Chart outlining Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway cost of planks, bridge, railway crossing and approaches thereto

Chart outlining Port Dalhousie and Thorold Railway cost of planks, bridge, railway crossing and approaches thereto, n.d.

A large scale quantitative study of pedestrian railway level crossing behaviour : deliberate violations, errors and deterrence

Every year a number of pedestrians are struck by trains resulting in death and serious injury. While much research has been conducted on train-vehicle collisions, very little is currently known about the aetiology of train-pedestrian collisions. To date, scant research has been undertaken to investigate the demographics of rule breakers, the frequency of deliberate violation versus error making and the influence of the classic deterrence approach on subsequent behaviours. Aim This study aimed to to identify pedestrians’ self-reported reasons for engaging in violations at crossing, the frequency and nature of rule breaking and whether the threat of sanctions influence such events. Method A questionnaire was administered to 511 participants of all ages. Results Analysis revealed that pedestrians (particularly younger groups) were more likely to commit deliberate violations rather than make crossing errors e.g., mistakes. The most frequent reasons given for deliberate violations were participants were running late and did not want to miss their train or participants believed that the gate was taking too long to open so may be malfunctioning. In regards to classical deterrence, an examination of the perceived threat of being apprehended and fined for a crossing violation revealed participants reported the highest mean scores for swiftness of punishment, which suggests they were generally aware that they would receive an “on the spot” fine. However, the overall mean scores for certainty and severity of sanctions (for violating the rules) indicate that the participants did not perceive the certainty and severity of sanctions as very high. This paper will further discuss the research findings in regards to the development of interventions designed to improve pedestrian crossing safety.

How safe is safe enough? : a socio-technical view of low-cost level crossing safety

Low-cost level crossings are often criticized as being unsafe. Does a SIL (safety integrity level) rating make the railway crossing any safer? This paper discusses how a supporting argument might be made for low-cost level crossing warning devices with lower levels of safety integrity and issues such as risk tolerability and derivation of tolerable hazard rates for system-level hazards. As part of the design of such systems according to fail-safe principles, the paper considers the assumptions around the pre-defined safe states of existing warning devices and how human factors issues around such states can give rise to additional hazards.

Evaluating ITS interventions at railway level crossings using a driving simulator

This paper assesses Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) to identify safety systems that are most likely to reduce driver errors at railway crossings. ITS technologies have been integrated in order to develop improved evaluation tools to reduce crashes at railway crossings. Although emerging technologies, knowledge, innovative interventions have been introduced to change driver behaviour, there is a lack of research on the impact of integrating ITS technologies and transportation simulation on drivers. The outcomes of ITS technologies for complementing traditional signage were compared with those of current safety systems (passive and active) at railway crossings. Three ITS technologies are compared with current treatments, in terms of compliance rate and vehicle speed profiles. It is found that ITS technologies improve compliance rate by 17~30% and also encourage drivers to slow down earlier compared to current passive and active crossings when there is a train approaching the railway crossings.

Understanding pedestrian behaviour at railway level crossings : is there a need for more research?

Aim Collisions between trains and pedestrians are the most likely to result in severe injuries and fatalities when compared to other types of rail crossing accidents. Currently, there is a growing emphasis towards developing effective interventions designed to reduce the prevalence of train–pedestrian collisions. This paper reviews what is currently known regarding the personal and environmental factors that contribute to train–pedestrian collisions, particularly among high-risk groups. Method Studies that reported on the prevalence and characteristics of pedestrian accidents at railway crossings up until June 2012 were searched in electronic databases. Results Males, school children and older pedestrians (and those with disabilities) are disproportionately represented in fatality databases. However, a main theme to emerge is that little is known about the origins of train–pedestrian collisions (especially compared to train–vehicle collisions). In particular, whether collisions result from engaging in deliberate violations versus making decisional errors. This subsequently limits the corresponding development of effective and targeted interventions for high-risk groups as well as crossing locations. Finally, it remains unclear what combination of surveillance and deterrence-based and education-focused campaigns are required to produce lasting reductions in train–pedestrian fatality rates. This paper provides direction for future research into the personal and environmental origins of collisions as well as the development of interventions that aim to attract pedestrians’ attention and ensure crossing rules are respected.

