Does NR really understand safety issues at Level crossings?
Discussion
The usual people trying to get through a crossing as a barrier comes down
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-32385550
It looks as though it's one of these once the barriers come down you're stuck for ages crossings
See the car doing a U turn as it's quicker to choose another route rather than wait for the train to come through and the barriers raise again. What sort of time delay causes someone to think like that?
See the 'skill' of the second motorist trying to get through before the second half barriers are down!
Doesn't it leap out with there's a timing issue leading to inappropriate behaviour
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-wales-32385550
It looks as though it's one of these once the barriers come down you're stuck for ages crossings
See the car doing a U turn as it's quicker to choose another route rather than wait for the train to come through and the barriers raise again. What sort of time delay causes someone to think like that?
See the 'skill' of the second motorist trying to get through before the second half barriers are down!
Doesn't it leap out with there's a timing issue leading to inappropriate behaviour
saaby93 said:
Doesn't it leap out with there's a timing issue leading to inappropriate behaviour
Without watching it, yes in some places.West Worthing crossing was a classic example of this when I lived down there. You could be waiting 15mins for a train you could see stationary at a station a mile up the track. It'd then come down to the station you where near (without crossing the crossing), stop again & finally cross the crossing before the gates went up. On a day the signaller was feeling a real tosser, you'd get another 15min wait for a train doing the same in the other direction.
My record there is 45mins in traffic & that started 200yrds from the crossing!
Whenever this subject comes up on PH there is usually an immediate polarisation of opinion.
The "railway" people will usually argue the safety case, and will just not accept that there is anything wrong with some of the existing arrangements. They often have a point - when the barrier comes down a train doing 125mph may still be a mile or more away, but it will be there in 30 seconds. The bystander on the crossing will not see it or hear it as the barriers come down, but that isn't to say that its arrival isn't imminent. And trains doing 125mph will of course not stop on a sixpence.
On the other side of the coin, the safety case can be over-argued, especially where it is blatantly obvious to all concerned that a train is not just about to pass over the crossing, and the example of a train stopped in a station immediately adjacent to a crossing is a good one. Improving signalling arrangements to minimise the time that the barriers are down could be carried out in some cases.
Busy roads crossing busy railways (two examples that spring to mind are at Reigate and Brockenhurst) are always going to cause congestion problems. Unless it is possible to provide a diversionary route (such as was done at Wareham 40+ years ago, for example) then both the railways and road users are stuck with the problem.
The "railway" people will usually argue the safety case, and will just not accept that there is anything wrong with some of the existing arrangements. They often have a point - when the barrier comes down a train doing 125mph may still be a mile or more away, but it will be there in 30 seconds. The bystander on the crossing will not see it or hear it as the barriers come down, but that isn't to say that its arrival isn't imminent. And trains doing 125mph will of course not stop on a sixpence.
On the other side of the coin, the safety case can be over-argued, especially where it is blatantly obvious to all concerned that a train is not just about to pass over the crossing, and the example of a train stopped in a station immediately adjacent to a crossing is a good one. Improving signalling arrangements to minimise the time that the barriers are down could be carried out in some cases.
Busy roads crossing busy railways (two examples that spring to mind are at Reigate and Brockenhurst) are always going to cause congestion problems. Unless it is possible to provide a diversionary route (such as was done at Wareham 40+ years ago, for example) then both the railways and road users are stuck with the problem.
This sort of thing rather undermines the "safety" case. A completely ungated level crossing on the Plymouth to Gunnislake branch, where Google has conveniently managed to get a car on the crossing included in Street View:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.503085,-4.216341...
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@50.503085,-4.216341...
rs1952 said:
This sort of thing rather undermines the "safety" case. A completely ungated level crossing on the Plymouth to Gunnislake branch
Well, no, it doesn't !Network Rail do studies of all crossings to see how much traffic goes across and see what the appropriate level of protection is.
http://orr.gov.uk/what-and-how-we-regulate/health-...
Without knowing the area concerned, that crossing doesn't look like it is going to get a lot of use.
Going back to the start of this thread, and again not knowing the area.
Maybe there are fast, heavy trains that go over that crossing that NEED the crossing blocked for their approach times. While the stopping passenger trains don't need the same amount of time. But some people would rather see NR spend HUGE amounts of money putting unnecessary extra signalling in place !
