train noise

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.
T

tom

Guest
Amtrak train noise is much louder than any of the other trains which go through our city. I have been present at decibel monitoring demonstrations for trains and am convinced that Amtrak horns are louder than the federal db ceiling allows. Does Amtrak monitor the db levels? Do Amtrak train horns have to be so high when other lines horns are bearable and in compliance with federal requirements?
 
For one, I think it's important to point out that this forum is in no way affiliated with Amtrak. Most of your concerns would probably be much better addressed directly with Amtrak themselves.

That being said, let me offer some pure speculation. Assuming you are correct that Amtrak's horns are louder, the likely reason is that Amtrak travels much faster than freight railroads - typically 20 MPH or more faster. So trains need to be heard from a much longer distance away to provide the same amount of warning. Most people are expecting a freight train at a crossing and a number of fatalities occur each year when people try and beat the train, expecting a much slower freight.

If your community is concerned about train noise, consider trying to raise the funds to become a quiet zone. This involves putting in quad gates at all crossing across a minimum of five miles. But that would result in trains being able to pass through town without sounding their horns. And quad gates save lives by preventing people from driving around lowered gates. This is what we have in the south end of Burlington, where I work, and several freights pass by a day without ever touching their horns.

Working on a project such as that, rather than gathering db data, would have positive benefits for everyone involved.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Amtrak, being Federally subsidized, would be the last railroad to violate federal db limits... This we can be sure of--
 
Amtrak, being Federally subsidized, would be the last railroad to violate federal db limits... This we can be sure of--
Micha, the fact that Amtrak receives a subsidy from the federal government, but is a quasi-public corporation, would have virtually nothing to do with the operational decisions on the loudness, (or not) of their horns.............

Virtually every US Domestic airline receives direct or indirect subsidies from the US Government, and I don't think that fact weighs in on their decisions on what engines to purchase for their jet airliners, or the decibel level of said engines.
 
Misspelled name.

And actually it should. Amtrak's leaders are not motivated by profit. Think of the CEOs of the Class Is, they're businessmen-- now I might not know much about the previous CEOs, but Boardman isn't a businessman. He's a railroader. He was the head of the FRA, the body that governs railroad rules-- to say that there was some oversight and that nobody noticed this in the years of the K5LAs is just asinine.
 
We have lived near train tracks most of our lives. I have noticed that the freight trains always seemed louder than Amtrak. Maybe the speed of the engines coupled with the horn maybe make it seem louder. I have noticed that since we don't live as close to the tracks, I don't hear any difference between the trains. Amtrak comes through here late evening/early morning, so really that's the only way I know it's The California Zephyr.

If it is a problem, though, I would check with the city, maybe they can help.
 
I would think this is a safety concern and motivated by the NTSB not the CEO. How long does it take a train going 79mph to stop, 1.5 miles or close to it. What about the car with the windows up and the radio on, or the teenager with a head set on not paying any attention. To blame Amtrak for loud train horns is pretty hard, blame the railroad that owns the tracks for having them there, blame the city for not buillding an overpass, blame the county for not insisting on a quad set of gates. I would think the issue here is safety for the reason for the loud train horn. Just a thought.....
 
The teenager with the headset on jogging next to or on the tracks etc with the volume at full blast is not going to hear the train horn anyway.
 
There are enough soreheads out and about, that the chance that Amtrak horns exceed legal limits is nil.

It might be worth checking whether the freight horns are as loud as they ought to be. Horns do clog gradually over time.

It could also be an artifact related to train speed. That is, if the train is approaching the frequency will sound higher than it really is. The faster the train, the greater the difference.

Parenthetically, I grew up within half a mile of a very busy railroad line pre air conditioning, and pre welded rail. Train noise was just part of the background and ambience of the area. It is intermittent, so to me much easier to live with than being the same distance from a major highway, regardless of whether you like or don't like train noise.
 
Virtually every US Domestic airline receives direct or indirect subsidies from the US Government, and I don't think that fact weighs in on their decisions on what engines to purchase for their jet airliners, or the decibel level of said engines.
But they do worry a lot about such if they want to land at certain very popular airports though, which of course they would irrespective of any subsidy. :) They do afterall have to maintain their certification in good standing and permissions to use various airports in good standing too, and that has requirements in terms of noise levels they are allowed to produce.
 
