Train Whistles - Things To Think About - picturethis's Blog - Tehachapi News

Jun 2, 2008 at 11:06 PM : You go-Randy!That...

You go-Randy!That attitude always irritates me too-I like the train whistles!

Jun 3, 2008 at 07:06 AM : I second your motion...

I second your motion above; keep the train whistles, for the greater good.

Jun 3, 2008 at 08:06 AM : That train...

That train has been rolling through these parts long before you Mr Bates ever dreamed about living here. I always find it very funny how someone who chooses to live in the vicinity of the existing train tracks will complain about the train noise and horns, that's idiotic if you ask me. Try moving or wearing ear plugs or better yet DON'T live next to the train tracks if you DON'T like the noise. STOP YOUR WHINING......................

Jun 3, 2008 at 08:06 AM : "Its always...

"Its always the stupid people that get killed", says Picturethis, as he crawls out from the wheel of his air-bag equipped car, still upset about the wait at the signalized intersection, only some of which he retrieved by passing the guy waiting to turn left by using the shoulder which had been engineered free of obstructions...

Thanks to folks who don't think people should be killed for a moment's inattention, distraction, or mistake of judgement, it is much safer to drive a car than it was just a few decades ago. The notion that unsafe conditions "were here first" didn't stop folks from figuring out how to make things better.

Most RR crossing accidents are at unsignalized crossings, and that is where your googled lawyers make their money. Red flashing lights and bells costs about $300k (about the same as traffic lights) and would be far more effective than whistles. The addition of a few feet of extra length to the gate arms would prevent most of the drive-arounds that occur at gated crossings now. Figure your own calculus for lives saved per buck.

Railroads have and they simply calculate that it is cheaper to kill people and pay lawyers than to fix crossings and save lives. These are the same companies who refused to use Westinghouse's safety air brake for 20 years, preferring instead to have brakeman scramble across the top of moving cars turning brakes one at a time. They refused to use knuckled couplings for longer.

Our country has shameful RR crossing accident rates, similar to a third-world countries.

Jun 3, 2008 at 09:06 AM : PD I"m glad...

PD I"m glad you brought that up, and I agree with you Railroads have enough money, they can and should make sure all RR crossings have signals in order to save many lives, This indeed should be dealt with. HOWEVER, I still want their whistles to blow. There are many places, especially in populated cities where conductors should blow their horn. I have seen many people who walk across the tracks (not at RR crossings) to get to the other side. The RR killing rate is bad, but it could be worse without the whistle. I have a buddy who is a retired conductor...you know the kind that hears a train rolling down the tracks and whistles blowing even when there isn't a train for miles around. lol Yep. I gotta love that guy...anyway he mentioned this very thing to me a couple years ago. It certainly would have made his life less stressful if there were signals at every crossing and it would save many lives.

You tell em Gube... lol

DonMar, Darn right, for the greater good. (smile)

Jun 3, 2008 at 09:06 AM : I never said it's...

I never said it's always the stupid people that get killed. If someone intentionally drives around or under the crossing arms and gets themselves killed, I would hardly qualify them as rocket scientists. As for unmarked crossings, in the majority of cases, there is a clear field of view for someone to "look both ways before crossing", the same thing you were taught before crossing the street. Just the other day 2 girls were run over when they were sunbathing on the railroad tracks, 1 lost a foot and the other lost a leg or two. Shall we blame the railroad for not posting no sunbathing signs? While a very unfortunate incident, a little forethought would have prevented a lifetime of disfigurement. By your tone I can only surmise you would sue Colt for their pistol being used in a fatal shooting. All I am saying is "Take responsibility for your actions, if you aren't willing to face the results, don't do it!"

Jun 3, 2008 at 09:06 AM : Then I'll say it...

Then I'll say it .......ONLY STUPID PEOPLE GET KILLED BY TRAINS AT R&R CROSSINGS.......

Jun 3, 2008 at 09:06 AM : Years ago I was going...

