28 September 2024

Cars on the Tracks

Cars turning off from a grade crossing onto the tracks are a perennial problem for Caltrain, often resulting in multi-hour cascading delays or worse, dangerous collisions. The statistics are shocking: from 2020 through 2023, there were 183 recorded incidents of "vehicle track incursions," of which more than half occurred at just five crossings as shown in the Caltrain bar chart at right.

Caltrain has tried mightily to take measures against this human error. It's useful to view these attempts through a risk management lens: the risk is the product of the probability of a vehicle entering the tracks, multiplied by its consequence.

Reducing Probability

We can do a little bit of Street View tourism to see what solutions have been attempted so far to reduce the probability of a vehicle track incursion:

Paint stripes give visual feedback, but such road markings are often not observed by the sort of driver who might not see that they are turning onto tracks.
Reflectors and Botts Dots keep a low profile to fit under passing trains, while giving visual and steering wheel feedback. In the gauge, they get beat up by equipment dragging under freight trains. This example is at Castro Street in Mountain View.

Rumble strips, similar to above solution, at Mission Bay Drive in San Francisco.
Solar reflectors go one step further by lightning up at night. The small solar cell at the top charges a battery that powers red LED lights when it is dark. This example is at 16th Street in San Francisco.
Speed bumps provide slightly more steering wheel feedback. This example is at Mission Bay Drive in San Francisco.

All of these measures are probably effective to some extent, but they won't stop a vision-impaired or inebriated or inexperienced driver, especially when they are mindlessly following GPS directions to turn onto a street that immediately parallels the tracks, a common feature of the grade crossings with the highest incidence of vehicle track incursions.

Reducing Consequence

Before we can discuss reducing the consequence of a vehicle track incursion, we need to acknowledge just what the consequence is: at a minimum, the vehicle becomes stranded on the tracks, requiring extrication by a tow truck. At worst, there is a dangerous collision with a train.

Most vehicles will end up high-centered if they blunder onto the tracks because the rail is 7" 5/16 tall and the center of concrete ties dips lower, resulting in easily 9" of height difference between the surface of the ties and the top of the rail. This height exceeds the ground clearance of most SUVs. Once high-centered, a vehicle with open differentials (i.e., not-Jeep) loses traction and becomes stranded. The driver is unable to correct their mistake, and when they try, they often just make it worse by driving further onto the tracks.

Currently, Caltrain applies no mitigation to this consequence. Their entire risk mitigation approach to vehicle track incursions relies on prevention, by reducing the probability while accepting the consequence that a stranding is inevitable. It is not!

Anti-trespass panels in New York, on Metro North.
Photo by Daniel Case.

Anti-trespass panels can mitigate the consequence of a vehicle track incursion through two mechanisms: 

1) very strong vibratory feedback that the vehicle has departed the road, likely to induce brake application on a reflexive basis and avoiding a deeper incursion.

2) reduced height difference between the rail and surrounding surfaces, enabling a vehicle with low ground clearance to maneuver without becoming high-centered. The driver can self-extricate the vehicle.

While these rubber panels are primarily intended to prevent pedestrian trespassing, they would likely also work for cars if laid down for about 30 feet beyond the edge of a crossing. They are a passive solution with low operating cost, certainly a much more effective mitigation than CCTV or intrusion sensors with alerts integrated into the signalling system. All these expensive and technology-heavy solutions may prevent a collision, but do nothing about the need for a tow truck or the resulting service disruption. This makes anti-trespass panels an ideal solution that best addresses the need of Caltrain riders to arrive on time.

The south side of Churchill Avenue in Palo Alto would make an excellent location for a pilot installation.

19 comments:

  1. I've wondered why there's not also a crossing gate across the tracks that opens when the one across the road closes.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Almost all of these vehicle “track incursions” occur after dark. That tells us that if there was sufficient lighting of the tracks on either side of crossings so that drivers can clearly see the ROW as being a railroad and not a street (as in daytime), they would almost never mistakenly turn from crossings onto the tracks.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It would also better light the roadway across the tracks and any markings on it.

      Delete
    2. "NO TURNS" "IN XING" ["ZONE"] signs might be of some assistance with good road markings (red herringbone forward- and inward-pointing edge lines, included?) all better lit at night along with tracks to each side.

      Delete
    3. Stripes are already listed. Lights would probably cost more to install, maintain and operate than anti-trespass panels. And these measures mitigate the probability, not the consequence. My point is you have to do both!

      Delete
  3. How about this 'old' solution? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3VF4hWvjC3g Originally the signalman would come down and manually close the gates.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Sounds like a solid idea. By which I mean a slippery slope. But which I mean a rough idea.

    Cursory googling re anti-trespass panels (what a world where "hostile architecture" is A Thing), I didn't come across anything about bearing motor vehicle loads and wheel shear forces, or about compressibility (anti-high-centering), or about "very strong vibratory feedback". Just about "you can't walk here".

    Not doubting you, but curious where this all came from. (And thinking it through a bit, the entirely hypothetical downside of a big-ass crossover SUV Canyonero somehow digging a hole with frantic wheel spinning doesn't seem that much different from high-centering. But you know, USA = lawsuits.)

