How could level crossings be improved to make them safer, easier to use and/or reduce their down time

[BayPaul]

Back to crossings, it is notable, of the ones I'm familiar with (including the Richmond/Egham ones), that each generation of operational update gives longer road closure times than the one before. The old days where there was an individual crossing keeper, who could time it to the second in their box, have been replaced by CCTV from a centre where, purely for the railways' convenience, one operator is running multiple crossings. Then more recently we had the Obstacle Detector fiasco, where NR seemed to be ignoring the regular disruptive failures until local MPs and then the Sec of State had to get involved. Now that we have the paranoid standoff between NR and TOC over delay minutes charges if the train so much as gets a double yellow, no regard whatsoever is meanwhile given to delaying the local inhabitants. And then you have events like the complete incompetence at Athelney, near Taunton, ending up with the fatal crossing accident there.

I do think that there is more work that can be done to ensure that the crossings are closed for an absolute minimum amount of time. Examples would be automatic opening as soon as the train is clear (it always seems to take until the train has disappeared into the distance), not closing a crossing where the station is before it until a few seconds before the train is ready to depart, or reducing line speed (and so signal spacing) when a crossing is before a station that all trains stop at anyway could all work. I'm sure many of these are often done anyway, but I have recently noticed crossings where some or all are not done, and the barrier just stays down for an indeterminately long period with no apparent reason (and as a pedestrian, you might not be able to see what is going on for a train that is coming, but it is very apparent and frustrating if the train is stopped in the station, or if it has gone down a single track line and the barrier is still down).

There has been frequent mention on this thread about how the lights are perfectly acceptable, as any driver using the crossing should know the highway code, and what the lights mean. Something that is not mentioned is that these same lights control the movement of pedestrians, who are not necessarily likely to be familiar with the provisions of the highway code, and who also may well get confused by the order the barriers come down (if walking on the right hand side of the road, the far barrier comes down first, leaving them trapped. Improved lights, perhaps based on the simple green/red man symbol would seem sensible for them. In many places it would also be useful to have a countdown to opening clock, so that users could decide whether to wait or to take an alternative route (though I know the argument is going to be it would be seen as 'a minute to go before the train, I have time to squeeze through...').
Hmmm... I seem to have gone a little off topic, so I will try to bring it back by saying that an optimised level crossing, including these and other features could well help to solve some of the issues in urban areas, without wholescale demolition.

 

[Meerkat]

Don’t forget the option of moving the platform to the other side of the level crossing

 

[Taunton]

The "Everyone will know the Highway Code" approach was found to be invalid in the Sudbury, Suffolk crossing RAIB report, where the heavy goods vehicle driver had a licence for such a vehicle issued in Lithuania, perfectly valid for what was being driven, but had not been through any crossing user training or testing. It was actually criticised in the report that the railway was relying on such testing/training, when they knew that a significant proportion of current HGV drivers had not been through it.

But the most significant thing about crossing lights is they indeed apply to pedestrians, cyclists, etc, who have not necessarily been through any training or explanation of their use.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Don’t forget the option of moving the platform to the other side of the level crossing

This was done at a number of locations on the Marston Vale and does make a difference.

The "Everyone will know the Highway Code" approach was found to be invalid in the Sudbury, Suffolk crossing RAIB report, where the heavy goods vehicle driver had a licence for such a vehicle issued in Lithuania, perfectly valid for what was being driven, but had not been through any crossing user training or testing. It was actually criticised in the report that the railway was relying on such testing/training, when they knew that a significant proportion of current HGV drivers had not been through it.

But the most significant thing about crossing lights is they indeed apply to pedestrians, cyclists, etc, who have not necessarily been through any training or explanation of their use.

