Level crossings (trains)

[Stevelondon]

This really is off topic I suppose.
But you know what its like. You have naff all to do and thoughts creep into your head.
Anyway.

There is a level crossing in Motspur Park. For those of you who have no idea where that is.....its not important.
But I sat there today (in traffic)....wondering why in the hell do the barriers stay down for so long when there is no fucking trains in sight, at the nearby station or even or moving anywhere near the vicinity.
Today was not so bad to be honest. Probably just over a ten minute wait while two trains went by.
But I have heard stories in other places where drivers have sat there for over twenty minutes before the barriers open.
So...........are there worse level crossings than this one.

I know its not a ground breaking question. But just suppose I am on my way to the Motspur Park massage place and I get caught up on the wrong sides of the track. Nowt worse than the anticipation of massage and HE and your sitting in your motor going nowhere.

[Liverpool]

External Link/Members Only

[lillythesavage]

You really do need a hobby, trainspotting perhaps? 

[alabama1]

Fuck me mate, you need to get a life 

[Stevelondon]

Fuck me mate, you need to get a life 

Believe you me mate, I've got a life. Its why I hate getting caught out by these effin level crossings. 

Actually saying that, I don't really care about how long I have to sit there. Its not like I work for a living and have to be somewhere quick. 

I watched the link by the way........well, half of it then nodded off.
Bit like being at the Motspur Park level crossing then 

[Ghost89]

A particular crossing near where I work had 9 trains come through. 45 minutes I was waiting

[mr.bluesky]

This really is off topic I suppose.
But you know what its like. You have naff all to do and thoughts creep into your head.
Anyway.

There is a level crossing in Motspur Park. For those of you who have no idea where that is.....its not important.
But I sat there today (in traffic)....wondering why in the hell do the barriers stay down for so long when there is no fucking trains in sight, at the nearby station or even or moving anywhere near the vicinity.
Today was not so bad to be honest. Probably just over a ten minute wait while two trains went by.
But I have heard stories in other places where drivers have sat there for over twenty minutes before the barriers open.
So...........are there worse level crossings than this one.

I know its not a ground breaking question. But just suppose I am on my way to the Motspur Park massage place and I get caught up on the wrong sides of the track. Nowt worse than the anticipation of massage and HE and your sitting in your motor going nowhere.

You still get mad bastards in cars and on bicycles who can't wait a few minutes and try and get across before both barriers come down.

[Chorley]

This really is off topic I suppose.
But you know what its like. You have naff all to do and thoughts creep into your head.
Anyway.

There is a level crossing in Motspur Park. For those of you who have no idea where that is.....its not important.
But I sat there today (in traffic)....wondering why in the hell do the barriers stay down for so long when there is no fucking trains in sight, at the nearby station or even or moving anywhere near the vicinity.
Today was not so bad to be honest. Probably just over a ten minute wait while two trains went by.
But I have heard stories in other places where drivers have sat there for over twenty minutes before the barriers open.
So...........are there worse level crossings than this one.


I know its not a ground breaking question. But just suppose I am on my way to the Motspur Park massage place and I get caught up on the wrong sides of the track. Nowt worse than the anticipation of massage and HE and your sitting in your motor going nowhere.

Next time ignore the barriers and lights and let us know how you get on.. 

[Squire Haggard]

It could be worse, if the trains were this long.....

External Link/Members Only

[winkywanky]

This really is off topic I suppose.
But you know what its like. You have naff all to do and thoughts creep into your head.
Anyway.

There is a level crossing in Motspur Park. For those of you who have no idea where that is.....its not important.
But I sat there today (in traffic)....wondering why in the hell do the barriers stay down for so long when there is no fucking trains in sight, at the nearby station or even or moving anywhere near the vicinity.
Today was not so bad to be honest. Probably just over a ten minute wait while two trains went by.
But I have heard stories in other places where drivers have sat there for over twenty minutes before the barriers open.
So...........are there worse level crossings than this one.

I know its not a ground breaking question. But just suppose I am on my way to the Motspur Park massage place and I get caught up on the wrong sides of the track. Nowt worse than the anticipation of massage and HE and your sitting in your motor going nowhere.

Well you have struck a chord with me.

I live close to a level crossing which is the bane of my life, and as a result I frequently take the (often, very) long way round to get where I want to go, even to the extent of negotiating loads of speed bumps 

Reason: 'Health & Safety'. When I first moved here some time ago, the crossing had just one barrier on each side, literally blocking off just the lane going that way.

Of course it's only a matter of time before a couple of twats zig-zag through as the barriers are actually coming down. And then on the other side of the country somewhere, one of these twats adds himself to the book of Darwin, and also gives the poor driver the screaming abdabs for the next six months. So then bit by bit, every level crossing in the country has double barriers fitted. Well that's fine, it's good, it will save lives  .

But oh no, then there are several new twats (I'm sure there never used to be so many twats?  ) who insist on going straight through the flashing red lights, playing Russian Roulette with the falling barriers. And again, someone gets killed doing this in some other part of the country.

