Life Desk :
On February 3 in Valhalla, NY, a mother of three, apparently confused, stopped her SUV on railroad tracks as the crossing gates came down, blocking her car. A Metro-North commuter train, racing New York City commuters home at 58 MPH in the evening rush hour, slammed into her SUV, killing her and six train passengers, and injuring more than a dozen others.
In Menlo Park, Cal., on February 23, a California woman, also driving an SUV, stopped on railway tracks as she appeared “to be looking down at something in her car”. She was struck and killed by a Caltrain commuter train.
In Oxnard, Cal., on February 24, a possibly disoriented Arizona man drove his pickup truck and trailer into a crossing and 80 feet down the tracks, gots stuck, and abandoned his vehicle. It was hit by a highspeed Metrolink commuter train in a fiery crash that destroyed the truck, derailed the train, and injured 30 people on the train. One of them, the train engineer, later died.
In Halifax County, NC, on March 9, An oversized tractor-trailer rig carrying a a modular electrical building was struggling to cross a CSX railroad track when Amtrak’s New York-Charlotte train, the Carolinian, hit it at high speed, derailing the locomotive and several coaches. A total of 55 train passengers and crew were injured.
This recent rash of serious and deadly crashes in succession has revved up public concern over the dangers of rail-highway grade crossings in America’s sprawling 140,000-mile railway system, and prompted a quest for remedies.
Sponsor video, mouseover for sound
First of all, it’s important to recognize that the most effective solutions will be mostly low-tech-full grade separations (underpasses and bridges) being the best of all. But, although Europe appears to be way ahead of the US on this, that’s a very costly solution, especially with 212,000 crossings across the US to deal with.
On the other hand, there are simple, lower-cost measures, like better lighting to make crossings safer (darkness was evidently a major factor in the Valhalla tragedy), and a national safety education campaign aimed at motorists and pedestrians.
But could analytics-based technology also have a role in improving crossing safety? Many rail industry professionals, and now some politicians, think so, via a federally mandated program, now under way, to install a nationwide system of Positive Train Control (PTC).
In a previous article, Are Railroads Headed for Big-Data Overkill?, I explained how this analytics/big data-based PTC system, involving computers on board thousands of trains, plus tens of thousands of wayside interface devices, as well as “back office server” (BOS) computer interface systems, wireless communications, and GPS, will implement computerized continuous real-time control over train operations just about everywhere. This will include speed enforcement as well as detection of other trains and the alignment of track switches. While PTC is mandated to be operational by the end of this year, its actual completion may be delayed, but this huge technological upgrade is definitely on the way.
However (as I’ve also criticized), while the primary aim has been to prevent train-to-train collisions such as a 2008 disaster in Southern California that prompted the federal legislative mandate, nothing has required the new system to address the grade crossing problem that’s so especially deadly-causing 40% of train-related fatalities. (In contrast, accidents like the sensational 2008 crash represent less than 5%.)
But this PTC deficiency could readily be rectified via a simple add-on (you might call it a “plug-in”) that could provide massive benefit, possible because of the basic architecture of the PTC communication-monitoring-control system. Installed as an adjunct to the basic PTC network, such functionality-integrating sensors (interconnected with the PTC system) to detect vehicles in crossings-could be a major step toward the development of what the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) calls Intelligent Grade Crossings.
The FRA sees this as a component of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), described as “the application of new communications, computer, and sensor technologies … and the careful integration of system functions to provide more efficient and effective solutions to multimodal transportation problems.”
Also known as vehicle intrusion detection systems, these PTC-linked grade crossing sensor interfaces “would have the capability for getting advance warning of approaching trains through interconnected information systems that link the motorist to the traffic management and rail operations systems.” This interconnectivity “also allows for the capability of warning the locomotive engineer of obstacles or trapped vehicles at grade crossings, and potentially for trespassers along the right-of-way.” FRA envisions “projects that will tie grade crossing warning systems to local traffic management systems and will include communication to the PTC systems now being developed to increase safety for both motor vehicle users and rail passengers and crewmembers.”
PTC-linked Intelligent Grade Crossings could get a boost from legislators, particularly motivated by the Valhalla disaster, such as Democratic New York Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney. In a recent op-ed, Maloney positioned PTC as “life-saving” technology that “can stop or slow trains remotely”, and he is lobbying for extra federal aid to install capability that “could also allow us to detect grade-crossing malfunctions or objects on the tracks.”
Connecticut Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal is likewise pushing this important PTC enhancement.