With specific regard to pedestrians and cyclists, this is only really a massive issue with automatic half-barrier and open crossings. Where it is a human controlled full barrier crossing, as the one under discussion is, there is no risk posed by someone "jumping the lights", only delay, because the signaller would not clear the signals onto the crossing until they had seen it to be clear. And if you're thick enough to physically jump the closed barrier (as some people unfortunately are), then you're thick enough to Darwin yourself by some other means, too, so I'm not sure to what extent this needs considering when specifically thinking of level crossings (other than in avoiding delay, cost and the trauma caused to the driver of the train).

 

[zwk500]

Don’t forget the option of moving the platform to the other side of the level crossing

This was done at a number of locations on the Marston Vale and does make a difference.

Only where a significant number of trains stop, and the LX is within the overlap. There also needs to be sufficient land for the new platform, and if the road is busy enough to justify moving the platform probably a footbridge and lifts as well. At Egham it's probably worth it, quite a few of the West Coastway ones as well, but it won't make a difference everywhere.

The "Everyone will know the Highway Code" approach was found to be invalid in the Sudbury, Suffolk crossing RAIB report, where the heavy goods vehicle driver had a licence for such a vehicle issued in Lithuania, perfectly valid for what was being driven, but had not been through any crossing user training or testing. It was actually criticised in the report that the railway was relying on such testing/training, when they knew that a significant proportion of current HGV drivers had not been through it.

But the most significant thing about crossing lights is they indeed apply to pedestrians, cyclists, etc, who have not necessarily been through any training or explanation of their use.

Regardless of any length of training, context or other information, a red flashing light is pretty universal for 'STOP, DO NOT ENTER', e.g. Fire Alarm Systems. If you're walking past a sign saying 'STOP When lights flash', A big yellow light and 2 flashing red lights and ignoring the Siren/Bell then I don't know how much clearer it can be made to people. Then add in the infrastructure around a railway, the red warning triangle etc, it's pretty obvious that there's a dangerous hazard approaching when the lights are lit. If other countries' licenses are going to be recognised in the UK, then we need to make sure that there is sufficient coverage of Level crossings, and that our standards for warning of LX hazards are comparable to those countries.

On a related but tangential note, I support Drivers being required to have the latest copy of the highway code in their vehicle at all times. It could be a digital copy, as long as you can produce it if stopped by a policeman. Then any discussion about 'are you aware of what the lights mean?' is settled rather quickly.

 

[Bletchleyite]

On a related but tangential note, I support Drivers being required to have the latest copy of the highway code in their vehicle at all times. It could be a digital copy, as long as you can produce it if stopped by a policeman. Then any discussion about 'are you aware of what the lights mean?' is settled rather quickly.

The lights at a full barrier crossing essentially only protect you from getting whacked round the head by a barrier, or from delay to the trains because people won't stop crossing so the barriers can be brought down. The meaning of a barrier is pretty clear, it is physically in the way, so any driver driving into one just needs a permanent ban for gross stupidity, really.

AHBs (or open crossings) are different due to people swerving round barriers, but this isn't an AHB.

 

[Meerkat]

On a related but tangential note, I support Drivers being required to have the latest copy of the highway code in their vehicle at all times. It could be a digital copy, as long as you can produce it if stopped by a policeman. Then any discussion about 'are you aware of what the lights mean?' is settled rather quickly.

If they can read the Highway Code they can read the sign that tells them to stop when the lights flash!

Rather than move the platform they can also move the protecting signal back, which on old stations with long platforms can just be the signal move and some fencing rather than any building

 

[Taunton]

Regardless of any length of training, context or other information, a red flashing light is pretty universal for 'STOP, DO NOT ENTER', e.g. Fire Alarm Systems. If you're walking past a sign saying 'STOP When lights flash', A big yellow light and 2 flashing red lights and ignoring the Siren/Bell then I don't know how much clearer it can be made to people.

At the fire station near us which has comparable wig-wags for when the fire engine is coming out, you see people driving past quite oblivious to them (including overtaking stopped vehicles) more often than not when activated.

