Trains.com

Railroad concern for crossing safety

11429 views
229 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Defiance Ohio
  • 13,319 posts
Posted by JoeKoh on Friday, July 11, 2003 7:38 AM
gates or no gates one last time IF THE DRIVER WOULD HAVE STOPPED LOOKED AND LISTENED HE WOULD HAVE LIVED!!If that cooridor is that busy it probably is a multiple track crossing.When are you going to get it ? Always expect a train anywhere anytime.
stay safe and quit hiding
joe

Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener").

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 10:15 AM
Equipment failed.. HA! yeah that'll be the day. Missouri, i think you MIGHT actually get a Girl Friend before the day YOU actually whitness Crossing devices fail...

key word: might
  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 2,849 posts
Posted by wabash1 on Friday, July 11, 2003 12:28 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by missouri

I sure have seen a lot of EYE-witnesses saying the equipment failed. What do you think---Bought off or the reports lost?

Train barrels into car, killing driver
Possible problem with crossing gate under scrutiny




Recent stories about traffic accidents.

Recent stories about plane crashes and train accidents


Post or read comments in our online forums




By Darrell Smith
The Desert Sun
July 10, 2003


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
MECCA -- Investigators are focusing on a malfunctioning rail crossing gate in the death of a man whose car was struck by a train Wednesday.

The collision happened just before 11:30 a.m. at a rail crossing on Avenue 66 north of Highway 111 in Mecca, said California Highway Patrol Officer Tami Low.

The driver, a 76-year-old Mecca man, was waiting behind the crossing gate when the crossing arm rose high enough to allow the man’s car to pass, witnesses told CHP investigators.

When he did, a Union Pacific freight train, loaded with nearly 300,000 pounds of cargo, barreled through the Toyota station wagon, knocking it into a nearby culvert.

Investigators marked the train’s speed at 61 mph, normal for that stretch of track, Low said.

"We have really good witnesses who came forward. We’re looking at that very seriously," Low said of the crossing gate.

"We have strong witnesses and strong indications there may have been a malfunction."

The train’s conductor leapt from the train and sprinted the length of the 37-car, 4,000-foot-long freight to pull the man from the wrecked car, Low said.

But the man’s injuries were too great and he died just after 2 p.m. at Desert Regional Medical Center in Palm Springs. His name had not been released Wednesday pending notification of relatives.

Neither the conductor nor the engineer were injured, and Union Pacific officials said the two were receiving counseling.

The train, based out of Los Angeles, was heading to the East Coast, said Union Pacific spokesman Mark Davis.

It is considered one of the most important trains on the railroad’s west-east route because of the expensive cargo it hauls, Low said.

The route through Mecca is a busy one, Low said, with a train passing through every 20 minutes.

The collision closed rail traffic for roughly 2 1/2 hours as crews tended to the victim and cleared the tracks.

The highway patrol is investigating the wreck. Union Pacific officials will also look into the collision and the crossing gate.

Union Pacific’s Davis would not comment specifically on allegations that the gate malfunctioned, citing its investigation into the wreck.

Davis did not know Wednesday how long the railroad’s investigation would take.

"As long as it takes," he said from the railroad’s Omaha, Neb., offices.



Again let me put this into a easier way for the less informed( meaning you missouri) The first thing i read was that the train was 300,000 pounds - it was 37 cars and 4000ft long. (red flag)

1) this is a problemas the math doesnt add up.( and this is a regular problem with your post.) I will try and break this down for you so it is understandable. conductors and engineers all understand this one.The train leigth and poundage dont add up. See railroads go by tons and if you have 300,000 pounds that is just what one dash 9 locomotive is, 200 tons roughly. so this train with 37 cars was only a engine? not according to you. so lets say that the train was 37 cars empty weight alone is over your figure again. and how long was it? 4000ft now railroads use a 50ft system on car size. so 50ft x 37cars =1,850 again something is wrong lets give you the benifit of a all auto rack train at 90ft x 37 cars = 3,330 again not close to the gosspil you are saying. do your homework before posting these replies of lies.

then you posted that the gates rose enough that a car could get through, ( then posted) when he did the train barreld through. This is a perfect example of a cut and paste job. as when he did what who did this, you left out the part of why he did . again missourri your way off base and need to do your homework before posting these chopped up stories. now i provided you with much needed information to make a good story up. lets see if you will use it.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 2:02 PM
What about Moose Crossing signs Kevin. Should drivers stop, look, and listen?
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Defiance Ohio
  • 13,319 posts
Posted by JoeKoh on Friday, July 11, 2003 2:10 PM
wabash
I had a great physics teacher in high school.if something didn't add up he would say "there's some minutia here!".I just hope missouri would get the Stop look listen and live concept before he posts his minutia.
stay safe
joe

Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener").