So then the barrier/lights timing is reset to activate two minutes earlier, right across the country  . But not only that, why not have the barriers rising again A FULL TEN SECONDS AFTER THE BACK END OF THE TRAIN HAS CLEARED THE CROSSING?   

Then over the next few years, with over-population (especially approaching large rail terminii) and perhaps a special extra train service specifically for an airport or such, add a few extra trains per hour.

So then what happens is that the barriers come down way early, and then because another train is coming perhaps even as much four minutes later, even when that train has departed, the barriers stay down. And then depending on the timetable, rinse and repeat. I have frequently had to wait 15 minutes for three or four trains to clear.

And you end up with such a tailback on either side, that people desperate to get across tailgate each other, and then the traffic can suddenly stop because 300m up the road, someone stops to turn right and the queue coming the other way hasn't left a gap for them. Which of course increases the likelihood of someone getting stuck on the tracks. In effect, the crossing has caused such a bad blockage that it raises the risk of a fatal accident on the crossing.

I actually spent fifteen minutes writing a letter to my local rail network, highlighting all the above points. As expected, they simply sent back a formulaic letter which actually addressed none of my points directly, simply said we need to run a safe railway or whatever. Of course it was a whole page to say nothing more than that, and it was written in corporate-speak  .

Hope this makes you feel better about your local one anyway 

[lillythesavage]

Well you have struck a chord with me.

I live close to a level crossing which is the bane of my life, and as a result I frequently take the (often, very) long way round to get where I want to go, even to the extent of negotiating loads of speed bumps 

Reason: 'Health & Safety'. When I first moved here some time ago, the crossing had just one barrier on each side, literally blocking off just the lane going that way.

Of course it's only a matter of time before a couple of twats zig-zag through as the barriers are actually coming down. And then on the other side of the country somewhere, one of these twats adds himself to the book of Darwin, and also gives the poor driver the screaming abdabs for the next six months. So then bit by bit, every level crossing in the country has double barriers fitted. Well that's fine, it's good, it will save lives  .

But oh no, then there are several new twats (I'm sure there never used to be so many twats?  ) who insist on going straight through the flashing red lights, playing Russian Roulette with the falling barriers. And again, someone gets killed doing this in some other part of the country.

So then the barrier/lights timing is reset to activate two minutes earlier, right across the country  . But not only that, why not have the barriers rising again A FULL TEN SECONDS AFTER THE BACK END OF THE TRAIN HAS CLEARED THE CROSSING?   

Then over the next few years, with over-population (especially approaching large rail terminii) and perhaps a special extra train service specifically for an airport or such, add a few extra trains per hour.

So then what happens is that the barriers come down way early, and then because another train is coming perhaps even as much four minutes later, even when that train has departed, the barriers stay down. And then depending on the timetable, rinse and repeat. I have frequently had to wait 15 minutes for three or four trains to clear.

And you end up with such a tailback on either side, that people desperate to get across tailgate each other, and then the traffic can suddenly stop because 300m up the road, someone stops to turn right and the queue coming the other way hasn't left a gap for them. Which of course increases the likelihood of someone getting stuck on the tracks. In effect, the crossing has caused such a bad blockage that it raises the risk of a fatal accident on the crossing.

I actually spent fifteen minutes writing a letter to my local rail network, highlighting all the above points. As expected, they simply sent back a formulaic letter which actually addressed none of my points directly, simply said we need to run a safe railway or whatever. Of course it was a whole page to say nothing more than that, and it was written in corporate-speak  .

Hope this makes you feel better about your local one anyway 

Try driving through London as I am having to do frequently now, There are so many phases on traffic lights for traffic, cycles and pedestrians, so many blocked side streets and no right turns you have one choice, the highway or no way.

3 am and sat at lights so long I witnessed the story I told you on the other thread, back in the day " professional lol " drivers working the streets of London had a challenge, Kings cross to the Paddington flyover, or vice versa, without stopping, green lights all the way, Kings Cross to St Pancras is barely possible now.

14000 black cab drivers have turned it in, the ones I talk to out in Essex say it was not the pandemic, that was just the final push. The knowledge scrapped soon anybody? Outdated maybe, but the biggest danger on the roads of London is Uber drivers stopping for no apparent reason and without warning, to look at jobs on the phone stuck to the windscreen. The 20 mph limits are because of them  .

Not as long as your rant WW, but a rant all the same. any sensible " twat " could do better than our road planners.

[Taggart]

To reply to the OP, it is probably this. In simple terms.

First you need to understand a railway line is broken down in to what are called ‘sections’ and only one train can occupy a section at any one time.  It’s a safety thing that has been in existence for 100+ years.

Having looked at Google, the south end of Motspur Park platform looks close to the level crossing, so the station and crossing are in the same section. It’s configured this way for safety.

Most level crossings are protected by a signal. Shows red when barriers are up and traffic flowing. But when a train is coming, barriers are lowered, signal turns green and train can enter/pass into that section. So in this case train can enter station platform after barriers come down, but there will be an additional delay while passengers get off/on, doors closed and driver given ok to proceed. With me so far?

