Level Crossing Pedestrian Signal

[bearhugger]

I was at Whitehouse Junction (Teesside) level crossing and noticed a new signal for pedestrians that I assume lights up red when the wig-wam signals start and the barriers come down. Are these now standard for all crossings or just at certain locations?



On closer inspection of another photo, it appears that there is one on each barrier, a total of 4.

 

[MarkyT]

I think they may be standard at MCB-type level crossings that are modernised or renewed. Sometimes wigwags are fairly high or pointing off in an odd direction to catch distant motorists approaching around a curve and may not be so easily visible by pedestrians much nearer the crossing. This covers that with an already well-understood signal for the pedestrian, specifically located for good visibility from the pavement. They're a great idea in my opinion, and now fitted at my local Paignton North crossing, which can be very busy with pedestrian holidaymakers during the summer.

 

[Ken X]

We've got these pedestrian lights at both the level crossings in Horsham, West Sussex.

 

[PP57601]

Lostwithiel L/C in Cornwall has them

 

[LittleRedTrain]

There's at least one at Porthmadog (NR) on the path leading from the eastbound platform to the road.
Visible in this stock photo here, to the left of the barrier:

A Transport for Wales train driver operating level crossing permission equipment at Porthmadog Station, Gwynedd, Wales, July 2023 Stock Photo - Alamy

Download this stock image: A Transport for Wales train driver operating level crossing permission equipment at Porthmadog Station, Gwynedd, Wales, July 2023 - 2RCDC7K from Alamy's library of millions of high resolution stock photos, illustrations and vectors.

www.alamy.com

(Not sure if I'd be allowed to post it directly into the forum).

Presumably to discourage pedestrians that have just got off a train from immediately turning across the crossing without checking.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

Newhaven Town has them

 

[traji00]

Grays has them too as it’s a “pedestrianised” level crossing

 

[bearhugger]

I think they may be standard at MCB-type level crossings that are modernised or renewed. Sometimes wigwags are fairly high or pointing off in an odd direction to catch distant motorists approaching around a curve and may not be so easily visible by pedestrians much nearer the crossing. This covers that with an already well-understood signal for the pedestrian, specifically located for good visibility from the pavement. They're a great idea in my opinion, and now fitted at my local Paignton North crossing, which can be very busy with pedestrian holidaymakers during the summer.

Looks like a great idea to me too.
Perhaps also as in this particular location, Middlesbrough's Riverside football stadium is directly behand where I stood to take the photos in th eoriginal post, and the pub on the other side is very popular on matchdays by all accounts. So possibly these lights might be installed where there is more of a risk of pedestrians trying to cross.

 

[Revilo]

Unlike steady red lights, flashing red lights mean that everyone (eg including emergency services) has to stop. Is the same true of flashing red pedestrian lights?

 

[matchmaker]

Cornton No 1 has them since being changed from AHB to MCB(OD).

 

[edwin_m]

Unlike steady red lights, flashing red lights mean that everyone (eg including emergency services) has to stop. Is the same true of flashing red pedestrian lights?

As we don't have jaywalking laws in the UK, a red pedestrian signal has no legal force, at least in its normal use at a road crossing.

From https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/know-your-traffic-signs/level-crossing-signs-and-signals:

Some crossings have flashing red road traffic signals; these mean STOP (and this applies to pedestrians too).

Flashing pedestrian signals used at some level crossings indicate that it is not safe to cross: pedestrians should stop at the pedestrian stop line.

This wording suggests that the legal requirement for pedestrians to stop is conveyed by the flashing wig-wags, not by the "red man".

 

[norbitonflyer]

Seen them at Wye as well - another place where the wigwags are not inn the line of vision of a pedestrian leaving the station.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

www.google.co.uk

 

[ainsworth74]

I was at Whitehouse Junction (Teesside) level crossing and noticed a new signal for pedestrians that I assume lights up red when the wig-wam signals start and the barriers come down.

Those signals have actually been there since installation of the upgraded crossing. You can see them on a historic Google Streetview whilst the crossing was in the process of being commissioned in late 2021. They're a good idea though I agree!