Years ago I was going to Benz over on Dennison and the R&R arms were down because a long train was stopped right before the intersection.I waited like 5 minuets the said screw it I along with another car went around the R&R arms to get to the other side. I made it but the car behind me got hit by a train that we couldn't see coming because the first train was blocking our vision. The 4 people in the car that got hit where lucky ...They all walked away without a scratch......This my Friends is why I say if you get killed at a R&R crossing then it was most likely caused by a stupid move on your part.

Jun 3, 2008 at 10:06 AM : picturethis......

picturethis... don't pay attention to PD. He/She does have a tendency to jump on people using rather lame excuses. PD is not a happy blogger... I read PD's posts because they are sometimes informative...I do not read PD's posts for his/her communication skills. lol

Jun 3, 2008 at 10:06 AM : I'm not against...

I'm not against whistles either. They are also required by law, although a few towns and areas have gotten special regulations to reduce the noise, normally these are accompanied by improved crossing controls to compensate.

Of course I was putting the words in your mouth to make a point about road safety, Picturethis. It was meant to be amusing - I hope you don't pass on the right either. But I'm not a big fan of the Darwin Awards. You've never done something really, really dumb?

As for the two sunbathers, I doubt if they were the first and only kids to use the rail yard that way. A responsible community or company, noting that the area was being used by teens might have erected fencing to reduce its attractiveness and availabilty to them. Sensible development principles might also reduce the conflict between railroads and communities.

As for unsignalized crossings, no doubt there are most often adequate sight lines to allow their safe passage IF the driver is not inattentive, distracted, or using bad judgement. But it is exactly to protect against inattention, distraction, and bad judgement that we have guards on power saws.

Jun 3, 2008 at 10:06 AM : The one and only time...

The one and only time the whistles "annoyed" me was during the production of The Vagina Monologues. It was held outside at the old art center. But kudos to the cast, they simply stopped and waited each time - and there was several times that night, lol.

To me, the trains, whistles and all, are part of Tehachapi's charm.

Jun 3, 2008 at 10:06 AM : Really, really dumb...

Really, really dumb move, gube. If I had MY way, that crossing would have big honking gates that you wouldn't be ABLE to drive around, instead of those bare-minimum sticks that practically invite your stupid chicane action. Because I care...

Jun 3, 2008 at 11:06 AM : Wow Gube.... good...

Wow Gube.... good point. I can see that happening to many people.

PD, geez louise... that's almost as extreme as my neighbors idea of putting speed bumps every 1/2 mile on Sand Canyon rd so that these crazy drivers will slow down. I don't think we will get new RR gates either, but, I am glad you care. (smile)

Jun 3, 2008 at 11:06 AM : I love the whistles...

I love the whistles and think they should be used before every intersection. I've heard that the likelihood that a train engineer will hit a car and kill someone is 100% over their career (through no fault of theirs!). However, I don't see any point in putting big railroad signals with arms at every freaking crossing. I can't even fathom how much it would cost! All those rural crossings...

The only case I've ever heard of where an intelligent person was hit by a train was when a girl stopped at the tracks (on a very foggy day) to listen for a train- and then some idiot flew up behind her, rear-ended her, pushing her onto the tracks infront of the train. A signal wouldn't have done a thing in that case. I myself almost was hit by a train once- it was a total failure of the designer of an intersection to anticipate large vehicles, coupled with two blaring blind spots. I didn't get hit- I got the hell out of the way.

Jun 3, 2008 at 11:06 AM : PD I was a lot younger...

PD I was a lot younger and dumber then.....today I would never pull a stunt like that..........................And I'm sure those 4 guys in the car that got hit felt even dumber.........I have always kinda felt a little responsible for that accident because if I did not illegally cross those tracks then the car behind me wouldn't have tried and got hit........Oh well better them then me.

Jun 3, 2008 at 11:06 AM : madkow yes there are...

madkow yes there are acceptances to the rules .......................but .....

Jun 3, 2008 at 11:06 AM : Yes, Gube, I agree...

Yes, Gube, I agree that almost all people that get hit by trains are idiots ;)

Jun 3, 2008 at 11:06 AM : The moral to my story...

The moral to my story is I ain't no idiot.......The Idiots where in the car behind me that got hit.......lol

Jun 3, 2008 at 12:06 PM : Sparks, don't...

