• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Sounding the horn for crossings?

Status
Not open for further replies.

Stigy

Established Member
Joined
6 Nov 2009
Messages
4,967
The thing that gets me is this "low tone only" thing they do these days. It's completely wrong, because it makes it not sound like a train. The two-tone train hooter is a highly distinctive sound, but it needs both the tones to be so. With only one tone it sounds more like a road vehicle somewhere out of sight. And it's neither less loud nor of significantly less duration than hooting both tones, so the excuse about not disturbing people doesn't wash.

In any case, if they really did care about not disturbing people they would get rid of those appalling shrieking sirens they install at the level crossing itself. They are loud even from within the train, they are much worse from outside, and they go on and on making that terrible noise for a very long time. And there is invariably at least one house right next to the crossing, inhabited by gibbering wrecks who have been driven insane by the racket until they ended up shoving knitting needles into their ears as the only way to get a bit of relief. It always amazes me that they keep on working, and people haven't squirted builders' expanding polyurethane foam into the things to shut them up.
The audible sirens are either silenced or “turned down” at night for this reason. However, during the day, they’re loud and piercing for a reason.

People move next to railways and level crossings, which 9 times out of 10 have been there for decades, often before the homes were built, and moan about the noise? I get that level crossing sirens have evolved over time and used to be bells essentially, which weren’t so piercing, but they’ve been like they are now generally, for a good 20 years or so.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

800301

Member
Joined
29 Dec 2022
Messages
540
Location
Essex
The audible sirens are either silenced or “turned down” at night for this reason. However, during the day, they’re loud and piercing for a reason.

People move next to railways and level crossings, which 9 times out of 10 have been there for decades, often before the homes were built, and moan about the noise? I get that level crossing sirens have evolved over time and used to be bells essentially, which weren’t so piercing, but they’ve been like they are now generally, for a good 20 years or so.

I know of one location where a person had been complaining for years but eventually moved but the new people that have moved in are now filming and complaining much more about trains idling…
 

43066

Veteran Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
12,089
Location
London
I know of one location where a person had been complaining for years but eventually moved but the new people that have moved in are now filming and complaining much more about trains idling…

In my view, if someone is stupid enough to buy a house next to a railway that has been there for the best part of two centuries, and then complain about it, they should simply be told to pipe down and get back in their box!

Typical small minded NIMBY “me me me” attitude. The same thing happens with general aviation airfields.
 

Stigy

Established Member
Joined
6 Nov 2009
Messages
4,967
I know of one location where a person had been complaining for years but eventually moved but the new people that have moved in are now filming and complaining much more about trains idling…
We have similar with a resident opposite a depot complaining of idling/running engines etc. probably just after some new double glazing, which they’ll probably end up getting no doubt.
 

Pigeon

Member
Joined
8 Apr 2015
Messages
1,123
In my view, if someone is stupid enough to buy a house next to a railway that has been there for the best part of two centuries, and then complain about it, they should simply be told to pipe down and get back in their box!

Typical small minded NIMBY "me me me" attitude. The same thing happens with general aviation airfields.

And motor sport tracks. I agree. But my point about sirens depends on the fact that they have not been there for the best part of two centuries (and also that they are not a noise which is intrinsic to railway operation). They are a recent invention, and every time one is installed it's a massively greater imposition on the people who live nearby than the noise of trains passing on the railway was when they moved in.
 

AlterEgo

Verified Rep - Wingin' It! Paul Lucas
Joined
30 Dec 2008
Messages
29,503
Location
LBK
And motor sport tracks. I agree. But my point about sirens depends on the fact that they have not been there for the best part of two centuries (and also that they are not a noise which is intrinsic to railway operation). They are a recent invention, and every time one is installed it's a massively greater imposition on the people who live nearby than the noise of trains passing on the railway was when they moved in.
Indeed. And those of us who want railways to be successful, to see more of them, and to advocate for expansion and renewal of services probably ought to also advocate that the railway be good neighbours.

You don’t get anywhere in this country by depressing property prices whether we like that reality or not.
 

43066

Veteran Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
12,089
Location
London
And motor sport tracks. I agree. But my point about sirens depends on the fact that they have not been there for the best part of two centuries (and also that they are not a noise which is intrinsic to railway operation). They are a recent invention, and every time one is installed it's a massively greater imposition on the people who live nearby than the noise of trains passing on the railway was when they moved in.

In relation to horns etc. being added to level crossings I would agree there’s more of an argument.

We have a couple of whistle boards right next to rows of houses. Hearing low tone horns every few minutes between 0600-0000 every day apart from Xmas day, Boxing Day and engineering blockades must get pretty irritating.
 

