you look at from a 50 year lifetime of driving, it's one in a hundred of being killed and one in three of being disabled. I use my belt each trip. I think it's smarter to frame the risk level with multiple occurances rather than single. 

[York1]

Has anyone heard any more about this accident?  I've looked, but I can't find anything more than reports saying essentially the same thing.

I guess since everyone was killed (one survivor?), we may never know why the driver proceeded slowly directly into the path of the train.

[charlie hebdo]

tree68

 

 

charlie hebdo

And the sequence of _  _ - _ could be modified to multiple long blasts to get the miscreants' attention.

 

 

Already in the rules...

That said, what's your objection to blowing for crossings?

 

Mostly because the horn blowing is often redundant to the gates and for the reasons concerning perception mentioned earlier, counter-productive.  Several operating personnel from major railroads (on here) agree.  

[Overmod]

Research has been done both in Canada and the United States to determine a more effective 'emergency' horn signal.  An interesting approach from the former was to dedicate two bells of an existing five-bell horn to 'emergency' tuning (a somewhat discordant chord, like the old Emergency Broadcast System tone) and then use the other three as a typical three-bell horn.

Some of the United States research centered around 'pulling' the horn sound to make it seem the source was rapidly accelerating toward the listener.  This combined with a distinctive modulation (my recommendation being what the New York subways uses, a repeated pattern of long-short with spaces between) produces an easily-distinguished "emergency-pay-attention" signal regardless of Doppler or multipath reflection.

[Cotton Belt MP104]

Does anyone have the FRA accident report number concerning the "Kismet siding collision" ?  Thanks.  endmrw0928230918

 

[rdamon]

charlie hebdo

 Several operating personnel from major railroads (on here) agree.  

 

 

But lawyers do not work on common sense :(

I remember we had a similar discussion when the there was the accident where the crew was walking towards a train on the tracks and did not distinguish the horn and lights of the train approaching from behind.

[Euclid]

rdamon

 

 

charlie hebdo

 Several operating personnel from major railroads (on here) agree.  

 

 

 

 

 

But lawyers do not work on common sense :(

I remember we had a similar discussion when the there was the accident where the crew was walking towards a train on the tracks and did not distinguish the horn and lights of the train approaching from behind.

 

We had a lively discussion about this in the thread named: 

 

https://cs.trains.com/trn/f/111/t/276370.aspx?page=1

 

 

Focusing on the sight and sound of one train that is distracting one from the warnings second train, that are not seen or heard, has claimed may lives over the years. 

 

From the linked thread:

 

CSX Fatalities Probable Cause, Ivy City, DC

Posted by Euclid on Wednesday, June 5, 2019 7:09 PM

 

Some questions are raised by the CSX accident at Ivy City, D.C. in which a conductor and student conductor were struck and killed by an Amtrak train. 

 

In other discussion of this topic, some have expressed certainty that death of the two conductors was due to their negligence in deciding to walk on an Amtrak track as they returned to their locomotive.  They were struck and killed by an Amtrak train approaching them from behind at the same moment that another Amtrak train was approaching on the other Amtrak track from ahead of them.  So an obvious conclusion is that they were not paying enough attention, were not expecting trains on any track, any time, etc.  And yet once a person decides a track is clear to cross, they have correctly ceased expecting a train.  So the rule is somewhat of a platitude.   

 

It is clear that had they not been fouling the Amtrak track, they would not have been struck. Yet their job on CSX required them to inspect a CSX freight train which meant walking along much of that train.  I am not sure of which side it was necessary to walk in this particular case, but the point is that it could have been either or both sides.  So my question goes to the larger premise of how it can be considered safe to inspect a train in such close proximity to the Amtrak line even if the inspecting personnel are not actually fouling Amtrak.  Or more precisely, how do you work in such close proximity to the foul zone of a track without inadvertently entering it?