However, as a further protection to crossing users, should the train driver  brake late or train skids on wet or greasy rail, a train cannot enter a platform close to a crossing unless barriers are down (and signal green). Saves clearing up the mess if driver overruns.

Yes it’s a ball ache, but it’s a procedure for everyone’s safety.

If a train, as noted above, arrives and departs and another is coming the other way, then barriers remain down. Trigger points for the barriers can be up to a mile away to allow time to clear the crossing and lower the barriers.

I should add that level crossings pose the biggest risk to railway safety and many have been closed, no new ones will be authorised, but in many locations it’s something you have to live with. Many take risks but the train always wins.

[Marmalade]

External Link/Members Only

Typical of modern YouTube blogger videos. Five minutes irrelevant waffle, 15 seconds answer to the question and that isn’t really an answer, then another two minutes of silly photo-op and reminders to subscribe. 

[timsussex]

Most crossings are single barrier and automatically triggered by a train

however nearly all double barrier crossings are signalman operated he (or she) has to close one pair  of gates ensure no idiot is on the crossing before closing the second pair

There are a few automated double gate ones with a radar system to chec no one gets trapped

is the problem crossng a double barrier type by any chance ?  they are always slower and if some lazy jobsworth is in charge can be really slow

[Stevelondon]

Most crossings are single barrier and automatically triggered by a train

however nearly all double barrier crossings are signalman operated he (or she) has to close one pair  of gates ensure no idiot is on the crossing before closing the second pair

There are a few automated double gate ones with a radar system to chec no one gets trapped

is the problem crossng a double barrier type by any chance ?  they are always slower and if some lazy jobsworth is in charge can be really slow

Double barrier.    But I’m not sure they are controlled by a signalman.

BTW.    This was just meant as a bit of banter and I fully understand the need for safety etc.

One the worst cases of bad thinking with regard to a level crossing. Was the one just down the line from Motspur Park at West Barnes Lane.
Cars going over the crossing from WBL did not have the right of way at the T Junction immediately after.
Therefore making it easier for bad drivers or drivers not paying full attention to the road. Sometimes having to stop on the crossing itself if the exit was not clear.
It’s changed now thankfully but yet another sign that road/rail planners can be idiots.

Hidden Image/Members Only

[petermisc]

Looks to be a crossing where the barriers close off both entrance and exit lanes.  Entrance barriers close first, then exit barriers.  With this type of crossing, there has to be some way of checking that there isn't anything trapped between the barriers.  In most cases, this will be a signalman. 

The signalman may be nowhere near the crossing, he may be looking at it by CCTV.  The cameras will usually be on tall poles next to the crossing.  Can't see any such cameras or poles in your photo, but they could be cut off the edge of the photo.  Even where a signalman is monitoring the crossing, that doesn't mean that he is opening and closing the barriers - in most cases this is done automatically, all the signalman does is check that there is nothing on the crossing once the barriers have automatically lowered, before he clears the signal for the train to go over the crossing. 

The barriers have to be down and the signalman has to clear the stop signal in sufficient time that the train driver doesn't start braking for the stop signal, which would happen if he sees a warning at any of the signals before that.  So in practice the train will be a LONG way away when the crossing starts to close.

On a double-line railway, when a train passes over the crossing, if there is a second train approaching on the other track, then the crossing will only re-open if there is time for it to re-open, a reasonable amount of road traffic to pass over, and for the crossing to then re-close, all without delaying the second train.  The same will apply if there is then a third train approaching when the second train passes over, and so on.  There are some crossings on very busy commuter lines in South London that can be closed while four or more trains pass over.

[petermisc]

Most crossings are single barrier and automatically triggered by a train

however nearly all double barrier crossings are signalman operated he (or she) has to close one pair  of gates ensure no idiot is on the crossing before closing the second pair

There are a few automated double gate ones with a radar system to chec no one gets trapped

is the problem crossng a double barrier type by any chance ?  they are always slower and if some lazy jobsworth is in charge can be really slow

There have been a number of single-barrier crossings where the locals have campaigned to have them converted to double-barrier as they are safer.  Of course, there is then an outcry once the crossing is converted, because the barriers are down for a LOT longer.

[winkywanky]

To reply to the OP, it is probably this. In simple terms.

First you need to understand a railway line is broken down in to what are called ‘sections’ and only one train can occupy a section at any one time.  It’s a safety thing that has been in existence for 100+ years.

Having looked at Google, the south end of Motspur Park platform looks close to the level crossing, so the station and crossing are in the same section. It’s configured this way for safety.

Most level crossings are protected by a signal. Shows red when barriers are up and traffic flowing. But when a train is coming, barriers are lowered, signal turns green and train can enter/pass into that section. So in this case train can enter station platform after barriers come down, but there will be an additional delay while passengers get off/on, doors closed and driver given ok to proceed. With me so far?

However, as a further protection to crossing users, should the train driver  brake late or train skids on wet or greasy rail, a train cannot enter a platform close to a crossing unless barriers are down (and signal green). Saves clearing up the mess if driver overruns.

Yes it’s a ball ache, but it’s a procedure for everyone’s safety.

If a train, as noted above, arrives and departs and another is coming the other way, then barriers remain down. Trigger points for the barriers can be up to a mile away to allow time to clear the crossing and lower the barriers.

