Thoughts about level crossings

[LYRobert]

Looking at U-tube videos under the heading "Level Crossing Abuse" I note that offenders don't heed the 'wig-wag' warning lights. The lights wink, and the offenders simply plough on regardless. I have tried to understand why they do it, the rules are quite clear - when lights show, you wait. Nevertheless people push on - for what? To save two or three minutes? Surely that can't be the real reason - taking an enourmous risk to save a couple of minutes. It defies logic. There must be other compelling reasons lurking in the background - in the subconcious. Maybe those flashing lights are seen to present a challenge - manage a sucessful transgression and that goes down as a "Win" - "Look - I made it" so that the offender can chalk up some imaginary points on an imaginary score-card.

But we don't see the same attitude toward ordinary traffic lights on the streets. Nearly everybody behaves themselves at a road junction, say, or a pedestrian crossing. Yes, I know there are some offenders, but only by the "Compulsive Get-Aheader" class of drivers, and not so many of them, and nowhere near as blatent. So that sets me wondering why the railway chose to be different, and have 'wig-wag' lights and not plain traffic lights. After all, a level crossing is a sort of cross-roads, and your average road-user knows how to deal with ordinary traffic lights at a cross-roads.

I suggest a trial - fit ordinary traffic lights at a well-used crossing - Poole, say, and see if it makes any difference to behaviour - drivers and pedestrians alike. I suspect it will - by substituting normality for the wig-wag challenge.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

In my experience, drivers are just as likely to race through regular traffic lights on amber (or even red if they've only just changed) as they are through the first few flashes of the wigwags.

I think there's a few reasons people do it though- they don't want to be held up, they assume they'll have a good bit of leeway before a train arrives, and some people somehow still believe that the train will be able to stop on a sixpence like a car or tram can.
Short of an instant 12 month ban for disobeying the signal, I'm not sure what can be done other than keep on with the occasional public information films... just hope they don't have to learn the lesson the hard way.

Using standard traffic lights would require a legislative change, as wigwags are a compulsory stop for all vehicles including Emergency Services on a "blues and twos" call.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

I think this has been going on since the introduction of wig wags and lifting barriers; especially with pedestrians. However, these days with busier lines, barriers can be "down" for much longer and people have clocked on to this, especially if there isn't a footbridge or subway.

Believe me, traffic lights are ignored a lot. People are more impatient these days and will chance it if they can get away with it. Many level crossings, especially those in more rural areas, or automatic ones now have road cameras to catch motorists that plough through. There are also some junctions adjacent to level crossings that are traffic light controlled; so maybe, drivers are less likely to jump the lights - West Worthing springs to mind

 

[43066]

Looking at U-tube videos under the heading "Level Crossing Abuse" I note that offenders don't heed the 'wig-wag' warning lights. The lights wink, and the offenders simply plough on regardless. I have tried to understand why they do it, the rules are quite clear - when lights show, you wait. Nevertheless people push on - for what? To save two or three minutes? Surely that can't be the real reason - taking an enourmous risk to save a couple of minutes. It defies logic. There must be other compelling reasons lurking in the background - in the subconcious. Maybe those flashing lights are seen to present a challenge - manage a sucessful transgression and that goes down as a "Win" - "Look - I made it" so that the offender can chalk up some imaginary points on an imaginary score-card.

But we don't see the same attitude toward ordinary traffic lights on the streets. Nearly everybody behaves themselves at a road junction, say, or a pedestrian crossing. Yes, I know there are some offenders, but only by the "Compulsive Get-Aheader" class of drivers, and not so many of them, and nowhere near as blatent. So that sets me wondering why the railway chose to be different, and have 'wig-wag' lights and not plain traffic lights. After all, a level crossing is a sort of cross-roads, and your average road-user knows how to deal with ordinary traffic lights at a cross-roads.

I suggest a trial - fit ordinary traffic lights at a well-used crossing - Poole, say, and see if it makes any difference to behaviour - drivers and pedestrians alike. I suspect it will - by substituting normality for the wig-wag challenge.

