Why such delays at unmanned level crossings?

[Ellaguru]

Here in NE Essex, I have two alternative routes to and from work.

One is via an unmanned, double gated crossing at Ardleigh, on the main London Norwich line. Even outside peak times, this busy crossing handles two up and down Norwich expresses, probably two or three freght trains to and from Felixstowe, and minimum two commuter trains. During the morning and evening commute, those numbers increase. But I am seldom delayed more than a two to three minutes - a train passes and barriers are raised even for a short time before warning signals cut in for the next one. (Sometimes the delay can be five minutes but thats an exception).

The other is at Thorrington, on the Colchester to Clacton and Walton branch. Typically, this handles four trains an hour - maybe six during peaktime. However, the delays at this crossing are much longer. There seems to be a genuine reluctance to raise the barriers if the next train is (say) less than ten minutes away. The net result is that people drive for miles around to avoid this bottleneck.

So my question is this: how does this system work? Are these level crossings controlled from the same control room? Why should the performance of one be so much worse than another? Can any action be suggested that I could take to try and get this service improved?

(The irony is that Thorrington until about 2000 was actually a manned level crossing, with a bloke who had to walk the single wide gate open and closed and the delays then were far less than they are today operating with the same timetable!)

 

[najaB]

However, the delays at this crossing are much longer. There seems to be a genuine reluctance to raise the barriers if the next train is (say) less than ten minutes away.

Is it really as much as ten minutes, or is that an exaggeration? I'm not familiar with the area, is there a station nearby?

 

[Ellaguru]

There is a station nearby - right in the village of Great Bentley. (They also have a level crossing btw).

The Thorrington crossing is also in the middle of a four way function (but should that make a difference?)

A 10 minute delay can occur when the barriers are left down waiting for a 2nd train to pass. (And possibly even a third).

But the key point is that while there would be an opportunity to raise the barriers for a short time to allow waiting cars to clear, it simply doesn't happen.

 

[GB]

I used to work at Thorrington level crossing before it changed to CCTV manual barriers and it was pretty much the same then as it is now. The trouble being you have two stations on the fringes of the calling points and by time one train cleared the crossing the next was already either within the calling point or very close to it. As a result you would often get three or four trains through in one hit.

The difference then was you had a man on the ground who's sole job was to operate the crossing and who could use their judgment (based on where the trains were and how much road traffic was waiting) to do a "quick swing" if appropriate.

Obviously the signallers at Colchester who now monitor/operate the crossing have a huge workload where a single crossing is only a tiny part of their duties so often not able to quickly raise and then lower the barriers. Specially when you have TDA and potential damage to the barriers to think about.

 

[John Webb]

Deleted following the post from GB

 

[306024]

You need a Colchester signal box expert to answer your question, but this simplistic explanation may help a bit. Both crossings are controlled from Colchester, but on different work stations.

Ardleigh level crossing is approximately 4.5 miles from Colchester, 3.5 miles from Manningtree. The line speed is 100 mph.

Thorrington level crossing is about 2 miles from Alresford and 1 mile from Great Bentley. The line speed is 75 mph for passenger trains, 60 mph for other trains.

Once Ardleigh barriers are down, most trains will clear the crossing quicker, simply because they are going faster, even if they have stopped at Colchester and Manningtree (most passenger trains do). At Thorrington, trains which have called at Alresford and Great Bentley will be going slower, so you wait longer. The mix of fast and slow trains at Thorrington also combine to cause the gates to be lower for longer.

The signalling on the line will also determine when the gates have to be lowered to allow trains get green lights, and therefore how long you wait. Before resignalling of the Clacton line it was unusual for a train to get green lights all the way if you drove it at linespeed. Most drivers hung back a bit to ensure they didn't get checked, that made it difficult to keep time, but you didn't lose as much time as you would by passing a yellow signal.

As for action, well the MP at Oulton Broad North persuaded Network Rail to move a signal to reduce the time the gates were lowered there, but that is in the town. You may struggle to get the same outcome at rural Thorrington.

 

[GB]

(The irony is that Thorrington until about 2000 was actually a manned level crossing, with a bloke who had to walk the single wide gate open and closed and the delays then were far less than they are today operating with the same timetable!)

I left early 2008 so it was either late 2008 or early 2009 they were all converted.

 

[The Planner]

Surely it is down to the strike in points, the higher the linespeed the further away they are going to be and the longer the barriers will be down.

 

[306024]

Surely it is down to the strike in points, the higher the linespeed the further away they are going to be and the longer the barriers will be down.