I should add that level crossings pose the biggest risk to railway safety and many have been closed, no new ones will be authorised, but in many locations it’s something you have to live with. Many take risks but the train always wins.

Regardless of your point about sections containing only one train, nevertheless the safety margins applied have definitely increased over the last few years, add to that a load of extra trains and the available 'windows' for the barriers to be open become less and less.

And the gap between those windows decreases or even disappears with those extra margins, meaning that drivers end up waiting for several trains.

The period between the arrival of a train and the barriers going down has definitely increased over the last few years, I have witnessed this personally.

[winkywanky]

There have been a number of single-barrier crossings where the locals have campaigned to have them converted to double-barrier as they are safer.  Of course, there is then an outcry once the crossing is converted, because the barriers are down for a LOT longer.

I'd assumed all crossings had double-barriers now, but some quieter rural lines still don't?

I don't see why changing to double barriers would in itself mean barriers are down for longer though? That seems to be a separate issue, and a general change in policy?

[winkywanky]

Most crossings are single barrier and automatically triggered by a train

however nearly all double barrier crossings are signalman operated he (or she) has to close one pair  of gates ensure no idiot is on the crossing before closing the second pair

There are a few automated double gate ones with a radar system to chec no one gets trapped

is the problem crossng a double barrier type by any chance ?  they are always slower and if some lazy jobsworth is in charge can be really slow

My local crossing went double-barrier probably around 15 yrs ago.

The signal box went a long time ago too.

So in my particular case everything seems to be fully automated now.

Perhaps with full automation rather than a human eye to oversee things, safety margins were increased?

[winkywanky]

Double barrier.    But I’m not sure they are controlled by a signalman.

BTW.    This was just meant as a bit of banter and I fully understand the need for safety etc.

One the worst cases of bad thinking with regard to a level crossing. Was the one just down the line from Motspur Park at West Barnes Lane.
Cars going over the crossing from WBL did not have the right of way at the T Junction immediately after.
Therefore making it easier for bad drivers or drivers not paying full attention to the road. Sometimes having to stop on the crossing itself if the exit was not clear.
It’s changed now thankfully but yet another sign that road/rail planners can be idiots.

Hidden Image/Members Only

This is exactly the situation in my locality.

It's almost as if Railways have made themselves 'bulletproof' in terms of level crossing safety, yet the local road congestion caused as a result will inevitably at some point cause an accident with effectively a slow-moving traffic jam going across the tracks.

I guess with the increased margins, trains will have time to stop in that scenario, nevertheless no-one seems to be looking at the overall picture of rail crossing safety as well the effect on local traffic. And the two are inextricably linked.

Something's gotta give 

[winkywanky]

On a double-line railway, when a train passes over the crossing, if there is a second train approaching on the other track, then the crossing will only re-open if there is time for it to re-open, a reasonable amount of road traffic to pass over, and for the crossing to then re-close, all without delaying the second train.  The same will apply if there is then a third train approaching when the second train passes over, and so on.  There are some crossings on very busy commuter lines in South London that can be closed while four or more trains pass over.

This is exactly what's happened with my local crossing.

Sometimes literally just three cars will go through before the lights start flashing again.

[daviemac]

It’s changed now thankfully but yet another sign that road/rail planners can be idiots.

No, it's a sign that some car drivers are idiots, if they haven't got the sense to wait before the lines until there's enough room at the other side they shouldn't be on the road.

At one time people had responsibility for their own actions and took care of themselves, now they need laws and physical barriers to make sure they are safe.

[winkywanky]

No, it's a sign that some car drivers are idiots, if they haven't got the sense to wait before the lines until there's enough room at the other side they shouldn't be on the road.

At one time people had responsibility for their own actions and took care of themselves, now they need laws and physical barriers to make sure they are safe.

Very true davie. But then again it's somewhat inevitable, especially with the frustration caused by having to wait so long to get across, and having been in a queue for possibly 15mins already.

Certainly with my local crossing, it has changed so much. Previously the barriers would come down perhaps 30s before a train would get there. Now it's about two minutes.

It's almost as if the obsession with absolute safety has caused so much driver frustration, that in itself will cause an accident  .

[daviemac]

Very true davie. But then again it's somewhat inevitable, especially with the frustration caused by having to wait so long to get across, and having been in a queue for possibly 15mins already.

Certainly with my local crossing, it has changed so much. Previously the barriers would come down perhaps 30s before a train would get there. Now it's about two minutes.

It's almost as if the obsession with absolute safety has caused so much driver frustration, that in itself will cause an accident  .

The trouble is the main cause of the extra caution by the rail companies is the total lack of common sense by the motorists. If drivers would just stop when the lights start to flash they could leave it a bit later to but the barriers down but they don't. Nobody has any patients these days so they have to allow extra time to compensate.

[winkywanky]

The trouble is the main cause of the extra caution by the rail companies is the total lack of common sense by the motorists. If drivers would just stop when the lights start to flash they could leave it a bit later to but the barriers down but they don't. Nobody has any patients these days so they have to allow extra time to compensate.

