|
|
|
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
Garuda
Active Member
Not condone driving up the tracks and getting a car stuck Queens Quay style. I've driven by this crossing many times and the angle at which the railway intersects gives the impression that the tracks are another road with a soft right turn from the road (even more so at night with no overhead street lights anywhere). I bet they started to panic and just kept trying to drive forward only to make the situation worse.
Jonny5
Senior Member
Cropped outside of that photo is the fact that both sides of this crossing have gates.
It's pretty hard to miss those and not realise the fact it isn't some random road, even at night.
I am with this being a full facepalm Queens Quay style.
crs1026
Superstar
^Well, if we are going to analyse, I would back off a little more. The markings at this crossing are actually pretty minimal and one might easily approach in the dark without noticing that one is approaching a railway crossing. I would want to see a lot more in the way of reflective approach signage, fresh reflectorised painted warning markings on the roadway, etc.
This line is in the process of being upgraded to 90mph and will see trains in each direction hourly when RER arrives. Surely we could spend a little money on lighting and marking the level crossing better.
I live up the street from a house at a T-intersection that became notorious for motorists failing to stop at the stop sign, and ending up in the living room of the house. It's easy to say "what, you didn't notice the sign? Or the house?" post hoc, but the point is, people don't always process perfectly. The intersection was rebuilt, and the accidents stopped. Sometimes the human factors have to be respected, even if at first glance the temptation is to just blame the driver.
The same narrowmindedness seems to show up regularly in the Road Safety thread - the human brain and driving are not a perfect match. Drivers make honest mistakes sometimes. That's why designing in safety measures is necessary.
- Paul
This line is in the process of being upgraded to 90mph and will see trains in each direction hourly when RER arrives. Surely we could spend a little money on lighting and marking the level crossing better.
I live up the street from a house at a T-intersection that became notorious for motorists failing to stop at the stop sign, and ending up in the living room of the house. It's easy to say "what, you didn't notice the sign? Or the house?" post hoc, but the point is, people don't always process perfectly. The intersection was rebuilt, and the accidents stopped. Sometimes the human factors have to be respected, even if at first glance the temptation is to just blame the driver.
The same narrowmindedness seems to show up regularly in the Road Safety thread - the human brain and driving are not a perfect match. Drivers make honest mistakes sometimes. That's why designing in safety measures is necessary.
- Paul
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
As I'm not particularly familiar w/this location.........I'll afford some benefit of the doubt about the moment a turn was attempted.
But the article indicated they ended up a fair distance in from the road...........which unlike Queen's Quay, is open rail over ballast.
Exactly how do you not notice, immediately after turning, you're centred over a set of tracks, and have only ballast in the middle/sides?
We all make mistakes; but that's a doozie and I don't get how they didn't recognize the problem immediately.
Perhaps I'm being unfair.
I certainly wouldn't oppose better markings, or given how busy Speedvale can be in the nearby urban section, considering a grade separation..........
But still.
Garuda
Active Member
People do stupid things around trains (and driving in general). Like Queens Quay, nobody regularly drives on tracks and don't understand how low their car sits to the ground and will bottom out on an iron rail when the wheels are over the ties. So continuing to drive down the tracks could feel like the logical thing to do.
I feel I'm trying to give the driver in this the benefit of the doubt. Alcohol/drugs could have been a factor but we'll have to find out.
There was also this: woman faces fine for walking in front of go train. The majority of the vocal general public (leaving comments) came to the woman's defence and said it was the kid's fault and threw the kid under the bus (well train) saying she was trying to stop him from running across the tracks. But 2 months later it comes out that it was her fault as she initiated crossing the tracks.
crs1026
Superstar
I'm speculating, but nothing in the press reports suggested that the driver was either intoxicated or reckless. The only remaining possibility is that out of inexperience or naivete, they actually decided that going forward was a better option than stopping or backing up.
