RAILROAD.NET

I've spent the last few weeks on round trips to Saint Louis and Detroit. Both lines have had some funding to add quad gates for HSR, which is not uncommon. But I notice quite a few in cities, adjacent to stations. You couldn't get a train through there at greater than 25mph if you tried, even with 4 engines pulling a 4 car train. So why spend the money on quad gates? Didn't some mechanical engineers sit down and figure this one out?

In the end, it's not surprising, as I've seen gov't projects with far more off-beat specs, but this is kind of crazy.

It isn’t about speed at that point, just general crossing safety with higher train volumes. In an ideal world all major crossings, especially urban ones, would have four gates (and also ideally, people would never try to drive around gates ) If the money for that has to come from a government pot labeled HSR rather than a government pot labeled Grade Crossing Safety, oh well, it needs to happen anyway.

I think these types of gates should be used for real high-speed crossings. These would probably be even useful for 125 mph territory.

For the type of low speed crossing you are mentioning, a relatively inexpensive median with some type of barrier/guard rail would probably suffice.

Where is that? There is or was a gate like that in Mountain View, CA where the light rail diverges from the Caltrain row and crosses a major street; at least it won't have to be replaced if a car hits it, though the car will ...

ExCon90 wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 2:44 pm Where is that? There is or was a gate like that in Mountain View, CA where the light rail diverges from the Caltrain row and crosses a major street; at least it won't have to be replaced if a car hits it, though the car will ...

They are in Madison Wisconsin on the Wisconsin Southern Railroad. I think this is an excellent solution for high-speed crossings. I remember seeing a crossing in upper New York State that was in 110 mph territory on the Empire Service Route. It was at the bottom of a steep hill and it just seems like an accident waiting to happen one icy winter night.

These are produced by a company called "Stopgate" which now seems to be a part of Trinity and also a company called BBRSS. GENERAL INFO: The resistance barrier shall be Model VT-6802HDTR, as manufactured by B&B Roadway, (888) 560-2060.
The barrier shall be crash tested in accordance with the Manual for Assessing Safety Hardware (MASH) Test Level 2 (TL-2) and shall be capable of stopping a 5,000 lb vehicle traveling at 44 mph impacting the arm at 90 degrees.

I know the remaining xings north of New Haven have quad protection, including those on high speed segments. Some of the crossings south of New Haven (eliminated by the 1980s) might been quads with gates on both sides (possibly federally funded as part of the high speed Metroliner upgrades in '65-69).

Edit: New London does not have full quads, only an auxiliary gate for sidewalk.

I remember seeing a crossing in upper New York State that was in 110 mph territory on the Empire Service Route. It was at the bottom of a steep hill and it just seems like an accident waiting to happen one icy winter night.

There is only one crossing I can think of at the bottom of a hill, and its either a left or right turn depending on direction of travel. The only reason one would use it is to access the Schodak[sp] landing. If it is that crossing, there is a speed change basically at the crossing from 110mph to 85mph. I dont think NYS is going to dump a boat load of money on a seldom used crossing, most of the crossings in the 110mph zone are seldom used. The only exceptions would be the unprotected private crossing into a camp ground and Hamilton Paper.

The NEC quad gates (present at 8 of the 11 remaining crossings - as mentioned, the three in New London don't have them) were the first in the US to be hooked into the signal system. If a vehicle is detected on the crossing after the gates are down, it should cause the train to automatically brake. If that happens soon after the gates are down, the train may be stopped completely before the crossing. The 2005 crash at Miner Lane, however, showed that even that system has its limits; the car rolled under the gates too late to significantly slow the train.

Weren't the three holdout crossings on the Keystone quads? (until now removed, as of 2015)

Railjunkie wrote: ↑Tue Jun 25, 2019 10:14 pm I remember seeing a crossing in upper New York State that was in 110 mph territory on the Empire Service Route. It was at the bottom of a steep hill and it just seems like an accident waiting to happen one icy winter night.

There is only one crossing I can think of at the bottom of a hill, and its either a left or right turn depending on direction of travel. The only reason one would use it is to access the Schodak[sp] landing. If it is that crossing, there is a speed change basically at the crossing from 110mph to 85mph. I dont think NYS is going to dump a boat load of money on a seldom used crossing, most of the crossings in the 110mph zone are seldom used. The only exceptions would be the unprotected private crossing into a camp ground and Hamilton Paper.

There's the one at the bottom of the hill at the Germantown boat launch (great place to picnic and watch trains, btw, to anyone in the area), but the area road speed limit is pretty low and it's only an access for the park/launch and I think one or two houses there. Not exactly a high traffic area.

Its not 110mph its 90mph. Still more than enough to kill you dead. In my 16 years running Ive never seen a car go around the gates on the upper Hudson. B&A and Mohawk well that's a different story.

I’ve seen the crash barriers at Federal buildings and secure data centers, but it seems like overkill for a grade crossing....

You know what's really crazy? You can have a four-lane highway with 65mph speeds and frequent semi trucks, all you need is a flashing light to protect the side streets.

But a railroad track? You could build a nuclear wall and these geniuses would keep going around it. Go figure.

You couldn't get a train through there at greater than 25mph if you tried, even with 4 engines pulling a 4 car train. So why spend the money on quad gates?

Installing quad gates is one of the methods which can qualify a grade crossing as a "quiet zone", where the usual FRA requirements for sounding train horns are waived. Is that the case where you observed these installations?

eolesen wrote: ↑Thu Jun 27, 2019 10:55 am I’ve seen the crash barriers at Federal buildings and secure data centers, but it seems like overkill for a grade crossing....

It may seem so, but people keep driving through lowered gates so that at some locations the gates serve as little more than smash boards which establish that the gate was indeed down when the car went through it. I've seen crossings where a spare arm was kept on the ground nearby so that the next time they have to replace one it'll be right there. And a runaway car that hits one of those gates will still experience less damage than if a train hit it broadside.