Absolutely that. Like so many other things, the few idiots mess it up for the many.

It's just where you draw the line really? Pandering to the idiots or recognising the vast majority do the right thing.

Obviously lives are at stake. If it were only the idiots bringing about their own demise that's one thing, but the poor train drivers have to put up with this shit, it can wreck their lives. Plus all the forms to fill in  .

I think overall we have become much more health and safety conscious over the last 20-30yrs. There were always a very few, isolated deaths at crossings. I have no idea whether they have become more frequent? But the reaction has certainly become more proactive, perhaps excessively so IMO.

[petermisc]

I'd assumed all crossings had double-barriers now, but some quieter rural lines still don't?
I don't see why changing to double barriers would in itself mean barriers are down for longer though? That seems to be a separate issue, and a general change in policy?

I don't know the figures, but there are still a lot of crossings with single-barriers, several I can think of near me.  Also of course a lot of crossings with just the flashing lights and no barriers at all.   Again, several near me.

Crossings with only entrance barriers cannot trap cars on the crossing, and should not be used in places where traffic will backup over the crossing.  So there is nothing to prove that there is no car on the crossing, and indeed in many cases there is no way of stopping the train in time if there were.  The barriers close, and 30 seconds or so later the train passes over.

Crossings with exit barriers can trap cars on the crossing.  They therefore need something to prove that a car isn't trapped on the crossing (in most places, currently a signalman watching through CCTV), before a train is allowed over the crossing.  As I posted previously, this all has to happen well before the train driver can see the signal where he would start braking.  So typically for crossings with exit barriers, the crossing has to close 2 minutes or so before the train arrives.

[petermisc]

It's almost as if Railways have made themselves 'bulletproof' in terms of level crossing safety, yet the local road congestion caused as a result will inevitably at some point cause an accident with effectively a slow-moving traffic jam going across the tracks.

One of the bugbears of anyone involved in the rail industry is the different safety levels expected by the public, and imposed by the government, on rail as opposed to road.  Just one rail accident, even if no-one is killed, causes a massive outcry, yet thousands are killed on the roads every year and no-one bats an eyelid.  I am not saying that we should make the railways less safe, but the endless quest for absolute safety on the railways comes at an ever-increasing cost, which someone has to pay for.

For many years, level crossings have been one of the top causes of rail accidents.  Almost all down to road-user stupidity.  An increasing number down to pedestrians, cyclists and even drivers distracted using electronic devices.

[winkywanky]

I don't know the figures, but there are still a lot of crossings with single-barriers, several I can think of near me.  Also of course a lot of crossings with just the flashing lights and no barriers at all.   Again, several near me.

Crossings with only entrance barriers cannot trap cars on the crossing, and should not be used in places where traffic will backup over the crossing. So there is nothing to prove that there is no car on the crossing, and indeed in many cases there is no way of stopping the train in time if there were.  The barriers close, and 30 seconds or so later the train passes over.

Crossings with exit barriers can trap cars on the crossing.  They therefore need something to prove that a car isn't trapped on the crossing (in most places, currently a signalman watching through CCTV), before a train is allowed over the crossing.  As I posted previously, this all has to happen well before the train driver can see the signal where he would start braking.  So typically for crossings with exit barriers, the crossing has to close 2 minutes or so before the train arrives.

Interesting point: the single barriers are actually possibly safer, you can actually escape rather than become trapped.

I suspect in modern day very busy locations then, they might be safer? Accept that a very few twats will try it on, but at least they get a chance to escape  .

So from what you are saying, the sequencing at my local crossing got fucked up as a direct consequence of putting double barriers in, causing many hours of frustration and tailback misery every bloody week. Infact, actually causing more danger sometimes, perhaps for more 'innocent' people who would never run a light.

[winkywanky]

One of the bugbears of anyone involved in the rail industry is the different safety levels expected by the public, and imposed by the government, on rail as opposed to road.  Just one rail accident, even if no-one is killed, causes a massive outcry, yet thousands are killed on the roads every year and no-one bats an eyelid.  I am not saying that we should make the railways less safe, but the endless quest for absolute safety on the railways comes at an ever-increasing cost, which someone has to pay for.

For many years, level crossings have been one of the top causes of rail accidents.  Almost all down to road-user stupidity.  An increasing number down to pedestrians, cyclists and even drivers distracted using electronic devices.

Exactly that.

[winkywanky]

You know a lot about this petermisc, either you are an 'insider' to some degree, or possibly just a dedicated trainspotter    .

You need not comment on that of course.

[petermisc]

Interesting point: the single barriers are actually possibly safer, you can actually escape rather than become trapped.  I suspect in modern day very busy locations then, they might be safer? Accept that a very few twats will try it on, but at least they get a chance to escape  .

So from what you are saying, the sequencing at my local crossing got fucked up as a direct consequence of putting double barriers in, causing many hours of frustration and tailback misery every bloody week. Infact, actually causing more danger sometimes, perhaps for more 'innocent' people who would never run a light.

