is it legal to cross when lights/bells are on but the gate is not down

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
C

ChrissyDFW

Guest
I was driving down the a 4-lane road yesterday. I saw the railroad crossing lights/bells were on, but the crossing gates were not down. An Amtrak train was stopped completely just a couple of feet in front the crossing. I could see the train driver staring at me and smiling. The nearest Amtrak station was 40 miles away, so this was not a stop. :)

I stopped for a couple of minutes. All the other cars just kept on going without stopping. The Amtrak driver waved as if telling me to go ahead. It was a surreal experience when a train driver told me to go ahead of him. The lights and bells were still on, but I just drove across like the other dozen or so cars. It was kind of obvious that there was some sort of malfunction at this crossing. Last year, at this crossing, I sat for almost 30 minutes because the gates wouldn't come up... finally the cops came out and redirectly traffic in the reverse direction.(not an easy task because it was in the middle of rush hour)

Does anyone know if that was wrong or illegal? I flipped through the driver's manual for my state.(the booklet that they give you to study for driving test at the DMV. It said if any ONE of the conditions is present at the railroad crossing, the driver MUST stop: (1) crossing gates down, (2) bells or lights are one, (3) driving a school bus or any other vehicle required to stop, (4) directly by a law enforcement officer, or (5) train on the track(duh!).... However, there was no mention of what to do in a crossing malfunction like the one I encountered.

Also, was the Amtrak driver supposed to wave me across like that? What is their policy for the driver in those situations?
 
How many tracks were there? Wouldn't want to go if there were another train sneaking up behind the one that's sitting there.

jb
there were two tracks.... the tracks were 99% freight and 1% Amtrak passenger... which is why I hesitated about going across, even with Amtrak driver's gestures....

I called the local police and informed them about it... the dispatcher also did not know if I should have crossed. (!) Not sure if they ever sent officers out to deal with the situation later.
 
The way I learned it (at least as I recall) was that lights flashing and bell ringing is like a stop sign - the driver MUST stop but can then proceed if clear. If the crossing gate is down, that is like a red light - the driver MUST stop and may not proceed until the gate rises (like a light changing to green). Of course, I might be mistaken and it could vary from state to state.
 
The safety rule is always to expect a train on any track at anytime. So you were right to be cautious.

If a railroad employee was clearly waving me across, I would infer that the employee perceived it to be safe. I would proceed cautiously. I'm not sure if this is legal.

If I understand correctly railroad employees are supposed to protect the crossing when gates and signals are malfunctioning by stopping traffic before allowing the train to proceed.

The situation described in the OP is murky to say the least.
 
It's definitely illegal to cross if the crossing is working properly and only the lights are on - at a lot of crossings, the lights come on a few seconds before the gates come down just to give drivers already on the tracks time to clear. If you were to *enter* the tracks at this point, you not only risk getting hit by a train but you also are almost guaranteed to get hit by the gate and damage both the car and the gate. So yeah, it is illegal.

But I'm not sure what the law would say if the gates were clearly malfunctioning in some way *and* an Amtrak engineer waved you across. I'm not a lawyer but it sure seems like the Amtrak engineer is taking any liability onto himself in that case, ie. he'd be the one responsible if you got hit by a freight train. As would whoever's responsible for maintaining the gates.

I'm not sure if you'd still get a citation if the cops got involved, though. It seems like it'd be kind of a messy situation if you did get hit.
 
I'm not 100% sure about all of this, but here's what I think was going on: The train entered the circuit, activating the bells, lights, and gates. The train got an order, either through radio communication or trackside/cab signals, to stop. In order to avoid fouling the crossing and snarling traffic, the engineer stopped just short of the crossing. Since the train was not going to cross within the normal time frame, the gates were raised to allow highway traffic to proceed; but since the train was still in the circuit, the lights continued to flash. The railroader then directed traffic until the train received authorization to proceed, at which time the gates were again lowered and the train resumed its run. I don't know exactly how the gates are raised in that situation, but I understand it can be done.

All perfectly legal. A human flagman can take appropriate action when the motorist is being given incorrect information by the crossing signals.

Tom
 
I think the legality varies based on the state. In Iowa you are allowed to cross a railroad crossing which has it's lights and bells on; you are not allowed to drive around the gates. In Michigan, it's illegal cross the tracks in the following circumstances:

(a) A clearly visible electric or mechanical signal device gives warning of the immediate approach of a railroad train.

