Railroad Forums 

  • "Trespass detection system" to be installed in Brunswick

  • Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.
Guilford Rail System changed its name to Pan Am Railways in 2006. Discussion relating to the current operations of the Boston & Maine, the Maine Central, and the Springfield Terminal railroads (as well as the Delaware & Hudson while it was under Guilford control until 1988). Official site can be found here: PANAMRAILWAYS.COM.

Moderator: MEC407

 #1215030  by MEC407
 
Press release from Maine.gov:
Maine.gov wrote:The Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) announced the City of Brunswick, the Northern New England Passenger Authority (NNEPRA), and the Maine Department of Transportation, among other partners, will participate in a field research program to develop and test new trespass detection and deterrent technologies. The research will consist of designing, operating, and evaluating a large-scale trespass detection and deterrent system to mitigate trespassing along several high-risk areas along the Pan Am Railway and Amtrak's Downeaster rail line in the Brunswick area.

"Illegal trespassing is the number one cause of rail-related fatalities in the United States," said Governor Paul R. LePage. "We welcome this opportunity to use the latest in technology as a means to reduce or prevent injuries and fatalities and to increase safety for Mainers."

The project will utilize remote presence detection sensors and secure, wireless cameras at locations frequented by trespassers. Upon detecting a person on the tracks, the Brunswick Police Department will be immediately notified for appropriate response.

The testing of the various devices will determine their feasibility and effectiveness for trespass prevention. The three-year research project is funded by a $200,000 interagency agreement between FRA to the U.S. Department of Transportation's Volpe National Transportation Systems Center.

"As we see continued growth in the rail industry in Maine, we need to do all we can to ensure safety along these busy rail lines," said MaineDOT Commissioner David Bernhardt. "This also serves as a reminder that walking along railroad tracks is trespassing on private property. Efforts like this will help cut down on the number of trespassing injuries and fatalities." This study is a follow up to a 2001-2004 pilot project in Pittsford, NY, utilizing updated technology and covering a wider area. These studies complement other efforts by the FRA to combat trespassing, such as the 2012 Trespass Demographic Study, a Right-of-Way Fatality & Trespass Prevention Workshop, and FRA's ongoing partnership with Operation Lifesaver, Inc. to educate the public on the dangers of trespassing.
Source: http://content.govdelivery.com/accounts ... ins/8b3cd0" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
 #1215288  by TomNelligan
 
That was basically my thought too. If they're looking for trespassers to detect, I can think of a bunch of places along the Downeaster route where they're going to find a lot more of them than in Brunswick. Maybe start with Lawrence yard? If the FRA is funding this with Federal money, why didn't they pick a more urban location where trespassing is routine? (I'm sure the answer is "politics".)
 #1215291  by MEC407
 
I was wondering the same thing. Perhaps they want to do the trial run in an "easier" area so that they can take their time working out the bugs before they venture into the areas where trespassing is a much bigger problem. Such an approach would be similar to what Amtrak has done in the past, testing out new technologies or projects on the Downeaster before rolling them out to bigger/longer/busier routes.
 #1215296  by MEC407
 
I'm sure that's the ultimate goal, but remember, this is a pilot project... a trial run or a beta test, in other words. The system is still in its infancy. If they installed it somewhere like Lawrence the equipment would probably get stolen or vandalized before they had any time to actually find out how well it was working. :P
 #1215301  by doublestack
 
The " Brunswick West Neighborhood Coalition" could be good reasoning for using Brunswick as a test site. Who more likely would trespass on railroad property than this group to interfere with the construction of the new layover facility.
 #1215343  by MEC407
 
