U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Arizona
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 1.5 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Jump to a detailed profile or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Business Search - 14 Million verified businesses
Search for:  near: 
View Poll Results: train horn blowing at crossing?
yes... blow the horn! 26 76.47%
no blow... silence is golden. 4 11.76%
yes...blow during daylight hours only... no blow at night. 4 11.76%
Voters: 34. You may not vote on this poll

 
 
Old 09-12-2010, 09:54 PM
 
260 posts, read 277,480 times
Reputation: 215

Advertisements

In my opinion, if the railroads feel it is safer to not have a quiet zone, I think they should just keep on blowing their horn.
And if Kingman want a quiet zone for the business area, they dont have to spend a half a million dollars to study this, they could use that money, and build a nice sound barrier wall along the railroad.
Quick reply to this message

 
Old 09-12-2010, 10:49 PM
 
Location: San Jose, CA
6,352 posts, read 10,507,715 times
Reputation: 7587
Quote:
Originally Posted by mosesmoses View Post
And if Kingman want a quiet zone for the business area, they dont have to spend a half a million dollars to study this,
You need to read more carefully. Nobody ever said any such thing.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-13-2010, 02:26 PM
 
260 posts, read 277,480 times
Reputation: 215
A good, sound barrier wall dont have to be an expensive stone, or brick, or cement wall, it could be just a cheep steel wall. Or from something recycled, that would block the sound, when the trains blowing their horns. I think a wall would be safer, than a quiet zone. But this is just my opinion.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-14-2010, 06:26 AM
 
146 posts, read 254,242 times
Reputation: 66
If you're concerned about noise, why would you move near train tracks in the first place?

That's like moving next to a airport and complaining about the amount of air traffic.
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 10:14 PM
 
Location: kingman az ,ventura ca
59 posts, read 93,032 times
Reputation: 41
looks like most posters and poll voters like all the horn blowin'...
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 10:25 PM
 
Location: San Jose, CA
6,352 posts, read 10,507,715 times
Reputation: 7587
How much you want to bet none of them have been to Kingman?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 10:31 PM
 
Location: SW Missouri
14,851 posts, read 17,682,962 times
Reputation: 18973
Quote:
Originally Posted by mrspeedyt View Post
heard that kingman az city council has considered a $50,000 study to stop unnessary train horn blowing at the three railroad crossings downtown. they could save $49,995 if they simply used flagstaff's study... and pass a 'no unnessary horn blowing' ordanance. sacramento ca also has 'no blow' crossings.
I want to see the lawsuits on that one when some fool get's hit and killed at a "no blow" crossing.

There is a reason they blow their horn. Because some people are so flippin' oblivious that they don't even know a train is approaching an intersection if they don't do it.

In 99 percent of the cases where people COMPLAIN about train noise, the train tracks were there first. So they should have realized it was going to be noisy. Hello???

20yrsinBranson
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-16-2010, 10:46 PM
 
Location: San Jose, CA
6,352 posts, read 10,507,715 times
Reputation: 7587
Quote:
Originally Posted by 20yrsinBranson View Post
I want to see the lawsuits on that one when some fool get's hit and killed at a "no blow" crossing.

There is a reason they blow their horn. Because some people are so flippin' oblivious that they don't even know a train is approaching an intersection if they don't do it.

In 99 percent of the cases where people COMPLAIN about train noise, the train tracks were there first. So they should have realized it was going to be noisy. Hello???

20yrsinBranson
Well, since you're the expert, perhaps you can enlighten us on which aspect of the Federal guidelines for Quiet Zones that you disagree with?
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2010, 02:36 PM
 
8,089 posts, read 15,924,428 times
Reputation: 8125
There is so much misinformation on this thread that it's pathetic. First, for a "quiet zone" to be implemented, all grade crossings affected must have active warning systems installed, including gates. These have to meet rigid specifications to be considered "compliant"--and those specs are often more stringent than for standard active warning systems. Those active warning systems can cost several hundred thousand dollars per crossing, and those inatallation costs are borne by the jurisdiction controlling the street, road, or highway--not the railroad. So, if Kingman or anyplace else wants a "quiet zone," they have to pony up the money to make the grade crossing compliant before it's going to happen. Period.

Second, as noted by others, federal law requires the engineer to blow the horn for any public grade crossing not located in a quiet zone--no exceptions. The rules require him or her to start blowing the standard two-long, one short, one long warning when the locomotive passes the "whistle post" placed along the railroad track, and to continue blowing the warning until the locomotive has passed through the grade crossing. The rule applies at all times--day or night, whether vehicle traffic is present or not. The distance of the whistle post from the grade crossing (and thus the length of time the engineer must blow the warning) is dictated by the track speed allowed for the train. The higher the speed, the farther the distance the whistle post is located from the crossing. Though some engineers may"fudge" distance at night, etc., if he or she does so, it is a rules violation subject to disciplinary action or termination. Most locomotives now have on-board cameras (with sound) and event recorders that can be reviewed by management or regulators to assure rule compliance.

Finally, grade crossing crashes are not "accidents." Accidents are unpreventable events that occur. Grade crossing crashes are 100% preventable--people just need to stop for oncoming trains. Period. That is why the railroads call crossing crashes "incidents," "collisions", etc., but not "accidents."

So, a better poll question should have been, "Does Kingman want a quiet zone, and are the taxpayers willing to pay the substantial cost to make it happen?"
Quick reply to this message
 
Old 09-19-2010, 03:17 PM
 
Location: San Jose, CA
6,352 posts, read 10,507,715 times
Reputation: 7587
Quote:
Originally Posted by jazzlover View Post
There is so much misinformation on this thread that it's pathetic. First, for a "quiet zone" to be implemented, all grade crossings affected must have active warning systems installed, including gates. These have to meet rigid specifications to be considered "compliant"--and those specs are often more stringent than for standard active warning systems. Those active warning systems can cost several hundred thousand dollars per crossing, and those inatallation costs are borne by the jurisdiction controlling the street, road, or highway--not the railroad. So, if Kingman or anyplace else wants a "quiet zone," they have to pony up the money to make the grade crossing compliant before it's going to happen. Period.

Second, as noted by others, federal law requires the engineer to blow the horn for any public grade crossing not located in a quiet zone--no exceptions. The rules require him or her to start blowing the standard two-long, one short, one long warning when the locomotive passes the "whistle post" placed along the railroad track, and to continue blowing the warning until the locomotive has passed through the grade crossing. The rule applies at all times--day or night, whether vehicle traffic is present or not. The distance of the whistle post from the grade crossing (and thus the length of time the engineer must blow the warning) is dictated by the track speed allowed for the train. The higher the speed, the farther the distance the whistle post is located from the crossing. Though some engineers may"fudge" distance at night, etc., if he or she does so, it is a rules violation subject to disciplinary action or termination. Most locomotives now have on-board cameras (with sound) and event recorders that can be reviewed by management or regulators to assure rule compliance.

Finally, grade crossing crashes are not "accidents." Accidents are unpreventable events that occur. Grade crossing crashes are 100% preventable--people just need to stop for oncoming trains. Period. That is why the railroads call crossing crashes "incidents," "collisions", etc., but not "accidents."

So, a better poll question should have been, "Does Kingman want a quiet zone, and are the taxpayers willing to pay the substantial cost to make it happen?"
Finally somebody gets it.
Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


 
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Options
X
Data:
Loading data...
Based on 2000-2011 data
Loading data...

123
Hide US histogram

Over $84,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > Arizona
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2014, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25 - Top