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 3:52 PM
Hey everyone,
Another one? Mike apparently you have not seen
the video from Europe that shows a person deliberatly going through
a state of the art grade crossing and getting hit . Missouri you say that
Operation Lifesaver and other safety programs are propaganda and
meaningless. If safety is your main concern why do you joke about
highway safety? That's not funny at all![:(!] Safety is important and should
be first and foremost no matter what a person is doing.
Seems that 's not the goal. More of a hate campaign
by Rail NUTS instead of Railroad ENTHUSIASTS . No wonder railroaders
look at rail enthusiasts in a bad light.[:(] Really sad.
Harry
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 5:35 PM
It's a real story . . . just bad reporting. No need for everyone to get paranoid.

http://www.thedesertsun.com/news/stories2003/local/20030710015652.shtml
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 6:15 PM
Moose crossing signs, well see ours in Canada don't have flashing red lights that TELL PEOPLE TO STOP! and they don't give that 30 second warnign.. maybe ours are jsut different...

Oh wait a moose weighs how much... and a train going at 60 mph weighs how much

hmmmm

Oh and do moose cross on private property?

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 6:24 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by missouri

The driver, a 76-year-old Mecca man, was waiting behind the crossing gate when the crossing arm rose high enough to allow the man’s car to pass, witnesses told CHP investigators.


NO no, you see the lights DO NOT stop flashing until the gate has reached there original state .. so therefore.. "rose high enough" DOES NOT mean the gates were going off... by Canadian law its wait until the Gates are COMPLETELY up and the lgiths HAVE STOPPED flashing ... lights don't stop flashing until the gate is completely up.. Ever noticed that??

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 7:06 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by missouri
What about Moose Crossing signs Kevin. Should drivers stop, look, and listen?


Is that the best response you have? Sorry, but that was just LAME!!

Besides that, it's not even remotely similiar. If your Moose Crossing signs are anything like Deer Crossings in the US, then it's a yellow diamond which is meant to warn people to be alert for deer. It doesn't mean stop. Red indicates that the driver should stop (or yield to oncoming traffic). Flashing red lights mean stop.

QUOTE: NO no, you see the lights DO NOT stop flashing until the gate has reached there original state .. so therefore.. "rose high enough" DOES NOT mean the gates were going off... by Canadian law its wait until the Gates are COMPLETELY up and the lgiths HAVE STOPPED flashing ... lights don't stop flashing until the gate is completely up.. Ever noticed that??


Exactly!! The guy was impatient and couldn't wait. Big difference between "rose high enough" and "completely".

These type of people probably ignore the flashing lights and the extended stop signs on school buses picking up or dropping off kids. If they hit a kid coming off the bus they would probably attempt to either blame the child or say the stop sign was not completely extended so they didn't have to stop.
  • Member since
    January 2002
  • From: Omaha, Nebraska
  • 1,920 posts
Posted by Willy2 on Friday, July 11, 2003 9:25 PM
I think that is about time that this topic is DROPPED!!!!!
We have all stated plenty of our opinions and I think that we really aren't going to get anywhere fast with this. We'd all be happier if we weren't arguing!

Willy

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 9:27 PM
OK, just to throw in a casual observers viewpoint.

Stopped to watch some trains yesterday (yes I am a foamer). Busy mainline with wye (south leg of wye is mainline). Switch engine came by with short drag of hoppers and was switching the west leg. He moved onto the mainline (after getting permission from dispatch etc.) where the switch is 50 feet from the grade crossing. Crossing protected by gates, lights, bells etc. Visibility west slightly limited by geography (rocky terrain and curve in track) hence the protection at the crossing with gates etc. etc..

With the switcher clearly visible to the east but with no way for approaching drivers to know which way he was going to go I watched 9 (yep, NINE) vehicles ignore the flashing red lights and bells and drive around both gates to pass through the crossing. This happened within approximately six minutes.