While there is no exit barrier to stop you from escaping from a single-barrier crossing, there is often nothing to stop the train if you can't escape, e.g. if you have broken down on the crossing, or the exit is blocked by something else.  On a slow-speed railway line, the train may be able to stop in time when the train driver sees the obstruction, but trains have very long stopping distances, so on an even moderate-speed line it won't be able to stop.  One of the worst-ever level-crossing accidents in this country was caused when a lorry with a heavy load got stuck on one of these types of crossing, and was hit by a passenger train at something like 70mph.  Which is why these types of crossing are being phased out on high-speed lines, replaced by double-barrier crossings.

The double-barrier crossings are safer, because if you do get trapped on the crossing for whatever reason, the train should not be allowed over the crossing.  This is why this type of crossing should be used wherever traffic can tail-back over the crossing, such as in urban areas.

Yes, changing your local crossing to double-barriers will have caused much more tailbacks and delays.  No, it should not have made it more dangerous, it should have made it safer.  Safety comes at a cost, not necessarily just financial.

[winkywanky]

The double-barrier crossings are safer, because if you do get trapped on the crossing for whatever reason, the train should not be allowed over the crossing.  This is why this type of crossing should be used wherever traffic can tail-back over the crossing, such as in urban areas.

Yes, changing your local crossing to double-barriers will have caused much more tailbacks and delays.  No, it should not have made it more dangerous, it should have made it safer.  Safety comes at a cost, not necessarily just financial.

Why can't we have single barrier crossings but with all the other safety protocols in place?

It seems to me that the only intrinsic safety advantage they have is to stop very late and very stupid speculative zigzagging through a closed crossing.

But in the case of my crossing as I explained earlier, tailbacks are getting so long that cars wanting to turn right across oncoming traffic only 300m up the road (after they have passed the crossing) are making the slow-moving traffic on the crossing have to suddenly stop. Congestion is so bad that even drivers who aren't mental are being drawn into tailgating across the crossing. I've seen a few very nearly come unstuck, they've just made it before the doube barriers come down. With a single barrier they;'d have been able to escape.

So what I'm saying is, my local crossing which used to be single barrier with a 30s gap between barriers down and train arrival, went to double barrier with a two minute wait, in one fell swoop. It's been crap and very congested ever since. The frustration that congestion causes has made it more dangerous IMO.

[Doc Holliday]

I used to live in a town bisected by a railway with multiple crossings. 'When I were a lad' they were actually double gates which swung across the track when opened to traffic, therefore facing the oncoming train and vice versa. These were very mechanical and controlled by turning a large wheel in the signal box close to the crossing. I can recall the signalman looking out of the window and waving me (as a pedestrian) through a small gap before closing them completely to traffic and changing the train signal to green. Traffic flowed very well.

Then came electrification and barriers and eventually CCTV and remote controlling of the gates. By remote that particular group of  crossings is controlled some 20 miles away!!

This results in much longer delays as a relatively small number of staff are in control and so for safety the default position is to keep them closed to traffic. If a train is due in the opposite direction within say 5 minutes they tend not to open them again, especially if they go to the loo 

Progress eh?

The single barrier crossings are controlled by sensors activated by the train and so will allow traffic to flow more freely. No train no barrier down. There was one of those remaining on the stretch of line. I used that where possible. Not without risk of course.

I recall once stopping behind a car as the lights began flashing. Traffic in the opposing direction also stopped. A guy in a Range Rover behind me overtook and zig zagged through the barriers as they began to come down. Given that the delay was only likely to be a couple of minutes you have to ask why? Seen many pedestrians crossing when single barrier was down. A quick glance right and left and off.

This particular crossing was also notorious for some drivers (usually very aged) turning left onto the lines instead of the road which ran parallel.

Once saw a cyclist fed up with waiting at a double barrier and so lifted his cycle over and jumped the barrier. Mind boggling.

[petermisc]

I used to live in a town bisected by a railway with multiple crossings. 'When I were a lad' they were actually double gates which swung across the track when opened to traffic, therefore facing the oncoming train and vice versa. These were very mechanical and controlled by turning a large wheel in the signal box close to the crossing. I can recall the signalman looking out of the window and waving me (as a pedestrian) through a small gap before closing them completely to traffic and changing the train signal to green. Traffic flowed very well.

Then came electrification and barriers and eventually CCTV and remote controlling of the gates. By remote that particular group of  crossings is controlled some 20 miles away!!

This results in much longer delays as a relatively small number of staff are in control and so for safety the default position is to keep them closed to traffic. If a train is due in the opposite direction within say 5 minutes they tend not to open them again, especially if they go to the loo 

Progress eh?

The single barrier crossings are controlled by sensors activated by the train and so will allow traffic to flow more freely.

I would put my money on the double-barrier crossings you mention also being automatically closed by sensors activated by the train, and automatically re-opening after the train.  It is very rare for a group of crossings remotely-controlled to be under full manual control.  All the signaller will be doing is checking the crossing once the barriers have automatically lowered, and clearing the signal.

If the crossings are closed for longer than they used to be when they were gates, my money would be on the railway linespeed having been raised along with the other improvements you mention.  The automatic sensors will be placed based on the fastest possible train speed.  Any train coming at slower speed will take longer to reach the crossing after passing the sensor, and so keep the crossing closed for longer.

