| Railway Preservation News http://www.rypn.org/forums/ |
|
| Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road http://www.rypn.org/forums/viewtopic.php?f=1&t=39580 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | J3a-614 [ Wed Jul 13, 2016 10:58 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
http://lancasteronline.com/news/communi ... user-share |
|
| Author: | CCDW [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:05 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
There is no provision for common sense or personal responsibility in the general rules. I don’t see this going anywhere even if it is a good idea. |
|
| Author: | softwerkslex [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
This is a very good idea and reflects modern changes in regulations. In the old days the railway was responsible for the engineer's actions, and could authorize a whistle optional policy like this. Today, the engineer is licensed by the Federal government, and the railway does not have the authority to release his liability. Although I am still a little confused about when this is a Federal regulation or a local regulation. Way back when (at the Strasburg), I was young and not always able to judge what was real and what was a tall tale. I was told by an old engineer that there was no whistling on Sunday. I then promptly hostled the 90 and took it up the hill for its blow-out, whistling normally at the crossing. When I got back, I had one cross engineer saying "didn't I tell you there was no whistlin' on Sunday!" I wonder if this Sunday restriction is still there, and if it is authorized by the local statute. |
|
| Author: | wesp [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:33 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
This does not seem unusual. We have an authorized "silent crossing" on a busy CSX line in a community nearby. There is extra signing and other posted information. Wesley |
|
| Author: | Dennis Storzek [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 1:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
I see this ending very badly. There are already spec.s for "quiet zone" crossings, which the FRA will push for compliance. Problem is, they require automatic gates, and center barriers a couple hundred feet leading up to the crossing to keep the horse from running around the gates. Hardly picturesque. 
|
|
| Author: | JimBoylan [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 2:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
Gate(s) that span block the entire roadway have also been used instead of the barriers. |
|
| Author: | Dennis Storzek [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 3:26 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
JimBoylan wrote: Gate(s) that span block the entire roadway have also been used instead of the barriers. In the US? I'm not aware of that being an option, as it sets up a situation where a car can become trapped in the crossing, and the occupants likely not have the good sense to just drive through the gate to get off the track. The photo I posted was just something I grabbed from the web... BNSF recently completed a similar installation in the town where I live, Big Rock, IL, except since we have sidewalks, the FRA also required chain link fence 100+ feet down along the track to each side of the crossing, with a "maze" of fence on the sidewalk so a kid can't just breeze through on a bike. Interesting watching a mom with a stroller, wagon, and toddler in tow trying to navigate that. What a bunch of hooey. |
|
| Author: | Alan Walker [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:38 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
softwerkslex wrote: This is a very good idea and reflects modern changes in regulations. In the old days the railway was responsible for the engineer's actions, and could authorize a whistle optional policy like this. Today, the engineer is licensed by the Federal government, and the railway does not have the authority to release his liability. As an employee of the railroad, the railroad is still legally liable for their acts. Federal regulation does not release the employer from liability in most circumstances. As a civil servant, I can see the inspector saying "I understand your perspective and concerns, but this is the law. That's something for FRA legal counsel to do, not the inspector. |
|
| Author: | softwerkslex [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 4:45 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
Quad gates do exist and they are a desirable safety option. See http://www.dailyherald.com/article/20121220/news/712209965/ |
|
| Author: | lmckay175 [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 5:20 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
It mentioned in the article that quad gates on the Chicago-St. Louis line cost nearly $500,000. So I feel that quad gates for Strasburg are probably not an option. |
|
| Author: | Dave Albright [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 5:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
The city limit of Hagerstown has been a "no-whistle zone" for decades. And we don't have those stupid dividers on any of our streets. And as far as I know, it's a city ordinance. |
|
| Author: | Dennis Storzek [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 6:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
So had a lot of other places in the US, until about twenty years ago, when the FRA insisted Federal Law preempted local laws. I'd be happy for someone familiar with the current situation to enlighten me, but as far as I know, you either put all this stuff in, or the law says the horn has to be sounded. The town where I work, Elburn, IL on the UP (ex C&NW) main has been trying to get a no horn zone established for years on a state highway... best they could do is STATIONARY horns, where the crossing equipment plays a recording of the crossing signal. Stupidest thing I've ever seen, and no help at all, except for the people who live OUTSIDE of town, where the sounding of the crossing signal used to begin. Now, the whole thing plays right downtown. |
|
| Author: | Mark Jordan [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 7:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
In Louisville, KY, there is quite a long stretch of L&N/CSX that parallels Frankfort Ave with multiple side street grade crossings. This is a residential neighborhood, and is a no horn zone. Regular gates, no additional barriers. Trains run approximately 10mph with bell on only. Been that way for years. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=Lo ... ORM=VRDGAR There is also a no horn practice in nearby LaGrange, KY where the same RR runs down the center of the street, with another large cross street in the middle of town. This route sees about 10 trains a day+/-. https://www.bing.com/videos/search?q=La ... ORM=VRDGAR |
|
| Author: | googanelli [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 7:28 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
The run one the CSX/L&N is 20mph from Frankfort up to double track. They've also added more quiet zones further north up the line by Obannon. Some of the crossings have this protection and some don't. Joe |
|
| Author: | Peter Nicholson [ Thu Jul 14, 2016 8:04 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: Possible Rule Exemption for the Strasburg Rail Road |
There's really no hard and fast rule about how a crossing must be equipped to permit a "quiet zone". It all depends on the QZRI (Quiet Zone Risk Index) calculated based on present conditions at each crossing, and how much the QZRI is decreased by the addition of various features such as median barriers, sidewalk chicanes, etc. The whole procedure is a full-employment act for Consulting Engineers. I don't think local political support reduces the QZRI any, though it can't hurt. The entire Chicago metro area received a blanket grandfathering of existing quiet zones when the rule was first implemented, no doubt at least partly due to political clout (the official reason was that grade crossing accident rates in the Chicago area were markedly less than in the rest of the country--the prevalent old Chicago rule was quiet if gates, whistle if not, similar to the Canadian nationwide rule). While we have a Congressman from the Jacksonville, FL area to thank for this whole mess when he attached a rider to a bill after an accident in his district, the railroad industry was also in favor of a blanket Federal-preemption must-whistle everywhere at all times rule and did not lobby against it. Good risk/liability management perhaps, but an unwise move politically. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|