The kicker, approximately 20 minutes earlier with the switcher waiting on the west leg of the wye by the switch and the gates down, lights flashing bells dinging, a 62 car gypsum train came out of the west on the main. Luckily there were no cars at the crossing until the train was well into it.

Humans driving cars are impatient and no matter how much protection is present, they will ignore it if it doesn't suit their schedule.

Jeff S
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 11:43 PM
In the same MUTCD if the gates are timed for more than 45 seconds median barriers are to be installed. Why did the switch engine have the equipment activated if it wasn't needed. Sounds to me a ticket needs to be issued for falsely activateing a railroad crossing for over 5 minutes without the PROPER flagger being in place. Operateing rule #1-1 page 1 column 1 paragraph 1---Railroaders should use their brain!!

____________________________________
OK, just to throw in a casual observers viewpoint.

Stopped to watch some trains yesterday (yes I am a foamer). Busy mainline with wye (south leg of wye is mainline). Switch engine came by with short drag of hoppers and was switching the west leg. He moved onto the mainline (after getting permission from dispatch etc.) where the switch is 50 feet from the grade crossing. Crossing protected by gates, lights, bells etc. Visibility west slightly limited by geography (rocky terrain and curve in track) hence the protection at the crossing with gates etc. etc..

With the switcher clearly visible to the east but with no way for approaching drivers to know which way he was going to go I watched 9 (yep, NINE) vehicles ignore the flashing red lights and bells and drive around both gates to pass through the crossing. This happened within approximately six minutes.

The kicker, approximately 20 minutes earlier with the switcher waiting on the west leg of the wye by the switch and the gates down, lights flashing bells dinging, a 62 car gypsum train came out of the west on the main. Luckily there were no cars at the crossing until the train was well into it.

Humans driving cars are impatient and no matter how much protection is present, they will ignore it if it doesn't suit their schedule.

Jeff S
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Friday, July 11, 2003 11:46 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by missouri
Sounds to me a ticket needs to be issued for falsely activateing a railroad crossing for over 5 minutes without the PROPER flagger being in place.

[xx(]
  • Member since
    August 2002
  • From: Memory Lane, on the sunny side of the street.
  • 737 posts
Posted by ironhorseman on Friday, July 11, 2003 11:54 PM
QUOTE: Originally posted by missouri
Humans driving cars are impatient and no matter how much protection is present, they will ignore it if it doesn't suit their schedule.


you just defeted your own argument. it's not the train's or the railroad's fault it's the MOTORIST'S fault.

WHEN THE GATE ARM'S DOWN: DON'T GO AROUND.

yad sdrawkcab s'ti

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 12, 2003 12:10 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by ironhorseman

Originally posted by missouri
Humans driving cars are impatient and no matter how much protection is present, they will ignore it if it doesn't suit their schedule.


you just defeted your own argument. it's not the train's or the railroad's fault it's the MOTORIST'S fault.

WHEN THE GATE ARM'S DOWN: DON'T GO AROUND.

No the driver didn't sit there and intentionally have the gate down because the RR is too damn cheap to manually override the equipment and put a couple flaggers out for a few minutes. The drivers figure the idiots are to lazy to turn the equipment off when there is NO train comeing. The railroads shouldn't be useing 1800's designed equipment.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 12, 2003 12:24 AM
1800's designed equipment? You obviously have no idea what you're talking about. Why keep making a laughing stock of yourself? I do get a good laugh when I read your posts! Keep on truckin' lil' buddy! Ha ha!
  • Member since
    August 2002
  • From: Memory Lane, on the sunny side of the street.
  • 737 posts
Posted by ironhorseman on Saturday, July 12, 2003 12:29 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by missouri
The drivers figure the idiots are to lazy to turn the equipment off when there is NO train comeing. The railroads shouldn't be useing 1800's designed equipment.


It's my impression you are no authority on railroad operation, rules, equipment, etc. There was no electricity in the 1800s. The first lighting of a city came about in the 1870s, but the first electricly powered crossing arms came when? Does anybody know? Not before 1900. I'll go to the library and look in the book of patents and see when these electricly powered crossing arms were invented.