Driver’s behavioural changes with new Intelligent Transport System interventions at railway level crossings: A driving simulator study

Improving safety at railway level crossings is an important issue for the Australian transport system. Governments, the rail industry and road organisations have tried a variety of countermeasures for many years to improve railway level crossing safety. New types of Intelligent Transport System (ITS) interventions are now emerging due to the availability and the affordability of technology. These interventions target both actively and passively protected railway level crossings and attempt to address drivers’ errors at railway crossings, which are mainly a failure to detect the crossing or the train and misjudgement of the train approach speed and distance. This study aims to assess the effectiveness of three emerging ITS that the rail industry considers implementing in Australia: a visual in-vehicle ITS, an audio in-vehicle ITS, as well as an on-road flashing beacons intervention. The evaluation was conducted on an advanced driving simulator with 20 participants per trialled technology, each participant driving once without any technology and once with one of the ITS interventions. Every participant drove through a range of active and passive crossings with and without trains approaching. Their speed approach of the crossing, head movements and stopping compliance were measured. Results showed that driver behaviour was changed with the three ITS interventions at passive crossings, while limited effects were found at active crossings, even with reduced visibility. The on-road intervention trialled was unsuccessful in improving driver behaviour; the audio and visual ITS improved driver behaviour when a train was approaching. A trend toward worsening driver behaviour with the visual ITS was observed when no trains were approaching. This trend was not observed for the audio ITS intervention, which appears to be the ITS intervention with the highest potential for improving safety at passive crossings.

Pedestrian safety at level crossings : how the issue should be addressed?

• crashes at level crossings : pedestrians at higher risk • why pedestrian risky crossing lacks in understandng ? • systems approach – what benefits ? • what are the risk factors at play ? • focus group study: results and future implications

Traffic safety at road-rail level crossings using a driving simulator and traffic simulation

A number of Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) were used with an advanced driving simulator to assess its influence on driving behavior. Three types of ITS interventions namely, Video in-vehicle (ITS1), Audio in-vehicle (ITS2), and On-road flashing marker (ITS3) were tested. Then, the results from the driving simulator were used as inputs for a developed model using a traffic micro-simulation (Vissim 5.4) in order to assess the safety interventions. Using a driving simulator, 58 participants were required to drive through a number of active and passive crossings with and without an ITS device and in the presence or absence of an approaching train. The effect of driver behavior changing in terms of speed and compliance rate was greater at passive crossings than at active crossings. The difference in speed of drivers approaching ITS devices was very small which indicates that ITS helps drivers encounter the crossings in a safer way. Since the current traffic simulation was not able to replicate a dynamic speed change or a probability of stopping that varies based on different ITS safety devices, some modifications of the current traffic simulation were conducted. The results showed that exposure to ITS devices at active crossings did not influence the drivers’ behavior significantly according to the traffic performance indicators used, such as delay time, number of stops, speed, and stopped delay. On the other hand, the results of traffic simulation for passive crossings, where low traffic volumes and low train headway normally occur, showed that ITS devices improved overall traffic performance.