(b) A crossing gate is lowered or a flagman gives or continues to give a signal of the approach or passage of a railroad train.

© A railroad train approaching within approximately 1,500 feet of the highway crossing gives a signal audible from that distance, and the train by reason of its speed or nearness to the crossing is an immediate hazard.

(d) An approaching railroad train is plainly visible and is in hazardous proximity to the crossing.
peter

Correction: In Iowa, if there is an Audible warning (i.e. bell) then you cannot cross. If it is either just a stop sign or has just flashing lights (or non-flashing lights) then you are allowed to cross, if it is safe.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
there were two tracks.... the tracks were 99% freight and 1% Amtrak passenger... which is why I hesitated about going across, even with Amtrak driver's gestures....
I am not sure that I would have even crossed, regardless of the Amtrak's engineer waving me thru from the cab.

And it would not be because I was unsure if it was legal or not. It would be because I was unsure if it was safe. How many times we read about someone doing something dumb, sees a freight train coming, and gets out of the way of that freight train only to get hit by a train coming from the other direction.

Did the Amtrak engineer check with a dispatcher and from that, knew there wasn't a second train on the other track? How would one know for sure that happened? Or was the Amtrak engineer simply guessing/hoping/assuming the second track was empty?
 
Where was the flagman standing? If it was on the second track, at least one could expect that he's putting his money where his mouth is. In any case, one (of course) ought not to enter into a crossing unless you are certain you can clear it. I would imagine, in this sort of situation, that there would be sufficient warning from the horn of any approaching train as well as the flagman's watchful eye not to direct anyone into the path of an oncoming train.
 
NO NO NO NO NO!

It is extremely dangerous to cross if lights and bells are flashing, particularly in a multi-track area. Another train could have come on the other track, concealed from view.

If there's an actual flagman on the ground who can see the second track, the flagman can override the bells. Otherwise... just don't do it. It is not worth the safety risk. Ever. Turn around and take a different route. if you have to.

If there were only one track, I might accept being waved across by the engineer. But with a second track.... not safe, not safe at all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is extremely dangerous to cross if lights and bells are flashing, particularly in a multi-track area. Another train could have come on the other track, concealed from view.
The OP hasn't said whether the second track was in front or behind the stopped train. That's a critical detail. If the second track was in front, then

a driver could make an informed judgement about whether or not it's safe to cross.

In that case, it would probably be safer to proceed than it would be to stay stopped on an active lane of a four lane highway.
 
I'm not 100% sure about all of this, but here's what I think was going on: The train entered the circuit, activating the bells, lights, and gates. The train got an order, either through radio communication or trackside/cab signals, to stop. In order to avoid fouling the crossing and snarling traffic, the engineer stopped just short of the crossing. Since the train was not going to cross within the normal time frame, the gates were raised to allow highway traffic to proceed; but since the train was still in the circuit, the lights continued to flash. The railroader then directed traffic until the train received authorization to proceed, at which time the gates were again lowered and the train resumed its run. I don't know exactly how the gates are raised in that situation, but I understand it can be done.

All perfectly legal. A human flagman can take appropriate action when the motorist is being given incorrect information by the crossing signals.

Tom
I'm really surprised that the train employee would be a authorized to direct traffic, personally. For a number of reasons.

I think the poster above who said to stop and look both ways (opening window door to listen for train noise/whistle is also a good move) was spot on.

I wonder if a non-exempt vehicle at a non-exempt crossing like that with lights on but gates up would be allowed to stop and proceed.
 
After rereading the O.P., I have to revise my comment. I was thinking that the Conductor or someone other than the Engineer was the person who was directing traffic over the crossing. Now I realize that it was the Engineer, directing traffic from the cab. The cab is no place to be when you're directing traffic. The Conductor can flag a crossing, and he can direct traffic over the crossing, but it seems highly irregular to do this from the cab. I wouldn't trust that kind of traffic directing.

As Emily Latella used to say, "Never mind."

