Skip to main content

Maine to trial rail-trespasser detector

Brunswick, Maine, will be the site of an unusual three-year research project involving testing an automated trespasser detection and deterrent systems in high-risk areas along the Pan Am railways and Amtrak Downeaster rail lines, the Maine Department of Transportation has said. Researchers will install and operate systems that automatically detect trespassers, capture video with wireless cameras and issue recorded warnings to tell them to get away from the tracks. The systems also can be used to alert lo
September 19, 2013 Read time: 2 mins
Brunswick, Maine, will be the site of an unusual three-year research project involving testing an automated trespasser detection and deterrent systems in high-risk areas along the 7503 Pan Am Railways and 2008 Amtrak Downeaster rail lines, the Maine Department of Transportation has said.

Researchers will install and operate systems that automatically detect trespassers, capture video with wireless cameras and issue recorded warnings to tell them to get away from the tracks. The systems also can be used to alert local police.

The project will be funded by a US$200,000 interagency agreement between the Federal Railroad Administration and the 324 US Department of Transportation's Volpe National Transportation Systems Center.

Since 2003, ten people have been killed and five seriously injured while trespassing on rail lines in Maine, according to US DOT data. Maine DOT spokesman Ted Talbot said trespassing is a common problem along railroad lines and is illegal and dangerous.

"When they do that, there's an inherent danger," Talbot said.

A 2008 US DOT report, US Automated Railroad Infrastructure Trespass Detection System Performance Guidelines, cited the three most common factors that lead to trespassing incidents as accessibility, poor visibility and short-cut potential.

Related Content

  • February 2, 2012
    US enforcement regulation to deliver clearer guidelines?
    Jim Tuton of American Traffic Solutions looks at the evolution of automated enforcement in North America "Technological regulation will become more sophisticated at the federal level, giving states clearer guidelines" Jim Tuton In just 20 years, photo enforcement in North America has grown from a single speed camera in a small town in Arizona to thousands of photo traffic enforcement cameras which are now operating in 350 communities spread across 27 states and three Canadian provinces. Most of these p
  • March 9, 2015
    Putting a stop to intersection indecision
    David Crawford takes a look at innovations to reduce crashes at rural intersections. Intersection crashes continue to represent a worryingly large share of deaths and serious injuries across US highway networks. Statistics from the US Department of Transportation’s Federal Highway Administration show that an average of 21% of road traffic accident deaths occur at crossings. The National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) calculates that intersection crashes account for 48% of all injury-related i
  • June 23, 2016
    Making enforcement multi-functional
    New enforcement equipment is coming onto the market apace, as Colin Sowman discovers. If there is one word that epitomises the current trend in enforcement technology then that word is consolidation: multi-function cameras, miniaturisation and combining radar and visual detection methods. One example is Turkish company Ekin Technology’s recently introduced Micro Plate is claimed to be the smallest licence plate recognition device. In addition to logging licence plate data, the system records speed, date, ti
  • June 13, 2014
    ‘Eating and drinking while driving almost as dangerous as using a mobile device’
    According to new data released by driver safety solutions company Lytx Europe, eating or drinking while driving is nearly as dangerous as using a mobile device – whether handheld or hands-free - and greatly increases a driver’s risk of being in or causing a collision. Lytx (formerly DriveCam) found that drivers who eat and drink while driving are 3.6 times more likely to be involved in a collision than those who do not due to the distraction this causes. This is almost as high as the collisions resultin