Thoughts about level crossings

[edwin_m]

I have had to stop at crossing wig-wag lights from time to time, but it always worries me that the guy behind will not agree with my decision, and drive round my stopped car and cross the line. There's an element of " - See, it was OK after all" to it, but of course it is my imagination that supplies that bit. One time, stopped at a crossing (Banbury Lane and West Coast Main Line) I had three other drivers who came from behind, follow-my-leader style, between flashing light commencement and barrier coming down, and right under the eye of the crossing keeper too. Is there an element of " If he can do it, so can I" to that?

The forces at work here are not easily understood because they lie in the minds of a diverse bunch of drivers, who will all react differently. The fact that transgressions continue demonstrates that the matter has not yet been settled, and the deficiency is not in the equipment, but in the minds of those who have to use it.

The latest report on RAIB has a somewhat similar situation with pedestrians, where each one held the gate open for the next one, who assumed it must be OK despite the red light coming on. The keeper had to physically intervene to prevent an accident.

Report 04/2022: Near miss at Farnborough North footpath level crossing

RAIB has today released its report into a near miss at Farnborough North footpath level crossing, 19 May 2022.

www.gov.uk

 

[Llanigraham]

Interestingly I often find that by driving in lane 1 at 70mph I undertake a sizeable number of vehicles doing well under the speed limit.

Fun place for that is at the bottom of the M5 at Exeter where I can be doing 60 in the inside lane towing the caravan whilst the outer lane plods along at 40.

 

[Peter Sarf]

As has already been said by others, myself included, the answer is a "zero tolerance" approach. ANPR cameras at all but the quietest crossings (starting with the ones most abused), which are ALWAYS on and ALWAYS lead to a penalty. It would require new legislation to do so, but if the penalty was a £500 charge (I've taken care not to say "fine" lest the pedants among us squeal about how only courts can issue fines, despite "fine" being common if technically incorrect parlance!) and 10 points... the message would get through pretty quickly.

Easiest approach that does not require legislation changes and all the faff that is required to get it is to make sure that most crossings have cameras and transgressions were always followed up. There would be no need to work on increasing the punishment because regular offenders would quite quickly rack up the required multiples of 3 points to ban them anyway. They cannot make an excuse/appeal over all of them. That would avoid the risk of kick back from those thinking the punishment is over the top and trying to stop legislation. It follows that those who only transgress once must have learnt.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Easiest approach that does not require legislation changes and all the faff that is required to get it is to make sure that most crossings have cameras and transgressions were always followed up. There would be no need to work on increasing the punishment because regular offenders would quite quickly rack up the required multiples of 3 points to ban them anyway. They cannot make an excuse/appeal over all of them. That would avoid the risk of kick back from those thinking the punishment is over the top and trying to stop legislation. It follows that those who only transgress once must have learnt.

One transgression in terms of alcohol or drugs is enough for a ban. Jumping the lights at a crossing is potentially just as dangerous in terms of risk to both the transgressor themselves, and innocent others.

 

[Peter Sarf]

One transgression in terms of alcohol or drugs is enough for a ban. Jumping the lights at a crossing is potentially just as dangerous in terms of risk to both the transgressor themselves, and innocent others.

That's a point. So maybe simpler as just moving crossing misbehaviour up to an existing level.

 

[Meerkat]

Oh yes that as well. So few use lane one there must be broken glass spread over it !.

TBF there are places, particularly on the M25 and M26/M20 where I wont go in lane one because the lorries have rutted it so badly - makes my car tramline or sway and I start to think my steering has gone loose.

Fun place for that is at the bottom of the M5 at Exeter where I can be doing 60 in the inside lane towing the caravan whilst the outer lane plods along at 40.

Isn't that people being a bit previous on the A30/A38 split, particularly holiday traffic that knows it happens but don't know how far along and are worried about forcing a lane change when its busy?

 

[BrianW]

TBF there are places, particularly on the M25 and M26/M20 where I wont go in lane one because the lorries have rutted it so badly - makes my car tramline or sway and I start to think my steering has gone loose.

Isn't that people being a bit previous on the A30/A38 split, particularly holiday traffic that knows it happens but don't know how far along and are worried about forcing a lane change when its busy?

My thought too- a bit off-topic, tho relating to driver behaviour.

