Major grade-crossing accident in Valhalla 2/3/15

No disrespect to the ones who lost their lives. I do not believe that texting or cell phone usage was a factor in this tragic accident.

For those drivers who are too busy texting or talking on their cell phones, you cannot fix irresponsible. One thing that may help from a technology standpoint is equip grade crossings with technology that will block all cell phone data within 100ft of the crossing when activated and transmit a looped message "TRAIN APPROACHING STAY CLEAR OF THE TRACKS". in my opinion if it saves one life or the host railrod from the expense and litigation exposure it would pay for itself.

Look at California, they have lowered the common sense of the general public by posting signs "Clear Crosswalk, then update Facebook". It is sad but unfortunately it is true.

DutchRailnut wrote:no any crossing of rails be it crossing, tunnel or overpass is paid for by town, not railroad.

Wishful thinking? The railroads do not pay 100%, but they do get to pay their portion of the costs.

no they don't, railroad maintains crossing gear but even that is billed to towns , its towns road that crosses railroad right of way , its towns obligation to provide for safe way to cross.

http://westchester.news12.com/news/new- ... -1.9929062" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I think it may be a bit different for the privately-owned freight railroads. According to the Association of American Railroads:

America's freight railroads spend hundreds of millions of dollars each year to maintain and improve grade crossings. They also:

• * Cooperate with state agencies to install and upgrade warning devices and signals, and bear the cost of maintaining them in perpetuity.
  * Help pay to close unneeded crossings.

Link

I don't think that is equipment, but just track including rubber pads maintenance and weed control at crossings

Nobody wants to pay the full price of crossings ... the easy answer is to try to get someone else to pay for it. Federal money is an easy target ... especially with programs a few years ago that would pay 100% or 80% of the cost of any approved project. But not all projects get federal funding.

The cost of the crossing is apportioned between the federal, state and local governments and the railroad. The more money that can be received from other sources the less the railroad needs to pay but they can and do pay for crossing improvements. And they certainly pay their share of maintenance.

Crossings are not free for railroads.

DutchRailnut wrote:I don't think that is equipment, but just track including rubber pads maintenance and weed control at crossings

It may have to do with commuter railroads being subsidized. Whereas for private freight as Tommy mentioned, it seems because they own the tracks, they're responsible for building and maintaining them and whatever it takes to "protect" the rails from undue wear and tear and to permit safe train operations. Take the formerly deteriorated grade crossing over US Highway 1 in Edison, NJ for example. In 2013, Conrail/NS hired a contractor to "remove and replace the track bed and rails and to place pre-cast concrete boxes with slots for the rails side-by-side across Route 1 (a 6-lane highway with shoulders) to form the new grade-crossing that should accommodate trains and cars in a safe manner for 25 years." They also hired Edison Police to direct traffic in and around the area of the weekend closure.

http://www.state.nj.us/transportation/a ... 80113.shtm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Their legal standing actually goes beyond being subsidized. Almost all American commuter railroads are essentially state agencies.

BandA wrote:Tech solutions: If the gates go down but not all the way, the train gets a stop signal. Induction loops detect the metal mass of any cars. Those echolocation sensors mentioned above, too. Cameras snap video of anybody in the crossing and they automatically get a ticket. Any issues and the train has to be prepared to stop before the crossing.

Nice idea, but not practical. Have to consider the maximum distance a train might need to brake from MAS to a full stop before reaching the crossing... that could be a mile or more, depending on speeds and types of trains. The signal circuit for that crossing has to go out at least that far -- actually farther, since you need to build in enough "reaction distance" for the crossing sensors to detect a car and activate a stop signal for the train in time for the engineer to see it and apply the brakes.

Considering that signal could be at least a mile away from the crossing, think of how much time passes between the instant the train hits the circuit to the time it gets to the crossing. FHWA requires at least 20 seconds of signal activation before a train would arrive, I believe MNR usually shoots for closer to 25-30 seconds. If the crossing is activated much longer than that, and people don't see a train, they start to get antsy and you increase the odds someone will decide the signal is a dud and go through it anyway. Their patience could run out at about the same time the train finally arrives.

About the inductive loop that would detect a car: wouldn't it also be triggered by a train? If a northbound train is going through the crossing when a southbound train on the other track hits the circuit, how does the system know NOT to stop that southbound train? A simple loop won't know the difference between car steel and train steel... it'll just know "something" is there and the signals get tripped. I'm sure additional logic and programming could be added to verify a train and override the signal, but that's getting into additional costs and complexity, and more complexity means more chances for something to fail and defeat the purpose of the entire thing in the first place.

At the end of the day, we just have to accept the fact that a reasonable amount of precautions have been taken and there's only so much you can do to idiot-proof it. After all, you can install all sorts of extra gadgets at the railroad crossing, only to have a successful railroad crosser drive another 75 feet and get t-boned crossing the Taconic, because a speeding parkway driver ran the red light there.

This accident is a good example of stopping distance ...

The engineer saw the obstruction with enough lead time to put the train into emergency prior to impact.

It slowed from just shy of 60mph to 48mph at impact (per the NTSB).

It took, I think I've seen stated, some 860 feet to stop from the impact point ... in fact, it stopped with the rearmost car straddling the crossing.

And that's with good visibility, and good reaction time on the part of the engineer.

To make a "stop before the crossing when it's obstructed" system work, you'd have to be able to trigger a stoppage another entire trainlength (and then some) further up the track.

Mod Note: we're done with the who 'pays' for a crossing in this thread.

NJT Rider wrote:For those drivers who are too busy texting or talking on their cell phones, you cannot fix irresponsible. One thing that may help from a technology standpoint is equip grade crossings with technology that will block all cell phone data within 100ft of the crossing when activated and transmit a looped message "TRAIN APPROACHING STAY CLEAR OF THE TRACKS". in my opinion if it saves one life or the host railrod from the expense and litigation exposure it would pay for itself.

Helluva dumb idea, sorry to have to say.

1. It's illegal; you mess with the airwaves and the FCC will give you pure holy hell, and rightly.

2. The LAST thing you EVER want is to disable the ability of people to call the emergency services - *especially* at a grade crossing!

Mike

Human Factors -
When one is talking about people who are having trouble figuring out how to safely cross railroad tracks adding another distraction (breaking their phone) is not a good idea.

The blocked user might spend more time trying to figure out why their phone is not working than paying attention to the train.

We already have the technology to write an application for someone's cellphone which warns them that they will be interacting with a train at a crossing. Use their phone's GPS to get their location and velocity along the road. Send the train's GPS location and velocity to nearby phones. If the two vectors intersect, warn the driver "NEARBY TRAIN". The cost of writing the app, and provisioning the service is about the same cost as a single person's life. Probably double the cost of a four-quadrant gate.

Plus think of how much easier it would be for railfans to chase trains.

yes lets improve on fact that smart phones now beat the user in being smarter ????