Sparks, don't even get me started on speed bumps! Not only are they annoying, they're extremely dangerous. And of course, the way to defeat them is to go even faster! bad, bad, bad....

Madkow - Bells and lights cost about $300k per crossing. Gates cost a couple of hundred thousand more. Last year there were 339 railroad crossing fatalities, 986 crossing injuries and another 800 trespass fatalities and injuries in the country. http://www.oli.org/statistics/statistics-frasitelink.htm

So it depends on what you figure a saved life is worth as to how much safety you want to buy. If a life is worth $2M and an injury is worth $1M, and if good crossings would cut the accidents in half (conservative, I think) we could spend about $1 billion a year on new crossing warning systems, fencing, etc. and break even on the deal. That would upgrade 3000 crossings a year. Obviously some triage would have to be applied to maximize the value of these improvements. Some crossings should be closed. Pay me now, or pay me later, as the lawyer would tell us.

In fairness, there has been progress in the last couple of decades, but it has greatly lagged roadway safety, partly because of (I think) this "the railroad was here first" bias, partly due to the funding split between the privately-held RR's and the government which does not exist in the case of highways, and - oddly I think - because of a general contempt for some unlucky people. All of these biases have been voiced here, and the last one bothers me the most. Plenty of intelligent people have been killed by trains, including intelligent people doing a dumb thing - or maybe even dumber, riding with someone like gube! And of course, since when is it OK for dumb people to die horrible deaths?

One of those 339 fatalities was a 15 year old girl in Boron. She wasn't stupid, just very unlucky. You are correct that every long-time RR Engineer has hit someone. What can that do for their peace of mind? What is that worth?

Jun 3, 2008 at 01:06 PM : PD, I look at it...

PD, I look at it simply as a matter of personal responsibility. If someone is stupid enough to get hit by a train- why the heck should they get $2 million? Intelligent people do make mistakes, but how is the railroad liable for that? We all learn proper procedure in drivers education. So we have no excuse.

Put crossing lights and gates at urban and suburban crossings, at crossings on highways and other high traffic thoroughfares, and dangerous (blind or unsafe for some other reason) crossings. I don't need a light to tell me that a train is coming when I can see five miles in either direction. I'd like to see a statistic about how many people are killed at intersections that already have lights and gates.

Jun 3, 2008 at 04:06 PM : PD posts......

PD posts... "As for the two sunbathers, I doubt if they were the first and only kids to use the rail yard that way. A responsible community or company, noting that the area was being used by teens might have erected fencing to reduce its attractiveness and availabilty to them."

So, I guess PD's logic would have us erecting 12 ft. high chain link fences with razor wire on the top all along the coastline to keep the teenagers out of the ocean so they won't drown?? That ocean is mighty attractive and available....

Jun 3, 2008 at 05:06 PM : picturethis and...

picturethis and madkow, you are both quite correct in your thoughts about personal responsibility. The world would be a MUCH better place if everyone took a little more responsibility for their actions. Personal responsibility seems to be a thing of the past.

As far as the train whistle issue, I just have to shake my head is disbelief. It's akin to people who move next to an airport then complain about the noise! What gives??!! What were you thinking??!! Not only do I enjoy hearing them (I love trains as some of you know), but if the addition of an audible warning can help prevent a truly accidental situation, I'm all for it. Besides, just a any thief will be able to steal something if they really want it, certain people will be hell bent on circumventing whatever safeguards are put in place at RR crossings. While it is the railroad's responsibility to provide due diligence regarding the safety of RR crossings (which I believe they do), it's shouldn't be their job to protect the idiots of the world from their own stupidity.

Jun 3, 2008 at 05:06 PM : Good one ragmop!...

Good one ragmop! The reason there's no fence around the ocean (even though it can be just as dangerous as an approaching train) is because the ocean is part of nature, while railroads are owned by big bad corporations that don't care about people, and we should sue them for every penny we can when we do something stupid! (I'm being sarcastic in case you couldn't tell.)

Jun 3, 2008 at 07:06 PM : We do hire lifeguards...

We do hire lifeguards to improve public safety at the ocean. Are you fellows such champions of personal responsibility that you are against that, as well?