 

[Bletchleyite]

At the fire station near us which has comparable wig-wags for when the fire engine is coming out, you see people driving past quite oblivious to them (including overtaking stopped vehicles) more often than not when activated.

A fire station is certainly somewhere where I'd say it is silly not to simply use normal traffic lights, and indeed some places if I recall now do. Or even use nothing at all, as people tend to give way to emergency vehicles anyway.

I would also agree with the idea of using normal traffic lights at level crossings, certainly ones with barriers, because they are familiar and in most senses* mean the same thing anyway.

* I know not quite, as e.g. emergency services can pass regular lights but not wig-wags, but that's just a matter of tweaking with legislation.

 

[WideRanger]

In Japan, almost all (if not all) Level Crossings are automatic, but with full barriers. There are multiple sensors around the crossing to detect if someone has been caught in the crossing, and often will have emergency buttons if people find themselves caught in the crossing. I suspect that this system is not particularly safer than we have in the UK, but it works pretty effectively. For example, if there is a train scheduled to stop at the platform just before the crossing, the crossing closure process will often only start when the train guard presses the 'train depart' button on the platform (the one that starts the melody to tell the passengers to get on the train in the next few seconds), or automatically as the train is coming to a stop. Trains that are not due to stop prompt the barriers coming down a lot earlier.

There are huge numbers of level crossings in the major cities in Tokyo. They try to keep the barriers down for the shortest time possible, but when the road is running across 6 lines, each of which has a service at least every 6 minutes during the rush hour, there can be periods when the barriers are down for the best part of an hour. Where this causes serious problems, the lines are put underground (for example in the case of the Odakyu line, where the 4 lines - 2 Fast, 2 slow - were put underground on two decks separated by type), or elevated (for example, the Keisei around Kamata which was put a 2 level viaduct, by direction).

There is a much stricter enforcement regime: there will often be police sitting hidden near notorious level crossings looking for people who go through on red, or people who have not stopped before the crossing to check that the route after the crossing is clear. I have seen police picking people up at the rate of one every couple of minutes, at crossings where people have started to 'bend the rules'. The equivalent of a £150 fine, points on the license, and occasionally a time-consuming trip to the police station, rather focuses people's minds, especially when it get reported to employers, if in a company vehicle.

 

[SynthD]

On a related but tangential note, I support Drivers being required to have the latest copy of the highway code in their vehicle at all times. It could be a digital copy, as long as you can produce it if stopped by a policeman. Then any discussion about 'are you aware of what the lights mean?' is settled rather quickly.

That risks road-side rule lawyering. No thanks, accept the ticket and contest it later.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Although the thread title asks how level crossings could be improved to make them safer, shouldn't the emphasis be on educating and/or penalising the idiots that abuse them?

Level crossings are (usually) very safe if respected and used properly

 

[jackot]

Although the thread title asks how level crossings could be improved to make them safer, shouldn't the emphasis be on educating and/or penalising the idiots that abuse them?

Level crossings are (usually) very safe if respected and used properly

Yes, I think more focus should be on informing the public how to use them, with some public information films. Another idea would be to improve measures for those caught being dangerous around crossings, maybe install ANPR numberplate detectors or (higher quality) CCTV to track down people who misuse them.

 

[NoRoute]

There has been frequent mention on this thread about how the lights are perfectly acceptable, as any driver using the crossing should know the highway code, and what the lights mean.

On a related but tangential note, I support Drivers being required to have the latest copy of the highway code in their vehicle at all times. It could be a digital copy, as long as you can produce it if stopped by a policeman. Then any discussion about 'are you aware of what the lights mean?' is settled rather quickly.

This is all very simplistic, sure some people know what the signs mean and wilfully violate the signs and lights, but a proportion of the drivers don't know what they mean or they make an error and fail to respond correctly.

On a railway site I'd assume that people are aware of SPADs, may be aware of historical railway accidents and their causes, where human factors like driver error come into play. They're also likely to be aware of the considerable sums the railways spends on safety systems like AWS, TPWS, ATP to reduce the risk of driver error.