Ianigsy

Established Member
Joined
12 May 2015
Messages
1,348
Reminds me of travelling from Montreal to Toronto several years ago, with the bell on the loco ringing pretty much constantly for 4 hours!
 

dk1

Veteran Member
Joined
2 Oct 2009
Messages
19,874
Location
East Anglia
does the whistle instruction at Stop boards (darsham and melton) apply all the time 24hrs?)
Yes it does as they are not whistle boards. There are however current no booked trains at either before 06:00 or after 23:59 during normal operations but that is about to change with Sizewell C construction at the latter.
 

Annetts key

Established Member
Joined
13 Feb 2021
Messages
3,816
Location
West is best
Off topic really, but as it’s been raised…
In any case, if they really did care about not disturbing people they would get rid of those appalling shrieking sirens they install at the level crossing itself. They are loud even from within the train, they are much worse from outside, and they go on and on making that terrible noise for a very long time. And there is invariably at least one house right next to the crossing, inhabited by gibbering wrecks who have been driven insane by the racket until they ended up shoving knitting needles into their ears as the only way to get a bit of relief. It always amazes me that they keep on working, and people haven't squirted builders' expanding polyurethane foam into the things to shut them up.

The audible sirens are either silenced or “turned down” at night for this reason. However, during the day, they’re loud and piercing for a reason.

People move next to railways and level crossings, which 9 times out of 10 have been there for decades, often before the homes were built, and moan about the noise? I get that level crossing sirens have evolved over time and used to be bells essentially, which weren’t so piercing, but they’ve been like they are now generally, for a good 20 years or so.
The audible sounders are known as Yodalarms (a brand name), the generic name is industrial audible signalling device.

I don’t know when they were introduced to replace bells, but they were the standard audible warning device for at least 35 years.

Here is some information on them:
YA30
Industrial Audible Signal 105 dB (A)

Yodalarm range. Compact, robust multi-purpose audible signalling device designed for use in industrial applications.

Features

Max sound output 105 db (A) / 1 m
IP66 rated as standard
32 selectable tones meeting international regulations
Stainless steel fixings
2 stage alarm
Independently selectable second stage
Sound selection via 5 way DIL switch
Low current consumption
Robust, reliable and simple to install

Material
Flame retardant ABS enclosure
Although there is a specific model made specifically for use on level crossings for the U.K. railway.

There is more information on the manufacturers web site, link to web site

Crossings where Yodalarm sounders are fitted must have a volume reduction system installed. This includes a timeclock that reduces the sound volume between defined hours (normally night time).

There are normally two Yodalarms fitted, one each on diagonal sides of the crossing.

Note that some crossings, such as Vamos red/green MSL (Miniature Stop Light) crossings use a different type of audible sounders.

The Yodalarms and the volume reduction system are checked and tested as part of the railway crossing equipment maintenance programme.

Here’s an extract of part of the maintenance requirements (I can’t link to source as it’s an internal Network Rail document):
Audible Warning Devices (AWD)
The audible warning is measured at a 3m radius from the source, in normal daytime operating conditions. It should be between 60 dB(A) and 80 dB(A), normally at the higher end of the range.
A site-specific assessment determines the level required at each level crossing, taking into account local conditions, noise nuisance etc.

If members wish to discuss level crossing sounders, it would be wise to start a new topic rather than continuing in this topic.

Moderators, feel free to move this post to a new topic if you wish.
 

Aviator88

Member
Joined
22 Oct 2012
Messages
323
In my view, if someone is stupid enough to buy a house next to a railway that has been there for the best part of two centuries, and then complain about it, they should simply be told to pipe down and get back in their box!

Typical small minded NIMBY “me me me” attitude. The same thing happens with general aviation airfields.

Amen brother.
 

43066

Veteran Member
Joined
24 Nov 2019
Messages
12,089
Location
London
In that case, ignore the flowers - I already had them posted!

Sorry, that was a low blow, but I couldn’t resist :D.

(I don’t actually approve of the “boy” nonsense, which does still exist in some quarters).
 
Last edited:

Aviator88

Member
Joined
22 Oct 2012
Messages
323
Sorry, that was a low blow, but I couldn’t resist :D.

(I don’t actually approve of the “boy” nonsense, which does still exist in some quarters).

Haha it's all good, I enjoyed it :D Your post about GA airfields definitely struck a nerve though - unlike the railways, as you know they have very little to fall back on in the way of government support and subsidies, and often all it takes is a small group of brand new homeowners to start a petition to finish them off, sadly.
 