Traffic safety at road–rail level crossings using a driving simulator and traffic simulation

Several intelligent transportation systems (ITS) were used with an advanced driving simulator to assess its influence on driving behavior. Three types of ITS interventions were tested: video in vehicle, audio in vehicle, and on-road flashing marker. The results from the driving simulator were inputs for a developed model that used traffic microsimulation (VISSIM 5.4) to assess the safety interventions. Using a driving simulator, 58 participants were required to drive through active and passive crossings with and without an ITS device and in the presence or absence of an approaching train. The effect of changes in driver speed and compliance rate was greater at passive crossings than at active crossings. The slight difference in speed of drivers approaching ITS devices indicated that ITS helped drivers encounter crossings in a safer way. Since the traffic simulation was not able to replicate a dynamic speed change or a probability of stopping that varied depending on ITS safety devices, some modifications were made to the traffic simulation. The results showed that exposure to ITS devices at active crossings did not influence drivers’ behavior significantly according to the traffic performance indicator, such as delay time, number of stops, speed, and stopped delay. However, the results of traffic simulation for passive crossings, where low traffic volumes and low train headway normally occur, showed that ITS devices improved overall traffic performance.

Integrating driving and traffic simulators to study railway level crossing safety interventions : a methodology

Safety at Railway Level Crossings (RLXs) is an important issue within the Australian transport system. Crashes at RLXs involving road vehicles in Australia are estimated to cost $10 million each year. Such crashes are mainly due to human factors; unintentional errors contribute to 46% of all fatal collisions and are far more common than deliberate violations. This suggests that innovative intervention targeting drivers are particularly promising to improve RLX safety. In recent years there has been a rapid development of a variety of affordable technologies which can be used to increase driver’s risk awareness around crossings. To date, no research has evaluated the potential effects of such technologies at RLXs in terms of safety, traffic and acceptance of the technology. Integrating driving and traffic simulations is a safe and affordable approach for evaluating these effects. This methodology will be implemented in a driving simulator, where we recreated realistic driving scenario with typical road environments and realistic traffic. This paper presents a methodology for evaluating comprehensively potential benefits and negative effects of such interventions: this methodology evaluates driver awareness at RLXs , driver distraction and workload when using the technology . Subjective assessment on perceived usefulness and ease of use of the technology is obtained from standard questionnaires. Driving simulation will provide a model of driving behaviour at RLXs which will be used to estimate the effects of such new technology on a road network featuring RLX for different market penetrations using a traffic simulation. This methodology can assist in evaluating future safety interventions at RLXs.

An innovative information gathering and data analysis platform for railway level crossing safety data

This paper describes an innovative platform that facilitates the collection of objective safety data around occurrences at railway level crossings using data sources including forward-facing video, telemetry from trains and geo-referenced asset and survey data. This platform is being developed with support by the Australian rail industry and the Cooperative Research Centre for Rail Innovation. The paper provides a description of the underlying accident causation model, the development methodology and refinement process as well as a description of the data collection platform. The paper concludes with a brief discussion of benefits this project is expected to provide the Australian rail industry.

Modelling risk at low exposure railway level crossings : supporting an argument for low-cost level crossing warning devices with lower levels of safety integrity

This paper describes a risk model for estimating the likelihood of collisions at low-exposure railway level crossings, demonstrating the effect that differences in safety integrity can have on the likelihood of a collision. The model facilitates the comparison of safety benefits between level crossings with passive controls (stop or give-way signs) and level crossings that have been hypothetically upgraded with conventional or low-cost warning devices. The scenario presented illustrates how treatment of a cross-section of level crossings with low cost devices can provide a greater safety benefit compared to treatment with conventional warning devices for the same budget.

In-vehicle railway level crossing warning systems : can intelligent transport systems deliver?