The other factor is that with a level crossing with a signalman on site, is that the signalman can see the traffic backing up, and so psychologically has a vested interest in letting it through (in the worst case, if it gets too bad, he may have angry motorists on his doorstep).  He can take a view that it wouldn't harm a particular train to be delayed slightly to let some of the traffic through.  With remote control, he no longer has much if any view of how much traffic is tailing back, he only has a view of the crossing itself.  And even if he does know how much tailback there is, not only does he not have any interest in letting it through, but also nowadays Network Rail gets fined if a train is delayed, so he knows that someone will be demanding an explanation if he delays a train in order to let traffic through.

[petermisc]

So what I'm saying is, my local crossing which used to be single barrier with a 30s gap between barriers down and train arrival, went to double barrier with a two minute wait, in one fell swoop. It's been crap and very congested ever since. The frustration that congestion causes has made it more dangerous IMO.

As I said in my earlier post, the two things come part-and-parcel of the same package.  If you want the safety of a double-barrier crossing (proving that there is no-one on the crossing before letting a train across), then you inherently get the two minute wait.

Yes, the extra congestion it has caused may lead to traffic tailing back over the crossing, and potentially getting trapped on the crossing if the barriers lower.  But the crossing is now being monitored, so if that does happen, the train won't be allowed over.  The signaller should stop the exit barriers lowering if he sees something waiting on the crossing.

Why can't we have single barrier crossings but with all the other safety protocols in place?

I don't see what advantage there would be of going to all the trouble of proving that there is no-one on the crossing, if you leave one half of the crossing open to all-comers.   Once you have proved that there is no-one on the crossing, and you have authorised the train over, the last thing you want is for someone to then zig-zag around in front of the train.  No point in going to all the trouble of proving that the crossing was clear if you are going to allow that.

[Stevelondon]

No, it's a sign that some car drivers are idiots, if they haven't got the sense to wait before the lines until there's enough room at the other side they shouldn't be on the road.

At one time people had responsibility for their own actions and took care of themselves, now they need laws and physical barriers to make sure they are safe.

I understand your point.
I also understand very clearly what I was talking about with regard to the West Barnes Lane crossing.
Having a level crossing exactly on a T junction where cars going over the crossing do NOT have right of way WAS ridiculous on the part of the authorities.
As I said. It’s been changed now.
Why…………… because it was badly thought of in the first place.

I agree about motorists (Not all) being impatient, poor drivers. As for them being idiots. Moot point.

[winkywanky]

As I said in my earlier post, the two things come part-and-parcel of the same package.  If you want the safety of a double-barrier crossing (proving that there is no-one on the crossing before letting a train across), then you inherently get the two minute wait.

Yes, the extra congestion it has caused may lead to traffic tailing back over the crossing, and potentially getting trapped on the crossing if the barriers lower.  But the crossing is now being monitored, so if that does happen, the train won't be allowed over.  The signaller should stop the exit barriers lowering if he sees something waiting on the crossing.
I don't see what advantage there would be of going to all the trouble of proving that there is no-one on the crossing, if you leave one half of the crossing open to all-comers.   Once you have proved that there is no-one on the crossing, and you have authorised the train over, the last thing you want is for someone to then zig-zag around in front of the train.  No point in going to all the trouble of proving that the crossing was clear if you are going to allow that.

But I don't want a double barrier crossing. I guess effectively what I'm saying is why can't it be like it used to be.

But perhaps that would mean having an actual signal box with a real person in it.

And yes, it would probably mean a handful of deaths every year (probably deserved, in the sense of the driver being at fault) for the benefit of the convenience of millions. It's balancing those two things. Also of course, the poor train driver who has to witness Darwinism taking place right in front of him.

[GingerNuts]

But I don't want a double barrier crossing. I guess effectively what I'm saying is why can't it be like it used to be.

But perhaps that would mean having an actual signal box with a real person in it.

And yes, it would probably mean a handful of deaths every year (probably deserved, in the sense of the driver being at fault) for the benefit of the convenience of millions. It's balancing those two things. Also of course, the poor train driver who has to witness Darwinism taking place right in front of him.

You don't mind the occasional train derailment then?

[Stevelondon]

You don't mind the occasional train derailment then?

A mate walked into the pub (Late)
Complaining about someone having jumped in front of the train.
“These fuckers who commit suicide. Bloody inconsiderate” 

[winkywanky]

You don't mind the occasional train derailment then?

You're quite right I hadn't considered that.

I just hate the enormous tailback at my local crossing every day, and it never used to be like that. And as I explained, that will in itself cause an accident one day.

I can't help thinking there is a better solution than the one we currently have.

[petermisc]

I can't help thinking there is a better solution than the one we currently have.

The better solution is to close the road over the level crossing.  And/or build a bridge.  That is what they did in Lincoln, and other places.  Unfortunately in urban areas, it can involve demolishing rather a lot of properties.

[winkywanky]

The better solution is to close the road over the level crossing.  And/or build a bridge. That is what they did in Lincoln, and other places.  Unfortunately in urban areas, it can involve demolishing rather a lot of properties.

