grade crossing accidents with a second train

[Joel N. Weber II]

This Boston Globe article describes a boy being killed when he decided to go through the crossing after the first train passed, not realizing there would be a second train.

I'm sure the simple, obvious advice anyone can offer to anyone who has to cross railroad tracks at grade is that this is why you really ought to have the patience to wait for the gates to come up.

But someone who studies human factors would probably argue that the gates could be better designed.

For example, is there normally a significant delay in the gates coming up after the train passes that would teach people who are failing to notice the subtle possiblity of a second train coming that once the train passes, they can save some time by going around the gates? Would eliminating most or all of that delay remove the incentive for people to enter the crossing as soon as a train passes even while the gates are still down? Does the signal system typically have enough information about the train direction that the gates can be lowered long before the train reaches the crossing but raised as soon as the train crosses?

 

[GG-1]

For example, is there normally a significant delay in the gates coming up after the train passes that would teach people who are failing to notice the subtle possiblity of a second train coming that once the train passes, they can save some time by going around the gates? Would eliminating most or all of that delay remove the incentive for people to enter the crossing as soon as a train passes even while the gates are still down? Does the signal system typically have enough information about the train direction that the gates can be lowered long before the train reaches the crossing but raised as soon as the train crosses?

Aloha

From my past I seem to rember the gates open under a second after the train or trains are clear. Is that to long to wait?

 

[Steve4031]

This scenario happens often in the suburbs of Chicago where there are stations with grade crossing at either end of the platfrom The commuters get off, and walk across the tracks and do not look for a train coming on the next track. Or they run to catch their train, and do not look after their train has stopped at the station. The only way to completely resolve this is to grade separate everything to make it idiot proof.

 

[transit54]

The LIRR did an interesting public service video about this. I think it really has the kind of shock value to wake people up to the danger of grade crossings:

http://mta.info/lirr/pubs/video/Crossing.htm

Also, I should add that I'm shocked how many people have the attitude of just steeping out into railroad tracks. Before I step out into any road, I always look both ways. Why anyone wouldn't do the same at railroad tracks, I have no idea.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

From my past I seem to rember the gates open under a second after the train or trains are clear. Is that to long to wait?

I think that depends on how a particular crossing installation is designed. I'm fairly sure I've seen crossings that aren't that fast.

The obvious relatively cheap way to design a grade crossing is to simply have it lower the gates whenever a train occupies the block that the crossing is in, and perhaps one or more adjacent blocks, possibly not paying any attention to where the crossings are when you're choosing a block layout. I suspect there are cases where railroads don't divide the track into extra blocks just to be able to raise the gates faster.

On the other hand, the Grand Junction Railroad crossing at Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge, MA (which doesn't have any gates, just blinking lights) only has the lights blink when the train is almost in the intersection, and so the train has to pretty much come to a complete stop right next to the intersection to get the lights to start flashing and then wait for the cars to get out of the way. If I remember correctly, there was one time when I saw a train coming (turned out to be a switching locomotive coupled to one of the locomotives the MBTA typically uses for revenue trains, with nothing else in the consist), and I looked down the track and was surprised that the flashers weren't flashing, and decided after a bit that I could safely cross and did so, and then I stopped and watched the train go through the intersection before I continued to wherever I was going.

 

[RRrich]

I remember waiting at a grade crossing outside of Springfield, MO - no way the gates lifted in one (or several) second.

I think I remember the Grand Junction Railroad crossing at Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge, MA - that was near Vasser St, wasn't it? My memories are from the mid-sixties.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

I think I remember the Grand Junction Railroad crossing at Massachusetts Avenue in Cambridge, MA - that was near Vasser St, wasn't it? My memories are from the mid-sixties.

Yes, as you're heading towards the Harvard Bridge (named for its proximity to MIT, or something) along Mass Ave from that grade crossing, the first street you come to is Vasser. (The part of Vassar between Mass Ave and Main Street is a lot different than it was 10 years ago, and I think the MIT cogen plant that sits between the tracks and Vassar near Mass Ave wouldn't have been there in the 60s. I think the IRE PROOF WAREHOUSE or whatever it's called is somewhere near there, too, on the other side of Mass Ave, and it might have been there in the 60s.)

MIT also built a building above the Grand Junction Railroad next to Main St a couple years ago. I'm sort of surprised that they got permission to do that, although I think they probably would have gotten that permission from CSX (who is probably perfectly happy with the very slow speed single track) and not the MBTA (who might, if we'd been lucky, have had the foresight to see that having a building there reduces the options for using it for any sort of quality revenue passenger service in the future, though I'm not really convinced that the Grand Junction Railroad's alignment is the most useful possible alignment for passenger service, even if it were grade separated).

 

[Walt]

Before I step out into any road, I always look both ways. Why anyone wouldn't do the same at railroad tracks, I have no idea.

Good point.

However, around here, every once in a while, there is some kid who climbs a fence, tries to "dart" across a multi-lane highway, and doesn't make it.

One can only protect people who want to be protected.

 

[frj1983]

The LIRR did an interesting public service video about this. I think it really has the kind of shock value to wake people up to the danger of grade crossings:
http://mta.info/lirr/pubs/video/Crossing.htm

Also, I should add that I'm shocked how many people have the attitude of just steeping out into railroad tracks. Before I step out into any road, I always look both ways. Why anyone wouldn't do the same at railroad tracks, I have no idea.

