MCB barrier changes

[Dartspro123]

could anyone advise what if there is a signal box controlling a Manually controlled barrier and as part of upgrades they were looking to close this box, what are the alternatives to this? The new controlling signal box would be almost an hour away and one train working is being considered for that section of line, how would that work for the crossing? I’m aware you have Obstacle Detection and CCTV options but would that mean the barrier stays closed as soon as the train enters the section or is there a way it can be done after the train enters the section? Any thoughts?

 

[Railsigns]

Dunragit, I presume? A trainman operated barrier crossing may be an appropriate solution, or perhaps an AFBCL, assuming that full barriers are deemed to be necessary. ABCL if full barriers are not required.

A CCTV or MCB-OD crossing need not be closed as soon as a train enters the section if the crossing has its own protecting signals (but this would be an expensive option).

 

[MarkyT]

could anyone advise what if there is a signal box controlling an MCB and as part of upgrades they were looking to close this box, what are the alternatives to an MCB? The new controlling signal box would be almost an hour away and one train working is being considered for that section of line, how would that work for the crossing? I’m aware you have OD and CCTV options but would that mean the barrier stays closed as soon as the train enters the section or is there a way it can be done after the train enters the section? Any thoughts?

Even if such a crossing is in a very long block section with the section signals many, many miles away, additional signals will be provided closer to an OD or CCTV crossing protecting it in both directions. These may not be block signals for trains following each other but are simply there to delay closing the crossing until the train is much closer. These are the signals that prove the control and road warning light sequence has occurred correctly and the barriers are now down and intact. The road closed time can still be a few minutes to avoid trains seeing restrictive aspects for OD and CCTV. If a local speed restriction of 55mph or below is acceptable with good approach visibility, the newish AFBCL design mentioned by Railsigns might be used instead, which actuates automatically and, like an ABCL, is then locally monitored by an approaching train driver observing a flashing red/white indicator and inspecting the road. This can significantly reduce the road closed time compared to standard CCTV and OD MCB types.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jan 2025 ==

Dunragit, I presume? A trainman operated barrier crossing may be an appropriate solution, or perhaps an AFBCL, assuming that full barriers are deemed to be necessary. ABCL if full barriers are not required.

A CCTV or MCB-OD crossing need not be closed as soon as a train enters the section if the crossing has its own protecting signals (but this would be an expensive option).

Traincrew-operated would be costly in time. ABCL or AFBCL would be my favoured option. If there's any likelihood of an additional station in the immediate vicinity, any necessary crossing speed restrictions may be more acceptable.

 

[jfollows]

MCB - Manually Controlled Barriers according to https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Level_crossings_in_the_United_Kingdom

MCB-OD – manually controlled barriers monitored by obstacle detection

AFBCL – automatic full barrier crossing locally monitored

ABCL – automatic barrier crossing locally monitored

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 18 Jan 2025 ==

Sorry, but this thread was completely baffling without looking up what these abbreviations meant.

 

[Dartspro123]

Dunragit, I presume? A trainman operated barrier crossing may be an appropriate solution, or perhaps an AFBCL, assuming that full barriers are deemed to be necessary. ABCL if full barriers are not required.

A CCTV or MCB-OD crossing need not be closed as soon as a train enters the section if the crossing has its own protecting signals (but this would be an expensive option).

Yes heard they might be upgrading this line in this control period and wondered what that might look like with if they’re trying to close the boxes completely and still needed the barrier while controlling it from a box further north

 

[zwk500]

Yes heard they might be upgrading this line in this control period and wondered what that might look like with if they’re trying to close the boxes completely and still needed the barrier while controlling it from a box further north

Assuming it is this location: https://maps.app.goo.gl/sHkewXT1cjdHT6Fz5, having looked at Google Maps I'd be very surprised if the crossing wasn't simply closed and a footbridge provided with road traffic diverted via the bypass.

 

[MarkyT]

Assuming it is this location: https://maps.app.goo.gl/sHkewXT1cjdHT6Fz5, having looked at Google Maps I'd be very surprised if the crossing wasn't simply closed and a footbridge provided with road traffic diverted via the bypass.

Agreed, or converted to a pedestrian only crossing with red/green lights.