Looks like a great idea to me too.
Perhaps also as in this particular location, Middlesbrough's Riverside football stadium is directly behand where I stood to take the photos in th eoriginal post, and the pub on the other side is very popular on matchdays by all accounts. So possibly these lights might be installed where there is more of a risk of pedestrians trying to cross.

That crossing is risky enough that it's actually manually controlled on match days! The little hut next to the crossing is staffed by a crossing keeper (I think usually a Mobile Operations Manager) so they can manually control the crossing. It was felt that MCB-OD during times of high pedestrian usage (i.e. just before or after a match) wouldn't be suitably safe. They wanted to use CCTV but that would apparently require design work so I assume they decided it was cheaper and easier to just install manual controls and send a MOM there for a few hours.

When they were renewing the crossing in 2021 they did look at closing it outright. But interestingly it's actually a private crossing (in Network Rail's estimation) rather than a public crossing as it was built by the railway when the line was constructed to allow the famer access to his fields. Obviously over time industry grew up and eventually the railway put a crossing keeper in place (no doubt the cost of the crossing keeper was easily covered by the money made from the traffic generated by that industry!) and appears to have survived through to the present day by accident rather than design due to a failure in the 1980s of BRB to press for closure of the crossing when the Dockside road was built and overbridges provided as part of that (it's necessity as a way of crossing the line therefore falling away). These days it's felt that it would be too tricky to get the agreement of all the relevant landowners (which includes Middlesbrough Football Club) and not worth the time or money to go for a full on Transport & Work Act order (nor provide a pedestrian overbridge which would likely ease the passage of a TWAO). Hence Network Rail sank money into upgrading it back in 2021.*

Apparently there's a 650 page file deep in Network Rail about this crossing and it's history!

*My thanks to an anonymous Network Rail Liability Adviser's 2019 report for the information in that paragraph.

 

[najaB]

That crossing is risky enough that it's actually manually controlled on match days! The little hut next to the crossing is staffed by a crossing keeper (I think usually a Mobile Operations Manager) so they can manually control the crossing. It was felt that MCB-OD during times of high pedestrian usage (i.e. just before or after a match) wouldn't be suitably safe. They wanted to use CCTV but that would apparently require design work so I assume they decided it was cheaper and easier to just install manual controls and send a MOM there for a few hours.

When they were renewing the crossing in 2021 they did look at closing it outright. But interestingly it's actually a private crossing (in Network Rail's estimation) rather than a public crossing as it was built by the railway when the line was constructed to allow the famer access to his fields. Obviously over time industry grew up and eventually the railway put a crossing keeper in place (no doubt the cost of the crossing keeper was easily covered by the money made from the traffic generated by that industry!) and appears to have survived through to the present day by accident rather than design due to a failure in the 1980s of BRB to press for closure of the crossing when the Dockside road was built and overbridges provided as part of that (it's necessity as a way of crossing the line therefore falling away). These days it's felt that it would be too tricky to get the agreement of all the relevant landowners (which includes Middlesbrough Football Club) and not worth the time or money to go for a full on Transport & Work Act order (nor provide a pedestrian overbridge which would likely ease the passage of a TWAO). Hence Network Rail sank money into upgrading it back in 2021.*

Interesting case study in cost/benefit analysis and how it can sometimes work out cheaper to keep doing a "strange" thing than it is to implement the standard "logical" solution.

 

[edwin_m]

Interesting case study in cost/benefit analysis and how it can sometimes work out cheaper to keep doing a "strange" thing than it is to implement the standard "logical" solution.

I'd say it was more about risk assessment. When you have a crowd, the risk is that the people at the front might check it is safe but those following might just follow despite a train perhaps approaching in the meantime. An attendant at the crossing provides a deterrent that CCTV isn't likely to, and a better possibility of getting trains stopped if things get out of hand.

For example, https://www.gov.uk/raib-reports/rep...-at-farnborough-north-footpath-level-crossing

At 08:20 hrs on Thursday 19 May 2022, 144 people were waiting on the east side of the railway to use the footpath level crossing at Farnborough North station. Pedestrian gates on each side of the crossing were locked until a train had departed from the station. The crossing users had arrived on this train and were mostly young people. They were regular users of the station and normally had to wait before crossing the railway to continue their journey to school or college. There is currently no footbridge or subway at this station.