Could this PTC safety upgrade win sufficient support in a politically polarized and deadlocked Washington? Are there other technological enhancements that could improve grade crossing safety? And could analytics play a role in other ways, like improving motorists’ safety education? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
—allanalytics.com
On February 3 in Valhalla, NY, a mother of three, apparently confused, stopped her SUV on railroad tracks as the crossing gates came down, blocking her car. A Metro-North commuter train, racing New York City commuters home at 58 MPH in the evening rush hour, slammed into her SUV, killing her and six train passengers, and injuring more than a dozen others.
In Menlo Park, Cal., on February 23, a California woman, also driving an SUV, stopped on railway tracks as she appeared “to be looking down at something in her car”. She was struck and killed by a Caltrain commuter train.
In Oxnard, Cal., on February 24, a possibly disoriented Arizona man drove his pickup truck and trailer into a crossing and 80 feet down the tracks, gots stuck, and abandoned his vehicle. It was hit by a highspeed Metrolink commuter train in a fiery crash that destroyed the truck, derailed the train, and injured 30 people on the train. One of them, the train engineer, later died.
In Halifax County, NC, on March 9, An oversized tractor-trailer rig carrying a a modular electrical building was struggling to cross a CSX railroad track when Amtrak’s New York-Charlotte train, the Carolinian, hit it at high speed, derailing the locomotive and several coaches. A total of 55 train passengers and crew were injured.
This recent rash of serious and deadly crashes in succession has revved up public concern over the dangers of rail-highway grade crossings in America’s sprawling 140,000-mile railway system, and prompted a quest for remedies.
Sponsor video, mouseover for sound
First of all, it’s important to recognize that the most effective solutions will be mostly low-tech-full grade separations (underpasses and bridges) being the best of all. But, although Europe appears to be way ahead of the US on this, that’s a very costly solution, especially with 212,000 crossings across the US to deal with.
On the other hand, there are simple, lower-cost measures, like better lighting to make crossings safer (darkness was evidently a major factor in the Valhalla tragedy), and a national safety education campaign aimed at motorists and pedestrians.
But could analytics-based technology also have a role in improving crossing safety? Many rail industry professionals, and now some politicians, think so, via a federally mandated program, now under way, to install a nationwide system of Positive Train Control (PTC).
In a previous article, Are Railroads Headed for Big-Data Overkill?, I explained how this analytics/big data-based PTC system, involving computers on board thousands of trains, plus tens of thousands of wayside interface devices, as well as “back office server” (BOS) computer interface systems, wireless communications, and GPS, will implement computerized continuous real-time control over train operations just about everywhere. This will include speed enforcement as well as detection of other trains and the alignment of track switches. While PTC is mandated to be operational by the end of this year, its actual completion may be delayed, but this huge technological upgrade is definitely on the way.
However (as I’ve also criticized), while the primary aim has been to prevent train-to-train collisions such as a 2008 disaster in Southern California that prompted the federal legislative mandate, nothing has required the new system to address the grade crossing problem that’s so especially deadly-causing 40% of train-related fatalities. (In contrast, accidents like the sensational 2008 crash represent less than 5%.)
But this PTC deficiency could readily be rectified via a simple add-on (you might call it a “plug-in”) that could provide massive benefit, possible because of the basic architecture of the PTC communication-monitoring-control system. Installed as an adjunct to the basic PTC network, such functionality-integrating sensors (interconnected with the PTC system) to detect vehicles in crossings-could be a major step toward the development of what the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) calls Intelligent Grade Crossings.
The FRA sees this as a component of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS), described as “the application of new communications, computer, and sensor technologies … and the careful integration of system functions to provide more efficient and effective solutions to multimodal transportation problems.”
Also known as vehicle intrusion detection systems, these PTC-linked grade crossing sensor interfaces “would have the capability for getting advance warning of approaching trains through interconnected information systems that link the motorist to the traffic management and rail operations systems.” This interconnectivity “also allows for the capability of warning the locomotive engineer of obstacles or trapped vehicles at grade crossings, and potentially for trespassers along the right-of-way.” FRA envisions “projects that will tie grade crossing warning systems to local traffic management systems and will include communication to the PTC systems now being developed to increase safety for both motor vehicle users and rail passengers and crewmembers.”
PTC-linked Intelligent Grade Crossings could get a boost from legislators, particularly motivated by the Valhalla disaster, such as Democratic New York Rep. Sean Patrick Maloney. In a recent op-ed, Maloney positioned PTC as “life-saving” technology that “can stop or slow trains remotely”, and he is lobbying for extra federal aid to install capability that “could also allow us to detect grade-crossing malfunctions or objects on the tracks.”
Connecticut Democratic Senator Richard Blumenthal is likewise pushing this important PTC enhancement.
Could this PTC safety upgrade win sufficient support in a politically polarized and deadlocked Washington? Are there other technological enhancements that could improve grade crossing safety? And could analytics play a role in other ways, like improving motorists’ safety education? Share your thoughts in the comments below.
—allanalytics.com