Good point. They already did quite a bit of trespassing in order to make their fearmongering video.
 #1226332  by Watchman318
 
westriverrr wrote:Moose, deer, etc. ?
Maine Eastern used cameras at various in Brunswick for awhile, and I've seen some of the photos. No moose, but occasionally a deer, and many, many turkeys. (The kind without feathers.)
Turkeys walking dogs, turkeys with bicycles, turkeys "in the gauge" with headphones on . . . Some days, it looked like a parade.
TomNelligan wrote:That was basically my thought too. If they're looking for trespassers to detect, I can think of a bunch of places along the Downeaster route where they're going to find a lot more of them than in Brunswick. Maybe start with Lawrence yard? If the FRA is funding this with Federal money, why didn't they pick a more urban location where trespassing is routine?
I think people being on the right-of-way every day (or almost every day) of the week, at all hours of the day, is "routine" trespassing, but maybe I'm alone in that belief. With a linear property like a RR right-of-way, it's hard to adequately monitor (or fence, or even posts signs on) the whole route, but there's entirely too much of the "Oh, I can just hear the train coming and step out of the way" nonsense going on. :-(
Most trespassers are just using it as a "shortcut," but there's a certain percentage who are there to vandalize something, to hide while they engage in substance abuse, or to steal something. (The original reason MERR installed cameras.) ATVs and snowmobiles have occasionally made illegal use of the right-of-way in different parts of Brunswick, too.
I happened to be in downtown Brunswick late one afternoon when a guy got caught walking past the big MDOT "Keep Out" signs near the crossing. I heard him saying "I saw the sign, but I also saw the well-worn path here."
Another day, near that same location, I saw two guys get stopped by a Brunswick officer who noticed them on the r-o-w as he was driving across a bridge over the track. He scooted around to intercept them at the crossing, and one of them had an outstanding warrant. I was able to overhear their excuse, too: "It's safer than walking on Bath Road." And the officer's reply: "No, it's not safer than Bath Road, and another difference is, it's legal for you to walk on Bath Road." (One might almost think that people with warrants or who are on bail conditions or probation might not want to draw attention to themselves by trespassing, but I guess they're not the brightest bulbs on the tree anyway.)
(I'm sure the answer is "politics".)
"The answer to any question starting, 'Why don't they-' is almost always, 'Money'." -- Robert A. Heinlein, Shooting Destination Moon ;-)

Operation Lifesaver's "Three E's," for both grade crossing and anti-trespassing safety: Education, Engineering, and Enforcement.
 #1226623  by RussNelson
 
doublestack wrote:The " Brunswick West Neighborhood Coalition" could be good reasoning for using Brunswick as a test site. Who more likely would trespass on railroad property than this group to interfere with the construction of the new layover facility.
... builds house next to railroad tracks ...
... expect quiet and peaceful enjoyment of their property ...

HERE'S YOUR SIGN!
 #1226764  by Watchman318
 
^^^ Yep. Or more likely, buys house next to RR property, believes real estate agent when salesperson says "Oh, railroads are old-fashioned. That'll never be used for trains again."
The world is full of people with a bad grasp of how action 'A' could lead to result 'B'.

Not too many years ago, I know more than one person at MERR was probably wishing there had been a trespasser-detection system in operation somewhere east of Church Rd., after one of the younger residents of a certain street parallel to the r-o-w apparently tagged the newly-delivered dining car, using a paint pan and roller. Okay, it's not "beyond a reasonable doubt" who did it, but someone's initials being painted on something is at least "reasonable suspicion."
I think they used dry ice blasting to get the unwanted "decorations" off the car so it could be used in passenger service.

I recall one morning in December 2011, right after we'd had a dusting of snow, when I saw some small footprints on top of inbound Dragon empties as the cars rolled under a bridge in Woolwich Somehow I don't think those marks came from employees at Rigby or anyplace else along the route.
When a passerby reports kids jumping from one freight car to another on the tracks between Church Road and Stanwood St., and around the same time the junior high school reports three students have left school property, something's going on.

Some people need a a summons or two along with their new Bill Engval-type sign.
 #1226770  by DogBert
 
They are throw away taxpayer money on this.

As an example, The NYC Subway system is now flooded with motion sensors that are never checked when try are triggered - because the tunnels are full of rodents and law enforcement is spread thin as it is. The only time police respond is when an actual employee sees a trespasser and calls it in.