Once you realise that even trained, examined, professional railway drivers can make errors interpreting and responding to basic red stop signals, which justifies substantial investment in safety systems, it seems a bit unreasonable to have no sympathy with the errors which non-expert, non-professional road drivers make encountering an unfamiliar crossing.

 

[HSTEd]

As I said in the other thread, I'm not sure why we don't use do away with wig wags entirely.

For the ambulance thing we could just display an appropriate retroreflector sign below it to demonstrate to emergency service vehicles that they should stop.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Once you realise that even trained, examined, professional railway drivers can make errors interpreting and responding to basic red stop signals, which justifies substantial investment in safety systems, it seems a bit unreasonable to have no sympathy with the errors which non-expert, non-professional road drivers make encountering an unfamiliar crossing.

There is no room for error. They shouldn't be driving then

 

[The exile]

For half-barrier crossings, would those claw things (like used on car park exits) help to stop zig-zags, or would they make them more dangerous when open by encouraging zig-zagging then?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is no room for error. They shouldn't be driving then

Meanwhile in the real world...

 

[Annetts key]

Examples would be automatic opening as soon as the train is clear

A lot of manual and CCTV controlled crossings already have automatic raise. Once the train has been detected as clear of the crossing, the signalling system releases the electrical lock on the crossing, and then if the auto raise switch is set, the barriers will automatically raise and the red lights will go out.

This is now a standard design feature.

not closing a crossing where the station is before it until a few seconds before the train is ready to depart

Again, where possible, this is already done. But in some places, it’s not always as simple as it seems.

I'm sure many of these are often done anyway, but I have recently noticed crossings where some or all are not done, and the barrier just stays down for an indeterminately long period with no apparent reason (and as a pedestrian, you might not be able to see what is going on for a train that is coming, but it is very apparent and frustrating if the train is stopped in the station, or if it has gone down a single track line and the barrier is still down).

Railway signalling, including level crossing controls are complex systems. Which became more complex at or near junctions, or on bi-directional lines, including single lines.

There are often reasons for a crossing being closed for longer than needed. And the reasons are often specific to the crossing. The reason may be related to the requirements at the time of installation, and things are different now.

There has been frequent mention on this thread about how the lights are perfectly acceptable, as any driver using the crossing should know the highway code, and what the lights mean. Something that is not mentioned is that these same lights control the movement of pedestrians, who are not necessarily likely to be familiar with the provisions of the highway code, and who also may well get confused by the order the barriers come down (if walking on the right hand side of the road, the far barrier comes down first, leaving them trapped. Improved lights, perhaps based on the simple green/red man symbol would seem sensible for them. In many places it would also be useful to have a countdown to opening clock, so that users could decide whether to wait or to take an alternative route (though I know the argument is going to be it would be seen as 'a minute to go before the train, I have time to squeeze through...').
Hmmm... I seem to have gone a little off topic, so I will try to bring it back by saying that an optimised level crossing, including these and other features could well help to solve some of the issues in urban areas, without wholescale demolition.

The red road lights (wig-wags) are required by law and are the devices that are deemed to have the authority to control road traffic. Hence no one should proceed past said red road light (wig-wag).
There has to be a minimum of two wig-wags on each side of the crossing. Extra wig-wags are provided if there is a nearby side road.
In addition, bells or electric sounders are provided. And normally there is additional signs.
In my experience, road users (including adult pedestrians) know what the red lights mean. But some people just don’t want to wait.

If it is a full barrier crossing, the crossing must be confirmed as being clear of road users before a train is allowed to approach the crossing. A signaller or crossing keeper will not leave the barriers down with a pedestrian trapped.

Count down clocks are not realistic. As the signalling system does not know how many trains are approaching or how fast the trains are travelling. It’s the signaller or crossing keeper that decides if there is time to open the crossing in between trains.

