In Australia, there is a warning of this type on the South West Highway south of Pinjarra in Western Australia. This is the only active advance warning sign for a railway level crossing that I know of in Australia although similar signs are used as advance warning of signalled road junctions.
The sign is a conventional highway warning sign around two metres by one metre, reflective white with black lettering “Caution Railway Crossing Ahead” with two amber flashing lights in the top corners of the sign. While it doesn’t look like a railway crossing sign, the message is clear.
The remote sign starts flashing a short time before the main crossing sign to allow approaching traffic to slow in advance of the gates descending. Visibility at the crossing is poor because the area is in a forest with little visibility in either direction.
The Highway is a busy road but not the major road in the area, a road to Interstate Highway standards being located about ten kilometres to the West.
On my first sighting of that sign, it began flashing as I drew level and the crossing lights began flashing as I reached them, having slowed appropriately. As the first at the gates, I jumped out with my camera and photographed a southbound bauxite train hauled by a JT42C, which I was able to follow for a number of following shots.
It does appear that the one in the original post should have the yellow round (RXR) sign. The addition of pavement markings would be appropiate as well.
Thanks for pointing out the images on page 57. I had overlooked those. It appears that there is generally some variation in the design of Active Advance Warning signs. I think I recall other references to the AAWS, but have not found them. Perhaps there was more elaboration on the purpose. The grade crossing handbook says they are for limited sight distance to the crossing. I think the same rationale might apply to a road with an exceptionally high speed limit, but I am not sure if that is referenced.
The limited sight distance need for AAWS is interesting because, technically, the function would be adequately served by the standard advance warning unilluminated, round, black on yellow, RXR sign. So I wonder how they split hairs over this application in deciding that limited sight requires an AAWS.
In making that decision, they must make a distinction in the need for “active” (signalized) advance warning between cases where you can see the crossing from the advance warning point, and cases where you cannot.
It also raises this question:
Is an active advance warning signal needed in the case of a crossing where the crossing cannot be seen from the advance warning point, and the crossing is “passive” or non-signalized?
More than half of the grade crossing accidents I’ve been involved in were highway vehicles hitting the side of the train. Most had either gates or flashing lights. The latest one in Hamden Maine derailed the locomotive and cause significant damage to it. The train itself was going less than 10 mph and had the crossing totally occupied, in fact the dump truck driver hit the locomotive and the last car, the remote operator was on the point of the shove and was 8 car lengths from the collision, the locomotive was on the rear. Had the remote operator been in the cab there is little doubt that he would have been severely injured.
There were other vehicles already stopped at the crossing.
No one was killed but that was dumb luck… I’m all for advance warning devices especially where highway speeds are high and/or there is poor crossing visibility either from curves in the road or a hill that obstructs a good view of the crossing.
I made some phone calls this afternoon and was told by a local person and official with actual knowledge of and responsibility for the situation:
The advance warning flasher was installed over 15 years ago, when the rail line was reactivated for freight traffic.
At that time, the Township requested the signal because of the increase in traffic on that road since the rail line was last used.
The railroad installed the signal and maintains it, except for the signs, which are furnished and replaced by the Township.
The yellow flashers activate at the same time as the red flashers at the crossing.
Thermo-plastic type advance warning pavement markings of “R R X-ING” will be installed this year at all 3 crossings in the Township.
I specifically did not ask my source about whether the PA PUC knew about or approved this arrangement (I didn’t want to risk embarrassing him, as I think I know the answer - perhaps better to be left wondering than to remove the doubt in the ‘wrong’ way, in this instance, I suppose).
I always thought that this was neat when I first saw it many years ago as a kid. The set of flashers with no sign around the bend. Simple, but seemed effective, I guess. Have to love the protective barriers created out of old rails.
Given the sight distance around that curve due to the building, that is a very nice touch for safety! The standard placement of the lights would not be visible until near too late to stop even at city street speeds!
Thanks for sharing that one, zug. Perhaps surprisingly for as old as it is (almost certainly dates back to Reading Railroad days), it’s pretty much still in accordance with the 2007 FHWA Railroad-Highway Grade Crossing Handbook - Fig. 28 - Use of Multiple Flashing Light Signals for Adequate Visibility Horizontal Curve to the Right in subsection 3. - Supplemental Flashing Light Signals, as linked by Euclid above (though the Figure apparently dates back to 1986): http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/xings/com_roaduser/07010/sec04b.htm So the original designers and builders correctly anticipated the modern trend !
From knowing the location and the FRA Grade Crossing Database for it - U.S. DOT ID No. 592-169 H - this signal protects a crossing of the fairly busy and fast (37 freight trains a day plus 7 switching moves, at up to 50 MPH) NS Harrisburg Line (to Reading) 2-track main line at Hummelstown (MP 103.09, N 40.2669750, W 76.7124220), plus a 3rd siding track which is or leads to a connection with the shortline and tourist railroad Middletown & Hummelstown. This auxiliary flasher does appear to be included in the count of the number of Flashing Light (“FL”) sets (though I’m not sure about the math or just how they arrived at their figures: 3 Mast-Mounted FL, 2 Other FL, 6 Total Number FL Pairs ?).
The old rails used as a barrier is common enough, too - the practical, thrifty ways of both railroads and the local “Pennsylvania Dutch” - use what you have, make it do, use it up, wear it out. Again, probably just as effective as modern highway guardrails ("