Seems to me that we've gone through all this before !
rs1952 said:
That's how they do it in New Zealand. No gates, just look left and right, if no train coming, cross. Just like a road level crossing here. But then Kiwis have a bit more common sense than many Brits I think; colonist's genes etc.Simpo Two said:
That's how they do it in New Zealand. No gates, just look left and right, if no train coming, cross. Just like a road level crossing here. But then Kiwis have a bit more common sense than many Brits I think; colonist's genes etc.
Nah, there are a few like that near me. Works perfectly, but few trains and few people
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nethertown_railway_st...
In the days when there was a signal box at every level crossing the signalman could look outside, see how big the traffic queue was and take a view on whether he would open the gates before the next train. All that the remote signaller sees now is a view restricted to the actual level crossing. What is happening outside this 'bubble' is invisible - there might be one car waiting or fifty.
Add to this the soothing PR types talking about a 'few seconds delay' when Joe Public knows full well that it can be ten minutes or more on a bad day then it isn't surprising that people take risks. NR may not have the resources to spend HUGE amounts of money on reducing delays but Joe Public doesn't want to spend HUGE amounts of time waiting for trains which clearly must have been still at the previous station when the barriers were lowered.
Add to this the soothing PR types talking about a 'few seconds delay' when Joe Public knows full well that it can be ten minutes or more on a bad day then it isn't surprising that people take risks. NR may not have the resources to spend HUGE amounts of money on reducing delays but Joe Public doesn't want to spend HUGE amounts of time waiting for trains which clearly must have been still at the previous station when the barriers were lowered.
tight5 said:
Without knowing the area concerned, that crossing doesn't look like it is going to get a lot of use.
Gunnislake branch passenger timetable. No freight goes up there, just 2-car class 150 DMUshttps://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/-/media/PDF/Ti...
tight5 said:
Going back to the start of this thread, and again not knowing the area.
Maybe there are fast, heavy trains that go over that crossing that NEED the crossing blocked for their approach times. While the stopping passenger trains don't need the same amount of time. But some people would rather see NR spend HUGE amounts of money putting unnecessary extra signalling in place !
A level crossing is a point where railways and non railway-travelling human being interact. Some of those people know a lot about railways; some know a little, most know nothing. If the danger is not apparent, many people will do what they think they can get away with. You could say that, to them, a level crossing against them might be seen as no more than a red man on a Pelican crossing that they feel they can safely ignore. Provided that nothing is coming, of course...
Most level crossing users will be local to the area and they would have observed what normally happens. And if you have a situation where, to take a classic example, a train comes to rest just shy of a crossing at a station and sits there for a minute or so with the gates closed, the locals will be aware that this always happens. And they will chance their arm. Then one day when they're chancing their something bears down upon them coming the other way that they weren't expecting.
The newspapers are then full of blame for NR possibly before, but certainly after, the funeral.
In a case like this, it could be argued successfully that there is a safety case for closing the gates prior to the train's arrival in the station (possible overshoot, perhaps). But it should also be possible for the gates to be opened again whilst the train is stationary, and closed again when it is ready to move. An additional, or perhaps a resited, starter signal would be all that would be needed.
Doing something like this would make the locals more aware that when the gates were closed, they were closed for a good reason.
tight5 said:
Seems to me that we've gone through all this before !
Blame Saaby for bringing up this old chestnut again Dogwatch said:
In the days when there was a signal box at every level crossing the signalman could look outside, see how big the traffic queue was and take a view on whether he would open the gates before the next train. All that the remote signaller sees now is a view restricted to the actual level crossing. What is happening outside this 'bubble' is invisible - there might be one car waiting or fifty.
Add to this the soothing PR types talking about a 'few seconds delay' when Joe Public knows full well that it can be ten minutes or more on a bad day then it isn't surprising that people take risks. NR may not have the resources to spend HUGE amounts of money on reducing delays but Joe Public doesn't want to spend HUGE amounts of time waiting for trains which clearly must have been still at the previous station when the barriers were lowered.
It seems to me we're all a bit impatient these days. Is it really worth risking your life for a measly 10 minute delay?Add to this the soothing PR types talking about a 'few seconds delay' when Joe Public knows full well that it can be ten minutes or more on a bad day then it isn't surprising that people take risks. NR may not have the resources to spend HUGE amounts of money on reducing delays but Joe Public doesn't want to spend HUGE amounts of time waiting for trains which clearly must have been still at the previous station when the barriers were lowered.