 

[MadMac]

Yes heard they might be upgrading this line in this control period and wondered what that might look like with if they’re trying to close the boxes completely and still needed the barrier while controlling it from a box further north

Nothing firm, but there has been some talk of reinstating a Signalling Centre at Paisley with a view to it ultimately covering the whole “South West Scotland“ area.

 

[MarkyT]

Nothing firm, but there has been some talk of reinstating a Signalling Centre at Paisley with a view to it ultimately covering the whole “South West Scotland“ area.

Once you leave Ayr (under W of Scotland SC) there are six signalboxes to Stranraer, a lot of operational expense for such a sparse service. At least Stranraer can be switched out.

 

[Dartspro123]

Nothing firm, but there has been some talk of reinstating a Signalling Centre at Paisley with a view to it ultimately covering the whole “South West Scotland“ area.

Think that’s the ultimate end goal is it not? To have a number of smaller signalling centres rather than 2 or 3 but I thought that was a long term plan for the next 25/30 years not right now?

 

[zwk500]

Once you leave Ayr (under W of Scotland SC) there are six signalboxes to Stranraer, a lot of operational expense for such a sparse service. At least Stranraer can be switched out.

Given the service, one RETB (or equivalent) workstation can probably cover the entire line. Amd it could be located wherever is easiest.

Big question would be what the impact of level crossings would be.

 

[MarkyT]

Given the service, one RETB (or equivalent) workstation can probably cover the entire line. Amd it could be located wherever is easiest.

Big question would be what the impact of level crossings would be.

Or a minimal TCB scheme with long axle counter blocks. The line doesn't need so many passing loops today, especially once past Girvan, and some of the road crossings might be closed, like your suggestion for Dunragit. There are many UWCs.

 

[Meerkat]

Why can’t Dunragit be an auto half barrier? Are they out of favour, even for such an infrequent service?
Though I agree that if a foot crossing was left there would be little hardship in closing it.

 

[MarkyT]

Why can’t Dunragit be an auto half barrier? Are they out of favour, even for such an infrequent service?
Though I agree that if a foot crossing was left there would be little hardship in closing it.

AHBCs seem to be going out of favour today with most being replaced by better-protected types when equipment is renewed today. I'm very happy about that personally. Locally monitored is a safer option if a possibly lower speed limit is acceptable at a particular site on such a rural line. Dunragit can probably be closed or downgraded to a foot only status however.

 

[DelW]

Given the service, one RETB (or equivalent) workstation can probably cover the entire line. Amd it could be located wherever is easiest.

Big question would be what the impact of level crossings would be.

The Heart of Wales system seems to cope with multiple level crossings and passing loops, from a single box at Pantyffynnon. It's a sparse service, but probably not much different from Girvan to Stanraer.

 

[MarkyT]

The Heart of Wales system seems to cope with multiple level crossings and passing loops, from a single box at Pantyffynnon. It's a sparse service, but probably not much different from Girvan to Stanraer.

I wouldn't implement a new system today with manual token exchange. It's quite time-consuming operationally at each loop and imposes an additional staffing requirement to balance the tokens periodically at each remote site. A simple TCB installation with axle counters would be more efficient and probably no more expensive with modern techniques. Remember the remote passing loops on the HoW all now have multiple indicators, TPWS loops and a small relay interlocking to switch powered point machines since all the self-actuated hydropneumatic ones were replaced.

 

[matchmaker]

Nothing firm, but there has been some talk of reinstating a Signalling Centre at Paisley with a view to it ultimately covering the whole “South West Scotland“ area.

I'm sure I saw somewhere that there was talk of scaling back the expansion of the East Scotland ROC (and West of Scotland ROC?) and instead opening some smaller Signalling Centres.

 

[MadMac]

I'm sure I saw somewhere that there was talk of scaling back the expansion of the East Scotland ROC (and West of Scotland ROC?) and instead opening some smaller Signalling Centres.

That’s what I recall, part of which was that whenever a decision is eventually made about Perth, it will retain a local signaling presence.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 21 Jan 2025 ==

I'm sure I saw somewhere that there was talk of scaling back the expansion of the East Scotland ROC (and West of Scotland ROC?) and instead opening some smaller Signalling Centres.

That’s what I recall, part of which was that whenever a decision is eventually made about Perth, it will retain a local signaling presence.