Trains In The Night

[ssullivan]

Of course, I'm talking about MetroRail. If they had proposed a full-on train sound there's no way anyone living near would've voted for it, so "quality of life" was a prime consideration. Even with 70+ wrecks with cars, I highly doubt that there will ever be anything but the cute little choo-choo sound.

Very true, although that cute "choo choo" whistle is mainly used at crossings with railroad signs, signals, and crossing arms where railroad regulations require the train to sound the whistle. There's actually a regulated pattern that the whistle has to be sounded at those crossings and it's the same pattern the big freight trains use. But those crossings are but a small minority of the intersections on the MetroRail line. They're also locations where accidents have been least likely to occur. Most of the time accidents have happened at intersections only controlled by traffic signals where the train just sounds its gong as it approaches the intersection.

There is a louder, blaring horn that MetroRail trains have. They used to use them more but as part of their safety revisions last spring the policy was changed to use that horn only when an accident is about to happen -- someone walks out onto the tracks in front of a train, or a car starts to make a turn in front of the train. The theory was that if that horn isn't used all the time then it will catch people by surprise and they're more likely to look up and realize they're about to run into the train.

[ricco67]

Danax Sez,

...the "accept it or move" mentality was realistic because most of the people affected were poorer people who probably felt powerless and decided "nothing can be done", which was probably correct then.

But today, the inner city is becoming a prime place to live and the people that are living there and will live there are people that are sensitive to quality of life issues....

Are you saying that those with higher incomes and educations are more deserving of train noise than others?

that's a rather myopic way to view things. It's akin to the current I-59 project; pointless aside from the fact that it will improve the view and provide a new area for water to accumilate during our monsoons.

Ricco

[Hunter]

Okay here is a little information. If the road was tin place before the tracks then the railroad is responsible for the crossing signals and maintenance. If the tracks were in place first then the city is responsible for maintained the crossing signals and road.

If the city wishes to relocate the tacks then it will have to buy the right away from the railroads and build new track age for them around the city or intended area at the cities or counties cost.

As for crossings. LA built a trench and placed all the tracks going tot he ports in the trench and put crossing over them. So now the trains run below the road grade. Laporte and Deer Park built bridges over the tracks along the HWY 225 corridor. This way the trains can countine moving and not block the intersections.

Houston is very dependent on its tracks and railroads. Has anyone ever seen a map of the tracks running in, through and around Houston? It is incredible. To reroute them all would cost a fortune and really upset a lot of people. Just the mess that was created when the city bought the old Katy main lime was incredible enough.

I am not really sure what could be done about the noise except to say have tthe city build bridges over the tracks or bury them in trenches which will eliminate the grade level crossings and this will allow the trains to pass through unhindered and not have to blow their horns.

Now we just need to find someone to help finance this little project.

[kjb434]

In most cases, the roads will move above or below the tracks and the tracks will remain the same. It is much cheaper to build over or under a road than to relocate a track system, especially if the tracks are heavily used.

[Guest danax]

Danax Sez,

Are you saying that those with higher incomes and educations are more deserving of train noise than others?

that's a rather myopic way to view things.  It's akin to the current I-59 project; pointless aside from the fact that it will improve the view and provide a new area for water to accumilate during our monsoons.

Ricco

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

No, Ricco, that's not what I was saying. I am saying that action to change railroad noise is much less likely to occur in low income/low education areas. The 59 project is a good example of that. How they managed to influence that project, and I'm assuming they had some influence, I can only speculate. And, I don't think it was pointless. I believe the noise level in the surrounding neighborhoods must be much less below grade.

I live in a relatively low-income/low education area on the East End and I don't see anyone doing anything anytime soon to attempt to alter the current situation. If the quiet zone idea pans out then maybe I'll try to get something started out here.

[jt16]

Federal Railroad Administration's Train Horn & Quiet Zone Rule

On December 18, 2003, the Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) issued an Interim Final Rule on Use of Locomotive Horns at Highway-Rail Grade Crossings. The Interim Rule is the result of a congressional mandate that the FRA establish a rule requiring the use of the locomotive horn at all public grade crossings. The rule was set to take effect one year following the date of its publication; however, that date has been extended to April 1, 2005. State laws governing horn blowing will remain in effect until April 1, 2005.

Once in effect, the rule will require that locomotive horns be sounded at all public grade crossings. Railroads will be required to sound their horns 15-20 seconds before arriving at a crossing, but not more than one-quarter mile in advance. The pattern for blowing the horn will remain the same: two long, one short, and one long to be repeated as necessary until the locomotive clears the crossing. Locomotive engineers will retain the authority to vary this pattern as necessary for crossings in close proximity and will be allowed to sound the horn in emergency situations, regardless if a quiet zone is in effect.