It's not just level crossings, it's road junctions as well.Most of the accidents at busy road crossings are people just too impatient to wait until there's a big enough gap to cross safely.
The town I live in gets gridlocked several times a day due to the level crossing, you just learn to live with it.
There's been a topic on this before. I used to work for NR as a PM delivering LX upgrades. You are welcome to ask me anything and I will answer as best I can.
To start off with, having a signal box per crossing is hugely inefficient. The railways are funded out of the public purse - be it taxpayers money or via ticket payers. A single (1) box requires a minimum for 4 staff (3 x 8 hour shifts plus 1 cover). If you saw the cost of staffing just a single box I think you would agree you would prefer your money spent elsewhere.
The honest answer is, yes not all level crossings are perfect, but NR are on a huge drive to upgrade them all across the Network. The general public just don't have any concept of the sheer size of the network, all the assets involved, the level of responsibility and ultimately the eye watering cost of maintaining the railway (keeping it standing still and preventing it degrading) and then upgrading and improving it on top of that. I don't say that in a derisory fashion; I had no concept of the size of the railway before I started in the industry.
It follows that whilst NR are working to address LX upgrades or closures where appropriate, due to the sheer number and the finite funding (taxpayer), not to mention the rail industry (those who design and build) is massively overstretched at the moment, it takes time to plough through all the assessments and upgrades. You can't simply snap your fingers and have them done within 5 years - this is a 25 year job that will take time. There is a need to prioritise those that are known problem areas but that happens and these things take time.
I won't get into the detail of signalling but have a read up on track circuits and block signalling. LX's are often on the boundary of a track circuit which means that when you see a train stationary in a station near a LX, the signalling system cannot safely distinguish that the train is stationary AND the crossing can be opened - its one or the other. The problem is, the railway infrastructure is so old, and in particular with signalling, so complex with so many interface and compatibility issues, that correcting these issues are far more expensive and time consuming that the public understand.
Once again it comes back to funding, priority and the size of the industry.
Another thing to consider with LX upgrades is that from start to finish, these projects can take up to 6 or 7 years to complete - especially where you have listed buildings (signal boxes), land purchase, local communities to appease, councils to satisfy, amendments to the highway to make etc.
The ungated crossing mentioned earlier is obviously on a lightly used line. Read the signage though and you will see that anyone crossing should call the signaller to confirm it is safe to pass. The crossing probably gets so little rail and road usage that this approach is deemed low enough risk.
The bottom line is LX's sadly need to be made safe for the lowest common denominator - the idiots who decide to jump or swerve around barriers. This happens on a daily basis all across the country. NR only has to get unlucky once out of those hundreds of abuse cases for someone to be killed, but by the laws of probability an individual could happily jump the barriers 100 times in a row and not get hit.
The crossings DO need to be idiot proof and whilst 99% of the population manage to not do themselves any harm, the network needs to be insulated against that remaining 1%.
To start off with, having a signal box per crossing is hugely inefficient. The railways are funded out of the public purse - be it taxpayers money or via ticket payers. A single (1) box requires a minimum for 4 staff (3 x 8 hour shifts plus 1 cover). If you saw the cost of staffing just a single box I think you would agree you would prefer your money spent elsewhere.
The honest answer is, yes not all level crossings are perfect, but NR are on a huge drive to upgrade them all across the Network. The general public just don't have any concept of the sheer size of the network, all the assets involved, the level of responsibility and ultimately the eye watering cost of maintaining the railway (keeping it standing still and preventing it degrading) and then upgrading and improving it on top of that. I don't say that in a derisory fashion; I had no concept of the size of the railway before I started in the industry.
It follows that whilst NR are working to address LX upgrades or closures where appropriate, due to the sheer number and the finite funding (taxpayer), not to mention the rail industry (those who design and build) is massively overstretched at the moment, it takes time to plough through all the assessments and upgrades. You can't simply snap your fingers and have them done within 5 years - this is a 25 year job that will take time. There is a need to prioritise those that are known problem areas but that happens and these things take time.
I won't get into the detail of signalling but have a read up on track circuits and block signalling. LX's are often on the boundary of a track circuit which means that when you see a train stationary in a station near a LX, the signalling system cannot safely distinguish that the train is stationary AND the crossing can be opened - its one or the other. The problem is, the railway infrastructure is so old, and in particular with signalling, so complex with so many interface and compatibility issues, that correcting these issues are far more expensive and time consuming that the public understand.