Ordinary traffic lights at level crossings are a poor idea because (as above) they can be passed by emergency service vehicles! It wouldn’t be desirable to prevent these vehicles from passing all traffic lights in the way they are currently prevented from passing wig wags, as would then be necessary.

I didn’t think crossings were more more prone to misuse than normal traffic lights - indeed I’d suspect the opposite is the case. As for why a few people take risks, it’s down to a combination of stupidity, impatience, or in many cases both!

 

[zwk500]

Looking at U-tube videos under the heading "Level Crossing Abuse" I note that offenders don't heed the 'wig-wag' warning lights. The lights wink, and the offenders simply plough on regardless. I have tried to understand why they do it, the rules are quite clear - when lights show, you wait. Nevertheless people push on - for what? To save two or three minutes? Surely that can't be the real reason - taking an enourmous risk to save a couple of minutes. It defies logic. There must be other compelling reasons lurking in the background - in the subconcious. Maybe those flashing lights are seen to present a challenge - manage a sucessful transgression and that goes down as a "Win" - "Look - I made it" so that the offender can chalk up some imaginary points on an imaginary score-card.

But we don't see the same attitude toward ordinary traffic lights on the streets. Nearly everybody behaves themselves at a road junction, say, or a pedestrian crossing. Yes, I know there are some offenders, but only by the "Compulsive Get-Aheader" class of drivers, and not so many of them, and nowhere near as blatent. So that sets me wondering why the railway chose to be different, and have 'wig-wag' lights and not plain traffic lights. After all, a level crossing is a sort of cross-roads, and your average road-user knows how to deal with ordinary traffic lights at a cross-roads.

I suggest a trial - fit ordinary traffic lights at a well-used crossing - Poole, say, and see if it makes any difference to behaviour - drivers and pedestrians alike. I suspect it will - by substituting normality for the wig-wag challenge.

I think perhaps you are slightly optimistic about driver's attitudes. Behaviour in many other aspects of driving such as lane usage, speed, following distance, attitude to other users, etc demonstrates that a substantial number of UK drivers are very happy to jeopardise safety for the sake of a few seconds that they then lose further up the road.
Traffic signals and signs are for lesser mortals who are stupid enough to obey the law - people who know the game think traffic laws are just silly things put there to inconvenience them.

 

[swt_passenger]

[…]
I suggest a trial - fit ordinary traffic lights at a well-used crossing - Poole, say, and see if it makes any difference to behaviour - drivers and pedestrians alike. I suspect it will - by substituting normality for the wig-wag challenge.

This has been suggested here many, many times. Almost every time there’s a level crossing problem discussed.

But you do regularly see people passing normal traffic lights as they turn red, because they have speeded up on amber rather then slowing down. I reckon your idea would make absolutely no difference. That’s without considering that wigwags are also used for quite a few other sites, such as lift or swing bridges, fire and ambulance station exits, low flying aircraft etc, etc. So maybe drivers should just follow the rules they’re already supposed to know…

 

[zwk500]

So maybe drivers should just follow the rules they’re already supposed to know…

Yes, see if we can't redeploy a few of the yellow box junction cameras to level crossings, and while we're at it up the penalty to 10 points, plus liability for all costs incurred by NR, TOC and Police/Ambulance/Fire when you get hit (with a fine up to £10,000 if you get lucky and don't hit anything).

On a wider note, anybody who loses their license should be made to re-sit their test to get it back, and every driver should be required to re-certify their theory test every 5 or 10 years.

 

[Fleetmaster]

It's more like five minutes, even ten on a mainline. These days that's the difference between getting to work on time and getting your last warning. A stupid decision made for seemingly rational reasons. People have also surely grown used to the idea the lights start flashing well before a train arrives, so in that respect, it can seem like a very low risk, risk.

 

[Taunton]

I think this has been going on since the introduction of wig wags and lifting barriers; especially with pedestrians. However, these days with busier lines, barriers can be "down" for much longer and people have clocked on to this, especially if there isn't a footbridge or subway.

Not just busier lines. I have written before about how, especially at all the crossings on the Barnes to Richmond line, each generation of new signalling leads to longer closure times for each train. On a line where the gates are across for more than 30 minutes of each hour, sometimes for four trains, two each way, it becomes significant.

