Level Crossing Standards

[CambrianView]

For some time now I have been concerned with the standard of surfacing over level crossings, especially for walkers and mobility aid users, not only on the national network but also on independently operated lines where they cross public rights of way. Much of the infrastructure of our railways was constructed in the 1800's, but as our community has changed and developed over the years, so has our independent mobility. Many more older people use walking frames, Zimmer frames and mobility scooters, not to mention younger people using a variety of push chairs and cyclists.

Many of these walking aids face difficulties when public highways are broken up by gaps for rails. I have received a number of reports from people trying to negotiate a level crossing who have stumbled and fallen because their walking aid has got caught in a gap between railway lines on a level crossing.

A couple of months ago I was in Harlech and noticed that the pedestrian section of their level crossing is filled with, what Network Rail informs me, a material called VeloSTRAIL. This material bends with the weight of a crossing train but springs back into place once the locomotive has passed over. Apparently the material is specifically designed to enhance safety and accessibility for pedestrians, cyclists, and other vulnerable users.

I was wandering if any other members have seen this material is use?

 

[bluenoxid]

A quick Google suggests that Ribble Rail have commissioned it on Strand Road in Preston.

 

[Travelmonkey]

as a wheelchair user NR don't care. I questioned at crossing in sutton park with inacessible gates and got told it was to "stop motorcylists and pedal cycles" in that effort allienating disabled people too. Thankfully a member of the public helped me get across but it was not dignified.

 

[Belperpete]

For some time now I have been concerned with the standard of surfacing over level crossings, especially for walkers and mobility aid users, not only on the national network but also on independently operated lines where they cross public rights of way. Much of the infrastructure of our railways was constructed in the 1800's, but as our community has changed and developed over the years, so has our independent mobility. Many more older people use walking frames, Zimmer frames and mobility scooters, not to mention younger people using a variety of push chairs and cyclists.

Many of these walking aids face difficulties when public highways are broken up by gaps for rails. I have received a number of reports from people trying to negotiate a level crossing who have stumbled and fallen because their walking aid has got caught in a gap between railway lines on a level crossing.

A couple of months ago I was in Harlech and noticed that the pedestrian section of their level crossing is filled with, what Network Rail informs me, a material called VeloSTRAIL. This material bends with the weight of a crossing train but springs back into place once the locomotive has passed over. Apparently the material is specifically designed to enhance safety and accessibility for pedestrians, cyclists, and other vulnerable users.

I was wandering if any other members have seen this material is use?

I believe that the Ffestiniog considered using it on its Britannia Bridge crossing, but there were concerns that it might derail the much lighter narrow gauge vehicles. I think there were also potential issues with using it on curved track.

 

[Pnerick81]

Bamber bridge crossing is always having the rubber in between the tracks redone . I’m sure it was tarmac at one point or some solid substrate at least . Is the rubber just easier to maintain or is it because there was a subway once there at the station side of the crossing ?

 

[Belperpete]

Bamber bridge crossing is always having the rubber in between the tracks redone . I’m sure it was tarmac at one point or some solid substrate at least . Is the rubber just easier to maintain or is it because there was a subway once there at the station side of the crossing ?

I believe the OP is talking about rubber in the flangeways, to give an unbroken level surface. I think you are talking about the fill between the tracks? Tarmac wouldn't last long in the flangeways!

Historically, most level crossings used wooden boards as the fill between the tracks, but these needed maintenance and wouldn't last long on heavily used roads. The problem with using tarmac is that it makes it almost impossible to maintain the track. The rubber fill, like the boards, can be readily lifted and replaced again if the track needs attention.

 

[Annetts key]

To the OP's question, I worked on the railways including on level crossings and never heard of it or saw this system. So I can't comment on it.

As to the "rubber" in the "four foot" between the rails and in the "six foot" between different lines, that's a panel system.

The panel level crossing systems are available as various types. Within the railway, they are often called Bowmac. Network Rail references them here

Bowmac

“Panel level crossings are used so that the panels can be removed to allow maintenance of the track. The Bowmac design of panel was the standard product used by BR for most of the 1970s and 1980s.”

Sometime mispelt as Bomac.

The panels can be on metal frames and the panel can be filled with concrete or can be a type of rubber.

For more details, see this commercial site of another manufacturer.

I won't quote all of it, just a bit:

Dominating the railway level crossing panel market in the UK since the mid 1970s, the Bomac design was combined with modern materials in 1990 by Polysafe.
The result was a level crossing system that key stakeholders in the rail network were looking for: reliable, durable, cost-effective, easy to maintain and above all – extremely safe

Numerous safety features are built into the Polysafe system including:

• High grip – even in the wet
• Visible road markings – White lines / yellow hatching are designed to increase safety
• High strength and durability
• No gaps – in addition to the weight of the system itself,
• No damage to rail infrastructure

A level crossing is designed to be a long term solution to keep road and rail traffic moving, and the features of a Polysafe system are geared towards this:

• Life span – Concrete panels can be expected to last at least 15 years
• Installation – QUICK AND SIMPLE
• Maintenance – the design of the system can help keep costs to a minimum

Level crossing panels​

A level crossing can have many uses, ranging from light pedestrian use up to extremely high volume, heavyweight traffic. Building on the Bomac design, Polysafe have a system which accommodates panels of different types to suit the needs of the end user.

 

[Johnhayworth21]

as a wheelchair user NR don't care. I questioned at crossing in sutton park with inacessible gates and got told it was to "stop motorcylists and pedal cycles" in that effort allienating disabled people too. Thankfully a member of the public helped me get across but it was not dignified.

Preventing accidents caused by careless cyclists/dog walkers etc is a priority. The crossing is in a nature reserve where most right of ways are inaccessible for wheelchair users anyway.

 

[Travelmonkey]

Preventing accidents caused by careless cyclists/dog walkers etc is a priority. The crossing is in a nature reserve where most right of ways are inaccessible for wheelchair users anyway.

Indeed saftey is a priority but its a typical NR cop out, similar to recent incidents where they are replacing at grade crossings that are acessibility friendly with stepped footbridges. @kingqueen & @Kieran_MF135 have both been more vastly affected by that particular issue, it is a shame try to get out into nature and then find myself trapped. Had it at Attenborough the other week, Google's wheelchair instructions took me through a gate that I wouldn't have fitted through with my off road wheel.

 

[Deepgreen]

I cycled down my lane to our 'new' (full vice half barriers) crossing today - Burrows Lane, Gomshall on the North Downs line. Looks to be finished, and the line is supposed to reopen tomorrow. Rubber panels in the four and six foots.

 

[stadler]

I cycled down my lane to our 'new' (full vice half barriers) crossing today - Burrows Lane, Gomshall on the North Downs line. Looks to be finished, and the line is supposed to reopen tomorrow. Rubber panels in the four and six foots.View attachment 189158

Very surprised to see a half barrier upgraded to a full barrier on a minor country lane in a quiet area. It is not a particularly busy or major road. The full barrier crossings have to be manually operated via CCTV where as half barriers are automatic and therefore cheaper to run. Good to see but i am surprised they spent the money on that. I suppose the only negative is that for road users it will now be closed for much longer each time.

It appears that all four level crossings (Albury Brook / Chilworth Station / Chilworth Tangley / Gomshall Burrows) in the area have been upgraded:

North Downs Line signalling upgrade - Network Rail

As part of the North Downs Line signalling upgrade, we're working between Shalford and Gomshall for a safer, more reliable railway.

www.networkrail.co.uk

It looks like they are all upgraded to full barriers and with new alarms. I wonder if the Betchworth and Brockham and Buckland ones will be done next. They are on the same line.

 

[takno]

Very surprised to see a half barrier upgraded to a full barrier on a minor country lane in a quiet area. It is not a particularly busy or major road. The full barrier crossings have to be manually operated via CCTV where as half barriers are automatic and therefore cheaper to run. Good to see but i am surprised they spent the money on that. I suppose the only negative is that for road users it will now be closed for much longer each time.

It appears that all four level crossings (Albury Brook / Chilworth Station / Chilworth Tangley / Gomshall Burrows) in the area have been upgraded:

North Downs Line signalling upgrade - Network Rail

As part of the North Downs Line signalling upgrade, we're working between Shalford and Gomshall for a safer, more reliable railway.

www.networkrail.co.uk

It looks like they are all upgraded to full barriers and with new alarms. I wonder if the Betchworth and Brockham and Buckland ones will be done next. They are on the same line.

The upgraded crossings are covered by Guildford and are in the Wessex Route area, whereas the others you mention are covered by Reigate box on the Sussex Route, so presumably different plans and different budgets. The Guildford box is undergoing a lot of other work at the same time anyway.

IIRC the original plan was to run more services on the line, which would trigger a risk assessment and potentially justify an upgrade. The extra services appear to be on hold anyway though, so there may be less priority to finishing the job.

 

[CambrianView]

I was at the level crossing in Gobowen yesterday evening and it looked to me as if a guy in hi-viz was testing the barriers from some sort of control at pavement level: the lights were flashing as I approached so I stopped, noticing this guy on the other side of the crossing operating the barriers from ground level. A couple of minutes went by with no appearance by a train, and then the barriers were raised. This was just before 9pm.

 

[Annetts key]

I was at the level crossing in Gobowen yesterday evening and it looked to me as if a guy in hi-viz was testing the barriers from some sort of control at pavement level: the lights were flashing as I approached so I stopped, noticing this guy on the other side of the crossing operating the barriers from ground level. A couple of minutes went by with no appearance by a train, and then the barriers were raised. This was just before 9pm.

All MCB CCTV and MCB-OD (and some other types of) crossings are provided with a LCU - Local Control Unit. This has buttons to start the "lower" sequence, stop the barriers, start the raise sequence and an emergency "start the red road lights" switch. It duplicates the signal box / PSB / signalling centre controls. There is also a switch to allow manual barrier operation.

Note that the "lower" sequence includes the amber lights, the red flashing lights etc.

As a S&T (Signal and Telecom) team leader / technician I've done this hundreds of times.

If an S&T team cannot attend, a MOM (Mobile Operations Manager) or suitably trained level crossing operator can attend and operate the crossing if needed due to a failure. Or during engineering work.

 

[Travelmonkey]

Very surprised to see a half barrier upgraded to a full barrier on a minor country lane in a quiet area. It is not a particularly busy or major road. The full barrier crossings have to be manually operated via CCTV where as half barriers are automatic and therefore cheaper to run. Good to see but i am surprised they spent the money on that. I suppose the only negative is that for road users it will now be closed for much longer each time.

Not nessacerilaly there is full barriiered crossings using LIDAR radar detection from grey mounts and a while "pill" shaped controller.

 

[CambrianView]

Note that the "lower" sequence includes the amber lights, the red flashing lights etc.

You're are absolutely right, I did notice a single amber light before the usual red lights started flashing.

I'm guessing that regular tests are done on level crossings on the main line to insure they work properly, but what about privately owned heritage lines where they cross public highways?

 

[zwk500]

Very surprised to see a half barrier upgraded to a full barrier on a minor country lane in a quiet area. It is not a particularly busy or major road. The full barrier crossings have to be manually operated via CCTV where as half barriers are automatic and therefore cheaper to run. Good to see but i am surprised they spent the money on that. I suppose the only negative is that for road users it will now be closed for much longer each time.

New AHBs are basically dead, because the risk of drivers swerving the barriers and the lack of interlocking means the chances of a serious incident are higher than the safety authorities will allow. When time comes to renew AHBs then consideration is given to upgrading them to either MCB-CCTV or MCB-OD (Obstacle detection, the LIDAR scanner referred to in #15) instead.

The upgraded crossings are covered by Guildford and are in the Wessex Route area, whereas the others you mention are covered by Reigate box on the Sussex Route, so presumably different plans and different budgets. The Guildford box is undergoing a lot of other work at the same time anyway.

IIRC it was one project to upgrade the level crossings between Reigate and Shalford Junction, despite the area boundary (it is at least all the Southern Region, rather than being e.g. a Southern/Western Region Boundary).
I can't remember if the trigger was the proposed service uplift, obsolete equipment needing replacement, an opportunity to move control to the ROC (or prep for it), increased LC risk from the road side, something else, or a combination of any of the above.
The plans I saw were in the middle of COVID anyway so I wouldn't be surprised if there had been changes to the scope after I'd seen them.

 

[Annetts key]

You're are absolutely right, I did notice a single amber light before the usual red lights started flashing.

I'm guessing that regular tests are done on level crossings on the main line to insure they work properly, but what about privately owned heritage lines where they cross public highways?

I don't know the answer to that question about privately owned level crossings (it's not just heritage lines, there are some level crossings on company /private lines with a public road or on private land/roads).

I can tell you this, each level crossing on a public road has an associated legal document, "level crossing order" I think it is called, where certain requirements are listed. The railway and the highway authority have to comply with these requirements.

For Network Rail owned level crossing equipment, there is a whole list of checks and tests. There is an annual level crossing equipment review where all these checks and tests are done. Plus various maintenance is carried out every three months.

 

[Travelmonkey]

heritage lines also work more slowly than the mainline railway max speeds 25mph, there will obviously be regular checks in place to prvent accidents and missuese. one set that have always intrested me in wondering how it works is the narrow gage railway of Rommeny Hyhe & Dymchurch down in Kent.

 

[DelW]

It appears that all four level crossings (Albury Brook / Chilworth Station / Chilworth Tangley / Gomshall Burrows) in the area have been upgraded:

It looks like they are all upgraded to full barriers and with new alarms. I wonder if the Betchworth and Brockham and Buckland ones will be done next. They are on the same line.

Chilworth station crossing may indeed have had some modifications, but it has been full barriers for a good many years. It was always noticeable that it was closed well before Tangley even when the approaching train was coming from the Guildford direction (i.e. reaching Tangley first).

 

[Deepgreen]

'Our' crossing (Burrows Lane) reopened as a full barrier crossing on 28 September. Ever since then, there has been a car with a NR driver parked by the crossing continuously, presumably monitoring performance. The road layout is tight there and he parks partly on the carriageway on the north side of the crossing, causing an obstruction right at the crossing, when there is ample space to pull off the road completely on the south side (on an area created specially for the project by NR!). I just wonder how long this monitoring process is likely to last?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2025 ==

Chilworth station crossing may indeed have had some modifications, but it has been full barriers for a good many years. It was always noticeable that it was closed well before Tangley even when the approaching train was coming from the Guildford direction (i.e. reaching Tangley first).

Yes - I have always thought it bizarre that the relatively quiet Chilworth station crossing was full barriers, whereas the nearly-adjacent main road A248/Tangley crossing was half barriers! I have often seen the station crossing to be lowered well over five minutes before an eastbound train appeared!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2025 ==

Very surprised to see a half barrier upgraded to a full barrier on a minor country lane in a quiet area. It is not a particularly busy or major road. The full barrier crossings have to be manually operated via CCTV where as half barriers are automatic and therefore cheaper to run. Good to see but i am surprised they spent the money on that. I suppose the only negative is that for road users it will now be closed for much longer each time.

It appears that all four level crossings (Albury Brook / Chilworth Station / Chilworth Tangley / Gomshall Burrows) in the area have been upgraded:

North Downs Line signalling upgrade - Network Rail

As part of the North Downs Line signalling upgrade, we're working between Shalford and Gomshall for a safer, more reliable railway.

www.networkrail.co.uk

It looks like they are all upgraded to full barriers and with new alarms. I wonder if the Betchworth and Brockham and Buckland ones will be done next. They are on the same line.

I live on Burrows Lane and it is a deceptively busy road for its size. It is narrow (single track) with random passing places, and even has a (two-hourly) bus service. The result is that vehicles tend to come in 'fleets', having passed each other. I have no knowledge of any near-misses or incidents.

Betchworth station is already full barriers, whereas Brockham (Chalk Pit Lane) and Betchworth (Rectory Lane) AHBs are on dead-end lanes and are very considerably quieter.