Strike in points, linespeed, signalling, traffic type, station stops, there are many variables. In this example it us the proximity of the relative stations that plays a significant part.

 

[Ellaguru]

Thanks all for that really useful information.

Both crossings are controlled from Colchester, but on different work stations.

If they are controlled from workstations, then presumably system logs will be maintained of precisely what times the gates were lowered and raised each and every day?

So the data would be available to support (or undermine) my case that there is significant scope for improving this service?

If a local councillor (for example) requested Network Rail to provide a sample day's logs, how might they respond?

(we start with the data ...)

 

[TheEdge]

I think the biggest issue may be how long that sort of data is held for if at all. You may find the data is only kept in the event of an incident where it needs to be preserved. Otherwise like other passive recording systems (like aircraft black boxes) or even OTMR on trains data of no interest will get overwritten fairly quickly.

You could ask for it, not sure how NR would respond or if its even possible to view it without propriety internal systems.

 

[LAX54]

306024 is correct

Ardleigh is controlled from the Colchester w/stn, the line speed is 100mph, at this location there is no station in the area, so all trains are running at line speed, and yes cover the distance quicker, Freight can take time depending on the weather (damp / wet) and if they are on restrictive aspects.

Thorrington is controlled by the Thorpe Le Soken workstation, who also has Great Bentley, Burrs Road and Frinton CCTV as well. Thorrington is almost mid-point Arelsford and Gt Bentley, service pattern is 1 Fast, 1 Slow in each direction, the 'problem' arises with the call in point, it is the same for all trains, those that stop at Bentley and Arlesford and those that don't.
The rule is train strikes in, and the Signaller lowers the barriers and clears the signals, now if this is a fast train, all is well, a few mins and the train is gone, a stopper, could take 3 mins or more longer, now combine this with a train striking in in the other direction as a train is passing Thorrington, then the time can be extended many minutes. Signallers do where possible raise the gates in between such trains, but if they are also dealing with maybe a line blockage for the S&T / PWAY elsewhere at the same time, then this may not be possible, (or if has an incident going on too) The other thing at the back of the Signallers mind is delay...'DELAY' ! if by raising the gates, and allowing traffic through, and then delays another service by a signal check or similar, then he will, get the delay, and if too many, will be placed on 'poor peformance'
On the Down Line to get a Greens 'all the way' the barriers must be down by the time the train is just past Coach Road CCTV.
On The Up Line to obtain all Greens the barriers must be down and clear by the time the Up train is leaving / passing Great Bentley Station.
Hope that sort of explains it..... a bit
I am the SSM at Colchester ASC.

As GB says in the old days there was a man at the crossing with gates, who could open and shut quite quickly between trains, and that is all he dealt with, nothing else. plus cars tend to stop a bit better for gates, the amount of traffic that seems to confuse flashing reds for a green light is astronomical !

An option is have a strike in point based on headcode Class 1 at Point A and Class 2 at Point B, but that then throws up the fact that Class 1 and Class 2 headcodes these days does not mean fast and slow anymore !!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You need a Colchester signal box expert to answer your question, but this simplistic explanation may help a bit. Both crossings are controlled from Colchester, but on different work stations.

Ardleigh level crossing is approximately 4.5 miles from Colchester, 3.5 miles from Manningtree. The line speed is 100 mph.

Thorrington level crossing is about 2 miles from Alresford and 1 mile from Great Bentley. The line speed is 75 mph for passenger trains, 60 mph for other trains.

Once Ardleigh barriers are down, most trains will clear the crossing quicker, simply because they are going faster, even if they have stopped at Colchester and Manningtree (most passenger trains do). At Thorrington, trains which have called at Alresford and Great Bentley will be going slower, so you wait longer. The mix of fast and slow trains at Thorrington also combine to cause the gates to be lower for longer.

The signalling on the line will also determine when the gates have to be lowered to allow trains get green lights, and therefore how long you wait. Before resignalling of the Clacton line it was unusual for a train to get green lights all the way if you drove it at linespeed. Most drivers hung back a bit to ensure they didn't get checked, that made it difficult to keep time, but you didn't lose as much time as you would by passing a yellow signal.

As for action, well the MP at Oulton Broad North persuaded Network Rail to move a signal to reduce the time the gates were lowered there, but that is in the town. You may struggle to get the same outcome at rural Thorrington.