 

[zwk500]

Not just busier lines. I have written before about how, especially at all the crossings on the Barnes to Richmond line, each generation of new signalling leads to longer closure times for each train. On a line where the gates are across for more than 30 minutes of each hour, sometimes for four trains, two each way, it becomes significant.

Of course, part of this is a greater safety awareness to factor in the regular misbehaviour of crossings.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I think perhaps you are slightly optimistic about driver's attitudes. Behaviour in many other aspects of driving such as lane usage, speed, following distance, attitude to other users, etc demonstrates that a substantial number of UK drivers are very happy to jeopardise safety for the sake of a few seconds that they then lose further up the road.
Traffic signals and signs are for lesser mortals who are stupid enough to obey the law - people who know the game think traffic laws are just silly things put there to inconvenience them.

There will always be those drivers who are averse to sticking to the rules. It takes a few transgressions for them to lose their licence and unfortunately many of them do not see a licence as necessary to drive anyway. Much less insurance.

But I think there is a section of the motoring public who are not conciously breaking or bending the rules. I think the flashg zig-zag reds are somehow weaker than a solid red. There might actually be a majority of motorists overall who fall in to this bracket as many will never encounter a flashing zig-zag red. A bit more explanation below.

This has been suggested here many, many times. Almost every time there’s a level crossing problem discussed.

But you do regularly see people passing normal traffic lights as they turn red, because they have speeded up on amber rather then slowing down. I reckon your idea would make absolutely no difference. That’s without considering that wigwags are also used for quite a few other sites, such as lift or swing bridges, fire and ambulance station exits, low flying aircraft etc, etc. So maybe drivers should just follow the rules they’re already supposed to know…

I think the problem with the zig zag lights is they are not perceived as like a solid red. I feel that for myself on the very rare occasions I encounter them. I would instinctively never pass a solid red but it seems to take a moment for me to think about a zig-zag red. It is as though it is a second thought rather than a primary instinct to STOP. So I think it is too unfamiliar to many otherwise law abiding motorists. It would not matter if people went through on an amber or a just turned red as much as if the solid red had been there for more than a few seconds - but I suggest a flashing zig-zag red might be seen psychologically as less definite than a solid red (maybe like an amber or just turning red).

Yes, see if we can't redeploy a few of the yellow box junction cameras to level crossings, and while we're at it up the penalty to 10 points, plus liability for all costs incurred by NR, TOC and Police/Ambulance/Fire when you get hit (with a fine up to £10,000 if you get lucky and don't hit anything).

On a wider note, anybody who loses their license should be made to re-sit their test to get it back, and every driver should be required to re-certify their theory test every 5 or 10 years.

There must be two types of transgressors. Those who routinely flirt rules and those who are kind of unfamiliar with flashing zig-zag reds.

I think we need to look at this as not motorists breaking rules but as motorists making a mistake. Mistakes happen and there is something weak about the flashing zig-zag reds n my view. Perhaps a SOLID red accompanied by the flashing red.

As for re-sitting tests. I think everybody should do that every ten years. But for those who are seen as consistently averse to rules there needs to be some method of preventing them driving. Perhaps a chip in their body that cars recognise and will then not start.

 

[zwk500]

There will always be those drivers who are averse to sticking to the rules. It takes a few transgressions for them to lose their licence and unfortunately many of them do not see a licence as necessary to drive anyway. Much less insurance.

There must be two types of transgressors. Those who routinely flirt rules and those who are kind of unfamiliar with flashing zig-zag reds.

I have yet to encounter a situation where a flashing red light means anything other than 'do not pass/enter/remain in the area'. Even if you are unsure, you have 3 aids to help you - 1. The Highway code lists the signal and what you should do. 2. There are signs on approach saying 'STOP when lights flash' and 3. There's an amber warning light and accompanying audible signal.

I really cannot think of any other situation in life generally where a Klaxon with Red Flashing lights means 'continue normally'. As mentioned above, Wig-wags are outside plenty of Emergency service locations as well as moveable bridges and other similar hazards that require a hard stop. If drivers aren't aware of the meaning of said signals they should be sent a copy of the highway code along with their points endorsement on their license.