Greg, if you think the railroad is doing such a great job (2728 collisions in 2007) how good a job were they doing in 1981 (9,461 collisions)? Were they doing a great job then too? Wanna tell me what changed?

Ragmop, lets suppose that this sun-bathing site was straight across from a burger joint or similar teenager "draw", and a few hundred feet of fence between the two would have made the area sufficiently less attractive that the kids would have gone elsewhere. In that case, would you begrudge a few thousand dollars for a fence or would you insist that we barricade the ocean too? What kind of kool-aid do you drink to toss off the disfigurement of two young girls so easily that you aren't even willing to consider such elementary precautions?

Jun 3, 2008 at 07:06 PM : Madkow - I didn't...

Madkow - I didn't mean that the accident victim should get $2M. I intended that only as a reasonable value of prevented fatalities to illustrate how much it would cost, and how many crossings that would fix. Pick your own number, but surely a life saved is worth something. It was just a Cost-Benefit calculation, that's all.

Jun 3, 2008 at 07:06 PM : I think the...

I think the railroads are doing a great job because their crossing signals, along with the train whistles, do a VERY GOOD job of alerting me to an approaching train so I have AMPLE time to stay back from the tracks. If people choose to willfully ignore those safeguards, it's not the railroad's fault. You can put up whatever statistics you want because there will never be any lack of stupid people in the world that will do whatever they want no matter what safeguards are put in place. You can't cocoon off everything in the world and have people walk around like big Nerf toys so they won't so much as stub their toe. What fun would that be anyway?

Jun 3, 2008 at 07:06 PM : Hey PD you...

Hey PD you may have hit on something. Why don't we have the railroad hire crossing guards for every single railroad crossing in the United States to shoo people away from the tracks when a train is approaching! Brilliant! Though there would have to be two for each crossing, one for each side of the tracks. Well, actually, there would have to be six, two for each 8 hour shift over a 24 hour period. There would also have to be a few extra too for sick days, vacations, etc. And then there would have to be a manager or two for each crew too. So I'd say 9 or 10 people per crossing ought to do it!

Jun 3, 2008 at 07:06 PM : PD.. are you dense or...

PD.. are you dense or do you deliberately twist everything anyone says and put your spin on it?? You totally missed the point of my post, and I don't have the desire or patience to try and explain every nuance to you. Sheesh!

GregL.... you 'get it'. Thanks.

Jun 3, 2008 at 08:06 PM : PD, the point is that...

PD, the point is that people should not be compensated for being idiots. Keep the responsibility with the guilty party. There is no cost-benefit when blame is properly assigned. You act as though the trains are purposely hunting people down- even though they're stuck on tracks... so it's obvious where the trains are going to go... yeah. Now, if it's something like the wreck at Devore- that's a good lawsuit. Sunbathing on the tracks- they're SOL.

Ragmop- I think you're right on both accounts :)

GregL- love the crossing guard idea!

Jun 3, 2008 at 08:06 PM : PD - You favor...

PD - You favor fencing, barriers, borders, and physical barriers to keep people out of and away from things. Nowhere have I seen you mention the most important part - education! Along the lines of taking responsibility, wouldn't you think a caring parent would educate their children as to the dangers of playing on the freeway, on RR tracks, near unstable cliffs, etc.? The cost to society for this education - nothing more than some quality child / parent time spent together in ernest conversation.

You mentioned in 1981 - 9,461 collisions and in 2007 2,728 collisions, that's an almost 400% reduction in accidents which to me says things are getting much better and safer in the RR business. With each day the world becomes a safer place for those who pay attention to what they are doing.

Jun 3, 2008 at 08:06 PM : Give the stupid...

Give the stupid people a chance! People who drive around crossing arms or play chicken or try to beat the train are just trying out for the Darwin Award! Someone has to win it....

Jun 3, 2008 at 08:06 PM : Madkow - I'll say...

Madkow - I'll say it again. I am not proposing and did not propose compensation for accident victims. I suggested that a saved life be considered "worth" that much when considering the cost of safety improvements. Propose your own value - smoke detectors are required in all new housing and they cost about $50...you tell me how many lives each smoke detector has to save to make it good public policy to require them.

ragmop, what do you think is nuanced about your reduction to absurdity? Your point - that all accidents can't be guarded against and that some mitigations are too costly or have other undesirable effects - was clear enough. At least you show some understanding of benefit/cost - please explain it to madkow.