INCIDENTALLY: everything in railroading has been revolutionized. Standards in place even 50 years ago are now gone. From the manufacture of rail to the wheels to crossties, even crossings are different today than many, many years ago.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DEACTIVATING A RAILCROSSIN WHEN THE TRAIN IS STOPPED? I don't know, yet. I know some factors that cause a crossing to activate are motion, weight, and an electric current that closes a circuit from rail to rail using the steel wheels as a circuit link. I also know the electric crossings do not rely on local powerplants for electricity. They're independent. I would imagine turning off a crossing signal would have to go through the approval of the dispatcher. I'll research that as well for your satisfaction.

WHEN THE GATE ARMS ARE DOWN, DON'T GO AROUND

yad sdrawkcab s'ti

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: US
  • 286 posts
Posted by dekemd on Saturday, July 12, 2003 12:53 AM
Speaking of the old days. If I remember history correctly automobiles weren't around in the 1800's either. I guess horse and buggys were the big problem back then.

Missouri I'm curious why you think the railroads should be forking over all the money on safety equipment. Where I live the last rail line to be completed and placed in service occurred in 1904. I'm pretty sure there were very few roads 99 years ago. Which translates into very few grade crossings other than footpaths. Most of the roads and grade crossing in my neck of the woods were put in long after the railroad was there by federal, state and local govenments. It seems to me that since the govenment built these roads they should have most of the burden of safety equipment. Maybe what needs to happen is that the people who built the roads (ie. the govenment) should have to rebuild them and either go over or under the tracks thus eliminating grade crossing. I'm sure the railroads would be very happy to not have to worry about idiot drivers at grade crossings.

Derrick
  • Member since
    March 2002
  • 9,265 posts
Posted by edblysard on Saturday, July 12, 2003 1:07 AM
Linda Morgan, before she resigned from the FRA, stated that,"railroads love to close crossings, in fact, railroads and the FRA belive the safest crossing is the one that isnt there". Underpases and overpasses were the most common in cities before the 50s. Go the the oldest part of your city, and look at how the street designers handled grade crossings. They didnt, they went under the tracks more than they went across them. Those of us who railroad for a living would love for the new moderen designers to learn a lesson from the past.
But... by now you have realized that no matter what you say to this clown[:o)]he wont listen, He has a problem with railroads and railroaders. Safety is not a concern of his, getting attention is.
So Derrick, dont let him get you too riled up, thats how he gets his groove on[:D].
Stay Frosty,
Ed
QUOTE: Originally posted by dekemd

Speaking of the old days. If I remember history correctly automobiles weren't around in the 1800's either. I guess horse and buggys were the big problem back then.

Missouri I'm curious why you think the railroads should be forking over all the money on safety equipment. Where I live the last rail line to be completed and placed in service occurred in 1904. I'm pretty sure there were very few roads 99 years ago. Which translates into very few grade crossings other than footpaths. Most of the roads and grade crossing in my neck of the woods were put in long after the railroad was there by federal, state and local govenments. It seems to me that since the govenment built these roads they should have most of the burden of safety equipment. Maybe what needs to happen is that the people who built the roads (ie. the govenment) should have to rebuild them and either go over or under the tracks thus eliminating grade crossing. I'm sure the railroads would be very happy to not have to worry about idiot drivers at grade crossings.

Derrick

23 17 46 11

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 12, 2003 2:26 AM
QUOTE: Originally posted by ironhorseman

QUOTE: Originally posted by missouri
The drivers figure the idiots are to lazy to turn the equipment off when there is NO train comeing. The railroads shouldn't be useing 1800's designed equipment.


It's my impression you are no authority on railroad operation, rules, equipment, etc. There was no electricity in the 1800s. The first lighting of a city came about in the 1870s, but the first electricly powered crossing arms came when? Does anybody know? Not before 1900. I'll go to the library and look in the book of patents and see when these electricly powered crossing arms were invented.

INCIDENTALLY: everything in railroading has been revolutionized. Standards in place even 50 years ago are now gone. From the manufacture of rail to the wheels to crossties, even crossings are different today than many, many years ago.

WHO IS RESPONSIBLE FOR DEACTIVATING A RAILCROSSIN WHEN THE TRAIN IS STOPPED? I don't know, yet. I know some factors that cause a crossing to activate are motion, weight, and an electric current that closes a circuit from rail to rail using the steel wheels as a circuit link. I also know the electric crossings do not rely on local powerplants for electricity. They're independent. I would imagine turning off a crossing signal would have to go through the approval of the dispatcher. I'll research that as well for your satisfaction.

