Just happened to see this while riding along with a co-worker one day recently. I’ve never heard of or seen anything like it before. As you can see, the lenses are yellow. I haven’t seen it operate yet, but I expect that the lights will flash alternately, same as the red ones at the signals right at the grade crossing.
It’s needed because the crossing itself is not visible from this point - the crossing is about 100 yds. southwest, further down a fairly steep grade, and around a set of sharp ‘S’-curves, as shown in the next 2 photos.
The location is Brown[‘s] Hill Road (T-592), leading to the Alpine Mountain [ [swg] ] ski area in the Analomink (or Parkside) area of Paradise Twp., Monroe Co., PA, about 1/4 mile north of SR 191, at about these Lat./ Long. coords.: N 41 6.392’ W 75 14.892’
I think advance warning is a great idea, Id like to see it implemented everywhere there are highway speeds above 40 mph. I’ve just seen too many bad things…
I have seen this before with the standard round (RXR) sign with an Amber flashing light that was activated with the grade crossing signals, but never a setup like that.
Would be curious to know who maintains? (railroad or road agency? … not exactly common to see WCH mast that far from crossing or in a standard inventory for road agency)
I’ve never seen it in a railroad context, but it’s a fairly common concept for stoplights with limited sight distance. I’ve seen it in cities and on busy suburban thoroughfares.
To what several others have indicated, this practice of linking an advanced warning sign with an illuminating source, is not generally, done.
It would be speculation, on my part; that the circumstances that brought about those installations, would be reactive in nature to some kind of Highway/Grade Crossing incursions [ series of incidents involving motor vehicles and equipment occupying the tracks, in areas where there is limited sight distances.]
As with automated Crossing protection, there is a process to gain that type of ‘active’ installation. It has been discussed in this Forum more than once.
A need for an active equipped crossing is initiated by a local political jurisdiction and if authorized by a ‘need’. The political jurisdiction advances the funds to purchase the equipment and the railroad installs it; and then maintains it in working order. That process can be very expensive depending on the individual crossings requirement for either rail or automotive protection. In the case of a ‘hybrid-type of requirement’, There would have to be some kind of specific arrangement for the maintenance of the sign and whose agents responsibility that would be.
Paul North or MC would be better qualified to comment on those aspects.
To one extent or another I’ve often seen warnings beyond the crossing hardware. Railroad crossing signs form a few hundred fee before to maybe a half mile warnings of the crossing ahead…
The advance warning flasher is a standard item in the inventory of installations. It is primarily used for limited sight distance crossings. The only reason that it seems unusual is that few crossings require it.
Whose “inventory of installations”? (Is it somewhere in MUTCD Chapter 8 ?)
The question I would be curious to see answered is: Is this rascal tied to the Penna. PUC application/decision that covers the crossing Paul saw it at or is it an unrelated add-on by the road agency. I cannot remember ever seeing mast mounted railroad signal flashers in advance of a crossing with yellow lenses.
Is this the MUTCD W10-16 signage that was approved at the Jan 2006 meeting?
There is ‘passive’ advance signage called for in W10-1,2,3,4, the familiar round black-on-yellow crossbuck plate and other signage warning that a crossing is a specified distance down the road, or hidden by a curve or other obstruction, etc. The addition of signage with lights to show ‘active’ status is a very good positive touch, especially where high train speeds are involved.
It is in the Nevada thread, but I don’t find the reference there yet to the manual where it is described. I have that here, but I have to find it. Meanwhile, I did find this drawing in the Nevada thread:
Here is the reference excerpted from that source. The drawing posted above accompanies this text in the manual, but does not paste with the text:
11. Active Advance Warning Sign
The active advance warning sign (AAWS) consists of one or two 12-inch yellow hazard identification beacons mounted above the advance warning sign, as shown in Figure 39. An advisory speed plate sign indicating the safe approach speed also should be posted with the sign.94 The AAWS provides motorists with advance warning that a train is approaching the crossing. The beacons are connected to the railroad track circuitry and activated on the approach of a train. The AAWS should continue to be activated until the crossing signals have been deactivated.
Figure 39. Examples of Active Advance Warning Signs and Cantilevered Active Advance Warning Sign
Source: Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Handbook, Second Edition. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Transportation, Federal Highway Administration, 1986.
A train-activated advance warning sign should be considered at locations where the crossing flashing light signals cannot be seen until an approaching motorist has passed the d
Definitely not here, anymore - max. speed is 10 MPH per the FRA Grade Crossing Database. I suspect this was installed back when the the DL&W owned and ran the line - like 50 - 60 years ago - and train speeds in the 40 - 50 MPH range were common, which is why the railroad-standard Western-Cullen-Hayes base and signal ‘roundels’ were used, instead of highway-type fixtures.
Although I haven’t asked yet and have no actual knowledge, I’m inclined to believe that the railroad still maintains this signal. There are power lines and poles between this flasher and the grade crossing ahead, so there are other utilities or agencies there to do that, other than the railroad. Paradise Twp. is a nice ‘back-in-the-woods’ hunting & fishing township, and I’m aware of only 1 or 2 typical traffic signals it has to maintain - and those might be done by the nearby Mt. Airy Casino anyway; other flashers are probably handled by the schools or churches where they are. I haven’t seen the PUC order/ decision yet, but I’ll put that on my huge list of “things to do someday”.
However, in the U.S. DOT - CROSSING INVENTORY INFORMATION, under Part III: Traffic Control Device Information, Train Activated Devices:, “Other Flashing Lights” are 0, as is “Highway Traffic Signals”, and the “Total Number of FL [Flashing Light] Pairs” is 4, same as for most other crossings. So this signal does not appear to have been counted or included there, either.
By the way, the sign message in the FHWA Figures kindly provided above by Euclid is "TRAIN WHEN
My gut feeling, the railroad maintains a ‘feed’ of the track occupancy circuit to a junction point with the governmental agency that maintains the road. I suspect that all the ‘advance warning’ lights and signs are the responsibility of the road maintenance agency, not the railroad. The railroad has the responsibility for maintaing the actual crossing protection at the crossing and making sure the ‘feed’ works. The railroad would want nothing to with maintaining any highway signs.
Too, the railroad may have fed the flashing circuit to the advance warning fixture. The proof will come when it’s time to replace or otherwise repair the device.
Given the device’s apparent age (based on estimates herein), today’s policies may not translate to practices in place when the device was originally installed.
Locally, there are several road crossings that have a ‘advance notice’ set up for the flasher protected crossings.
The notification, isn’t about the railroad crossing per se, but about stopped traffic when the sign’s lights are flashing. There are multiple 20 MPH curves between the advance notification sign and the railroad crossing. When the crossing protection is not operating, the advance notice sign is not flashing.
I understand that the so called, “Active Advance Warning Sign” is a necessary feature where there is unusually short sight distance. The reason they are rare is that it is rare to have an unusually short sight distance. The grade crossing handbook says this:
“A train-activated advance warning sign should be considered at locations where the crossing flashing light signals cannot be seen until an approaching motorist has passed the decision point (the distance from the track from which a safe stop can be made).”
I can see where it would also contribute protection to prevent stopped traffic from getting rear-ended.