 

In their accident report, the NTSB says the following: 

1. There is not any prohibition against employees walking on a live track.
2. There is not any system by which CSX could request that Amtrak provide protection for CSX employees working in dangerous proximity to Amtrak track.
3. NTSB wishes there was such a system and recommends that it be set up by both companies.
4. The cause of the accident was the decision of the two conductors to walk in the fouling zone of the Amtrak track. 

 

The CSX train was on one CSX main with the hind end cars, and the other main with the head end cars.  It was also occupying a crossover between the two mains.  Focusing on the head end portion of the CSX train since that portion was along the track on which the conductors were struck: 

 

On one side of the standing CSX train (head end), there was a CSX mainline track; and on the other side was an Amtrak mainline track. If there were a train on the Amtrak track, its side would be about 5 feet from the side of the CSX train. So that is a 5-foot wide space for a person to stand in.  This is the space that would be safe for a conductor to be in while inspecting the train. 

 

Inside of the 5-foot space, one side is defined by the presence of the stopped train being inspected.  The other side is defined by the start of the fouling zone for the Amtrak track.  At the threshold of this fouling zone, a person would want to allow a little more space because it would be unsafe to use up all of the space right up to the point where you contact a moving train.  So how much of the 5-foot zone of clearance can you use when inspecting a train?  Specifically, how close can a person safely be from the fouling boundary of a fast passenger train?  Bear in mind that air movement and spatial disorientation can also be induced by a fast train at close proximity. 

 

It is my understanding that Amtrak trains on this stretch of track are allowed to travel at speeds up to 125 mph.  So in terms of safe railroad practice, how close can a worker be to a 125 mph passenger train?  What do the rules say about this?  Where is the line drawn?  If you clear the train by one inch, it is not going to hit you.  But how can a person be expected to work safely even within a couple feet of contacting a 125 mph passenger train?  At the site where the conductors were killed, such a train could not have been seen until it was only about 8 seconds away from them.   

 

In my opinion, I would consider anywhere in that 5-foot clearance zone to be unsafe unless there was formal train protection provided to assure that no trains would pass on the empty Amtrak track.  

 

Yet, because CSX and Amtrak are two different companies, there is no system by which CSX can arrange protection from Amtrak trains.  The two conductors killed in this accident did not have the option of protection.  Whether their job required them to be in the fatal location in this specific case, I don’t know.  But it certainly could have required that, and no doubt would require that in the future, and has probably required it in the past.  And yet CSX has no means of protecting employees from this extremely dangerous need to be working in or near the fatal foul zone.  I find it incredibly odd that CSX, like most railroads, has an ultra-high sensitivity to safety hazards and safe practices to address them.  But then they have no concern about the danger of sending train crewmen into the death trap of working on the ground, in confined spaces, with 125 mph trains passing within a couple feet of them, and only a few seconds of warning. 

 

I also find it odd that the NTSB would find the probable cause of this accident to be the two conductors deciding to walk on the Amtrak track, while telling us that the employees were entirely permitted to walk there. 

 

https://www.ntsb.gov/investigations/AccidentReports/Reports/RAB1901.pdf

[tree68]

charlie hebdo

Mostly because the horn blowing is often redundant to the gates...

Unless drivers can go around them.  

Quiet zones generally include crossings with four quadrant gates.

So, assuming the decision was made to stop blowing for crossings, how would you go about the transition?  Public education?  Ask Operation Lifesaver how that's going.  How to you respond to a family member who insists that "they've always blown for the crossings before - they didn't this time and that's why Dad died."

Of course, you could simply absolve the railroads of any blame if a citizen chooses to ignore the signage at a crossing and drives in front of a train...

Euclid

 I also find it odd that the NTSB would find the probable cause of this accident to be the two conductors deciding to walk on the Amtrak track, while telling us that the employees were entirely permitted to walk there.

The answer to that one is easy.  Just because you can doesn't mean you should.  A key rule of railroading is to always expect a train.   Period.  No discussion necessary.

[Euclid]

tree68

 

 

charlie hebdo

Mostly because the horn blowing is often redundant to the gates...

 

 

Unless drivers can go around them.  