WHEN THE GATE ARMS ARE DOWN, DON'T GO AROUND

The patented invention of the electric closed track circuit by Dr. William Robinson in 1872 gave the railroad industry its first means of automatic vital signaling.

The track circuit is used to detect the presence of a train or a broken rail within a block of track. When an electric current traveling through the rails in a block of track is shorted by the presence of a train or interrupted by a break in the rail, a red signal indicates danger to approaching trains. When the track is clear, the closed circuit activates a green signal to indicate that approaching trains can enter the block.

In 1878, Dr. William Robinson founded the Union Electric Signal Co. to hold his patents, to produce track circuits, and to install them. This technology continues to be a foundation of rail signaling and communications today.

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, July 12, 2003 2:30 AM
The patented invention of the electric closed track circuit by Dr. William Robinson in 1872 gave the railroad industry its first means of automatic vital signaling.

The track circuit is used to detect the presence of a train or a broken rail within a block of track. When an electric current traveling through the rails in a block of track is shorted by the presence of a train or interrupted by a break in the rail, a red signal indicates danger to approaching trains. When the track is clear, the closed circuit activates a green signal to indicate that approaching trains can enter the block.

In 1878, Dr. William Robinson founded the Union Electric Signal Co. to hold his patents, to produce track circuits, and to install them. This technology continues to be a foundation of rail signaling and communications today.

  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 2,849 posts
Posted by wabash1 on Saturday, July 12, 2003 5:03 AM
missouri you almost said something that made sense. you was gettign a point across then fell apart problems are

1) weight has nothing to do with activation of a signal, the shunting of a track to close a circut.

dispatcher can not have a signal cut out. he has no authority it goes much higher than that. all signals operate on electricity and the power comes from the local power company. the only time they dont use the power from the power company is when the power is out. then the signals go to battery backup..

keep up the work you always have us correcting your mistakes, and if you research something read all of it not just little parts and add your opinion as fillers that is where you keep getting the wrong ideas
  • Member since
    August 2002
  • From: Memory Lane, on the sunny side of the street.
  • 737 posts
Posted by ironhorseman on Sunday, July 13, 2003 3:45 PM
OK, missouri dude, I did some research for you. You didn't site the source you referenced about the signaling. I found it word for word at http://www.switch.com/about/about.htm

You plagerize quite well. While your copy and paste skills are exceptional, your ability to think critically, however, is less than adequate. The article you copied refers to BLOCK SIGNALING, not CROSSING ARMS an FLASHING LIGHT activation which is what we were talking about.

Your second oversight is the part where it says this continues to be a "foundation of rail signaling and communications today." It's the FOUNDATION. That doesn't mean the exact same systems from 1870 are in place today. True, it is 1870s technology, but it works and works well. I still use a wooden pencil to write with but I guess then that makes me old fashioned.

I will go to the library on Monday, just for you, like I promised and look up the patent for the grade crossing devices JUST FOR YOU.

But before I do that let me quote you something from Trains Magazine Vol. 62, No. 1 January 2002 Pg. 80 "Ask Trains:"
"Q: How are railroad grade-crossing lights and gates activated?

"A: In the 1950s, audio frequency overly (AFO) track circuits were adopted by railroads for grade-crossing signal-control circuits, because this did not require insulated joints in the rails. The circuits were refined to not only detect the presence of a train, but also to sence its movement toward the crossing and start the warning signals based on that. If the train stopped moving, the warning signals were turned off; resumption of movement toward the crossing restarted them....

"Most installations now have constant warning time (CWT) control systems, which also utilize AFO on the rail...The warning devices thus can distinguish between fast- and slow-moving trains giving motorists the same amount of warning."

Now this part is important so pay attention:

"Most states have laws which specifiy the minimum crossing-signal warning time given to motorists and pedestrians, usually 20 to 30 seconds, before a train occupies the crossing. What all motorists should know is that at all grade crossings, the train has the right of way as stated in a 1934 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court."