Greg, why would I want to use such an idiotic crossing guard method as the one you propose when much better and cheaper methods exist? Nice bit of absurdity for you too, hope you enjoyed it. Surprised an old Train Hand like you wouldn't be interested in what reduced crossing accidents by 60%, though.

As for "nerf toys", haven't you noticed those big yellow barrels at bridge abutments? Maybe you want to go back to the "good old days" when people were just killed when they drifted off the road...those days were FUN!!

And I note that out of 4 non-rhetorical questions I asked, you guys answered exactly....ZERO! I love the give and take of informed, intelligent discussion!

Jun 3, 2008 at 09:06 PM : PD, there is a line...

PD, there is a line between personal responsibility and public safety. You seem to have no understanding of that line. I know I tend to veer strongly in the direction of personal responsibility (to the degree that I was debating seatbelt laws for adults the other day)- but I know that this is a position that most people are much more middle-of-the-road. So sticking to that middle-of-the-road position, a vast majority of people still do not want a completely padded, muffled world. You can only go so far in trying to protect everyone from injury before it begins to get ridiculous. What are you going to propose next- eliminating guns? No drugs? Medications are dangerous too (they're also good- hmmm... kind of like railroads). The world is never going to be a safe place for people that can't think for themselves, no matter how much bubblewrap you try to surround it with.

Have you really thoroughly thought out your cost ratio? You just talk about the cost of putting signals in as equivalent to lawsuits from the families of the dead and the injured parties. Have you considered the cost to the railroad- that it will be passed on to us through increases in freight transport costs? Even more expensive food/cars/goods doesn't sound very appealing to me. Or are you proposing some sort of subsidized program where the taxpayers pay for it? Either way, there will still be lawsuits from the dead/injured that went around the gates. And sunbathers ;)

What were your non-rhetorical questions you wanted answered? State them without all the surrounding BS and I might pay more attention to answering them.

Jun 3, 2008 at 09:06 PM : PD's...

PD's rhetorical question... "Ragmop, lets suppose that this sun-bathing site was straight across from a burger joint or similar teenager "draw", and a few hundred feet of fence between the two would have made the area sufficiently less attractive that the kids would have gone elsewhere. In that case, would you begrudge a few thousand dollars for a fence or would you insist that we barricade the ocean too? What kind of kool-aid do you drink to toss off the disfigurement of two young girls so easily that you aren't even willing to consider such elementary precautions?"

First of all.. it was YOUR post that proposed fencing to keep stupid people safe. Even if you did succeed in fencing off the entire California coastline to keep people out of the ocean, there would be stupid people who would tunnel under the fence, climb over the fence or cut a hole in the fence, and go drown in the ocean in spite of your efforts! Your imaginary teenagers at the burger joint would find a way to conquer the fence if they really wanted to get to the 'attractive' sunbathing area.. in fact, they might even consider it a challenge to 'beat the fence"! (Just like stupid people trying to 'beat the train' which is the subject of this blog) Point being - I agree with those intelligent bloggers who have pointed out the necessity for people to take responsibility for themselves and to teach their kids safe behavior. Sunbathing in a railroad yard? Hello?

Jun 3, 2008 at 10:06 PM : I agree that the idea...

I agree that the idea of sunbathing in a railroad yard sounds preposterous. Yet, there they were. I propose the possibility that some feature of the area must have made it attractive. So my question about the burger joint or similar attraction - which is not the least rhetorical.

Another non-rhetorical question was if you were in favor of hiring life guards at public beaches, as is done now, or does your "line between personal responsibility and public safety" prohibit you from endorsing this long-accepted practice?

Madkow, I'm not talking about breaking-even on law-suits or freight charges. I'm talking about the value a society places on protecting people from violent death. If you try to answer the non-rhetorical question about the smoke detectors it may help. Assume no lawyers exist.

And funny you should bring up drugs into this, Madkow...since drugs are probably the most heavily-regulated consumer product there is. Drugs must be explicitly approved for use by an agency of the Federal government, for heaven's sake! You choose that to indicate that you're more interested in personal responsibility than me?

