Do you think all railroad crossings should be replaced with overpasses?

[Megabox]

I think so. Well maybe not all of them. There's just so many of them. But they are pretty dangerous for passengers in vehicles with drivers that choose to ignore the signals. The passengers in those vehicles can't help it if the driver chooses to ignore the signals.

[Charles Hunter]

The cost is prohibitive to replace "all", or even a significant percentage, of RR crossings with overpasses.  Because the minimum vertical clearance over a RR is 23'6", while over a highway is 16' for Interstates, and less for other roads, RR overpasses must be longer, which disrupts access to more properties that front the road.  More can be done to make at-grade crossings safer - crossing arms in all four quadrants of the crossing, medians to limit cars from crossing the the wrong side, or slipping between the arms, shorter trains (CSX in now running trains that are 2+ miles long) to reduce the temptation to run the gates to avoid being stuck for a long time, to name a few.  There are costs to these, as well, and there is no regulatory way to make railroad companies to shorten their trains, or the time they block crossings.

[acme54321]

Im feeling a little deja vu...

[bl8jaxnative]

Let's walk before we sprint.  As Charles Hunter pointed out, there's a lot that can be done to improve most at-grade crossings.