Getting the Attention of Drivers Back on Passive Railway Level Crossings: Evaluation of Advanced Flashing Lights

Abstract

Improving safety at railway level crossings remains a priority for the rail industry internationally, as they remain a significant hazard. A high proportion of collisions occur at passive level crossings, because of their high prevalence and their lower effectiveness at mitigating the risks that road users encounter at such crossings. The unreasonable cost required to upgrade them to incorporate active warnings implies that such crossings will remain on the road, and that alternative approaches are required. Drivers tend to make errors at such crossings, and this can be related to approaching such level crossings at speeds that are too high, exhibiting reduced scanning behaviors to look for trains, and not complying with stop signs at the crossing. An alternative approach is to upgrade the advanced signage with active flashing lights activated by road vehicles, aimed at reducing looked-but-failed-to-see errors and reinforcing the behavior expected from road users at such crossings. A field trial was conducted in New Zealand that evaluated how approach speeds and the visual scanning behavior of 27 drivers, recorded with an eye tracker, changed with such treatments. It was found that the presence of road vehicle-activated advanced signage provided a range of benefits for drivers unaware of the presence of a passive crossings, such as increasing drivers’ attention to road signs through drivers fixating on signage for longer durations and reduced (slower) approach speeds. Further research is needed to evaluate whether these benefits are sustained over time, and whether this can minimize complacency resulting from familiarity.

Acceptance of visual and audio interventions for distracted pedestrians

“…Participant may not have paid sufficient attention to the static part of the intervention, which reminded to look for trains, aligning with previous outcomes showing that static sign performance is related to their conspicuity and comprehensibility (Charlton, 2006). Similar confusion has been observed with drivers when encountering advanced flashing lights (Larue, Watling, Black, & Wood, 2019;Noyce & Fambro, 1998) whereby it was incorrectly assumed that a train was at or approaching the crossing when a flashing light was observed. This misperception is, however, greater for lights that continuously flash compared to vehicleactivated lights (Noyce & Fambro, 1998).…”

Understanding Why Drivers Cross the Line at Activated Railway Crossings

“…Our study identifies that for urban and congested crossings, a 6 s grace period may provide sufficient time to react and respond safely to flashing light activation. However, for enforcement to be viable and for this information to be useful in locations and countries such as those focused in this study, such a grace period needs to be provided to road users before the crossing lights are activated, as is currently done in the UK (with a third amber-color light), or through advanced warnings as provided at traffic lights ( 37 ), passive or highway level crossings ( 46 , 47 ).…”

Analysis and Evaluation of the Effectiveness of Safety Systems at Railroad Crossings in Poland

“…and recommended in several studies [43][44][45]. For this reason, it makes sense to introduce this solution at one of the level crossings and to observe the behaviour of drivers crossing the crossing.…”