Very true, but in most locations that won't be an option.

[Marmalade]

I can't help thinking there is a better solution than the one we currently have.

There probably is, but is it likely?

Consider Germany. Infinite patience. Never crosses their mind to skirt the law or jump a red light. On the other hand, things do tend to have been organised with a degree of scientific precision, so grumbling would be pointless.

On another ‘transport’ dilemma, I am horrified at the awful reception of e-scooters in this country. They are common on the continent and many other countries, even less developed ones: yet here apparently they are so dangerous — as proved by yobs driving into grannies or using them as an escape vehicle after committing an offence  — that for the most part they are sadly banned.

How has Britain fallen so far behind that civilised behaviour can no longer be regarded as the norm?

[winkywanky]

There probably is, but is it likely?

Consider Germany. Infinite patience. Never crosses their mind to skirt the law or jump a red light. On the other hand, things do tend to have been organised with a degree of scientific precision, so grumbling would be pointless.

On another ‘transport’ dilemma, I am horrified at the awful reception of e-scooters in this country. They are common on the continent and many other countries, even less developed ones: yet here apparently they are so dangerous — as proved by yobs driving into grannies or using them as an escape vehicle after committing an offence  — that for the most part they are sadly banned.

How has Britain fallen so far behind that civilised behaviour can no longer be regarded as the norm?

My experience of E-Scooters so far in my area: kids using them after dark on the road, wearing dark clothing and with no lights on, either to see with or be seen. If you hit a pothole (our roads are shit) then the tiny wheels mean you will be sprawled across the road instantly. Do they have brakes? I don't know. Even if they do, they seem to be doing about 15mph and there's no way they will stop effectively in the event of an emergency.

Also, kids zig-zagging through crowded shopping streets on the pavement, on the absolute assumption that everyone in front of them will behave perfectly predictably and not suddenly change direction if they decide to zip quickly into an adjacent shop. Also on the assumption that a little old lady won't be spooked when she suddenly hears a strange noise behind her, making her jump, possibly into its path.

I don't wish to be a wet blanket, I like to see kids having fun, but pretty well every time I have seen these things they are being driven inappropriately. It's not such a big deal if the driver falls off and gets a skinned knee, what concerns me more is the fact that an innocent person who happened to be in the vicinity will get hurt  .

Why can't kids just have bloody bikes? At least they'd propel themselves and get some exercise, there's a fair chance the brakes would work properly, and they would have to use the roads, which although admittedly can be dangerous for them, pose far less risk for others.

Rant over 

[Chorley]

Looks to be a crossing where the barriers close off both entrance and exit lanes.  Entrance barriers close first, then exit barriers.  With this type of crossing, there has to be some way of checking that there isn't anything trapped between the barriers.  In most cases, this will be a signalman. 

The signalman may be nowhere near the crossing, he may be looking at it by CCTV.  The cameras will usually be on tall poles next to the crossing.  Can't see any such cameras or poles in your photo, but they could be cut off the edge of the photo.  Even where a signalman is monitoring the crossing, that doesn't mean that he is opening and closing the barriers - in most cases this is done automatically, all the signalman does is check that there is nothing on the crossing once the barriers have automatically lowered, before he clears the signal for the train to go over the crossing. 

The barriers have to be down and the signalman has to clear the stop signal in sufficient time that the train driver doesn't start braking for the stop signal, which would happen if he sees a warning at any of the signals before that.  So in practice the train will be a LONG way away when the crossing starts to close.

On a double-line railway, when a train passes over the crossing, if there is a second train approaching on the other track, then the crossing will only re-open if there is time for it to re-open, a reasonable amount of road traffic to pass over, and for the crossing to then re-close, all without delaying the second train.  The same will apply if there is then a third train approaching when the second train passes over, and so on.  There are some crossings on very busy commuter lines in South London that can be closed while four or more trains pass over.

There are several crossing along the East Coast mainline that experience huge queues due to the high level of high speed Intercity trains heading from Kings Cross up to Edinburgh and freight and intermodal trains heading to hubs in the north and Midlands. Also a lot of the villages in South Cambridgeshire seem to suffer large tailbacks due to the frequency of Thameslink trains heading to Cambridge up from Brighton via Kings Cross and St Pancras.

[lamboman]

There are several crossing along the East Coast mainline that experience huge queues due to the high level of high speed Intercity trains heading from Kings Cross up to Edinburgh and freight and intermodal trains heading to hubs in the north and Midlands. Also a lot of the villages in South Cambridgeshire seem to suffer large tailbacks due to the frequency of Thameslink trains heading to Cambridge up from Brighton via Kings Cross and St Pancras.

Well done for stating the bleeding obvious 

[winkywanky]

Charming 

[Chorley]

Well done for stating the bleeding obvious 

And there was me trying to give public information so that members with penis compensating Italian supercars could avoid busy level crossings.You can't help some people can you? 

[winkywanky]

And there was me trying to give public information so that members with penis compensating Italian supercars could avoid busy level crossings.You can't help some people can you?