The reply was written by Steve Patterson, BNSF, Operation Lifesaver; and Clayton C. Tinkham

If you want to look up US Supreme Court cases post 1893 I suggest http://findlaw.com

There, put that in your pipe and smoke it.

yad sdrawkcab s'ti

  • Member since
    December 2002
  • From: US
  • 286 posts
Posted by dekemd on Sunday, July 13, 2003 8:05 PM
Ed,

He won't get me riled up. I've been following the M&M saga for quite a while. I find it interesting how he changes the context on things, or leave facts out. Almost like a lawyer or a criminal. I work in law enforcement so dealing with people like this is a daily occurance. When backed in to a corner they'll usually back off or ignore what was said like they didn't hear it. For example, as I read the last post which at the time was made by ironhorseman, who made some very good points with good references, there were two members looking at this topic; myself and Mr. Missouri. I waited 20 minutes and he never replied to ironhorseman's post. But to give him the benifit of the doubt, he may be looking up the references. Your notice too that he didn't answer my post of yours either. Kind of like selective hearing[:)]

Derrick

quote]Originally posted by edblysard

Linda Morgan, before she resigned from the FRA, stated that,"railroads love to close crossings, in fact, railroads and the FRA belive the safest crossing is the one that isnt there". Underpases and overpasses were the most common in cities before the 50s. Go the the oldest part of your city, and look at how the street designers handled grade crossings. They didnt, they went under the tracks more than they went across them. Those of us who railroad for a living would love for the new moderen designers to learn a lesson from the past.
But... by now you have realized that no matter what you say to this clown[:o)]he wont listen, He has a problem with railroads and railroaders. Safety is not a concern of his, getting attention is.
So Derrick, dont let him get you too riled up, thats how he gets his groove on[:D].
Stay Frosty,
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • From: Defiance Ohio
  • 13,319 posts
Posted by JoeKoh on Sunday, July 13, 2003 8:23 PM
Im still waiting for Mr.Pines to respond to my post.Stay safe
joe

Deshler Ohio-crossroads of the B&O Matt eats your fries.YUM! Clinton st viaduct undefeated against too tall trucks!!!(voted to be called the "Clinton St. can opener").

 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, July 13, 2003 8:37 PM
"Most states have laws which specifiy the minimum crossing-signal warning time given to motorists and pedestrians, usually 20 to 30 seconds, before a train occupies the crossing. What all motorists should know is that at all grade crossings, the train has the right of way as stated in a 1934 decision of the U.S. Supreme Court."

That's actually a Federal statute that says lights/gates are to give 20 seconds warning--- whoops I forgot the gates are to be down 5 seconds before the train arrives now since the crooks covered the RRs butts lately. Maybe the Secretary of Transportation and his Supreme Court buddies can get in their wheelchairs at a three track crossing and demonstrate on Network T.V. just exactly how bright they are.

The T.V. industry changed from flat lead cable to shielded coaxial cable because the flat lead (railroad track) was bad to pick up outside interference. Is that why the RRs still use the tracks as a transmitting antenna because the metal in them will see lightning, electrical interference, bad spark plugs, rust, what was it oh yeah soy beans spilt in Bourbonnais after the Amtrak crashed so the gates didn't see the train. And what does that salt and snow do?

Look up the crossing systems in Europe that use 4 beeper frequiencies (shielded) so there is a back up or two not the Oh the equipment failed quick hide the smokin' gun which happens all the time according to the crossing EXPERTS I have talked to.
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, July 13, 2003 8:41 PM
HEy mr.pines.. do you know the diff between block signaling and RR crossing lights?
  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Monday, July 14, 2003 12:34 AM
About $80,000
  • Member since
    April 2001
  • From: US
  • 2,849 posts
Posted by wabash1 on Monday, July 14, 2003 3:54 AM
missouri as usual you are wrong but this is no suprise to everyone here. all this stuff you are spitting out about europe signal system and usa system sheilded coax cable for radio signals for crossing ( i guess this is why you want cameras on rear of trains) soy beans keeping signals from working. you are windier than a bag of .. you get the point. In other words you are spitting out stuff that was rumored back in 1960 us kids use to say about the signals it was hogwa***hen like now. salt and snow does nothing to the signal. lightning does nothing to it. unless it is hit by it. then it goes into failsafe and keeps ringing and flashing til its fixed. otherwise the usa has the best system around. the 5 sec the gate need to be down is included into the time of warning of 20 sec. but of couse you knew this you just wanted to be contaversatle. and the amtrak train in illinois the signal system was working perfect. it was the truck driver who was alittle off. this is why he lost his job and his company paid the damages. but you knew this also i am sure.

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