That is a bit of human nature that one sees in motorists a lot. People who realise they have made a navigational error just keep driving forwards. Partly we are trained to not stop and think, because in many situations that's the most dangerous thing to do....can't slow down on the 401 to ponder whether this is my exit, etc. But one finds people do wander up dead end roads and trails and so forth, because continuing forward just seems like the right answer, and there's hope that one will find an exit or turnoff. It may be quite illogical, but it's human nature. Queens Quay is an example of that - some of those errant drivers both turned into the tunnel (which is one error) but just kept going until their cars got stuck (which is a second thing altogether).
It's quite common to find "do not enter" signs at intersections with one way streets. Similarly, there is lots of signage on freeway off-ramps to deter people from entering in the wrong direction. Sometimes the arrow sign alone isn't enough. Given the odd angle of this particular railway crossing, it's not inconceivable that such a sign might have elicited a different decision from this particular driver. Just saying.
- Paul
Allandale25
Senior Member
Realize this is a tangent and a stretch, but I wonder if any rail service to the plant will resume for this:
If it does, I wonder if they would use the CP route into the plant or CN. If for some reason it's CP, that certainly highlights CP's interested at making sure the Bowmanville Extension service using the CP bridge over the 401 doesn't create a conflict. Of course with COVID-19, who knows where the Bowmanville Extension stands.
If it does, I wonder if they would use the CP route into the plant or CN. If for some reason it's CP, that certainly highlights CP's interested at making sure the Bowmanville Extension service using the CP bridge over the 401 doesn't create a conflict. Of course with COVID-19, who knows where the Bowmanville Extension stands.
drum118
Superstar
April 24
Opp's!!!,,,,,,,someone made up some 6 car trains the wrong way for the Stouffville Line, as the accessibility car was behind the cab car, not the locomotive. Both trains in opposite direction had the locomotive beside the platform when stop. The northbound train CAS was on 4522 in front of the cab car and only noticed the number today as I am working on the photos shot that day. Normally, it been behind the locomotive.
Too far away to get a shot of the southbound coach. Would be some fun to move either train to the accessibility platform as it would cause the gates to come down and block traffic if someone had to use the platform. Only one person got off the northbound train and no one waiting for the southbound. No cars in the parking lot.
Opp's!!!,,,,,,,someone made up some 6 car trains the wrong way for the Stouffville Line, as the accessibility car was behind the cab car, not the locomotive. Both trains in opposite direction had the locomotive beside the platform when stop. The northbound train CAS was on 4522 in front of the cab car and only noticed the number today as I am working on the photos shot that day. Normally, it been behind the locomotive.
Too far away to get a shot of the southbound coach. Would be some fun to move either train to the accessibility platform as it would cause the gates to come down and block traffic if someone had to use the platform. Only one person got off the northbound train and no one waiting for the southbound. No cars in the parking lot.
TransitBart
Senior Member
Depressing statistic really. Grr.
crs1026
Superstar
A second hand tidbit that I heard from a reliable source - when SARS hit all those years ago, GO ridership dropped. It took 18 months before GO ridership rebounded to its pre-SARS level. The comment I heard was that ML’s internal projection this time is much more pessimistic - ie it could be several years before ridership gets back to where it was.... a combination of widespread job losses, more people working from home, and the newfound aversion to physical proximity.
Transit is in for a rough haul.
- Paul
mickael
Active Member
Now would be a good time for them to invest heavily then, if ridership is down they can upgrade the system faster surely? Ridership bouncing back could coincide with RER
Jonny5
Senior Member
Something not widely reported is that most of the big banks, law firms, investment managers, etc. downtown have all offered to cover any costs of parking, taxi or rideshare fares for their essential workers who continue to come in every day so they don't have to use transit. There's still a big drop in the number of daily workers commuting to the core, but not as many as people think from the transit statistics. Some of the office towers have significantly cut parking fees for tenants as an incentive to stay post-Covid.
Garuda
Active Member
With many staff working remotely, now is a great time to get the detailed design work done and shovel ready for the post CVOID rebound.
drum118
Superstar
|
|