Easiest approach that does not require legislation changes and all the faff that is required to get it is to make sure that most crossings have cameras and transgressions were always followed up. There would be no need to work on increasing the punishment because regular offenders would quite quickly rack up the required multiples of 3 points to ban them anyway. They cannot make an excuse/appeal over all of them. That would avoid the risk of kick back from those thinking the punishment is over the top and trying to stop legislation. It follows that those who only transgress once must have learnt.

I like this idea. I would imagine that tech exists to trigger camera (or alert re 'enforcement') at same time as train triggers wig-wags and barriers when a vehicle passes under a closing barrier. 'Wrong way' would also indicate crossing a solid white line? This endangerment must surely be at least dangerous driving.

 

[Llanigraham]

My thought too- a bit off-topic, tho relating to driver behaviour.

I like this idea. I would imagine that tech exists to trigger camera (or alert re 'enforcement') at same time as train triggers wig-wags and barriers when a vehicle passes under a closing barrier. 'Wrong way' would also indicate crossing a solid white line? This endangerment must surely be at least dangerous driving.

All that is needed is for the camera to be switched on when the yellow lights are illuminated.

 

[edwin_m]

With the advent of cheap and inconspicuous cameras, I believe many crossings on NR do now have them fitted. I'm not sure if they can be used as evidence in a prosecution unless they are made conspicuous as with speed cameras.

 

[Meerkat]

With the advent of cheap and inconspicuous cameras, I believe many crossings on NR do now have them fitted. I'm not sure if they can be used as evidence in a prosecution unless they are made conspicuous as with speed cameras.

AIUI speed cameras don't have to be bright yellow - its just done as they are supposed to be deterrents. In fact the ones on the backs of overhead gantries are often pretty hard to spot, even if you know what you are looking for.
The LC ones are bright yellow.

 

[Krokodil]

We certainly want to deter people from offending in the first place, rather than it getting to the stage of an offence being committed that warrants a prosecution.

 

[Dr_Paul]

... they assume they'll have a good bit of leeway before a train arrives...

I think that's the main reason. Drivers know that crossing the stop-line on the amber can often be very risky, as other drivers will sometimes start off on the red/amber, and not all junctions have an all-red sequence. However, it's often the case with level crossings that a good half-minute or more goes by before before a train arrives, so there's plenty of time to get across. Of course, a train might arrive at the crossing in a little less time than that...

 

[fishwomp]

I beg to differ on the last point, at least if you're talking about seeing them in operation, it's certainly been well over a year since I last saw one simply because there are no routes I drive which include level crossings. There are less level crossings around now than there used to be and those that do exist don't tend to be on major roads (there are exceptions obviously).

Agreed. I'd cross a level crossing about four times a year. Given most level crossings are open far more often than they are not - chances of seeing them lit are actually pretty slim. As more and more crossings are being replaced by bridges or being shut outright, then my encounters continue to decrease in frequency!

I just read Network Rail's instructions on the use of... https://www.networkrail.co.uk/commu...-crossing-safety/level-crossings-for-drivers/

Warning lights​

1. The majority of road crossings have amber and red warning lights.
2. We must stop when the amber lights come on, unless our vehicle has already crossed the stop line.
3. We must stop when the red lights flash.
4. We need to remain stationary until the lights stop flashing – there may be more than one train.
5. A few crossings have red and green lights. We must only cross when the green lights are showing.

So, apparently, if doing, say, 30mph we must stop if the amber lights come on and we are 10m ahead of the stop line.. that would be rather dangerous - as you would stop on the crossing itself in all likelihood.. Hopefully no-one is daft enough to do that. It ought to say 'if it is safe to do so without passing the stop line or getting shunted up the backside by the car behind you'..

 

[Bikeman78]

The latest report on RAIB has a somewhat similar situation with pedestrians, where each one held the gate open for the next one, who assumed it must be OK despite the red light coming on. The keeper had to physically intervene to prevent an accident.

I've never thought like that. I'll never assume that just because someone else does something, it must be fine. I've taught my kids to think the same. Use your eyes and ears and decide for yourself.

 

[66701GBRF]

It's more like five minutes, even ten on a mainline. These days that's the difference between getting to work on time and getting your last warning. A stupid decision made for seemingly rational reasons. People have also surely grown used to the idea the lights start flashing well before a train arrives, so in that respect, it can seem like a very low risk, risk.

If a 5 or 10 minute stop at a level crossing is enough to make you late then I'd suggest you are not leaving early enough, particularly if your on a last warning.