User avatar
SirenMadness
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 3746
Joined: Mon May 15, 2006 2:47 pm
Location: Windsor, Ontario
Contact: Website

Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:22 pm

Brandon, I've seen a rare instance in which signals activated twenty feet from the train. However, the train was going at a fairly slow speed, for switching itself; the train's size prohibited the locomotive from being switched at the station. The train got to the crossing just as the gates were about to go down fully.
I took a video of that!
~ Peter Radanovic

q2bman
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 426
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 12:32 am

Thu Aug 10, 2006 6:29 pm

quiksmith10 wrote:
q2bman wrote:The new signlas will still activate from about 25 ft from the road even today instantly."

There isn't a set "distance" on where crossing lights and guards are activated. It depends on the speed of the tracks in the area and any type of sight blocking obstacle (ie, a curve). The higher the speed, the longer the distance the activation point will be placed. 25 feet is a very close distance for an activation point. The train would be to the crossing before the gates (if there were any) would be down. Usually the activation point is a couple hundred feet down the tracks, if not more.
There is a activation point within the motion sensing portion of the rail called the "island". This "island" will not allow the signals to deactivate if the "island" is shunted. The motion sensor part will activate the signals and deactivate the signals after it senses the train is moveing slowly approaching the crossing (like if its stopping at the crossing). The "island" is setup to activate the signals instantly when shorted. It is usually about 25 ft or so away from the road edge in each direction. In case the train cannot stop before fouling the crossing or if, say, a car is slowly rolling towards the crossing when the motion sensor thinks a train is stopped on the tracks within in the motion sensing part. Kind of a safety feature i guess.

Robert Gift
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 2857
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 2:22 am
Location: Denver, CO

"Mee-Mool" lights

Fri Aug 11, 2006 12:02 am

Hey, Q "2bQ or not 2b"

I thought I saw "island" insulators much closer to the roadway than 25 feet. A rail section just happened to be conveniently a few feet from the pavement. Or will they now cut a rail to install insulators at designated
distances?

Maybe I'm wrong, or maybe they have since required it further away from the roadway.
Seems I have seen RR cars parked closer than 25 feet to a roadway.

But you are correct, anything shunting the island activates signals
regardless if stopped or moving away.

Years ago, a train stopped just inches onto the island.
The gates were down and creating a huge traffic jam.
It was very inconsiderate of them to block this important Denver street,
so I lifted one gate. Then a train crew member lifted the other.

Couldn't understand why the train could not have backed just
a foot. Slack alone would have allowed that!
You could see the island insulator he just barely passed.

It was a slight upgrade, so would not even have required much effort
to roll back.

But I remember in the old days, a train anywhere on the crossing
circuit activated the "mee-mool" lights. I believe nothing would turn them
off unless they backed out of the circuit - maybe hundreds of feet -
or could they open the control box and flip a switch?

q2bman
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 426
Joined: Tue May 16, 2006 12:32 am

Fri Aug 11, 2006 4:22 pm

Ya, well, the island may not be 25'. Its more like 15' or so, i don't know exactly. The distance a train may stop away from the rails is dependant on the state the train is in. We make ou trains stop 250' away when cutting crossings so that vehicle traffic may see any adjacent main lines or siding that may have trains approaching the crossing. The train you spoke of could not back up just a foot. Releasing the air (brakes) would be neccessary to move the train even a foot. To get the brakes aired back up takes time and the train will roll. Its a tricky manouver to stop those trains at the right point. Several factors can cause the engineer to overshoot his stopping point. he may have been able to shove some of the slack in with the brakes applied but i doubt it. Even if he could he maynot have wanted to. Trains stop with the cars stretched to ensure no vandals pull the pins on the cars. Which by the way is very dangerouse and illegal (just in case some vandals are watching).

q2b or not 2b i like it!

Robert Gift
Registered User
Registered User
Posts: 2857
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 2:22 am
Location: Denver, CO

Sat Aug 12, 2006 2:06 am

q2bman wrote:Ya, well, the island may not be 25'. Its more like 15' or so, i don't know exactly. The distance a train may stop away from the rails is dependant on the state the train is in. We make ou trains stop 250' away when cutting crossings so that vehicle traffic may see any adjacent main lines or siding that may have trains approaching the crossing. The train you spoke of could not back up just a foot. Releasing the air (brakes) would be neccessary to move the train even a foot. To get the brakes aired back up takes time and the train will roll. Its a tricky manouver to stop those trains at the right point. Several factors can cause the engineer to overshoot his stopping point. he may have been able to shove some of the slack in with the brakes applied but i doubt it. Even if he could he maynot have wanted to. Trains stop with the cars stretched to ensure no vandals pull the pins on the cars. Which by the way is very dangerouse and illegal (just in case some vandals are watching). q2b or not 2b i like it!
Hey, I think I've learned how to quote!
Thanks for the education.
That rule means losing 1000 feet of storage space.
I can understand that at crossings with no signals.
Unneeded at crossings with signals.
Didn't know they kept tension to keep idiots from pulling coupler pins. Also did not know about brake air repressurization time.

The SB engineer did a great job stopping - only missed by 11 inches!

Still, it was inconsiderate and bad PR for them to have kept the gates down. Pedestrians walked around the gates. They could see no NB trains approaching, but few even looked to see if another train SB on the next track was coming to the crossing. (Of course, it would have blown the horn
for the crossing.)

When the crewmember came out, I thought he was going to scold me for
raising the gate. But he.ld the other one up. I kept looking both directions for any other trains. One did come, so we let the gates back down --probably too early.

Just had pedestrains, 26 y/o mother and her 2 y/o daughter, killed by Amtrak at 78 mph. Mother apparently was trying to get across before
the train. Short fast Amtrak would only close crossing for 50 seconds.
Train was held for many hours (5?) of investigation. Why? To bring in new engineer?

A 10 y/o girl was killed at the same crossing in 2005.
Father claims they should have had a pedestrian gate in addition to the
existing lights, bells and gates.
Of course, my heart goes out to him, but what more is needed? A letter inviting people NOT to cross?

He is suing everyone; town, railroad, train conductor, engineer.
They will settle because that costs less than going to court and winning.
STUPIDITY PAYS!
(Hey! Where's MY check?)

Return to “Other Warning Systems - Indoor, Outdoor and Vehicular”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 9 guests