Quiet zones generally include crossings with four quadrant gates.

So, assuming the decision was made to stop blowing for crossings, how would you go about the transition?  

You put four quadrant gates at every signalized crossing.  

[charlie hebdo]

tree68

Unless drivers can go around them.   Quiet zones generally include crossings with four quadrant gates.

"Generally" is not the case in west suburban Chicago, as quiet zones prevail with single gates. As you say, people go around gates and become inuured to horns, tume them out. That is how people operate.

So why tdo you want to blow horns? Often, by the time the engineer can see the vehicle, it's too late, horn blowing or not.  Maybe on your short line, operating at low speeds, your horn might be useful but not likely on a Metra train at 60 mph or a two-mile-long container train at 55.

[BaltACD]

charlie hebdo

 

tree68

Unless drivers can go around them.   Quiet zones generally include crossings with four quadrant gates. 

"Generally" is not the case in west suburban Chicago, as quiet zones prevail with single gates. As you say, people go around gates and become inuured to horns, tume them out. That is how people operate.

So why tdo you want to blow horns? Often, by the time the engineer can see the vehicle, it's too late, horn blowing or not.  Maybe on your short line, operating at low speeds, your horn might be useful but not likely on a Metra train at 60 mph or a two-mile-long container train at 55.

Are your West suburban Chicago 'quiet zones' FRA authorized?  I don't believe the FRA has authorized single gate crossings as quiet zones.

What is your personal aversion to hearing horns?  Do they indicate that there is someone besides yourself in the world? ????

[rdamon]

Without the horn, finding a good place to stop and set up the tripod will be harder

[CSSHEGEWISCH]

The Chicago-Aurora line was governed by a lot of local ordinances which banned sounding the horn except to prevent accidents.  These ordinances predated the FRA regulations so they may have been grandfathered.

[tree68]

Certainly wouldn't want to spend any time at the Duluth Aerial Bridge, Soo Locks, or Port Huron, among others.  Horn salutes are de rigeur.

At Duluth, the ships give a horn salute, and the bridge answers it (with two five chime train horns)...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k_sg8rhsgk

 

[BaltACD]

CSSHEGEWISCH

The Chicago-Aurora line was governed by a lot of local ordinances which banned sounding the horn except to prevent accidents.  These ordinances predated the FRA regulations so they may have been grandfathered.

Time for the Grandfathers to be buried and current regulations put in place.

[mudchicken]

BaltACD

 

CSSHEGEWISCH

The Chicago-Aurora line was governed by a lot of local ordinances which banned sounding the horn except to prevent accidents.  These ordinances predated the FRA regulations so they may have been grandfathered. 

Time for the Grandfathers to be buried and current regulations put in place.

 

In Los Angeles / Pasadena - those grandfathered ordinances were dumped.

[ChuckCobleigh]

tree68

Certainly wouldn't want to spend any time at the Duluth Aerial Bridge, Soo Locks, or Port Huron, among others.  Horn salutes are de rigeur.

At Duluth, the ships give a horn salute, and the bridge answers it (with two five chime train horns)...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9k_sg8rhsgk

 

 

Watched that stream for a bit, went back in the playback and after a couple of ore boats came into the harbor, all I can hear is Gordon Lightfoot.

[tree68]

ChuckCobleigh

Watched that stream for a bit, went back in the playback and after a couple of ore boats came into the harbor, all I can hear is Gordon Lightfoot.

Need to catch the "Barker Bark."  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lzIZbEynCK8

The Arthur Anderson, last ship to see the Fitzgerald, still plies the lakes.

 

[Ulrich]

There's a nice motel along the Trans Canada Highway near Edmunston, new Brunswick. Unbeknown to most motorists, the CN mainline runs behind the motel, hidden by a few trees. There's also a little dirt road that veers off the highway and crosses the tracks. And when the train comes through at 2:00 am the engineer blows two longs, a short, and a long, and if you have any room in that motel you're wide awake after that train has passed. I think the engineers make a game of it..