nyandw wrote:Interesting... Any photos of these items?https://www.newsday.com/opinion/editori ... 1.18559283" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Railroad Forums
Moderator: Liquidcamphor
nyandw wrote:Interesting... Any photos of these items?https://www.newsday.com/opinion/editori ... 1.18559283" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
Sir Ray wrote:Yes, while the half barriers are automatically operated (off the track circuits, I assume), those full barriers In the UK all required a crossing guard to be present to operate the gates (if there happened to be an interlocking at that location, the block operator would control the gates manually from the tower -- and the towers are also rapidly disappearing). The main obstacle to anything like that in the US is that in the UK, and elsewhere in Europe, the gates are interlocked with the signal system, meaning that the nearest home signal in each direction cannot be cleared until the gates have been closed. This means that to avoid delaying trains the gates have to be completely closed and the locking on the home signal released before an oncoming train comes within sighting distance of the distant signal beyond -- a good 3 or 4 minutes every time a train is due. I don't see Long Islanders, or any other motorists in the US, waiting patiently at the crossing for 3 or 4 minutes when absolutely nothing is happening. Safe, but at a cost of more time than most people would be willing to give up.vince wrote:Swinging grade crossing gates as are used in the UK. Tracks are blocked when gates are open to road traffic AND would stop the run-around-the-gate deaths that occur with any partial gate system as used in the USI think the UK has gotten away from that design with their later automatic gated level crossings, which use the typical drop arm barriers as seen in the US (normally 4 quadrant, but still drop arms). Gate barriers do still exist on heritage railways and the like, but perhaps the barrier arms are too long to stow across the ROW when not in use vs the generally smaller gates.
Norton wrote:Thank you, Norton! Tough to envision here from Tampa!nyandw wrote:Interesting... Any photos of these items?https://www.newsday.com/opinion/editori ... 1.18559283" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
nyandw wrote:Norton wrote:Thank you, Norton! Tough to envision here from Tampa!nyandw wrote:Interesting... Any photos of these items?https://www.newsday.com/opinion/editori ... 1.18559283" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
vince wrote:Excuse by the RR's? Cost!Don't know how they did it, but the value of a human life is routinely determined in wrongful death tort litigation. Basis includes age, current earnings, earnings potential and so forth. Perhaps the average wrongful death recovery in jury trials and settlements was used.
I wonder where they came up with what are human lives worth? A 4 quadrant gate is somewhat less (75%?) than a two gate system.
regards,
vince