Jun 3, 2008 at 10:06 PM : As far as fencing is...

As far as fencing is concerned, here's a little story to sadly illustrate the point (or pointlessness). There is a spot next to the railroad in Santa Clarita where there IS a fence next to the tracks for quite a ways (a mile or more maybe). Recently a couple of young adults were killed when they tried to cross the tracks near the end of the fence. Exactly how long or far must a fence be? The entire length of the railroad? What about at grade crossings? What happens to the fence there? My point (AGAIN!) is that people will ALWAYS find ways around WHATEVER safeguards or precautions are put in place. Sad but true. I'm not against fencing at all, but like everything else, it must be within reason. It's just not as simple as: railroads are dangerous and people are stupid, therefore we must do everything under the sun to separate the two. There are practical limits to everything.

Jun 3, 2008 at 10:06 PM : picturethis - I was...

picturethis - I was hoping Greg would answer the question about improved crossing safety. (not 400% though - you can't get past 100% after all.)

The reduction certainly isn't due to improved education. Do you really think that parents are having more and better ernest discussions about railroad safety than 26 years ago? I think folks have known trains will kill you for a long time.

I already said that there has been improvements. There are more and better signals and barriers in place. More traffic has been moved to grade-separated highways. (as the Mojave bypass has done, for example) Miles and miles of low-use, low signaled branch lines have been abandoned.

Jun 3, 2008 at 10:06 PM : At Madkow's...

At Madkow's request - A non-rhetorical question with no surrounding "BS"

Q) If the addition of a guardrail on Willow Springs Road would save one life over the next 20 years, how much should we (through Caltrans) be willing to pay for it?i

Jun 3, 2008 at 11:06 PM : Progresso-There is a...

Progresso-There is a big difference between spending money on a guard rail that can be installed to prevent an accident vs spending money to install more/better barriers at railroad crossings to prevent people from driving around them or putting up a fence to prevent people from sunbathing on the tracks. A guard rail prevents an accident, whereas there is no way to prevent someone from trying to beat a train, sunbathing on the tracks or intentionally going around barriers which is a willful disregard for their own safety. It is one thing to spend money on accident prevention vs spending money on fools who act stupid at railroads.

People need to take responsibility for their actions resulting from stupidity.

Jun 4, 2008 at 12:06 AM : Your interpretation of...

Your interpretation of what an accident is sounds unique. Does your insurance company agree?

Trust me, once you've hit the guardrail, you've had an accident. Guardrails reduce the total damages from accidents, they don't prevent them. Of course, in any given crash, they can increase your damages by bouncing you back into traffic or they can give you an impact like that wall did to Dale Earnhardt, that hurts worse than running off the road.

But I stipulated the case here - one less fatality every twenty years, no other changes. How much should the state spend to install it?

Jun 4, 2008 at 01:06 AM : I reread my post but...

I reread my post but don't see where I interpreted as to what an accident was.

Hitting a wall is a lot different than hitting a guard rail. Guard rails are engineered to slow you down and slide vs falling off a dropoff. Guard rails do prevent accidents--they warn you that there is a drop off on the side of the road, resulting in you being a little more alert. When driving on a road with guardrails most people drive a little more careful as there is not much leeway in clearance. Guard rails are up in areas to prevent a more serious crash.--not just to keep you from "running off the road." If you didn't hit the guard rail, you would roll over down the hill. Guard rails do not "bounce you back into traffic" --that is a result from driver error that occurs from overcorrecting after hitting the guardrail. What would I rather do--hit a guard rail or drive off Willow Springs and fall 50 ft into a canyon?MMMM I'll have to think about that one.

Jun 4, 2008 at 01:06 AM : I live a...

I live a mile and 1/4 from the crossing @ Green and Tehachapi, and can hear quite clearly the horn blasts of approaching trains. While I certainly appreciate these warnings...especially @ 2:00 a.m., 3:00 a.m., etc., I'm unsure as to what is expected of me. Am I to jump into my vehicle and proceed with great haste to the crossing? This seems illogical, as the train will be gone before I can arrive.