The person at the front of the queue opened the gate and the group started to cross the railway. Each person held the gate open for the person following them.

When around half the group had crossed, the miniature stop lights changed from green to red and the audible warning started, indicating that another train was approaching. The crossing attendant turned the switch to lock the gates, but crossing users continued to pass through the gate until the crossing attendant left their cabin and directly intervened to close it. The driver of a train approaching from around a bend in the track saw people on the crossing ahead and applied the train’s emergency brake and sounded the horn. The crossing was clear before the train passed over it.

 

[najaB]

I'd say it was more about risk assessment. When you have a crowd, the risk is that the people at the front might check it is safe but those following might just follow despite a train perhaps approaching in the meantime. An attendant at the crossing provides a deterrent that CCTV isn't likely to, and a better possibility of getting trains stopped if things get out of hand.

That was actually the point I was making. The "standard" thing to do would have been to implement CCTV monitoring, with all the cost that would bring, against the fact that the main risk was only on say 20 match days a year. So it was more cost effective to do something "odd" by designing in the ability to have a keeper staff the crossing on those days.

 

[styles]

As we don't have jaywalking laws in the UK, a red pedestrian signal has no legal force, at least in its normal use at a road crossing.

From https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/know-your-traffic-signs/level-crossing-signs-and-signals:


This wording suggests that the legal requirement for pedestrians to stop is conveyed by the flashing wig-wags, not by the "red man".

Be interesting if the "red man" came on before the wig-wags for whatever reason, and a pedestrian continued to cross. I wonder if, assuming they get caught, they would be taken to task for some railway offence, or indeed as we currently have being debated on the Far North Line, reckless conduct.

 

[py_megapixel]

Woodsmoor level crossing has had one of these for years. It is situated on a one-way street so has wigwags only on the southern side, but since pedestrians are allowed to walk in either direction a special pedestrian signal was provided on the northern side.

Are there any other examples of similar setups? Can't imagine a level crossing on a one-way street is that unusual.

(Looking on Google Street View it looks like Woodsmoor has now acquired pedestrian signals attached to the wigwag poles on the southern side as well, similar to the photo in the OP)

 

[edwin_m]

Be interesting if the "red man" came on before the wig-wags for whatever reason, and a pedestrian continued to cross. I wonder if, assuming they get caught, they would be taken to task for some railway offence, or indeed as we currently have being debated on the Far North Line, reckless conduct.

As it's controlled by the same high-integrity system that controls the crossing, and may even be on the same circuit as the wig-wags, it's highly improbable that it would light up first unless specifically designed to. There's a potential hazard at AHBs if someone is crossing on foot on the right (from their point of view) and the descending half barrier blocks their exit. I think there would be a safe space between the barrier and the train but the other options of returning to the other side, walking round the end of the barrier or ducking under it all carry some risk.

Woodsmoor level crossing has had one of these for years. It is situated on a one-way street so has wigwags only on the southern side, but since pedestrians are allowed to walk in either direction a special pedestrian signal was provided on the northern side.

Are there any other examples of similar setups? Can't imagine a level crossing on a one-way street is that unusual.

(Looking on Google Street View it looks like Woodsmoor has now acquired pedestrian signals attached to the wigwag poles on the southern side as well, similar to the photo in the OP)

They can probably do that here because it's a full-barrier crossing so the barrier itself would be the legal prohibition on pedestrians continuing onto the crossing. It has cameras so the controlling signaller must have to check that nobody is trapped when they descend.

An AHB on a one-way street is probably quite unusual, because one-way streets tend to be in urban areas where one of the full barrier types is more appropriate. If anyone knows of one I'd be interested to see on Streetview what it has on the exit side - presumably no barrier whatsoever but what lights?

 

[bearhugger]

Be interesting if the "red man" came on before the wig-wags for whatever reason, and a pedestrian continued to cross. I wonder if, assuming they get caught, they would be taken to task for some railway offence, or indeed as we currently have being debated on the Far North Line, reckless conduct.