Regarding drivers who consider themselves above the law - there are certainly those for whom any motoring legislation is superfluous, but there is a much bigger category of driver who believe themselves to be law-abiding citizens and will have taxed, insured and MOT'd their vehicle and hold a valid license but believe their judgement to carry more weight than traffic signals or the highway code. These are the people who need to be put on notice that if it's red, stop.

 

[Fleetmaster]

I think you may be in the minority. A zig zag red is definitely both more alarming by its nature than a standard red light, and for the very fact it is unusual (but not so rare that any reasonably experienced motorist hasn't come across them).

 

[43066]

I think the problem with the zig zag lights is they are not perceived as like a solid red.

Anyone who has a driving license should know the difference between wig wags and a solid red, and there’s really no excuse for not doing so.

I don’t believe for a second that the people who take these risks don’t know exactly what it means, they simply choose to do it anyway.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Apr 2023 ==

but there is a much bigger category of driver who believe themselves to be law-abiding citizens and will have taxed, insured and MOT'd their vehicle and hold a valid license but believe their judgement to carry more weight than traffic signals or the highway code. These are the people who need to be put on notice that if it's red, stop.

Agreed.

 

[Fleetmaster]

For the record, joyriders aside, anyone driving without a license or insurance, doesn't tend to do anything to draw attention to themselves or otherwise get their number plate and mugshot on a camera. It's already a manner if law breaking that requires the offender to know they ought to at least make sure their plate is taxed (which of course is not the same as saying the car is) given the number of static and mobile anpr cameras there are out there now.

 

[Krokodil]

Ordinary traffic lights at level crossings are a poor idea because (as above) they can be passed by emergency service vehicles!

Isn't there a crossing somewhere (Glasgow?) which is directly adjacent to a road junction but instead of using the set up used at Deganwy Quay (where there are both wig-wags and conventional traffic lights which work together) purely relies upon traffic lights. Presumably the local blue light drivers are trained to treat this particular junction as a mandatory stop.

I think perhaps you are slightly optimistic about driver's attitudes. Behaviour in many other aspects of driving such as lane usage, speed, following distance, attitude to other users, etc demonstrates that a substantial number of UK drivers are very happy to jeopardise safety for the sake of a few seconds that they then lose further up the road.
Traffic signals and signs are for lesser mortals who are stupid enough to obey the law - people who know the game think traffic laws are just silly things put there to inconvenience them.

Behaviour is bad all around, granted. People seem more likely to ignore level crossing lights than traffic lights though, but I imagine that this is due to the length of time they anticipate stopping for.

I think we need to look at this as not motorists breaking rules but as motorists making a mistake.

Rubbish. Not one person in the UK genuinely thinks "flashing red lights mean stopping is optional". They know perfectly well that what they are doing is wrong, and they do it anyway.

 

[zwk500]

Behaviour is bad all around, granted. People seem more likely to ignore level crossing lights than traffic lights though, but I imagine that this is due to the length of time they anticipate stopping for.

It's based on the tradeoff between the perceived risk and the length of the expected stop. Many road users know that the lights come on well before the train gets close, so think they have plenty of time even after the lights go red. They expect the crossing to be closed for 5 minutes or so, and therefore they think it's worth jumping the lights.

I've been driving along plenty of roads later at night when red Traffic lights have been habitually ignored by the majority of vehicles because they can see a much lower level of traffic and therefore think it's perfectly fine to breeze past the red light above the speed limit.

 

[Railsigns]

Isn't there a crossing somewhere (Glasgow?) which is directly adjacent to a road junction but instead of using the set up used at Deganwy Quay (where there are both wig-wags and conventional traffic lights which work together) purely relies upon traffic lights. Presumably the local blue light drivers are trained to treat this particular junction as a mandatory stop.

Logans Road level crossing in Motherwell. Since this crossing has full barriers and is monitored by CCTV, emergency vehicles ignoring the red lights isn't a major concern.

 

[Peter Sarf]

I have yet to encounter a situation where a flashing red light means anything other than 'do not pass/enter/remain in the area'. Even if you are unsure, you have 3 aids to help you - 1. The Highway code lists the signal and what you should do. 2. There are signs on approach saying 'STOP when lights flash' and 3. There's an amber warning light and accompanying audible signal.