Since I live in the Chicagoland area, I often find myself looking both ways down the track, and I will not move until a train has completely cleared and I can see what may/may not be coming. I keep thinking back to a video filmed in this area a few years ago where a woman crossed in front of a stopped Metra Train only to be hit by another...it made quite an impression on me and those who saw it!

 

[ThayerATM]

Before I step out into any road, I always look both ways. Why anyone wouldn't do the same at railroad tracks, I have no idea.

Good point.

However, around here, every once in a while, there is some kid who climbs a fence, tries to "dart" across a multi-lane highway, and doesn't make it.

One can only protect people who want to be protected.

This is Mother Nature's way of improving the gene pool. <_< It takes many years, but eventually will work.

 

[VT Hokie]

This happened to a kid in my hometown of Hazlet, NJ a few years ago....went around the gates on his motorcycle trying to beat one train, and was killed by a train on the other track that he didn't even see coming.

 

[MStrain]

There should be 4 arms, two on each side of the track. Problem solved. The 2 arm design was put in place back when people used common sense. These no longer work and should be upgraded to two arms on each side.

 

[jackal]

Quad gates are being installed at some grade crossings, but crossing gates aren't cheap, and governments don't often allocate a lot of funding to them.

There may be a special need to retrofit quad-gate crossings so that cars caught between the gates can still get out (the gate can swing outward but not inward), but I'm not an expert on this.

I believe, too, that quad-gate crossings are also one of the ways to create a "quiet zone" crossing in which the standard grade crossing whistle signal does not need to be blown by the train.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

None of the MBTA quiet zone discussions I've seen in the news media have said anything about a need for quad gates to establish quiet zones.

 

[Walt]

A related CNN Report on Bus enters train crossing.

 

[AlanB]

None of the MBTA quiet zone discussions I've seen in the news media have said anything about a need for quad gates to establish quiet zones.

Quad gates are one of several choices that a community can pick if they want to apply for permission to have a quiet zone. But they aren't required to establish a quiet zone, there are other improvements that can be made to a crossing that will allow a community to get a quiet zone, which is why the Jackal said "one of the ways".

 

[Green Maned Lion]

What is the point of a "quiet zone"?

 

[AlanB]

Quiet!

 

[Green Maned Lion]

I can figure that out. But why wouldn't you want to blow horns through grade crossings? Only bad things can happen from not.

 

[flashwave]

Hi. Newb here.

The quiet zones were set up becase enough homeowners complained about noisy trains rattling their homes/fine china and cats.

It;s the old squeaky wheel saying

 

[Neil_M]

I can figure that out. But why wouldn't you want to blow horns through grade crossings? Only bad things can happen from not.

The way some road users behave around grade(level!) crossings, even if you put the locomotive horns in the car they still wouldn't get the point...........

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Hi. Newb here.
The quiet zones were set up becase enough homeowners complained about noisy trains rattling their homes/fine china and cats.

It;s the old squeaky wheel saying

If you don't like that, why live near a railroad? I'd hate living in such a "quiet zone"!

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

If you don't like that, why live near a railroad? I'd hate living in such a "quiet zone"!

What about those who hate urban sprawl, hate automobiles, and hate loud horns? I guess they're supposed to live near a subway station that isn't anywhere near commuter rail service, if they can find such a place?

I live about 1/5 of a mile from some train tracks. Sometimes the train horn is a bit louder than I'd like. I'm not sure if we nominally have a quiet zone here or not.

 

[jackal]

None of the MBTA quiet zone discussions I've seen in the news media have said anything about a need for quad gates to establish quiet zones.

Well, I'm a little fuzzy on my details, so maybe I'm mixing a couple of different things up.

What I was referring to is some relatively new FRA rules that allow exceptions to the requirement that a train blow its whistle at a crossing. As far as I'm aware, the following situations do not require a train to blow its whistle:

1. A grade crossing which ensures a car cannot enter the crossing when it is activated (e.g. quad gates or Jersey barriers between the lanes so cars cannot drive around the closed gate)

2. An at-gate audible horn, usually composed of a loudspeaker aimed parallel to the road with a very narrow dispersion ratio, such that, in effect, anyone driving along the road will hear something like a train's horn (although it's usually pretty fake-sounding) while the sound will be much more muted for any neighborhoods off of the loudspeaker's axis

I'm sure a simple Google search will turn up information on these rules and exceptions, but that's what I was referring to. Quiet zones are, I think, a separate issue, where trains proceed through normal crossings without blowing their whistles between certain low-traffic nighttime hours. Their legality is, I think, still being challenged.

 

[AlanB]

I'm sure a simple Google search will turn up information on these rules and exceptions, but that's what I was referring to. Quiet zones are, I think, a separate issue, where trains proceed through normal crossings without blowing their whistles between certain low-traffic nighttime hours. Their legality is, I think, still being challenged.

No, that type is gone. The FRA undid those rules a few years ago. Now the only way to silence the horns is via Quad gate, or some of the other options that both you and I have mentioned. And if a municipality qualifies under those new rules for a quiet zone, then it is quiet 24/7, unless the engineer sees something alarming.