Under the rule, localities will be provided the option to establish quiet zones or preserve existing pre-rule quiet zones, provided certain supplemental safety measures are in place and the crossing accident rate meets FRA standards. The rule also allows for the installation of automated horn systems as a substitute for the train horn. Qualification for a quiet zone or the retention of an existing pre-rule quiet zone will be determined by specific FRA guidelines as set forth in the rule.

Because the FRA may make changes to the rule as the result of public and industry comments, Union Pacific encourages communities to postpone taking any costly or irreversible action until the rule becomes effective. Once the comment period is over and the FRA finalizes its plans, Union Pacific will be able to provide the communities it serves its plan for working with the rule.

Those wanting additional information on the Interim Final Rule are asked to visit the FRA's Web site at www.fra.dot.gov.

http://www.uprr.com/newsinfo/horn.shtml

From UP's website. It sounds as if this is a federal issue. I guess the whole interstate commerce thing governs the railroads.

[kjb434]

great find jt16!

[uncertaintraveler]

Thanks for posting the FRA rule, but I think the rule is idiotic. I'm sure it was enacted in the name of safety and the over-used line of "think of the children," but allowing for "automated horn systems" is crazy. And I would prefer it if the federal gov't didn't have the right to set forth quiet-zone standards.

Upon much reflection, why can't the fed gov't (since they appear to be in charge here) simply institute a shut-down time? As in, no trains are to be run between the hours of 10:00pm and 6:00am.

I can't see how that rule would really hurt anyone. Its pro-worker (most would have guaranteed time off at night), its pro-resident (no rude horn blowing in the middle of the night), its pro-business (easier to budget time and manpower needs for trains, since you can now schedule all repair work to occur at night, and good for the end-consumer because they know deliveries will be between X and Y time). Plus the rule is cheap (no real start-up costs) and easy to implement.

What am I missing here?

[HeightsGuy]

OK, so setting aside the fact that the ROW is their private property, the idea that we should get rid of railroads is folly. In fact we need more railroads, for both public transport and shipping.

Using vague figures (I'm sure these are out there, these just come to my head), each rail car carries approximately the same freight as 4 semi trucks. Times that by 75 or so cars per train, and times again by the hundreds of trains that move around the city per day. That's how many extra semi trucks you will have to dart around as you try to navigate the roads. Also, collectively, trains use far less energy and produce far less pollution per pound of freight than semi trucks do. Finally, we produce a lot of dangerous industrial products in the refineries that need to be shipped around the state and country. Even though you hear about train derailments, it's a much much safer way to transport those items than by truck.

If you want to think of better answers, think technology. How about setting up noise cancellators (proper term??) as barriers around the tracks so the horns sound only where they are needed along roads that intersect the tracks. That may have sounded kooky just a few years ago, but the technology is there.

[HeightsGuy]

I can't see how that rule would really hurt anyone. Its pro-worker (most would have guaranteed time off at night), its pro-resident (no rude horn blowing in the middle of the night), its pro-business (easier to budget time and manpower needs for trains, since you can now schedule all repair work to occur at night, and good for the end-consumer because they know deliveries will be between X and Y time). Plus the rule is cheap (no real start-up costs) and easy to implement.

What am I missing here?

What you're missing is the sheer volumn of cargo that needs to be hauled. Houston used to have much more rail lines. Deregulation brought a lot of consolidation, and the major players in Houston closed many of the ROW's to save money. Now, they are having a hard time getting cargo moved and are running at basically 100% capacity.

I don't know if it's still going on, but a backlog in Houston last year almost brought the entire railroad system in the U.S. to it's knees. Here is an article describing it:

Southern Pacific Woes

[kjb434]

Also, not running trains at night mean that the trains would have to run non-stop through the day time tying up road traffic all over the city. I prefer more to run at night time. And yes, i do live by two separate railroad tracks. The noise is not as bad as people make it seem.

[Hunter]

If we could just build under or over passes at some of the more noisy crossings then the trainswoudl not have to sound their horns and all would be semi quiet.

No crossing, No horns.

[kjb434]

The trains companies would love for more roads to go over or under their tracks. It would allow trains to move faster through the city.

[Hunter]

The trains companies would love for more roads to go over or under their tracks.  It would allow trains to move faster through the city.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

It would also stop a lot of accidents, vandalism, noise compliants and reduce pollution and speed up traffic in many areas.

[Travel_n_Transport]

A great topic...and one I am surprised that hasn't surfaced more-so in the mainstream in some form since the Inner Loop area was inundated with the tacky three story townhomes and their seemingly collective crop of SUV-driving NIMBYs.

The tracks that cross Shepherd, Durham onward through Memorial Park (the Sunset Route) have been in their present location for roughly 120 years. That's well before any us were born and for about 80% of Houstonians, well before their ancestors even thought about living in Texas.