Alarmkid23

On Moderation
Joined
13 Aug 2019
Messages
68
That is so funny lol

It doesn’t have to be 1.5 seconds for each tone when departing the likes of Darsham up or Melton down. Many confuse it with the 3 second rule (all low tone) that has to be done at (W) boards. I just give a blast on any tone and within the last month was agreed to be correct by my driver manager accompanying me.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==


Me too!! I’m doing testing work with Stadler on Monday so will enquire.
@dk1 how did the testing go with the horn tones? were they deemed too loud or does anything needs changing?
 

12LDA28C

Established Member
Joined
14 Oct 2022
Messages
5,058
The thing that gets me is this "low tone only" thing they do these days. It's completely wrong, because it makes it not sound like a train. The two-tone train hooter is a highly distinctive sound, but it needs both the tones to be so. With only one tone it sounds more like a road vehicle somewhere out of sight. And it's neither less loud nor of significantly less duration than hooting both tones, so the excuse about not disturbing people doesn't wash.

The Rule Book states that only a low tone of the horn needs to be used at Whistle boards however after an incident a few years ago where a 'near miss' occurred at a foot crossing due to exactly the reason you quote, a pedestrian not realising a train was approaching due to not associating the single tone sound with a train, ASLEF issued an instruction to all drivers stating that both tones of the horn should be sounded at Whistle boards going forward. This instruction is still in place AFAIK.
 

Deepgreen

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2013
Messages
7,478
Location
Gomshall, Surrey
I'm just coming back to this thread - is the requirement for single tones at crossings still no closer to be being rescinded in favour of the blindingly-obvious requirement to have two tones? The two-tone horn was designed specifically to be identifiable as a train rather than a lorry, etc., and yet this basic safety element has been removed for no good reason - the noise from a single tone is virtually no less disturbing than a twin, so the benefit of the change was minute, while the risk was surely greatly increased by comparison.
 

12LDA28C

Established Member
Joined
14 Oct 2022
Messages
5,058
I'm just coming back to this thread - is the requirement for single tones at crossings still no closer to be being rescinded in favour of the blindingly-obvious requirement to have two tones? The two-tone horn was designed specifically to be identifiable as a train rather than a lorry, etc., and yet this basic safety element has been removed for no good reason - the noise from a single tone is virtually no less disturbing than a twin, so the benefit of the change was minute, while the risk was surely greatly increased by comparison.

Apparently not. I would certainly advocate using both tones of the horn and many drivers I know do exactly that. Of course there are also plenty of others who comply with the Rule Book to the letter and just use a single tone. It's one of those Rule Book amendments which is a retrograde step and flies in the face of safety, rather like the requirement to sound the horn when passing a signal at danger.
 

Aviator88

Member
Joined
22 Oct 2012
Messages
323
Just out of curiosity, is there an exception in the Rule Book whereby you can perform an action in a way that is overzealous on safety when compared to the 'by the book' method?

For instance, the rule book says you must wait 2 seconds, so you wait 4 seconds (context irrelevant).

Or the rule book says you must sound the low tone at a whistle board, but you sound both.

Etc?
 

Railsigns

Established Member
Joined
15 Feb 2010
Messages
2,754
Just out of curiosity, is there an exception in the Rule Book whereby you can perform an action in a way that is overzealous on safety when compared to the 'by the book' method?

Or the rule book says you must sound the low tone at a whistle board, but you sound both.
After the single tone rule came in, some whistle boards were altered to instruct the use of both tones.
 

driverd

Member
Joined
29 Mar 2021
Messages
910
Location
UK
I have learnt something from you there dk1 - I thought it was 3 seconds like at a whistle board. Glad to be corrected, you have made my day, the less I sound that bloody horn the better!

In fairness I believe this may be a company standard. The rule book doesn't specify and our TOC don't dictate a "duration of horning" (so to speak) o_O.
 

Deepgreen

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2013
Messages
7,478
Location
Gomshall, Surrey
Apparently not. I would certainly advocate using both tones of the horn and many drivers I know do exactly that. Of course there are also plenty of others who comply with the Rule Book to the letter and just use a single tone. It's one of those Rule Book amendments which is a retrograde step and flies in the face of safety, rather like the requirement to sound the horn when passing a signal at danger.
Yes. I live on the North Downs line and I can't remember the last time two-tones were used at the very many crossings here. To confirm further what you say about the signals - I was on a train a few days back which passed a signal at danger at Betchworth (with permission) - no horn, despite it being at a (fully-gated) level crossing, too.
 

LAX54

Established Member
Joined
15 Jan 2008
Messages
3,906
And motor sport tracks. I agree. But my point about sirens depends on the fact that they have not been there for the best part of two centuries (and also that they are not a noise which is intrinsic to railway operation). They are a recent invention, and every time one is installed it's a massively greater imposition on the people who live nearby than the noise of trains passing on the railway was when they moved in.
Recent...1965/67 ? so 58 years :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top