As it's controlled by the same high-integrity system that controls the crossing, and may even be on the same circuit as the wig-wags, it's highly improbable that it would light up first unless specifically designed to. There's a potential hazard at AHBs if someone is crossing on foot on the right (from their point of view) and the descending half barrier blocks their exit. I think there would be a safe space between the barrier and the train but the other options of returning to the other side, walking round the end of the barrier or ducking under it all carry some risk.

They can probably do that here because it's a full-barrier crossing so the barrier itself would be the legal prohibition on pedestrians continuing onto the crossing. It has cameras so the controlling signaller must have to check that nobody is trapped when they descend.

An AHB on a one-way street is probably quite unusual, because one-way streets tend to be in urban areas where one of the full barrier types is more appropriate. If anyone knows of one I'd be interested to see on Streetview what it has on the exit side - presumably no barrier whatsoever but what lights?

I went to the level crossing in my original post to observe what happens, as @styles had piqued my curiosity. I took some video, which I am in the process of downloading & editing and I shall try to add later.
The steps at Whitehouse Jn.(Teesside) level crossing are:

1. Amber light on wig-wams illuminates briefly
2. Red lights on wig-wams & the red pedestrian light then flash simultaneously
3. All barriers lower (two barriers on each side that meet in the middle)
4. Rail traffic passes
5. Barriers raise
6. lights go off

EDIT: Link to YouTube video of lights sequence: Whitehouse Jn pedestrian light sequence

 

[William3000]

They have had these at the Fen Road level crossing just south of Cambridge North station for 5 or 6 years.

 

[ricoblade]

I was impressed on Saturday that an obscure public footpath crossing at Hampole, just south of South Elmsall, had green/red lights, especially as on one side, the path was invisilbe, had not been used for a while and was overgown shrubs. There are foot crossings near Retford that are used far more frequently that have no lights.

 

[plugwash]

This wording suggests that the legal requirement for pedestrians to stop is conveyed by the flashing wig-wags, not by the "red man".

Interestingly in Woodsmoor there is a level crossing which is one-way for vehicles but two-way for pedestrians. The side from which cars can enter has a pair of traditional wig-wags, but the side from which only pedestrians can enter has a pair of flashing red men and no wig-wags.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

www.google.com

 

[edwin_m]

Interestingly in Woodsmoor there is a level crossing which is one-way for vehicles but two-way for pedestrians. The side from which cars can enter has a pair of traditional wig-wags, but the side from which only pedestrians can enter has a pair of flashing red men and no wig-wags.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

www.google.com

That's the same one mentioned in #18 and following posts - I believe the legal prohibition on pedestrians crossing is conveyed by the full barriers in this case.

 

[MarkyT]

That's the same one mentioned in #18 and following posts - I believe the legal prohibition on pedestrians crossing is conveyed by the full barriers in this case.

Sands Road crossing at Paignton is also one way. There's no practical way you could limit pedestrian flow to one way, and they're less likely to break through the gate.

East (beach) side.

West side

 

[norbitonflyer]

Feltham level crossing (now closed to make way for a platfoprm extension) used to be one way

Both level crossings in Lincoln are one way, albeit the High Street is now limited access. All three are/were full barriers and, as I recall, have/had wig wags on both sides.

 

[dorsetdesiro]

3 locations in Poole:
- High Street level crossing
- Poole lifting bridge
- Twin Sails lifting bridge

 

[edwin_m]

3 locations in Poole:
- High Street level crossing
- Poole lifting bridge
- Twin Sails lifting bridge

From what I can see on Google:

High Street has the pedestrian indicators as discussed in this thread and shown on government guidance, so presumably the correct ones to use.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl

The other two have some indicators which are different from the level crossing one and look slightly different from each other. The Poole Bridge one also looks rather poorly positioned to be noticed by a closely approaching pedestrian.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl

 

[dorsetdesiro]

The Poole Bridge one also looks rather poorly positioned to be noticed by a closely approaching pedestrian.

Street View · Google Maps

Explore a place in a more immersive way in Google Maps.

maps.app.goo.gl

On GSV, go back in time to 2009 and 2014 - there are different designs!

 

[edwin_m]

On GSV, go back in time to 2009 and 2014 - there are different designs!

The latest pedestrian light seems to have appeared between 2016 and 2018, probably at the same time the wig-wags were replaced by a different design. Before that it had a red man next to the wigwags.