Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2007 11:55:43 GMT
Listening to the news this morning i heard another person has been killed in a car on a level crossing in Norfolk by a Colchester to Norwich express. In this day and age is it not possible to prevent this kind of accident with the use of impedance loops (like the ones used to detect your car at traffic lights) installed between the rails and across the crossing area to automatically detect any large metalic object above them which would not allow signals on the approach to the crossing to turn green. While this would not prevent the brain dead who drive around half barrier crossings it would certainly prevent those intent in parking their cars on the crossing for suicide,vandalism or just breakdown. I'm sure there is something that can be done.
Darren.
|
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Mar 1, 2007 12:11:09 GMT
news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/6407025.stmYour idea has been suggested many times. But in cases such as this the train is already too close to the crossing to be able to stop when the car driver decides to drive round the barriers. The simple solution is for car drivers to stop at the barrier. We can only be thankful that no one on the train was physically hurt although I'm sure the driver is seriously shaken. My best wishes to him or her.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2007 12:34:26 GMT
I suppose it would be a start to replace half barriers with full barriers seeing as some motorists are so dumb and uneducated and cannot be trusted to obey the law. Perhaps they were on their mobile at the time.
Incidently, my boss and i used to spend our lunch hours at a layby near the end of the runway of RAF Brize Norton watching VC10's and Tristars landing. There is a set of flashing red lights like a level crossing but no barriers as the main road passes across the end of the runway track. These are provided for the motorist and landing aircrafts safety and are switched on when an aircraft is on final approach. The VC10 and Tristar cross the road at no more than 30 feet above the road but some motorists continue to travel through the flashing lights. BRAIN DEAD. On occassions the VC10 refueling boom has not retracted fully and drags across the road destroying the wooden perimiter fence. When the planes take off they line up about 80 feet from the primeter fence and when a fully ladden VC10 gives it's four engines full bananas the jet wash blows dust and debries all over the place off the road. These motorists as with level crossings just don't comprehend the consequences of their actions.
|
|
|
|
Post by Chris W on Mar 1, 2007 13:47:15 GMT
Having just walked past an Evening subStandard kiosk this lunchtime, I rather got the impression that this (not in my opinion) QUALITY newspaper was up to its old tricks with an inflammatory front page sweeping statement of: "Car driver dies as express ploughs into level-crossing"   www.thisislondon.co.uk/promotions/article-23363709-details/article.doI wasn't going to waste my time/money in buying it. If the car driver had priority then IMO they are correct, otherwise Lets not speculate further until we find out the facts first! |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Mar 1, 2007 13:54:07 GMT
I suppose it would be a start to replace half barriers with full barriers seeing as some motorists are so dumb and uneducated and cannot be trusted to obey the law. Perhaps they were on their mobile at the time. But at the same time as solving one problem it creates another. The very reason half- (rather than full-) barriers were introduced was to allow an escape for the other dumb and uneducated motorists who keep driving as the yellows turn to red. Lots of'em. By changing to full barriers they would not be able to escape and further accidents would follow, in this case the car being stationary in the direction of travel of the train. Terrifying thought if you're a train driver. Nowhere to go. Too late to stop. As AGC says, the ONLY solution is for motorists to stop once the lights flash...... |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2007 13:54:20 GMT
Personally I think level crossings should be equipped with those tyre spikes you see in one-way parking garage entrances. If the crossing barriers are up, the spikes are up, and woe betide the poor ^%*&@( who tries to beat them!
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Mar 1, 2007 14:01:05 GMT
Personally I think level crossings should be equipped with those tyre spikes you see in one-way parking garage entrances. If the crossing barriers are up, the spikes are up, and woe betide the poor ^%*&@( who tries to beat them! That is VERY clever (if a little expensive)! Hope somebody important reads it. |
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Mar 1, 2007 14:21:58 GMT
Personally I think level crossings should be equipped with those tyre spikes you see in one-way parking garage entrances. If the crossing barriers are up, the spikes are up, and woe betide the poor ^%*&@( who tries to beat them! These gadgets in Manchester and Cambridge seem to work very well. This next one is impressive! |
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Mar 1, 2007 14:45:20 GMT
However, upon reflection, I've realised those rising bollards don't allow anyone caught the wrong side of the barrier to escape. Therefore a device which will stop a vehicle trying to enter but allow one to get out is needed.