Once again it comes back to funding, priority and the size of the industry.
Another thing to consider with LX upgrades is that from start to finish, these projects can take up to 6 or 7 years to complete - especially where you have listed buildings (signal boxes), land purchase, local communities to appease, councils to satisfy, amendments to the highway to make etc.
The ungated crossing mentioned earlier is obviously on a lightly used line. Read the signage though and you will see that anyone crossing should call the signaller to confirm it is safe to pass. The crossing probably gets so little rail and road usage that this approach is deemed low enough risk.
The bottom line is LX's sadly need to be made safe for the lowest common denominator - the idiots who decide to jump or swerve around barriers. This happens on a daily basis all across the country. NR only has to get unlucky once out of those hundreds of abuse cases for someone to be killed, but by the laws of probability an individual could happily jump the barriers 100 times in a row and not get hit.
The crossings DO need to be idiot proof and whilst 99% of the population manage to not do themselves any harm, the network needs to be insulated against that remaining 1%.
rs1952 said:
Blame Saaby for bringing up this old chestnut again 
It wasnt me - it was NR with their video showing locals had lost confidence in the crossing times
It would be interesting to see the rest of the video until the train comes through - yawn
The trouble is by making times longer NR seem to be making people act in a less safe manner.
Surely putting cameras up is only going to result in some nice pictures proving the point
What's so complicated / controversial about this?
It's a level crossing - when the lights flash and the barriers come down, stop your car and wait for the train to pass and the barriers to raise again - or risk getting killed in a horrible way.
They're not going to disappear, so get used to it.
Not difficult is it?
It's a level crossing - when the lights flash and the barriers come down, stop your car and wait for the train to pass and the barriers to raise again - or risk getting killed in a horrible way.
They're not going to disappear, so get used to it.
Not difficult is it?
No it isn't, but let me set another albeit exaggerated scenario building on yours.
You encounter some roadworks, controlled by a traffic light. The traffic light is at red. You stop. Nothing happens. The light doesn't change, neither does any traffic come through from the other end.
How long do you sit in your car waiting before doing something?
5 mins?
10 mins?
1 hour?
1 day?
A year?
Until death?
Point is, when does perfect robot stop and flawed human take over?
You encounter some roadworks, controlled by a traffic light. The traffic light is at red. You stop. Nothing happens. The light doesn't change, neither does any traffic come through from the other end.
How long do you sit in your car waiting before doing something?
5 mins?
10 mins?
1 hour?
1 day?
A year?
Until death?
Point is, when does perfect robot stop and flawed human take over?
eltawater said:
I'd say it's probably fairly unlikely that you'd be smacked sidewards by a high speed locomotive at the roadworks....
What about when they resurface the crossings?Oddly that West Worthing crossing I mentioned earlier had the smallest queues it's ever caused (in my memory) while it was being resurfaced with temporary lights controlling it.
Hooli said:
eltawater said:
I'd say it's probably fairly unlikely that you'd be smacked sidewards by a high speed locomotive at the roadworks....
What about when they resurface the crossings?Oddly that West Worthing crossing I mentioned earlier had the smallest queues it's ever caused (in my memory) while it was being resurfaced with temporary lights controlling it.
With no trains running, it would simply have been a two way shuttle running of cars controlled by temporary lights.
As for the comment about 'orders' and obeying them.. the instructions are obviously optional - there's nothing stopping you drive around the barriers. But let's be sensible, the instructions/orders are there for a reason - to avoid accidents and deaths. In the same way you can walk down the middle of the road instead of the pavement, drink bleach instead of using it for cleaning, stick your finger into a socket instead of using a plug etc.
I do recognise however there is a need to improve some crossings to minimise the time people are waiting - or at least provide better visibility of how long until they will be raised. But this all comes back to cost and resources.
really struggle with the idea that motorist and pedestrians are unable to look at a set of traffic lights and think "oh I'm being told that there is 100s of tonnes of metal coming my way at 100mph, I better get out of the way".
Its very very difficult to have sympathy for people who jump lights or contravene barriers.
National Rail shouldn't spend any more money pandering to errant stupidity.
Its very very difficult to have sympathy for people who jump lights or contravene barriers.
National Rail shouldn't spend any more money pandering to errant stupidity.
Gassing Station | Boats, Planes & Trains | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff