Egham level crossing - increased road delays?

[Deepgreen]

This is on the BBC News pages today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-surrey-67058152

Extract from item: Residents of Egham are having to wait up to 20 minutes for level crossings to open to reach parts of the town, a councillor has said.
Alex Balkan, a member of Runnymede Borough Council, said the delays were making people late for work and GP appointments.
He has called on Network Rail to find a solution.
Network Rail has admitted recent "upgrades" to signalling systems had led to more delays.
Mr Balkan told BBC Radio Surrey: "Egham residents have to go to important GP appointments and they have to go to work, but they can't because they are largely landlocked by four level crossings which have very long waiting times. They have only got worse very recently."
"Network Rail recently did works in August, however, they promised during those works that there would be a marginal reduction in waiting times, instead what we saw was a substantive increase, from residents' reports.
"People are waiting between 15 and 20 minutes."

I wonder what members' views are. I suspect that with each 'rationalisation' of signalling systems, level crossing delays will tend to increase as safety margins are repeatedly increased, and local knowledge and control decrease.

 

[SWT_USER]

Surprised the down times have increased given the huge cuts in services SWR have made on this line.

Although an idiot driver has smashed in to one of the level crossings this morning, presumably leading to even longer wait times for road and rail users.

 

[peteb]

When I lived in Egham in the 1980s there seemed to be a more intensive timetable than now yet no real problems with the level crossing. But then again railway/road H&S case much tighter now than then.

 

[Deepgreen]

Surprised the down times have increased given the huge cuts in services SWR have made on this line.

Although an idiot driver has smashed in to one of the level crossings this morning, presumably leading to even longer wait times for road and rail users.

Yes, odd timing with my post!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Oct 2023 ==

When I lived in Egham in the 1980s there seemed to be a more intensive timetable than now yet no real problems with the level crossing. But then again railway/road H&S case much tighter now than then.

Yes, that was my point - will it continue to worsen, or has it gone as far as it's likely to (not just at Egham, but widely)? The problem, obviously, is that the longer the down times the more risks drivers and pedestrians will take to avoid them, which is directly counter-productive in safety terms. I used to live in Ashtead, Surrey, where the crossing caused angst because of the length of time it was down - up to five minutes between trains in the same direction (!) was not uncommon. The particular irritant was witnessing the barriers being down when a stopping train was approaching and arriving very slowly with a red platform starter signal. People, rightly, questioned the point of a signal to protect the crossing if it seemingly could not be relied upon.

 

[GW43125]

When I lived in Egham in the 1980s there seemed to be a more intensive timetable than now yet no real problems with the level crossing. But then again railway/road H&S case much tighter now than then.

Two of the crossings were AHB (Automatic Half Barrier)-Pooley green upgraded in the early 2000s after an argument with a bus, and Rusham last year, so 30 seconds rather than 5+ minutes as is now common.

Surprised the down times have increased given the huge cuts in services SWR have made on this line.

Definitely seems to have got worse since Basingstoke ROC took over at the end of August.

Although an idiot driver has smashed in to one of the level crossings this morning, presumably leading to even longer wait times for road and rail users.

Hangover from last night-moped vs. train at about 8pm.

 

[Deepgreen]

Two of the crossings were AHB (Automatic Half Barrier)-Pooley green upgraded in the early 2000s after an argument with a bus, and Rusham last year, so 30 seconds rather than 5+ minutes as is now common.

Definitely seems to have got worse since Basingstoke ROC took over at the end of August.

Hangover from last night-moped vs. train at about 8pm.

Deleted

 

[davews]

Who won...?

Well the train didn't, virtually everything cancelled to end of service. Thanks though for the explanation, it was announced as 'person hit by train' which led to all sort of speculation. As to crossing closure times while once waiting at Sunningdale I noticed the barriers went down quite a few minutes before the train arrived, which explains the long queues on the A30.

 

[Deepgreen]

Well the train didn't, virtually everything cancelled to end of service. Thanks though for the explanation, it was announced as 'person hit by train' which led to all sort of speculation. As to crossing closure times while once waiting at Sunningdale I noticed the barriers went down quite a few minutes before the train arrived, which explains the long queues on the A30.

Luckily it's only a minor road..!

At Chilworth on the North Downs line, the station level crossing can be closed for at least six minutes before the eastbound train passes! No wonder so many people jump the lights at so many locations. The odd thing is that the adjacent AHB crossing there closes very late on before the train arrives.

 

[JN114]

Well the train didn't, virtually everything cancelled to end of service. Thanks though for the explanation, it was announced as 'person hit by train' which led to all sort of speculation.

A person (on a moped) was hit by a train.

 

[Fastlane256]

Surprised the down times have increased given the huge cuts in services SWR have made on this line.

Although an idiot driver has smashed in to one of the level crossings this morning, presumably leading to even longer wait times for road and rail users.

It was last night.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Oct 2023 ==

Two of the crossings were AHB (Automatic Half Barrier)-Pooley green upgraded in the early 2000s after an argument with a bus, and Rusham last year, so 30 seconds rather than 5+ minutes as is now common.

Definitely seems to have got worse since Basingstoke ROC took over at the end of August.

Hangover from last night-moped vs. train at about 8pm.

Yeah. It’s definitely gotten worse.

 

[Ken X]

On a related subject I came through Littlehaven (North Horsham) level crossing and noted that the trains are still stopping across the road. I was under the impression that the platforms were lengthened to prevent this but obviously not.

Is there a signalling or technical reason the train could not stop with its last carriage in the station rather than the first? Quess there would need to be a trackside stop marker and signalling with appropriate announcements to leave from the rear X coaches. The driver would have to pass through the train to disembark if required so may be a non starter. Rail is not my expertise as you can tell.

 

[Olivine]

I’m not entirely convinced the Egham barriers is a real issue - lots of party political politics in an estate that has historically been Labour but swung to Conservatives during the Brexit fallout and now the sole Conservative councillor is whipping up noise about it.

When it’s only the Labour councillors that NR will actually go see to discuss the issue with!

 

[Deepgreen]

I’m not entirely convinced the Egham barriers is a real issue - lots of party political politics in an estate that has historically been Labour but swung to Conservatives during the Brexit fallout and now the sole Conservative councillor is whipping up noise about it.

When it’s only the Labour councillors that NR will actually go see to discuss the issue with!

However, it does appear to have have worsened with the switch of control.

 

[GW43125]

On a related subject I came through Littlehaven (North Horsham) level crossing and noted that the trains are still stopping across the road. I was under the impression that the platforms were lengthened to prevent this but obviously not.

Is there a signalling or technical reason the train could not stop with its last carriage in the station rather than the first? Quess there would need to be a trackside stop marker and signalling with appropriate announcements to leave from the rear X coaches. The driver would have to pass through the train to disembark if required so may be a non starter. Rail is not my expertise as you can tell.

As far as I'm aware, the door selection system on electrostars (green ones) can only handle front X coaches, it's only the more modern stock which can handle opening from the back. I'm also not sure where the signal is in relation to the platform-if there is one then going past it to stop at the station isn't ideal.

 

[Deepgreen]

As far as I'm aware, the door selection system on electrostars (green ones) can only handle front X coaches, it's only the more modern stock which can handle opening from the back. I'm also not sure where the signal is in relation to the platform-if there is one then going past it to stop at the station isn't ideal.

I wonder why such a seemingly obvious feature as variable door selection from the rear was omitted from the 377s. Oversight, too complicated or just ineptitude?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

As far as I'm aware, the door selection system on electrostars (green ones) can only handle front X coaches, it's only the more modern stock which can handle opening from the back. I'm also not sure where the signal is in relation to the platform-if there is one then going past it to stop at the station isn't ideal.

I'm sure this isn't a problem at places like Angmering in the Littlehampton direction where the doors of the rear carriage don't open

 

[Ken X]

As far as I'm aware, the door selection system on electrostars (green ones) can only handle front X coaches, it's only the more modern stock which can handle opening from the back. I'm also not sure where the signal is in relation to the platform-if there is one then going past it to stop at the station isn't ideal.

Many thanks, I am slightly surprised, but pleased, the concept of rear bias door opening has been considered.

If I remember correctly, the train in question, parked on the crossing, was a Thameslink. It's the southbound trains which overhang. I have no idea where the signals are located but it may be a future solution to the problem, which would be cheaper than lengthening platforms.

There must be several stations where long trains stop across road crossings and rear bias door opening would solve this. Here's hoping.

 

[Taunton]

However, it does appear to have have worsened with the switch of control.

I have known these crossings (and North Sheen etc) for some generations, through manual gate boxes, Feltham signal centre, and the recent resignalling, and have to say that at each "upgrade" the delay time has grossly increased. There have also been some increases midstream as well when someone from crossing safety comes along and changes the procedures. Invariably for the worse. The old gate boxes of past times were brilliant, they could eyeball the trains in the distance, and the traffic, and know just when to drop the gates and pull the signals off to minimise delay to both.

Those (above and elsewhere) who have this attitude of it's all the road users' fault presumably do not live in a place where rail crossing closures is a substantial proportion of the hour, and climb ever upwards. There's a railway attitude sometimes like something from Soviet days, of "we'll close it whenever we like and you have to lump it". Which if you want to minimise people chancing it across is the last attitude you want.

If you want to see the outcome of putting the gates across just to suit the railway's procedures, regardless of why people are wanting to cross the line, look up the Elsenham crossing accident.

 

[Big Jumby 74]

I have known these crossings (and North Sheen etc) for some generations, through manual gate boxes, Feltham signal centre

Ditto. Pooley Green was (may still be?) a main bug bear in relation to Feltham, in that the one bod who had to monitor same, also had to deal with the alternating platform usage (train arrivals/departures) at Windsor, IIRC. Different places in the box! The leaf fall timetable, which allowed operation at Windsor to be on a one platform basis, was (Feltham Panel's) ideal solution, but was not possible outside leaf fall, as the industry was governed by numerous things such as max. journey time etc, which combined with the overall timetable requirements on the Windsor side required the two platform/longer turn rounds at Windsor to remain.

 

[Deepgreen]

I have known these crossings (and North Sheen etc) for some generations, through manual gate boxes, Feltham signal centre, and the recent resignalling, and have to say that at each "upgrade" the delay time has grossly increased. There have also been some increases midstream as well when someone from crossing safety comes along and changes the procedures. Invariably for the worse. The old gate boxes of past times were brilliant, they could eyeball the trains in the distance, and the traffic, and know just when to drop the gates and pull the signals off to minimise delay to both.

Those (above and elsewhere) who have this attitude of it's all the road users' fault presumably do not live in a place where rail crossing closures is a substantial proportion of the hour, and climb ever upwards. There's a railway attitude sometimes like something from Soviet days, of "we'll close it whenever we like and you have to lump it". Which if you want to minimise people chancing it across is the last attitude you want.

If you want to see the outcome of putting the gates across just to suit the railway's procedures, regardless of why people are wanting to cross the line, look up the Elsenham crossing accident.

I recall North Sheen from my youth - my father driving his Rover P4 to take us to see relatives and it being very rare to be able to drive through without significant delay, even with local control.

I think it's particularly poor when even those crossings which have platform starter signals protecting them and which have 99% of trains calling (back to Ashtead again!) are not worked to make use of those signals - it's got to the stage where the railway doesn't trust its drivers not to pass red signals (combined with a station stop anyway) and leaves the barriers down/lowers them ridiculously early 'just in case'. The effect of the insidious increases in closure time must surely be to increase the risk of jumping the lights significantly - far more than the risk of a SPAD.

Crossings local to me where this happens are Betchworth (with EB platform starter) and Reigate (WB starter). The latter is inexcusable as the controlling box is adjacent to the crossing. GWR trains are usually given clear home and starting signals to enter the platform, even though they all call anyway, resulting in the very busy A217 being blocked unnecessarily for several minutes before the train actually crosses the crossing. Trains are permitted to enter the platform there with a red starter as the terminating Southern ones do so with the crossing up. Why is there a perception that a Southern train entering the platform is less likely to suffer a SPAD than a GWR one?! I have seen several instances where emergency ambulances (with lights and sirens) are caught by the crossing for a westbound GWR train to approach, call and depart when they could have got through with smarter crossing operation and without any delay or safety compromise to the train.

 

[SecretKiwi]

Many thanks, I am slightly surprised, but pleased, the concept of rear bias door opening has been considered.

If I remember correctly, the train in question, parked on the crossing, was a Thameslink. It's the southbound trains which overhang. I have no idea where the signals are located but it may be a future solution to the problem, which would be cheaper than lengthening platforms.

There must be several stations where long trains stop across road crossings and rear bias door opening would solve this. Here's hoping.

It's strange that you experienced a 12 car stopped over the crossing at Littlehaven this week as the down platform was finally commissioned a few months back and, at last, the 12 cars fit on the platform without impeding the crossing.....

 

[LAX54]

Luckily it's only a minor road..!

At Chilworth on the North Downs line, the station level crossing can be closed for at least six minutes before the eastbound train passes! No wonder so many people jump the lights at so many locations. The odd thing is that the adjacent AHB crossing there closes very late on before the train arrives.

AHB's are not interlocked with the signals, so will show green with the barriers raised, and lower when the strike in is reached. approx 30 seconds away. CCTV crossings are protected by signals controlled from the box, as with all things H&S after they have stuck their nose in, protecting signals (when resignalled) are futher away, so have to be lowered earlier to get all associated signals green ( the amount depends on 2 aspect or 3 or 4 aspect)

 

[Snow1964]

On a related subject I came through Littlehaven (North Horsham) level crossing and noted that the trains are still stopping across the road. I was under the impression that the platforms were lengthened to prevent this but obviously not.

Is there a signalling or technical reason the train could not stop with its last carriage in the station rather than the first? Quess there would need to be a trackside stop marker and signalling with appropriate announcements to leave from the rear X coaches. The driver would have to pass through the train to disembark if required so may be a non starter. Rail is not my expertise as you can tell.

Recently caught a train that stopped at Thatcham, (IET towards Paddington) and I am sure it was use X coaches at rear to avoid stopping over level crossing.

So in principle doesn't seem to be a problem, but if all stock is configured to do it, is different question

 

[Ken X]

It's strange that you experienced a 12 car stopped over the crossing at Littlehaven this week as the down platform was finally commissioned a few months back and, at last, the 12 cars fit on the platform without impeding the crossing.....

Ah, wasn't this week, it may well have been just before the platform was sorted.

Glad to hear of the improvement. Don't go that way often since retirement.

Still interested to find out that rear bias doors are a possibility though.

Thanks for the heads-up.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 14 Oct 2023 ==

Recently caught a train that stopped at Thatcham, (IET towards Paddington) and I am sure it was use X coaches at rear to avoid stopping over level crossing.

So in principle doesn't seem to be a problem, but if all stock is configured to do it, is different question

That's good to hear, thought as a non-rail engineer, I was hoping for something which couldn't be done.

 

[Goldfish62]

There are always periodic whinges in Egham about the level crossings. It will all calm down again. Until the next time.

 

[AlastairFraser]

What I don't get is why the council don't build a bridge at the Prune Hill crossing adjacent to Royal Holloway UoL or apply for funding for one? There's plenty of land, and it would lessen the queues at the other 2 level crossings.

 

[Meerkat]

What I don't get is why the council don't build a bridge at the Prune Hill crossing adjacent to Royal Holloway UoL or apply for funding for one? There's plenty of land, and it would lessen the queues at the other 2 level crossings.

I think that would involve a CPO on an oligarch’s garden, and they have lots of lawyers.
I wonder whether they would worry about it becoming a rat run to Staines avoiding the M25 junction.

 

[Deepgreen]

There are always periodic whinges in Egham about the level crossings. It will all calm down again. Until the next time.

However, if it is steadily worsening, then the whinges may have merit. I do wonder whether the full risk implications are accounted for regarding road users and the railway when planning signalling changes that worsen road delays - i.e encouraging road users to take risks and cause delays through crossing abuse.

 

[Lucan]

I do wonder whether the full risk implications are accounted for regarding road users ...- i.e encouraging road users to take risks and cause delays through crossing abuse.

No they are not taken into account. I remember an interview with someone from the Railway Inspectorate (or whatever they were called at the time) and when this was raised the response was on the lines "What road users do is not our problem - they should just behave themselves".

 

[Juniper Driver]

What I don't get is why the council don't build a bridge at the Prune Hill crossing adjacent to Royal Holloway UoL or apply for funding for one? There's plenty of land, and it would lessen the queues at the other 2 level crossings.

They did that down the Reading road when Waterloo crossing AHB closed.(I think that's the reason)
Must have cost a bomb.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Oct 2023 ==

There are always periodic whinges in Egham about the level crossings. It will all calm down again. Until the next time.

I don't know though.Every time I've been at Egham up road waiting in the platform the signal has been cleared (Under the new signalling).I only say this as I've heard that some guards were confused whether they could give "ding ding" on a red as the signal is further up and there is no OFF indicator on the platform.So I do wonder how long the motorists have been waiting there.