The threshold of pain is 130 decibels. Since train horns blare at up to 140 decibels, I would think that the thrill and novelty associated with these sounds would fade rather quickly. The City Council, however, disagrees. In their regular meeting of 09/06/05, they decided against applying for a Quiet Zone due to business and safety concerns. While I don't dispute the inherent dangers of railroad crossings, I do question the need for such high decibel levels. On the bright side, the FRA has established a maximum volume level of 110 decibels as of 2010. Of course, that's the equivalent of standing next to a jet aircraft at takeoff, but jets are almost as cool as trains, aren't they?

Jun 4, 2008 at 01:06 AM : Which came...

Which came first? Your house or the train? Didn't you realize buying a house that close to a train would result in train noise? It's like buying/building a house near an airport and complaining about the jet noise!

Jun 4, 2008 at 06:06 AM : PD I beg to differ...

PD I beg to differ about awsmom's interpretation of what an accident is, In fact I couldn't agree with her more! There is a BIG difference between a guardrail on a road and an barrier at a railroad crossing! The guardrail is to prevent an out of control vehicle from leaving the roadway, while the railroad barrier is to prevent a deliberate act from a stupid person. I would be curious to see just what percentage of grade crossing accidents are true 'accidents' vs. stupidity. I would be willing to bet that vast majority are the result of people being impatient and using poor judgment, as opposed to their car suddenly being thrust in the path of an oncoming train accidentally.

One more time, I guess I don't see the need for additional safety at grade crossings because the existing measures are more than sufficient to warn me of oncoming trains. Heck I drive across plenty of crossings in the desert where there is nothing more than the 'X' sign and maybe a stop sign, and that's all the warning I need. If people have to have a parent standing over them saying "No, No, No!!! Don't go around the barrier and drive in front of that speeding train!!!", maybe society is better off without them around anyway!

Hey gube, I think it's time for your graphic of beating the dead horse!

Jun 4, 2008 at 07:06 AM : While some of you...

While some of you crybaby's want to bi-ch and moan because you were to stupid to live by one of the busiest train tracks in America, others move here to tehachapi just to live next to the tracks because they get all exited when the train noisily rolls past their houses with the horns a blowing.......Its music to many peoples ears. Like I already said you can always wear ear plugs or move.......After all it you idiotic dumb-ass stupid self that moved there in the first place. So I hope that every time the good old train blows its horn at 12:00, 1:00,2:00,3:00,4:00 you remember just how stupid you were to move into the vicinity or the train tracks.......

Here you go Greg............

Jun 4, 2008 at 09:06 AM : Q) If the addition of...

Q) If the addition of a guardrail on Willow Springs Road would save one life over the next 20 years, how much should we (through Caltrans) be willing to pay for it?

A) How did this get to guardrails from railroad crossing signals? Although I do have to say that one fatality every 20 years isn't bad. Been on the 15 lately? Three days in a row, my husband passed a fatality at nearly the same spot on Baker grade.

I can't really answer your question about smoke alarms for two reasons: (1) we have not established a total number of railroad crossings that would need to be upgraded and the subsequent cost to the railroad and it's further cost to each taxpayer and (2) people using bad judgement near/on railroad tracks is very different than people whose homes catch on fire in the middle of the night. One is an idiot- in most cases, and the other the victim of an accident- in most cases.

Jun 4, 2008 at 10:06 AM : From what I remember...

From what I remember (and if I'm wrong I'm sure someone will jump in and correct me ; ) ) there is more to designating a Quiet Zone than filling out the application. All crossing in that area have to meet certain extra, very stringent safety regulations before a Quiet Zone application can be approved. It is not the responsibility of the railroad to improve these railroad crossings, the costs are to be paid by the city requesting the Quiet Zone. It would have resulted in hundreds of thousands of dollars to the city of Tehachapi, which was better spent building a fire station.

Hi GregL good to see you!

spam code BINGO!

Jun 4, 2008 at 10:06 AM : Engineers are required...

Engineers are required to sound the horn 1,000 feet from a R.R. crossing...that's approx. 1/5 of a mile. Naturally, anyone within that radius can expect to experience the full impact. However, an individual living in a well insulated apartment 1 1/4 miles from the crossing can reasonably expect that at that distance the sound will become nothing more than background noise. And, in most instances, that is the case.