|
|
|
|
Post by sm on Mar 1, 2007 14:55:36 GMT
well, here in Perth, we have full barriers, and it's pretty rare for a car to get hit at a level crossing with barriers
been a long time since i can remember one happening, many years atleast...
i think the best idea is to have full barriers, but which will be easily driven through in the case of an emergency, i think if you had the choice of getting hit by a train or a few dents on the bonnet of your car...
|
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Mar 1, 2007 15:15:36 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sm on Mar 1, 2007 15:54:01 GMT
Perth South Africa ofcourse  |
|
|
|
Post by compsci on Mar 1, 2007 16:23:20 GMT
NR are actually trying to remove all full barrier crossings at the moment. This definition covers crossings which have two booms, each covering the full width of the road. These trap vehicles which don't stop in time.
The replacements use four half width booms, with the front boom in direction of travel lowering first, then the rear one a bit later. This allows a vehicle which has moved on to the crossing as it was activated to escape, while stopping anything else from entering.
There will still be some people who attempt to weave through the wrong way. This design may actually be more risky for them as there will be no way out after entering.
The famous Cambridge rising bollards (which wrote off another car today) are far stronger than they look. Put a row of them on both sides and there is no way a trapped vehicle could escape in time, even if fited with a giant angle grinder.
|
|
|
|
Post by sm on Mar 1, 2007 16:33:35 GMT
what if you simpy put the gates far enough away from the rails themselves, so that even if they can't get out, they can move their car safely away?
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Mar 1, 2007 16:44:12 GMT
Perth South Africa ofcourse REALLY, sm - I had assumed you were in the land of the Aussies. Sorry  . Humble apologies. Just goes to show....... |
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Mar 1, 2007 16:46:05 GMT
In some (most?) locations that would work for those that have got trapped inadvertently but it does nothing to deter those who try to beat the train which is the major cause of cars obstructing level crossings.
|
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Mar 1, 2007 16:47:48 GMT
I had assumed you were in the land of the Aussies.. (OT: First unwritten rule of operating a railway - don't make assumptions!  ;D ;D ) |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Mar 1, 2007 18:08:49 GMT
(OT: First unwritten rule of operating a railway - don't make assumptions! ;D ;D ) Definitely not true!!!! If you approach a colour light signal and it is not showing an aspect you ASSUME it to be at danger   ;D |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2007 18:30:14 GMT
Perhaps level crossing lights need to be like road junction lights. Changing from a green aspect to amber then red then the barriers are lowered.
The people who jump these lights must have been caught before by them and relised it takes ages for the train to actually get to the crossing from the time the barriers are down and thought they could get away with it. I wonder if it was a local person that uses that route alot that died or a stranger.
|
|
|
|
Post by agoodcuppa on Mar 1, 2007 18:58:32 GMT
(OT: First unwritten rule of operating a railway - don't make assumptions! ;D ;D ) Definitely not true!!!! If you approach a colour light signal and it is not showing an aspect you ASSUME it to be at danger ;D On the contrary, on is instructed to treat it as a signal at Danger. No assumption needed. ;D ;D |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,772
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 1, 2007 19:21:12 GMT
Well as I understand it, the idea of the yellow light with warning tone at level crossings is the same as the amber traffic light - i.e. stop unless you are too close to do so safely. If there is space (and I appreciate there isn't at all locations) then a way to prevent people driving around half-barriers is to make a raised central reservation between the traffic lanes before and after the crossing, such that drivers physically cannot weave -  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2007 19:25:02 GMT
Chris M's suggestions sounds good to me. Not appropriate for narrow roads, but there must be places where that would work.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2007 20:29:36 GMT
How long before the crossing would the central reservation commence? Or, what you do, is have those flaps that stick up, or spikes that are angled for the direction of travel... if you go against them, you get punctures... Simply but a few rows of these in the road a few tens of metres from the crossing and there you go...