 

[Annetts key]

'Our' crossing (Burrows Lane) reopened as a full barrier crossing on 28 September. Ever since then, there has been a car with a NR driver parked by the crossing continuously, presumably monitoring performance. The road layout is tight there and he parks partly on the carriageway on the north side of the crossing, causing an obstruction right at the crossing, when there is ample space to pull off the road completely on the south side (on an area created specially for the project by NR!). I just wonder how long this monitoring process is likely to last?

But are they actually Network Rail staff?

If the work was carried out by a contract company for Network Rail, normally Network Rail requires said company to provide staff cover in case of problems for a period of time. They don't normally have to be on site, but do have to be able to attend on site quickly if needed. These arrangements sometimes last for a couple of weeks.

Then for a further period of time after this initial period of cover ends, they normally are required to provide "second level" cover to provide technical assistance if required to Network Rails own maintenance staff. I forget how long for.

 

[Deepgreen]

But are they actually Network Rail staff?

If the work was carried out by a contract company for Network Rail, normally Network Rail requires said company to provide staff cover in case of problems for a period of time. They don't normally have to be on site, but do have to be able to attend on site quickly if needed. These arrangements sometimes last for a couple of weeks.

Then for a further period of time after this initial period of cover ends, they normally are required to provide "second level" cover to provide technical assistance if required to Network Rails own maintenance staff. I forget how long for.

I don't know, but the impact (and responsibility) is the same whether they are actually NR or their contractor. Either way, they/he (same car all the time) seem determined to park in the worst spot rather than sensibly out of the way on the other side of the crossing!

 

[Belperpete]

'Our' crossing (Burrows Lane) reopened as a full barrier crossing on 28 September. Ever since then, there has been a car with a NR driver parked by the crossing continuously, presumably monitoring performance. The road layout is tight there and he parks partly on the carriageway on the north side of the crossing, causing an obstruction right at the crossing, when there is ample space to pull off the road completely on the south side (on an area created specially for the project by NR!). I just wonder how long this monitoring process is likely to last?

Would he have a clear forward view of the crossing if he parked in that off road area?

Yes - I have always thought it bizarre that the relatively quiet Chilworth station crossing was full barriers, whereas the nearly-adjacent main road A248/Tangley crossing was half barriers! I have often seen the station crossing to be lowered well over five minutes before an eastbound train appeared!

Things such as the likelihood of traffic standing back over a crossing will rule out an AHB. It isn't just based on how busy a road is.

As the volume of road traffic increases, so the chances of an accident increase. However, you reach a tipping point, after which the chances of an accident decreases with increasing traffic. You are significantly less likely to fail to stop if there is a vehicle in front of you that is stoppping, so the risk decreases as the chances of there being a vehicle in front of you increases. Taken to the extreme, in dense traffic you will likely already be at a standstill!

 

[Deepgreen]

Would he have a clear forward view of the crossing if he parked in that off road area?


Things such as the likelihood of traffic standing back over a crossing will rule out an AHB. It isn't just based on how busy a road is.

As the volume of road traffic increases, so the chances of an accident increase. However, you reach a tipping point, after which the chances of an accident decreases with increasing traffic. You are significantly less likely to fail to stop if there is a vehicle in front of you that is stoppping, so the risk decreases as the chances of there being a vehicle in front of you increases. Taken to the extreme, in dense traffic you will likely already be at a standstill!

Yes, completely. There was an area of hard-standing (to the immediate left of the car in the photo, taken the day before the crossing reopened) created by NR months ago specifically for vehicles working at the crossing (while the road and railway were open), which allows vehicles to park entirely off the carriageway. The engineer's car has so far been parked part on, part off the road in the foreground on the left, causing an obstruction which is often enough to stop two vehicles from passing each other, which is quite a significant issue immediately adjacent to the crossing. For context, the road has a narrow point behind the photographer (me) and narrows again to single track beyond the crossing.

I understand the busy-ness issue, but for a fairly busy (but not to urban levels) A road to have half barriers has always seemed odd, which prompts a possible trivia question - what's the busiest road to have an AHB? I won't actually pose it, though!