However, there are a number of locomotives that have the decibel level of their horns set to an absurdly loud pitch. It's this lack of uniformity that creates occasional episodes of unwarranted noise pollution.

Those residents who derive satisfaction from noisy trains rolling by are certainly entitled to their enjoyment. By the same token, those of us who don't share their enthusiasm should be allowed to make this fact known without being subjected to discourteous comments.

Jun 4, 2008 at 10:06 AM : Yesterday I drove up...

Yesterday I drove up to Lake Isabella area and there was a sign that said "Dum and Dummer-Honk so we know you are Here!" Maybe we should post signs at railroad crossings that say, "Dum and Dummer-Drive around the railroad crossing arms so we know you are Here!"

Jun 4, 2008 at 10:06 AM : Jerry I did not mean...

Jerry I did not mean to come off as discourteous but Tehachapi is a railroad town. And with railroads there is an extremely large amount of noise and living anywhere near the tracks would be difficult unless you were a train lover. Live in a train town + near the tracks = train noise.

Jun 4, 2008 at 11:06 AM : awsmom8 - my remark...

awsmom8 - my remark about discourteous comments was not directed at you. And, yes...Tehachapi IS a train town and as such I didn't expect to receive much sympathy from my post. At least I was able to get a minor irritation off my chest.

Currently I'm working on my next rant in which I complain about the wind, the snow in the winter, and the sun rising in the east.

Take care.

Jun 4, 2008 at 11:06 AM : LOL Jerry--I have a...

LOL Jerry--I have a few things to say about the wind too! Esp. today! And when did the sun start to rise in the east?!?!?!

Jun 4, 2008 at 01:06 PM : Madkow, we got to...

Madkow, we got to smoke alarms and guard rails because the installation of both of them is dependent on the value society places on lives saved. But I give up, you unwillingness to make even a stab at an answer has me shaking my head.

awsmom8 and Greg, I'm glad you do whatever you do instead of traffic engineering. I'll just assure you that running into a guardrail certainly is an accident, guardrails are hazards themselves and they are never placed to provide warning, they certainly can deflect autos back into traffic, and people do die by crashing into them. Believe it or not.

Most of these facts are also contained in this study. http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/7000/7500/7574/778822.pdf The second paragraph of page 1 hits the high points (guardrails are hazards, cost of action must be less than cost of inaction, etc.) On page 15, this 1996 study uses a value of $2.4M for each averted fatality. This is a detailed example of the simple Benefit/Cost ratio I illustrated several frustrating posts ago. So my $2M cost per death at a railroad crossing was a little low. We could probably improve 5,000 crossings a year. But, if you'd rather have violent deaths to teach people lessons, you can blame them and call them stupid and unworthy of life, instead. Frankly awsmom8, you show more concern for roadkill.

Jun 4, 2008 at 02:06 PM : Geez, PD, I answered...

Geez, PD, I answered your question as best as I could, given that it was totally missing the point and too vague. You ask much we should pay for a human life? That all depends on who responds. I've already indicated the crossings that I think should be equipped with signals/gates/etc, and the railroad seems to have done a good job at doing such. The only case I've ever come across of a bad rr crossing/traffic intersection combination was simply because of a misplacement of sensors needed to trigger the signal for auto traffic.

Your post confuses me- so are you saying guard rails are good or bad?

Jun 4, 2008 at 03:06 PM : lol madkow...that...

lol madkow...that depends on which side of the issue you're on....

;-)

Jun 4, 2008 at 03:06 PM : MMMM, I still...

MMMM, I still haven't decided what I would want....hit a guard rail or plunge 100 feet down a canyon??? This question is taking a long time to solve...

Jun 4, 2008 at 04:06 PM : I only wanted your...

I only wanted your opinion, Madkow. There is no right or wrong answer.

I'd hope you would say that the cost of a death on the track should be counted as more than the price of the water the fire department will use to hose it down, but given the responses I've read here, it wouldn't surprise me if that were it.

Don't worry awsmom8 - only stupid people who don't take responsibility for their actions fall off roads.