I really cannot think of any other situation in life generally where a Klaxon with Red Flashing lights means 'continue normally'. As mentioned above, Wig-wags are outside plenty of Emergency service locations as well as moveable bridges and other similar hazards that require a hard stop. If drivers aren't aware of the meaning of said signals they should be sent a copy of the highway code along with their points endorsement on their license.

Regarding drivers who consider themselves above the law - there are certainly those for whom any motoring legislation is superfluous, but there is a much bigger category of driver who believe themselves to be law-abiding citizens and will have taxed, insured and MOT'd their vehicle and hold a valid license but believe their judgement to carry more weight than traffic signals or the highway code. These are the people who need to be put on notice that if it's red, stop.

My point is they are not as familiar as normal traffic lights to many so the reaction will not be so instant.

Anyone who has a driving license should know the difference between wig wags and a solid red, and there’s really no excuse for not doing so.

I don’t believe for a second that the people who take these risks don’t know exactly what it means, they simply choose to do it anyway.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Apr 2023 ==



Agreed.

They are not all taking risks - only those who really want to flout the rules do that. For many drivers zig-zag reds are an unfamiliar experience.

Isn't there a crossing somewhere (Glasgow?) which is directly adjacent to a road junction but instead of using the set up used at Deganwy Quay (where there are both wig-wags and conventional traffic lights which work together) purely relies upon traffic lights. Presumably the local blue light drivers are trained to treat this particular junction as a mandatory stop.

Behaviour is bad all around, granted. People seem more likely to ignore level crossing lights than traffic lights though, but I imagine that this is due to the length of time they anticipate stopping for.

Rubbish. Not one person in the UK genuinely thinks "flashing red lights mean stopping is optional". They know perfectly well that what they are doing is wrong, and they do it anyway.

I beg to differ. I think that there is a risk that many drivers are not reacting on instinct as fast as they would to a solid red. I find for me it is a "oh whats this then" moment and then I remember its stop. For me I am always going to stop if in doubt but for some it might mean they have not thought fast enough.

I am totally sure there are those will jump a red light and I am also sure there are those who are impatient.

I think an attitude that it is all the drivers deliberate fault is a route to not understanding the problem.

 

[43066]

Isn't there a crossing somewhere (Glasgow?) which is directly adjacent to a road junction but instead of using the set up used at Deganwy Quay (where there are both wig-wags and conventional traffic lights which work together) purely relies upon traffic lights. Presumably the local blue light drivers are trained to treat this particular junction as a mandatory stop.

Not sure on that one. I know on the Croydon Tramlink the “level crossings” do use normal traffic lights, but of course trams are driven on sight and at a much slower speed, so are a different kettle fish.

I find for me it is a "oh whats this then" moment and then I remember its stop.

In that case, I sincerely hope you don’t drive over any of the level crossings I sign!

 

[zwk500]

I think an attitude that it is all the drivers deliberate fault is a route to not understanding the problem.

No, it literally is the problem. The driver has a responsibility to make sure they are familiar with the signs in use around the network. Wig-wags are not some completely arcane 1-off usage signal, they are regular and come up where there is a railway, moveable bridge, emergency service or other similar hazard (airport runways have them on occasion).

If a driver is unfamiliar with the signal they have failed to uphold their part of the license where they undertake to make sure they know the highway code. Wig-wags aren't convoy working or something most drivers wouldn't see in a year.

 

[Peter Sarf]

..........................

In that case, I sincerely hope you don’t drive over any of the level crossings I sign!

You really need to grasp the point I am making. I think many people react less quickly to a varying degree and not as instinctively as they would to a solid red. If you don't like that then stop driving trains or better insist crossings are replaced by bridges.

Or would it be better to understand the problem and mitigate it ?.

 

[Bikeman78]

Not just busier lines. I have written before about how, especially at all the crossings on the Barnes to Richmond line, each generation of new signalling leads to longer closure times for each train. On a line where the gates are across for more than 30 minutes of each hour, sometimes for four trains, two each way, it becomes significant.