Think that was more to do with the proximty of the platform starter to the road, so the back door benefit was to road users, of course trains take a min or so longer to get from LWT to OBN, as the Signaller cannot clear the Home signal until train is at a stand or nearly at a stand (OB31)

 

[Ellaguru]

In this example it us the proximity of the relative stations that plays a significant part

Let me now turn to the timetable. Let's take a weekday off peak hour's working from the perspective of a clock at the crossing gates:

1118 Fast Clacton London due
1121 Slow Colchester Clacton due
1126 Slow Clacton Colchester due
1129 Fast London Clacton due

As discussed above, the signaller gets notified when trains pass GBR and Church Road.

Fast up might take 48 secs from GBR to the Crossing.
Fast down might take 90 secs from Church Road to the Crossing.
Slow up (accelerating) might take 120 secs from GBR to the Crossing.
Slow down (accelerating) might take 180 secs from Church Rd to the Crossing.
(clearly these are estimates)

Plugging these figures in:

1118 Fast Clacton London on time - gates closed at (say) 1117
1118 gates could open but ...
1118 Slow Colchester Clacton on time, just passing Church Rd - gates stay down
1121 Slow Colchester Clacton passes
1121 Gates should open
1124 gates should close
1126 Slow Clacton Colchester due
1129 Fast London Clacton due

As discussed, the signaller may have something else to deal with, and trains frequently experience short delays, but I think I have illustrated how even to planned workings gates may remain closed from 1117 to 1129 each off peak hour. That's 12 minutes or 20% of the time!

Now when you switch to peaktimes, 11 trains leave Thorpe le Soken for Colchester between 0600 and 0900 which is almost twice the off peak number. Plug that into the model and its easy to determine that the gates will be closed for around 20 - 30 minutes each hour, with closure durations (and this is the important point) regularly around 10 minutes.

The irony of all this of course is that between the crossing in question at Thorrington and the crossing at Great Bentley, there is an unmanned, single automatic gated crossing, on a single track road (Frating Abbey Rd). It is perhaps 500m towards Great Bentley. It is controlled by a computer. The gate opens when it needs to, and closes when it can. The delays at this gate are negligible! Delays here are simply not an issue.

I am not advocating replacing the signaller controlled crossing at Thorrington with single automatic gates. But is there anything that could possibly be suggested to improve this situation?

 

[najaB]

But is there anything that could possibly be suggested to improve this situation?

Close the crossing and replace it with a bridge - that's NR's long-term goal for most if not all crossings on main roads.

 

[Ellaguru]

Close the crossing and replace it with a bridge - that's NR's long-term goal for most if not all crossings on main roads.

Because of the complexities of this specific road junction, I think thats highly unlikely:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place...x1c56bc654209c419!8m2!3d51.8270277!4d1.054677

 

[GB]

The irony of all this of course is that between the crossing in question at Thorrington and the crossing at Great Bentley, there is an unmanned, single automatic gated crossing, on a single track road (Frating Abbey Rd). It is perhaps 500m towards Great Bentley. It is controlled by a computer. The gate opens when it needs to, and closes when it can. The delays at this gate are negligible! Delays here are simply not an issue.

Its not really ironic as the controls and signalling set up for AHB crossings as well as the rules for their installation are completely different to full barrier crossings.

Also, as Great Bentley station is within the strike in point for Frating AHBs I'm sure (though could be wrong) the signalling is fitted with stop/non stop controls for up services to stop the crossing lowering to early if the train calls at the station.

In the down direction the signal will show a proceed aspect (block permitting) regardless if the barriers are up or down.

 

[AM9]

Because of the complexities of this specific road junction, I think thats highly unlikely:
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/place...x1c56bc654209c419!8m2!3d51.8270277!4d1.054677

If the map is still representative, I would say that a bridge from Station road to Great Bentley Road would be practical. The major traffic flow would be improved and the Frating/Great Bromley route is accessible from two roads off Great Bentley Road. Church Road may well be used as a rat run but is really only there for local traffic. In addition, there is a Balfour Beatty yard but no residential properties within 120m of the crossing so there should just be enough space to put reasonable ramps down either side.

 

[GB]

The question is whether they would build a bridge to replace a crossing that has zero safety issues or that in the grand scheme of things doesn't really cause that much delay.

 

[AM9]

The question is whether they would build a bridge to replace a crossing that has zero safety issues or that in the grand scheme of things doesn't really cause that much delay.

Obviously not that incidental to some.

 

[najaB]

The question is whether they would build a bridge to replace a crossing that has zero safety issues or that in the grand scheme of things doesn't really cause that much delay.

