Mike's Railroad Crossing Forum

http://mutcd.fhwa.dot.gov/resources/pro ... esentn.ppt

This is a 57 MB 300+ page Microsoft Powerpoint file showing the possible changes that are expected to take shape later this year when the 2009 MUTCD comes out.

If you don't have Powerpoint installed, then there are Powerpoint viewers out there for free to view.

For Windows users, click here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... d2a8fd7485

For MAC users, click here: http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/deta ... laylang=en

Also, Elton wasn't kidding about proposed changes to the gate arm stripes changing. This download shows the proposed change.

I'm completely against the gate stripes changing. I don't see a need to do so. Instead, the FRA should make installing a gate upside down a violation...and then it wouldn't happen like it does. Slanted lines mean "HAZARD"...and the straight lines just don't seem have the same meaning. Not to mention, that would be a big waste of money changing all the stripes on existing gates, but oh well...

The RR crossing photo at the top right of page 181 shows NE 28th Avenue in Hillsboro before the LEDs and with the 7" gate lights.

http://www.rxrsignals.net/Oregon/Hillsboro/28/4.jpg

AndrewFields wrote:The RR crossing photo at the top right of page 181 shows NE 28th Avenue in Hillsboro before the LEDs and with the 7" gate lights.

http://www.rxrsignals.net/Oregon/Hillsboro/28/4.jpg

Looks like they added some type of railing around the crossing signal as well. Not sure how that would work with the ped gate.

8" traffic signals are being banned from now on although they are allowing existing installations to be 'grandfathered' in. Almost all of Portland's downtown signals are all-8" lenses.

I found more stuff on the proposed changes to the MUTCD 2009.

http://www.techtransfer.berkeley.edu/ra ... mpbell.pdf

Some changes are:

Using scale signals at pedestrian crossings, instead of full sized signals. The picture shown is one of these signals:

http://www.trainsignals.com/

One odd non-MUTCD sign at a crossing only shows a very faded STOP sign with no crossbuck along with a sign saying "BE SURE YOU CAN CLEAR TRACKS".

What do you think about scale signals at pedestrian crossings? Should signal companies go in this direction soon?

In my opinion, a scaled down signal with a full size train behind it looks dumb. The one's you see for model trains or at amusment parks look OK since the trains are usually scaled down too. But I think that the signal size, regardless of what it is used for, should match that of the train.

I guess I understand their thinking a little that the light heads would be more visable to the people on the path if they were down lower, but you could accomplish that with 8" heads mounted lower on the pole.

I personally don't like the idea either. They can get vandalized very easily. I agree that 8" would work better for pedestrian crossings too.

Smjh1979 wrote:I agree that 8" would work better for pedestrian crossings too.

Add in pleasant-sounding M-bells, and it'll be perfect!

My thoughts:

With the gate striping, I'm sure that this will reduce the amount of up-side down gates. However, I see no mention if the current standard of slanted stripes will still be allowed; It would be an unnecessary waste of many to have to replace every gate simply to change the striping.

Red lettering is okay although I would have preferred the current standard or maybe a "hybrid" of Canada's cross bucks. Like a red outline with the same RAILROAD CROSSING lettering as currently used.

(Example below was made in 2 minutes in PAINT so its not very good)


I don't really like the scale signals. While they might sound like a good idea since your line of sight is directly at the signal, they make it seem like the tracks are a "toy" or "model" not a "real" railroad.

What pedestrians should use instead is common sense and look both ways before crossing the rails, just like when you're crossing the road. This eliminates the need for expensive signals to be installed.