    Regardless, just this once, this might be a low-enough cost thing that Caltrain could be given a ***one-time-only*** permit to be a "world innovator", to throw down some lumpy mats at a couple spots, and just see what does or doesn't happen. (A world innovations just like CBOSS, only a billion dollars cheaper, and *actually* no downside to failure, and maybe even without endless deception and fraud.)

    PS my take it is, as "Reality Check" suggests, 95% dangerously deskilled drivers blindly (literally blindly!) following Google Maps on their phone ("turn right in 100 feet") and not looking out the windscreen.
    Same people who mow down pedestrians who "come out of nowhere, wearing dark clothing at night".
    How much are lumpy rubber mats around the rails going to help with that? Maybe, maybe not, but maybe!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. As with red lights and crossing gates.

      In reality, as most know, there are bad road users of all kinds, including pedestrians that come out of nowhere, wearing dark clothing at night, as I encounter myself in addition to reading complaints about them, as with those who like to ride bikes at night without lights and sometimes without reflectors, and as the complaints correctly have it, they can wear dark clothing (and no helmets). Some now ride electric bikes instead. As with conventional bikes, electric bike riders often flout traffic laws, one of a number of things about cycling that loses respect for it today.

      Pedestrians and cyclists also join motorists in disregarding flashing lights and lowered gates at railroad grade crossings, what is pertinent here. That included the late Mr. King, a notable example when Brightline was introduced in southeastern Florida. Many road users flouting laws also misjudge 79 mph train speed.

      Delete
    2. @Reality Check: Yes, good illumination, something so often missing and now so much more possible with LED efficiencies.

      Don't forget, where surfaces permit it, to paint arrows showing the path for road users to take across the tracks. It may be better to have one or more long straight arrows than any arrow to right or left with a slash or X over it. Maybe try a straight arrow across each track: "Stick To the Basics." Edge lines along the crossing path or route might help, too. Red lines across each track, etc.

      Delete
    3. "... there are bad road users of all kinds, including pedestrians that come out of nowhere, wearing dark clothing at night, ... , and as the complaints correctly have it, they can wear dark clothing (and no helmets). ... bike riders often flout traffic laws, one of a number of things about cycling that loses respect for it today. ..."

      Time to take the car keys away from grandpa.

      Delete
    4. I resent the false equivalency being made here between pedestrians, bikers, e-bikers (all wearing dark clothing, of course) and the blunt force killing power of a 4000 pound motor vehicle operated by an entitled motorist. One of these is orders of magnitude more hazardous to other people's health and safety when "flouting traffic laws." It will be used with literal impunity because the phrases "came out of nowhere" and "darted into the roadway" will feature prominently in the police report where the "driver stayed at the scene and cooperated," going unpunished for their carnage.

      Delete
    5. Note that for pedestrians it can in some situations be safer to wear all dark clothes as that is a way to avoid "predators", i.e. getting mugged, assaulted or whatnot. So although it's bad for traffic safety in particular, it might overall be the better trade off.

      Delete
  5. Hopefully such measures aren't an excuse to avoid grade separation.

    Least wanted, especially in busy metro areas, is closing any crossing.

    Separations potentially offer more access and circulation with more crossings of the railroad right-of-way by all road users (not only by motorists), a bonus in addition to the primary benefits and motives, safety and reduction of collision risks and their consequences.

    Even if the whole route won't be fully grade-separated, as it should be already, more separations are needed. The cost for them, though ...

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Grade separation is always better, but Caltrain has cracked the code on how to make them cost two to three times as much as they should, which puts a serious damper on how many you can build.

      Delete
  6. The Diridon station redesign planning team is recommending elimination of the “stacked” alternative, leaving the “at-grade” and “elevated” alternatives. They say they’ve figured out how to avoid impacting CEMOF and have determined that if VTA extends the Diridon BART station concourse it could allow for a more direct transfer, cutting walking times by 1 minute.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Sorry, couldn't get past page 4 because it is just too funny/ridiculous. "We care about SAFETY" (big bold letters) -- meanwhile the artist simulation shows a giant stroad with pedestrians darting out into traffic on an unprotected zebra crossing. The bike lane is also unprotected.

      Good Lord, just fire these consultant idiots (into the Sun).

      Delete
  7. So the Caltrain’s fiscally unconstrained draft 10-year Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) (starting on PDF page 11) has been updated and re-released. Lots to see and bemoan here.

    On PDF page 72, true “universal” level boarding currently looks to be a ~10-year, $660m project set for completion in 2035!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I think they've just re-badged their $40M/year station platform factory as "level boarding" and called it good. Why do something right when you can do it over and not be done until FY45? That's right, "FY36 and beyond" is another $380M at $40M/year which gives you a finish date of 2045 and also a very good idea of how urgent they think this project is.

      Meanwhile, the EMUs can't even stick to the new timetable because the dwells are a horrific mess...

      I also notice that the Redwood City four-track station (probably without four-track station approaches, because Caltrain will always Caltrain) is also scheduled out to "never," forever just beyond the ten year planning horizon.

      Delete