Tom
 
This is a very unusual situation. First, the lights are flashing, but the gates are not down, which could mean a problem with the gates. Ordinarily I would not cross the tracks unless I could see that the way was clear on both tracks. The Amtrak train sitting at the crossing would indicate that it was stopped because of a signal, or perhaps a mechanical problem which forced the train to remain on the circuit. If the train remained stopped, I imagine the lights would eventually stop and not be activated until the train began moving. The OP mentions that the engineer indicated it was OK to proceed. If the engineer was on the ground directing traffic then it would be OK to proceed since the employee was probably told to flag the crossing until the signal or mechanical problem was resolved. If the engineer was still in the cab, then that would be a problem, since he wasn't on the ground where he could see if there was traffic on the other track. Since the OP made it across the tracks safely, then all's well that's ends well. If a police officer was in the area he should have been assessing the situation and stopping traffic or waving traffic across, not issuing tickets. A very confusing situation. I would guess the driver would technically be violating the law and putting her life at risk, but since there was no harm to her or the other drivers, then it was a matter of making the best of a bad situation.
 
Crossing tracks with contradictory indicators is potentially harmful or even lethal, but so is being the only car that's stopped or reversing. I'd probably make my decision using intuition based on factors above and beyond what's detailed in the OP's post. If it's a crossing I'm extremely familiar with I'd probably be less careful than if I'd never seen it before. It wouldn't surprise me if it was illegal but sometimes backing up and/or turning around isn't that safe either. I would say that a situation like this is where a silent crossing can work against you.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Reminds me of the one time I came to a crossing that I knew had had a history of false signals. Stopped, waited a minute or two,looked both ways, saw nothing (and I knew the freight trains were limited to a max speed of 10 mph). Tried to call the number on the signs. No answer. Finally drive through after 5 minutes. Still no sign of a train. But yes, I knew that one well.
 
I was on a city bus once when we were stopped at a crossing with gates stuck in the down position. We were waved around the gates via a signal maintainer who couldn't get the shed open due to a frozen lock.
 
I think the legality varies based on the state. In Iowa you are allowed to cross a railroad crossing which has it's lights and bells on; you are not allowed to drive around the gates. In Michigan, it's illegal cross the tracks in the following circumstances:

(a) A clearly visible electric or mechanical signal device gives warning of the immediate approach of a railroad train.

(b) A crossing gate is lowered or a flagman gives or continues to give a signal of the approach or passage of a railroad train.

© A railroad train approaching within approximately 1,500 feet of the highway crossing gives a signal audible from that distance, and the train by reason of its speed or nearness to the crossing is an immediate hazard.

(d) An approaching railroad train is plainly visible and is in hazardous proximity to the crossing.
peter

Correction: In Iowa, if there is an Audible warning (i.e. bell) then you cannot cross. If it is either just a stop sign or has just flashing lights (or non-flashing lights) then you are allowed to cross, if it is safe.
Just to supplement my post. I in no way endorse crossing a RR crossing when the lights are flashing. Just pointing out that in some places it is legal.

peter
 
The bad:

Amtrak is fouling the intersection by stopping and activating the warning devices with no intent (or ability) to proceed.

The questionable:

The engineer attempting to wave traffic through.

Traffic proceeding without clear direction from identifiable flaggers (RR, highway, or police)

The risky:

Traffic blowing through at speed.

The worse case:

Another train going through the intersection with the accompaning demonstration of the "law of lugnuts"

The Amtrak enginner leaving their safe cab and becoming a target on the highway. (not to mention how many rules violations their might be)

The question:

What is reasonable and prudent?

One other thought for the reason the train stopped at that specific location, besides mechanical failure or orders, is there may have been a passenger emergency requiring a meet with EMS or Law.
 
If a police officer was in the area he should have been assessing the situation and stopping traffic or waving traffic across, not issuing tickets.
IMHO, this is one of the best answers here to the simple question of, could I get a ticket? And as answered (repeating it), any police officer at the location should not be issuing tickets, but rather taking charge and safely controlling the situation.
 
If a police officer was in the area he should have been assessing the situation and stopping traffic or waving traffic across, not issuing tickets.
IMHO, this is one of the best answers here to the simple question of, could I get a ticket? And as answered (repeating it), any police officer at the location should not be issuing tickets, but rather taking charge and safely controlling the situation.
Sadly most police officers these days (in the US,) job is not to protect the citizens but instead to enforce laws. Which is why their becoming more and more referred to as "Law Enforcement Officers" rather the "Police Officers" or even "Peace Officers"

peter
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top