Перейти к основному содержанию
AkademIndex

Продукты

Для разработчиков

AkademBaseОткрытый API экосистемы
Статья

Human Factors Issues of Accidents at Passively Controlled Rural Level Crossings

Christina M. Rudin-BrownTransportation Safety Board of Canada, 200 Promenade du Portage, 4th Floor, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 1K8, CanadaMarilyn French-St. GeorgeTransportation Safety Board of Canada, 200 Promenade du Portage, 4th Floor, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 1K8, CanadaJonathan J. StuartTransportation Safety Board of Canada, 200 Promenade du Portage, 4th Floor, Gatineau, Quebec K1A 1K8, Canada
2014en
ABI

Аннотация

Collisions between road vehicles and trains at passively controlled level crossings, where no indication is given to drivers of the presence (or absence) of an approaching train, raise important human factors safety concerns. A database search of Canadian level crossing crash data for the 10-year period between 2003 and 2012 and a targeted review of the scientific research literature were conducted to explore the human factors and related risks involved in crashes of this nature. Accidents at passively controlled, rural level crossings where the driver of the road vehicle did not stop constituted 15% of all level crossing crashes. Statistical analysis revealed that this type of accident was most likely to occur in prairie provinces, during daylight hours, and to involve a disproportionate number of heavy vehicles. Nine human factors issues were identified. Four affected driver detection of an approaching train, including sightlines, train conspicuity, unchanging retinal image, and train horn audibility. Five issues related to driver decision making, including looked-but-failed-to-see errors, faulty activation of schema–mental model, distraction, impairment, and information processing. These issues were overlaid across four previously proposed driver approach zones at passive level crossings. Analysis of countermeasures designed for application within the approach zone, which began at the decision sight distance point, revealed several potential countermeasures, including the observation that current minimum sightline guidelines for passive level crossings might not have been adequate to ensure that drivers have sufficient time to assess the threat posed by an approaching train from both directions and to respond appropriately.

Перевод пока недоступен

Идентификаторы

Цитирования и источники

Цитирований: 3Использованных источников: 0