As the Europeans have already figured out, grade-separating railroad infrastructure from pedestrians and vehicles should be the first and foremost solution to enhancing railroad safety and decreasing noise. But like so many Houston transport issues, the ill-conceived approach usually gets the funding and the "go ahead" for construction. Westheimer, Richmond, Durham, etc. could all have received a similar treatment like Memorial Dr decades ago.

As for the crossing themselves, there is new technology that allows for directional horns at each crossing to be activated by a passing train. Simply, the horns would blow downwards towards the vehicles in a very confined pattern, thus eliminating a great deal of wasteful horn noise that resounds into adjacent areas. Like all new things, it's costly and not in widespread use but will become more common once testing is complete.

As for the comments about shutting down railroads after a certain hour. Pure nonsense. At this moment between Houston and Long Beach, CA, where these "problem tracks" terminate, there are 75-100 trains heading east or west. Many of these trains either left Houston or will transit our city heading east. To simply turn on and off this artery each night to satisfy some ill-conceived idea would be a logistical nightmare.

Like others have pointed out, our lives, whether we realize it or not, are very dependent on the timely, safe and regular movement of trains. Keep that in mind next time you get stuck at a crossing by a trainload of coal hoppers. It used to generate electricity to power your computer so you can complain about railroad noise on the internet. Quite ironic.

[Lowbrow]

A great topic...and one I am surprised that hasn't surfaced more-so in the mainstream in some form since the Inner Loop area was inundated with the tacky three story townhomes and their seemingly collective crop of SUV-driving NIMBYs.

The tracks that cross Shepherd, Durham onward through Memorial Park (the Sunset Route) have been in their present location for roughly 120 years. That's well before any us were born and for about 80% of Houstonians, well before their ancestors even thought about living in Texas.

As the Europeans have already figured out, grade-separating railroad infrastructure from pedestrians and vehicles should be the first and foremost solution to enhancing railroad safety and decreasing noise. But like so many Houston transport issues, the ill-conceived approach usually gets the funding and the "go ahead" for construction. Westheimer, Richmond, Durham, etc. could all have received a similar treatment like Memorial Dr decades ago.

As for the crossing themselves, there is new technology that allows for directional horns at each crossing to be activated by a passing train. Simply, the horns would blow downwards towards the vehicles in a very confined pattern, thus eliminating a great deal of wasteful horn noise that resounds into adjacent areas. Like all new things, it's costly and not in widespread use but will become more common once testing is complete.

As for the comments about shutting down railroads after a certain hour. Pure nonsense. At this moment between Houston and Long Beach, CA, where these "problem tracks" terminate, there are 75-100 trains heading east or west. Many of these trains either left Houston or will transit our city heading east. To simply turn on and off this artery each night to satisfy some ill-conceived idea would be a logistical nightmare. 

Like others have pointed out, our lives, whether we realize it or not, are very dependent on the timely, safe and regular movement of trains. Keep that in mind next time you get stuck at a crossing by a trainload of coal hoppers. It used to generate electricity to power your computer so you can complain about railroad noise on the internet. Quite ironic.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Welcome to HAIF! and thanks for your input. I have two uncles on Long Island that were conductors on the railroad there and I used to spend summers riding with them. I totally concur that it would be impossible to even conceive of "turning off" the rail line at night. If there is a possibility of moving lines outside the city I'd like to see it but I have a feeling thats not probable. I do hope that the current at-grade crossings can be addressed and fixed though.

When my uncle found out I had never had a Reuben sandwich before he stopped the 40 car train at his favorite deli, blocking 4 crossings, and we took a half hour lunch. It left a definate impression on me (both the sandwich and the traffic situation). Now I wonder when a train slows and stops at a crossing if I've just fallen prey to the same situation.

[Guest danax]

As for the crossing themselves, there is new technology that allows for directional horns at each crossing to be activated by a passing train. Simply, the horns would blow downwards towards the vehicles in a very confined pattern, thus eliminating a great deal of wasteful horn noise that resounds into adjacent areas.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I like that idea. It's silly to think we have to put up with noise that resounds for miles around when the target of that noise is only a handful of vehicles within a hundred feet of so of the crossing.

[jm1fd]

When I lived in Wisconsin, the railroad had to pay a fine if it blocked a railroad crossing.  I believe it was something like $150 every 15 minutes.  The reason was that the railroad ran right through the center of town, so when the trains stalled (invariably), all the ambulances and fire trucks would be trapped on one side.

<{POST_SNAPBACK}>

We have that fine in TX too...or at least used to. My grandfather was a signal maintainer for Southern Pacific, and we have a 1940s picture of him with a huge handful of tickets written out by some deputy dawg down in the valley....the signals got stuck in the down position for nearly a day until he could get there to fix them, and the tickets had been accumulating until he arrived.

[Hunter]

You might be able to divert the main ,ines around Houston but the majority of the tracks the run through the city are here to provide rail line service to various industries that are here and there in the great city. It would near impossible and an economic disaster to remove them.