Well, all crossings have potential safety issues, but I agree this one is probably pretty far down the priority list.

 

[Ellaguru]

What I am really looking for is any suggestions for technical improvements in signalling or general improvements in working practices which might be actually be feasible?

And which could be implemented by Network Rail without a major cost impact or undue delay?

 

[306024]

What I am really looking for is any suggestions for technical improvements in signalling or general improvements in working practices which might be actually be feasible?

And which could be implemented by Network Rail without a major cost impact or undue delay?

Unfortunately the bits in bold won't fit in the same sentence. And as said in the national scheme of things Thorrington would be so far down the list as to not appear at all. Waiting in a car at a level crossing is frustrating, but that's life as they say.

 

[XDM]

It always amazed me when travelling passenger in the unit back cab that the level crossing barriers would lift within half a second of us passing,yet point work for a move that was blocked by our passage would take a minute or more to move & the signals even longer to clear. If the proving system for a car to safely cross can work in micro seconds, why can't it be the same for proving points.

 

[moggie]

What I am really looking for is any suggestions for technical improvements in signalling or general improvements in working practices which might be actually be feasible?

And which could be implemented by Network Rail without a major cost impact or undue delay?

Unfortunately the bits in bold won't fit in the same sentence. And as said in the national scheme of things Thorrington would be so far down the list as to not appear at all. Waiting in a car at a level crossing is frustrating, but that's life as they say.

Not knowing the particular installation there's probably good reason why the following isn't employed but options that do exist with variable measures of effectiveness.

The first is the use of Auto Lower / Auto Raise control. This would typically be employed where road closure time needs to be minimised and where the signaller is unable due to planned workload to manage all aspects of crossing operation effectively (of course the signaller still has to confirm crossing clear). The use of this facility is relatively small to employ if. I assume from the description of the issues this control is not used / provided at present, the reason why will be known by the operator.

Level Crossing predictor technology also exists to optimise the strike in point used to call the crossing, especially useful where the speed of approaching trains varies which seems to be the case here. This requires extra equipment.

If as inferred by other posts the issue is predominantly created by the timetabling of trains which means that Up and Down trains approach the crossing strike in points at approximately the same time there's not a lot one can do with the LC controls to mitigate road closure times.

As for finding money / prioritising the work; I guess that depends on how much of a real problem it is to the local road users AND if the local MP has the guile to persuade NR to address the problem. If they can resolve Oulton Broad there must be hope for a review of the why's and wherefores.

 

[Ellaguru]

Well that sounds like there are some things which could be done at little cost.

I don't know how Network rail is organised. Is there a 'regional controller of level crossings' ? Someone who has responsibility for safety? performance? operating costs? Someone who regularly deals with these sorts of issues?

Going back to my original posting, the crossing at Ardleigh is on a high-use line, with frequent freight trains (and slow running during peaks) yet I don't ever experience long delays there. My feeling is that the Ardleigh crossing has had more attention from the ''regional controller of level crossings' - but that's purely speculative.

Have other level crossing users in other parts of the country raised issues like this with Network Rail? with any success?

 

[moggie]

Network Rail is divided into 'Routes' these days. Each route having a management structure responsible for assets and operation. AFAIK these aren't generally responsible to the public at large but there is a public relations contact number published on the NR website which you might try and lodge a question / complaint to.

NR has dedicated Level Crossing people who are generally concerned with public safety of all users at level crossings. I wouldn't call delays caused by road closure a high safety issue but it is a valid reason to contact NR. Whether NR will follow up is debatable, especially if there is an insignificant number of contacts made about the particular crossing. I guess you can only try. You might also try contact with the local council as this is essentially a highways issue to see if they are in contact with NR about road delays.

Ultimately, there is unlikely to be any quick solutions but you may get a response sooner explaining why the 'delays' occur and whether anything practical can be done. Be prepared for the fobb off. As others have stated, it won't be top of NR's snagging list and will need a lot of 'persuasion' to get it there. If you feel unhappy that you are not being taken seriously see if your MP is interested in taking up your complaint if NR / Council seem disinterested. They may get a better quality response from NR if nothing else.

 

[snowball]

Network Rail is divided into 'Routes' these days.

Stupid name, they are actually regions. I seem to remember reading that they had for some reason to avoid the word "regions", but there are other words they could have used, such as "divisions". Almost anything else would have been less misleading than "routes".

NR are currently under much pressure to devolve decision-making from the centre to the Routes.