Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 02-01-2018, 07:45 AM
 
23,177 posts, read 12,115,297 times
Reputation: 29347

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
I think they need to expand the requirement that buses and hazmat trucks stop at railroad crossings, to all large vehicles. If somebody wants to drive their car in front of a train, it's not really a big deal to anyone other than the occupants of the car. But these types of large vehicles can cause a lot of damage to trains. Even derailments that could result in a mass amount of injuries and deaths.
I assume you mean to always stop even when the lights aren't flashing. I think it's that requirement that cause them to get stalled on the tracks in the first place. The most likely time to kill the engine in a manual is when you first start moving, with just enough kick to roll ten feet and stop. If the engine dies while at normal speed, what are the odds they come to a stop right on the tracks?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 02-01-2018, 07:56 AM
 
18,073 posts, read 18,732,081 times
Reputation: 25191
Never understood that requirement to stop at the tracks, I mean, what is the failure rate for train crossing arms and signals? I do understand for those without signals, and even without arms, but does anyone know the reason for the rule? Aside from the "safety" thing, I mean a real reason, like crossing failure rates show a need for stopping before tracks for example.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2018, 12:28 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,263 posts, read 8,883,700 times
Reputation: 20279
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
Never understood that requirement to stop at the tracks, I mean, what is the failure rate for train crossing arms and signals? I do understand for those without signals, and even without arms, but does anyone know the reason for the rule? Aside from the "safety" thing, I mean a real reason, like crossing failure rates show a need for stopping before tracks for example.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4ewXJhEBj8g
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2018, 12:47 PM
 
Location: Gaston, South Carolina
15,697 posts, read 9,452,039 times
Reputation: 17597
In the video above, I believe they reasoned the crossing did not work because of the snow. Ironic that they came down after the train had gone through the truck though. I'm no expert, but I believe the truck driver could have still been charged in that case since he failed to yield the right of way.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2018, 01:02 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,263 posts, read 8,883,700 times
Reputation: 20279
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia View Post
I assume you mean to always stop even when the lights aren't flashing. I think it's that requirement that cause them to get stalled on the tracks in the first place. The most likely time to kill the engine in a manual is when you first start moving, with just enough kick to roll ten feet and stop. If the engine dies while at normal speed, what are the odds they come to a stop right on the tracks?
Often large vehicles start across the tracks, and suddenly traffic in front of them forces them to stop, with their back end on the tracks. The crossing gate comes down on top of the vehicle, and then the train hits it. A few years ago a tired truck driver in Nevada was barreling toward a railroad crossing in a poorly maintained truck. He slammed on his worn out brakes when he saw the flashing crossing lights, and skidded into the side of an Amtrak train. His fuel tanks ruptured and caught fire and burned six people to death on the train. This happens way too often. If it's a hazmat truck, they have to stop. But if it's a regular truck which can be almost as dangerous, we let them just barrow across the tracks without stopping. It doesn't make much sense to me.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2018, 01:02 PM
 
23,177 posts, read 12,115,297 times
Reputation: 29347
Any data on how often the gates fail versus vehicles stall after a stop? We can find examples of anything. The question is which examples are most probable.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2018, 01:03 PM
 
23,177 posts, read 12,115,297 times
Reputation: 29347
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cloudy Dayz View Post
Often large vehicles start across the tracks, and suddenly traffic in front of them forces them to stop, with their back end on the tracks. The crossing gate comes down on top of the vehicle, and then the train hits it. A few years ago a tired truck driver in Nevada was barreling toward a railroad crossing in a poorly maintained truck. He slammed on his worn out brakes when he saw the flashing crossing lights, and skidded into the side of an Amtrak train. His fuel tanks ruptured and caught fire and burned six people to death on the train. This happens way too often. If it's a hazmat truck, they have to stop. But if it's a regular truck which can be almost as dangerous, we let them just barrow across the tracks without stopping. It doesn't make much sense to me.
It's standard intersection rules - you don't enter the intersection (or rail crossing) unless you have room to clear it.

Tired truck driver... poorly maintained truck... worn out brakes... It wasn't the presence or absence of a law that resulted in that accident.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2018, 01:17 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,263 posts, read 8,883,700 times
Reputation: 20279
Quote:
Originally Posted by Joe the Photog View Post
In the video above, I believe they reasoned the crossing did not work because of the snow. Ironic that they came down after the train had gone through the truck though. I'm no expert, but I believe the truck driver could have still been charged in that case since he failed to yield the right of way.
The truck driver was not charged. He did nothing wrong. The cause of the crash was a Utah Transit Authority employee who was working on the gate and bypassed the protection system to open the gate. The truck driver was not required to stop and verify that no train was coming. If he had been required to stop, there is a good chance the crash could have been avoided.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2018, 01:25 PM
 
Location: Fort Lauderdale, Florida
11,936 posts, read 13,041,511 times
Reputation: 27078
Quote:
Originally Posted by boxus View Post
When I lived in the DC area, the VRE seemed to always have an incident involving hitting someone, and who knows how many near misses. Here in Miami, the new Brightline train has killed four people just during testing, and numerous close calls.
All four of those people tried to outrun the train by crossing after the arms were down, lights flashing, bells ringing, and a locomotive barreling down on them.

All four deaths could have been easily prevented.

Darwin's Theory of Natural Selection.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 02-01-2018, 01:28 PM
 
Location: Oregon Coast
15,263 posts, read 8,883,700 times
Reputation: 20279
Quote:
Originally Posted by oceangaia View Post
It's standard intersection rules - you don't enter the intersection (or rail crossing) unless you have room to clear it.

Tired truck driver... poorly maintained truck... worn out brakes... It wasn't the presence or absence of a law that resulted in that accident.
Yes, but that doesn't help the people who got killed in the crash. As I said if somebody drives a car into the path of a train, they will probably just kill themself. If a truck driver does the same thing, he could easily kill hundreds of people. That is a good reason to require extra precautions for all truck drivers IMHO. In a perfect world they shouldn't be required to stop. But since the world is not perfect and this type of stuff happens, there needs to be more safety precautions.
Reply With Quote 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.


Reply
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:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Current Events
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - 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, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top