Same in Horsham. The queue at Parsonage road now has to be seen to be believed. But someone truly believes this is a win for society in general.

 

[Peter Sarf]

No, it literally is the problem. The driver has a responsibility to make sure they are familiar with the signs in use around the network. Wig-wags are not some completely arcane 1-off usage signal, they are regular and come up where there is a railway, moveable bridge, emergency service or other similar hazard (airport runways have them on occasion).

If a driver is unfamiliar with the signal they have failed to uphold their part of the license where they undertake to make sure they know the highway code. Wig-wags aren't convoy working or something most drivers wouldn't see in a year.

I am not saying they are unfamiliar with the rule BUT I suspect many are not instinctively reacting to it as fast as they would to a red.

 

[zwk500]

I find for me it is a "oh whats this then" moment and then I remember its stop.

You have ahelpful sign on approach to warn you EXACTLY what you should do when the lights flash https://www.google.com/maps/@50.838...4!1sIgihs0MweDQemED0gmEJJQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192

If you have passed that sign and still don't remember what the lights mean, you have been driving without due care and attention. The Amber light is timed to allow for normal safe braking, a moment's hesitation is not a problem. If the lights are already red when you approach then you have ample sighting time to slow down the car wihtout heavy braking.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Apr 2023 ==

I am not saying they are unfamiliar with the rule BUT I suspect many are not instinctively reacting to it as fast as they would to a red.

I'm sorry, but this is purely a problem of driving standards and training. The Wig-wag exists as a separate signal from traffic lights for good reason - to convey the much higher risk associated with the hazard at the site. It should not be the duty of the highway authorities to surrender to crap drivers who don't familiarise themselves with a fairly basic signal.

 

[satisnek]

I think that the main problem here is the yellow/amber light. The Highway Code states the following:

AMBER means ‘Stop’ at the stop line. You may go on only if the AMBER appears after you have crossed the stop line or are so close to it that to pull up might cause an accident

Well that's what they think it means. Down here in the real world it actually means: "The lights are about to go red so put your foot down and get over the line pronto". I see it regularly at traffic light junctions when cycling to work and I've also seen it a couple of times at the AHB crossing near the marina. Perhaps railway-style 'distant signals' are a solution?

 

[zwk500]

I think that the main problem here is the yellow/amber light. The Highway Code states the following:

Well that's what they think it means. Down here in the real world it actually means: "The lights are about to go red so put your foot down and get over the line pronto". I see it regularly at traffic light junctions when cycling to work and I've also seen it a couple of times at the AHB crossing near the marina. Perhaps railway-style 'distant signals' are a solution?

The Amber effectively is a distant signal.

Stronger enforcement and penalties are the answer. Run a wig-wag = 10 points, no if's no but's. You're on your last chance until the points expire. Perhaps points for running a wig-wag should last for 5 years instead of 3 as well?

 

[43066]

You really need to grasp the point I am making. I think many people react less quickly to a varying degree and not as instinctively as they would to a solid red. If you don't like that then stop driving trains or better insist crossings are replaced by bridges.

I grasp it, but I don’t agree with it. It’s such an odd suggestion that I’m not sure if you’re being entirely serious. I don’t believe for a second that people somehow think wig wags mean stop “less” than normal traffic lights do.

If you (or anyone else reading this) genuinely have a moment’s hesitation before remembering what wig wags mean then I’d suggest it isn’t me who should consider stopping driving…

Or would it be better to understand the problem and mitigate it ?.

Catching and properly punishing people would be a start - perhaps cameras at every crossing with high fines and driving bans.

 

[AlastairFraser]

Additional red lights would reinforce the existing lights, but wouldn't stop the blazen willing offender types.
Someone above suggested cameras and that's probably the best solution. Installation paid for by NR at high risk crossings and monitored by the local highways authority. £10k fine min if you cross onto the crossing itself.
They would soon pay the installation cost back and provide an incentive for drivers to change their behaviour.

 

[Railsigns]

Perhaps railway-style 'distant signals' are a solution?

Barberstown level crossing in Ireland has one of those - a flashing amber wigwag on one side of the crossing, where a hump bridge over a canal restricts sighting of the main wigwags.