At the fire station near us which has comparable wig-wags for when the fire engine is coming out, you see people driving past quite oblivious to them (including overtaking stopped vehicles) more often than not when activated.

Just as you see drivers going past the red road (wig-wag) lights on a level crossing even as the first two barriers are half way down (I’ve seen this many, many times). And I often see drivers crossing in front of me at traffic lights while the lights I’m at are changing from amber to green. Nearly every day that I drive in a city in fact.

In the vast majority of cases, I strongly suspect that the driver that is ignoring the red lights knows it’s wrong to ignore the red lights, but due to not wanting to be delayed, ignores them anyway and takes a chance.

For example, if there is a train scheduled to stop at the platform just before the crossing, the crossing closure process will often only start when the train guard presses the 'train depart' button on the platform (the one that starts the melody to tell the passengers to get on the train in the next few seconds), or automatically as the train is coming to a stop. Trains that are not due to stop prompt the barriers coming down a lot earlier.

Some signals and some stations on the mainland U.K. network are provided with push button(s) for drivers to use to start the level crossing sequence. The driver has to then wait for the crossing to close to road users before the signal will clear to a proceed aspect.

They try to keep the barriers down for the shortest time possible, but when the road is running across 6 lines, each of which has a service at least every 6 minutes during the rush hour, there can be periods when the barriers are down for the best part of an hour.

There are some crossings similar to this in England. Where the number of train movements does result in a level crossing being closed to road traffic for rather long periods of time. Unless someone finds a pot of money to build a suitable bridge, unfortunately there is not much that can be done that will make any significant difference.

There is a much stricter enforcement regime: there will often be police sitting hidden near notorious level crossings looking for people who go through on red, or people who have not stopped before the crossing to check that the route after the crossing is clear. I have seen police picking people up at the rate of one every couple of minutes, at crossings where people have started to 'bend the rules'. The equivalent of a £150 fine, points on the license, and occasionally a time-consuming trip to the police station, rather focuses people's minds, especially when it get reported to employers, if in a company vehicle.

But do we try better education or try enforcement?
At the moment, the railway favours education, Network Rail tries to go to schools to explain level crossing safety to the children.

As I said in the other thread, I'm not sure why we don't use do away with wig wags entirely.

The red road lights in the wig-wags are deliberately designed to be bright and attention grabbing. I’m certain that providing normal style traffic lights will make no difference at all. And given how often I see road vehicle drivers jump the normal traffic lights at normal road junctions, it may actually be worse.

Besides, it would require a change in the law, and I don’t see any political party backing this idea.

 

[zwk500]

Once you realise that even trained, examined, professional railway drivers can make errors interpreting and responding to basic red stop signals, which justifies substantial investment in safety systems, it seems a bit unreasonable to have no sympathy with the errors which non-expert, non-professional road drivers make encountering an unfamiliar crossing.

We're not talking about a technical element such as priority judgement or yellow box junctions. This is a clear hazard, with several indications, in order of readability:
- The general infrastructure of a railway
- A Red Warning triangle indicating the level crossing
- A written instruction to 'STOP when lights flash'
- A yellow box marking or 'keep clear' markings on the crossing.
- A Steady Yellow light, which in all other road contexts means 'Stop unless unsafe to do so'
- A siren/bell to give audible warning of danger
- A red and white barrier that moves to close the road
- Multiple Flashing Red Lights, a universal symbol for danger and to keep clear.

What more do people need to know this is something you shouldn't mess about with? And why does anybody think adherence to ordinary traffic lights will be any better?

 

[Annetts key]

One other point. Strangely enough, when there is a police presence at a level crossing, no one jumps the lights…

 

[Bald Rick]

One other point. Strangely enough, when there is a police presence at a level crossing, no one jumps the lights…

Not always. I have been present with very visible BTP (and a camera van) and watched someone not only jump the lights but also take off a barrier. He (literally) felt the long arm of the law before he was even out of his van!

Getting that barrier back on was a right pain too.