Intelligent Transport System (ITS) technology is seen as a cost-effective way to increase the conspicuity of approaching trains and the effectiveness of train warnings at level crossings by providing an in-vehicle warning of an approaching train. The technology is often seen as a potential low-cost alternative to upgrading passive level crossings with traditional active warning systems (flashing lights and boom barriers). ITS platforms provide sensor, localization and dedicated short-range communication (DSRC) technologies to support cooperative applications such as collision avoidance for road vehicles. In recent years, in-vehicle warning systems based on ITS technology have been trialed at numerous locations around Australia, at level crossing sites with active and passive controls. While significant research has been conducted on the benefits of the technology in nominal operating modes, little research has focused on the effects of the failure modes, the human factors implications of unreliable warnings and the technology adoption process from the railway industry’s perspective. Many ITS technology suppliers originate from the road industry and often have limited awareness of the safety assurance requirements, operational requirements and legal obligations of railway operators. This paper aims to raise awareness of these issues and start a discussion on how such technology could be adopted. This paper will describe several ITS implementation cenarios and discuss failure modes, human factors considerations and the impact these scenarios are likely to have in terms of safety, railway safety assurance requirements and the practicability of meeting these requirements. The paper will identify the key obstacles impeding the adoption of ITS systems for the different implementation scenarios and a possible path forward towards the adoption of ITS technology.

Alta velocidad ferroviaria en California(USA): quinta parte (V) LAV San Francisco–Sacramento (Bay Crossing Alternative) = High speed railway in California (USA): fith part (V) HSRL San Francisco–Sacramento (Bay Crossing Alternative)

Implantación de la Red de Alta velocidad Ferroviaria en California. Tramo San Francisco-Sacramento. Este artículo de la serie “Alta velocidad Ferroviaria en California (CHSRS), se ocupa de la línea San Francisco– Sacramento “Bay Crossing Alternative”, que cierra la red de alta velocidad ferroviaria del Estado de California, permitiendo en la terminal HSR de Sacramento, conectar con la línea Fresno–Sacramento, en coincidencia de trazados para en el futuro prolongar la red californiana de alta velocidad ferroviaria hasta su entronque con la del Estado de Nevada, vía Tahoe Lake–Reno. La línea San Francisco–Sacramento “Bay Crossing Alternative”, consta de tres trayectos: El primero de ellos “San Francisco urbano” va desde la terminal HSR “San Francisco Airport”, donde termina la alternativa “Golden Gate” de la línea Fresno–San Francisco, hasta el viaducto de acceso al Paso de la Bahía, que constituye el segundo trayecto “San Francisco–Richmond”, trayecto estrella de la red, de 15,48 Km de longitud sobre la Bahía de San Francisco, con desarrollo a través de 11,28 Km en puente colgante múltiple, con vanos de 800 m de luz y 67 m de altura libre bajo el tablero que permite la navegación en la Bahía. El tercer trayecto “Richmond–Sacramento” cruza la Bahía de San Pablo con un puente colgante de 1,6 Km de longitud y tipología similar a los múltiples de la Bahía de San Francisco, pasa por Vallejo (la por plazo breve de tiempo, antigua capital del Estado de California) y por la universitaria Davis, antes de finalmente llegar a la HSR Terminal Station de Sacramento Roseville. This article of the series “California High Speed Railway System”(CHSRS) treats on Line San Francisco–Sacramento “Bay Crossing Alternative” (BCA). This line closes the system of California high speed state railway, and connects with the line Fresno–Sacramento “Stockton Arch Alternative”, joining its alignments in the HSR Terminal of Sacramento Roseville. From this station it will be possible, in the future, to extend the Californian railway system till the Nevada railway system, vía Tahoe Lake and Reno. The BCA consists of three sections: The first one passing through San Francisco city, goes from HSR San Francisco Airport Terminal Station (where the line Fresno–San Francisco “Golden Gate Alternative” ends), up to the Viaduct access at the Bay Crossing. The second section San Francisco–Richmond, constitutes the star section of the system, with 15,48 Km length on the San Francisco Bay, where 11,28 Km in multi suspension bridge, 800 m span and 67 m gauge under panel, to allow navigation through the Bay. The third section Richmond–Sacramento crosses the San Pablo Bay through another suspension bridge of similar typology to that of San Francisco Bay crossing; pass through Vallejo (the ancient and for a short time Head of the State of California) and through Davis, university city, to arrive to the HSR Terminal Station of Sacramento Roseville.