Mike's Railroad Crossing Forum

http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&source= ... 2&t=h&z=17

Saw this in Lewiston today. Traffic on Mill Road was stopped, even though the tracks only cross the entrance to the mill.

I'm surprised they didn't put gates on the main road signals. Plus, it doesn't tell that the crossing is on the connecting road...

New peoples to the crossing would stop assuming to see a train cross over the road before them, but would consider running the signal if they saw where it was crossing. I believe they could've put another cantilever between the road and the rails. (between the T-intersection and the railroad...a little closer to the edge than the gate-less light/crossbuck only signal) They could've put a different set of lights (one facing left, and the other facing right) to warn traffic of the train, and a set of stops signs on the whole intersection, to make sure people are hesitating before turning over the crossing.

If they couldn't decide to put another set of angled lights above the set of lights that would already be existent, then they could (and should at least) angle the overhead lights like they did for the gated signal. A gate on this new signal would be a good idea.

Cheers,
Joshua

I do agree the crossing maybe could be designed a little better... but it wouldn't make sense to put gates on the main road. Traffic that is not wanting to turn can still proceed even though there was a train.

The best and safest way to do it would be to put in traffic lights that would be interconnected with the crossing signals.

Just my worth.

Depends on the road's traffic density. If it's as rural as it appears and sounds, a traffic light seems like a bit much. I suggest another alternative 3-Way stop sign system with a yellow light that activates when with the railroad signals and an additional cantilever to be put a further closer to the corner where the gateless, light-and-crossbuck-only signal is... with lights facing Left (60 degrees), Right (-60 degrees), Forward, and Reverse.

Of course, this means the signals on the main street would be uprooted, but for the best.

Cheers,
Joshua

I think this one about takes the cake... and it is only about 30 miles from my house!

http://www.railpictures.net/viewphoto.php?id=350749

Not only do the roads intersect here... there is also a another set of tracks here! Check out the intersection on StreetView and you can see the diamond.

A couple of notes... this entire intersection appears to be controlled by the traffic lights... no crossings signals. But there appears to be the "no turn" boxes and from the looks of it on the Railpictures photo, strobe lights that indicate the presence of a train! Also, in Streetview, you can see that a crossing gate blocks the one set of tracks when they are not in use.

Definitely going to have to make a trip to Decatur and check this mess out!

Must be a shortline. They obviously have a low speed limit and must use the gate as a visual not to go which way. Who needs a LED rail signal anyway?

Anyway, that looks a tad confusing, but oh well, interesting anyway.

Cheers,
Joshua

Surprised there is no gate on our side of the road, from that lone signal.
The cantilever should have GREEN through-arrows and RED turn arrowso thathrough-traffic is not stopped.

Robert_Gift wrote:Surprised there is no gate on our side of the road, from that lone signal.
The cantilever should have GREEN through-arrows and RED turn arrowso thathrough-traffic is not stopped.

Fra violation to use traffic lights to control a railroad xing

Maybe from the FRA, but the MUTCD does allow traffic lights only, for crossings with very little activity.

I wouldn't be objected to having traffic lights with crossing signals, with a green straight arrow LED and red left turn arrow lighting up when the signals do.

Smjh1979 wrote:Maybe from the FRA, but the MUTCD does allow traffic lights only, for crossings with very little activity.

I wouldn't be objected to having traffic lights with crossing signals, with a green straight arrow LED and red left turn arrow lighting up when the signals do.

I wouldn't either, but its a violation of FRA.I wounder what MUTCD's definitions of a lightly used line is and if MUTCD is aloud to over rule the FRA