I don't mean to be rude or anything, but whenever I see a thread with an OP by an anonymous or "Guest" poster, it always seems to be anti-Amtrak, or at least anti-rail, with some sort of complaint or anecdote that has little or no background information behind it that might help other posters on the thread arrive at a useful answer or at least proceed with a useful discussion. This thread seems to be rehashing the pros and cons of train horns vs. "quiet zones," which have been discussed time and again before in this forum.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Amtrak train noise is much louder than any of the other trains which go through our city. I have been present at decibel monitoring demonstrations for trains and am convinced that Amtrak horns are louder than the federal db ceiling allows. Does Amtrak monitor the db levels? Do Amtrak train horns have to be so high when other lines horns are bearable and in compliance with federal requirements?
Let's find yet another subject to whine about. Stuff cotton in your ears or just stay away from Amtrak routes altogether.
 
Last edited:
ll the details are in

Code of Federal Regulations

TITLE 49--TRANSPORTATION

CHAPTER II--FEDERAL RAILROAD ADMINISTRATION, DEPARTMENT OF

TRANSPORTATION

PART 229_RAILROAD LOCOMOTIVE SAFETY STANDARDS--Table of Contents

Subpart C_Safety Requirements

Sec. 229.129 Locomotive horn.
 
Thanks for the cite.

For those that don't want to chase it down, it reads (in part):

(a) Each lead locomotive shall be equipped with a locomotive horn that produces a minimum sound level of 96 dB(A) and a maximum sound

level of 110 dB(A) at 100 feet forward of the locomotive in its

direction of travel. The locomotive horn shall be arranged so that it

can be conveniently operated from the engineer's usual position during

operation of the locomotive.
http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/cfr_2009/octqtr/49cfr229.129.htm
 
Remind me again why a train blaring a horn through the city might suggest that the city pay money to build infrastructure to silence the horn?

Seems pretty backward to me. If Amtrak is disturbing the peace with their horns (federally required or not) they should be responsible for minimizing their own disturbance.
 
Remind me again why a train blaring a horn through the city might suggest that the city pay money to build infrastructure to silence the horn?

Seems pretty backward to me. If Amtrak is disturbing the peace with their horns (federally required or not) they should be responsible for minimizing their own disturbance.
What? That makes zero sense.
 
Remind me again why a train blaring a horn through the city might suggest that the city pay money to build infrastructure to silence the horn?

Seems pretty backward to me. If Amtrak is disturbing the peace with their horns (federally required or not) they should be responsible for minimizing their own disturbance.
What? That makes zero sense.
Don't respond. We had a muli-page thread on this novel Volkris theory months ago. Short answer: Safety.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Remind me again why a train blaring a horn through the city might suggest that the city pay money to build infrastructure to silence the horn?

Seems pretty backward to me. If Amtrak is disturbing the peace with their horns (federally required or not) they should be responsible for minimizing their own disturbance.
Explain to me again why a railroad should be responsible for paying to silence their horns when the laid the track before the city was even in existence? It's not like this railroad popped out of nowhere.

And who makes the decision of how much of a negative impact the horns are having versus the costs of the remedy (a quiet zone)? Volkris, you're a pretty conservative guy - it's really an economic question: simply because a few homeowners don't like the sound of train horns (and horns of a particular railroad that passes only a handful of times a day, if that) doesn't mean that it makes economic sense for quiet zones to be installed. The negative impact of the horns has to be valued against the cost of installation (using some economic method such as contingent valuation) and then compared to the cost of the crossing gates.

And even forgetting the quiet zone option, it's really not that cut and dry. If you'd be willing to extend Amtrak a waiver of liability for any accidents in which reduced horn noise would be cited, you might have a point. But you have to look at the totality of the issue - do you think that it's better to waive Amtrak's liability (and deprive what you would likely cite as the right of an individual to seek remedy from Amtrak if they are injured) or subject these residents to noise? You can't put Amtrak between a rock and a hard place, which is what would happen if they reduced the horn noise and then an accident occurred.
 
"The negative impact of the horns has to be valued against the cost of installation (using some economic method such as contingent valuation) and then compared to the cost of the crossing gates." YOU say....... THAT, I agree with and totally wish the latest INTERSECTION WARNING was inovated to save the whole city of the intrusive, blaring unnesseary (GATES ARE THERE)noise. It does not save lives, it disrupts them, at the very wrong time of day! Thank you.,
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top