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,772
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 1, 2007 21:00:43 GMT
I think the reservation would extend about three car lengths each side of the crossing. This should have the psychological impact of it being too long to think of going along the wrong side of the road like an overtaking manoeuvre.
The road blockers I think are quite expensive to maintain and do not allow for emergency use of the other carriageway when there is no train coming (although if space allows, providing lay-bys ahead of the crossing for e.g. slow loads would allow cars to get out of the way of emergency vehicles, and tieing them in with the signalling system would, I expect, be very expensive and unreliable. They can also puncture tires which could lead to an increased chance of the vehicle becomming stranded on the level crossing.
Another suggestion is to perhaps to provide some fixed bollards in the six foot (without fouling the loading gauge of course) or, where there is a wide enough crossing, to just make two physically separate crossings with no road surface between the carriageways.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2007 21:04:30 GMT
Of course, where I talked about the spikes, you could also have each emergency vehicle fitted with a transponder that allows them to drop down, a la the bollards in the bus lane clip somewhere on here... This would be quite expensive, given there are lots of crossings on the network.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,772
|
Post by Chris M on Mar 1, 2007 21:15:47 GMT
The bus gate transponders are also unreliable - mostly failing to go down but occasionally coming up under a bus.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 1, 2007 21:26:07 GMT
Hugely expensive, but lets go back to having manned crossings! As indeed most of them were...
|
|
|
|
Post by ttran on Mar 2, 2007 11:01:03 GMT
Perth South Africa ofcourse REALLY, sm - I had assumed you were in the land of the Aussies. Sorry . Humble apologies. Just goes to show....... He's having you on Phil. He's no Afrikaaner. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Mar 2, 2007 12:42:07 GMT
I suppose it would be a start to replace half barriers with full barriers seeing as some motorists are so dumb and uneducated and cannot be trusted to obey the law. Perhaps they were on their mobile at the time. But at the same time as solving one problem it creates another. The very reason half- (rather than full-) barriers were introduced was to allow an escape for the other dumb and uneducated motorists who keep driving as the yellows turn to red. Lots of'em. By changing to full barriers they would not be able to escape and further accidents would follow, in this case the car being stationary in the direction of travel of the train. Terrifying thought if you're a train driver. Nowhere to go. Too late to stop. As AGC says, the ONLY solution is for motorists to stop once the lights flash...... But the impedance loops can also be used to control the exit barriers, ie if something is detected on the crossing they do not lower until the crossing is clear while at the same time indicating an obstruction in the signal control room and keeping the approach signal at red. |
|
|
|
Post by johnb on Mar 2, 2007 12:51:02 GMT
Hugely expensive, but lets go back to having manned crossings! As indeed most of them were... The main problem with manned crossings isn't the cost. If you've got a 100mph railway (as with the one in Norfolk yesterday morning), then you have two options for level crossings. One is to have a signal-protected full-barrier crossing (these are the ones that are manned). Close the crossing before the train reaches the protecting signal, and keep it closed until the train has passed the crossing. The problem here is that the safe stopping time and distance from 100mph is sufficiently high that you'd need to have the crossing closed for several minutes before the train arrived, which would upset motorists quite a lot and induce non-trivial amounts of road rage. The other is to have a crossing that is automatically triggered when the train passes a certain point on the track (at the moment, these have half-barriers for reasons of driving-off safety). The advantage is that it only needs to be closed for ~20 seconds before the train arrives, hence causing far less disruption. The disadvantage is that it allows idiots to kill themselves and others more easily. Converting AHB (automatic) crossings into full barrier signal-protected crossings would be expensive, but the reason it could never happen is because of the impact on road drivers. While some of the bollard/stinger plans are appealing, the problem is that you might end up with an out-of-control tyreless/crippled car coming to a halt on the crossing itself, which is the last thing you want. Overall, keeping AHBs but adding in Chris's dual-carriageway solution wherever possible seems like the least-worst solution, short of closing them all (which would also be fair enough, as long as the Highways Agency rather than Network Rail is landed with the bill for new bridges). |
|
;D ;D )
;D
