Yapton LC - What can be done about it?

[SussexSpotter]

I understand that Yapton level crossing (between Ford and Barnham) has had a 20mph TSR for a while, 20mph like Winchelsea level crossing on the Marshlink.

Any ideas if they are likely to do anything about this menace of a level crossing????....With 8tph in both directions during Off-Peak alone, and there having been a number of near misses in the past due to abuse.....I think the TSR has been implemented to avoid a fatal collision....

What i'd like to know is what can be done about this dangerous level crossing other than building a bridge like they did at Beddingham where the A27 crosses the East Coastway????.....

 

[John Webb]

.....What i'd like to know is what can be done about this dangerous level crossing other than building a bridge like they did at Beddingham where the A27 crosses the East Coastway????.....

It's a half-barrier crossing at present - as a short-term measure why not make it a fully-barriered crossing? That would minimise, but not completely eliminate, misuse.

Looking at maps, the Beddingham location you mention doesn't seem to have housing close to the road near the railway, so I assume a bridge was relatively easy to build. At Yapton there seem to be dwellings and business premises on the road which would make building the approaches awkward, perhaps.

 

[SussexSpotter]

It's a half-barrier crossing at present - as a short-term measure why not make it a fully-barriered crossing? That would minimise, but not completely eliminate, misuse.

That is a good suggestion, not sure whether NR have given it serious thought though.

Looking at maps, the Beddingham location you mention doesn't seem to have housing close to the road near the railway, so I assume a bridge was relatively easy to build. At Yapton there seem to be dwellings and business premises on the road which would make building the approaches awkward, perhaps.

Indeed, the Beddingham bridge took 2 years to build if I remember correctly. The Beddingham crossing itself though saw 25 accidents between 1999 and 2002!....

 

[Southern313]

Despite the TSR being in place for well over a year now no one seems to have made a final decision about a long term solution. Network Rail suggested closing the crossing but that wasn't well received by West Sussex Council. A bridge would be quite difficult giving the previously mentioned houses Yapton side and access to Lake Lane on the north side. So full barriers under Barnham control seems the most likely but as to when who knows? Even the local NR manager who I had in the cab a few weeks ago doesn't know anything about it!

The only new thing we know is the degradation is about to expire (may accelerate when the cab clears the T board) and the 20 will raise to 30mph BUT will be treated as a normal TSR.

 

[SussexSpotter]

Despite the TSR being in place for well over a year now no one seems to have made a final decision about a long term solution. Network Rail suggested closing the crossing but that wasn't well received by West Sussex Council. A bridge would be quite difficult giving the previously mentioned houses Yapton side and access to Lake Lane on the north side. So full barriers under Barnham control seems the most likely but as to when who knows? Even the local NR manager who I had in the cab a few weeks ago doesn't know anything about it!

The only new thing we know is the degradation is about to expire (may accelerate when the cab clears the T board) and the 20 will raise to 30mph BUT will be treated as a normal TSR.

Thanks for the info on that. It surprises me WSCC were so against closing it.....was there a particular reason????

 

[paul1609]

I understand that Yapton level crossing (between Ford and Barnham) has had a 20mph TSR for a while, 20mph like Winchelsea level crossing on the Marshlink.

Any ideas if they are likely to do anything about this menace of a level crossing????....With 8tph in both directions during Off-Peak alone, and there having been a number of near misses in the past due to abuse.....I think the TSR has been implemented to avoid a fatal collision....

What i'd like to know is what can be done about this dangerous level crossing other than building a bridge like they did at Beddingham where the A27 crosses the East Coastway????.....

Its always amazed me that this has been allowed to remain a AHB. The crossing is situated directly on a T junction from which articulated lorries emerge from the Nurseries and visibility across the crossing is very poor.
Its also interlocked with the adjacent signal so it is not unusual to drive across to find a 377 waiting feet away!
I wonder what sort of risk assessment was carried out when Barnham was resignalled a few years back

 

[steamybrian]

Is it anything to do with the old station building being destroyed by fire a while ago and the burnt out building is still standing in a now derelict state.

 

[SussexSpotter]

Its always amazed me that this has been allowed to remain a AHB. The crossing is situated directly on a T junction from which articulated lorries emerge from the Nurseries and visibility across the crossing is very poor.
Its also interlocked with the adjacent signal so it is not unusual to drive across to find a 377 waiting feet away!
I wonder what sort of risk assessment was carried out when Barnham was resignalled a few years back

Well it amazes me that they didn't include Yapton level crossing within the Barnham resignalling, changing it to full barrier instead of the AHB....surely it would have made sense to have done that???

 

[paul1609]

Thanks for the info on that. It surprises me WSCC were so against closing it.....was there a particular reason????

Given that its one of only three roads west of the river arun and east of Barnham that cross the line I'm amazed that Network Rail even considered requesting closure, even more so when Barnham Bridge is height restricted and the route through Arundel from Ford Level Crossing "not suitable for HGVs".
Given the increase in rail services along this particular stretch Network Rail should be funding a bridge imho.

 

[SussexSpotter]

Given that its one of only three roads west of the river arun and east of Barnham that cross the line I'm amazed that Network Rail even considered requesting closure, even more so when Barnham Bridge is height restricted and the route through Arundel from Ford Level Crossing "not suitable for HGVs".

That's a good point actually, i'd forgotten about the low bridge at Barnham and Ford crossing not suitable for HGV's.....so no wonder WSCC objected to the closure then....

 

[Tomnick]

Obstacle detection technology provides a good opportunity to replace AHBs such as this one with full-barrier crossings without increasing the workload at the controlling box, and indeed Network Rail speak of the safety improvements that the technology will bring. Instead, they seem to be using them almost exclusively to replace existing full-barrier (or gated) crossings: no significant safety improvement...but potentially significant cost savings.

 

[TDK]

Well it amazes me that they didn't include Yapton level crossing within the Barnham resignalling, changing it to full barrier instead of the AHB....surely it would have made sense to have done that???

You cannot have a full barrier automatic level crossing - I recon rising bollards is the only prevention for misuse of a LC, bollards that will allow cars off the crossing with sensors if a car gets stuck.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Obstacle detection technology provides a good opportunity to replace AHBs such as this one with full-barrier crossings without increasing the workload at the controlling box, and indeed Network Rail speak of the safety improvements that the technology will bring. Instead, they seem to be using them almost exclusively to replace existing full-barrier (or gated) crossings: no significant safety improvement...but potentially significant cost savings.

Obstacle detection is a major fail - they should have been installed on the Crewe to Shrewsbury route and it has now been shelved indefinitely as the radar technology was sub-standard.

 

[Tomnick]

You cannot have a full barrier automatic level crossing - I recon rising bollards is the only prevention for misuse of a LC, bollards that will allow cars off the crossing with sensors if a car gets stuck.

Do you mean sensors that detect an obstacle? I wouldn't want to rely on them! I'd say there's too great a chance of rising bollards disabling a vehicle (and leaving it foul of the running lines) weaving around the barriers just as they're starting to rise too.

Obstacle detection is a major fail - they should have been installed on the Crewe to Shrewsbury route and it has now been shelved indefinitely as the radar technology was sub-standard.

I won't disagree with you on that one .

 

[paul1609]

You cannot have a full barrier automatic level crossing - I recon rising bollards is the only prevention for misuse of a LC, bollards that will allow cars off the crossing with sensors if a car gets stuck.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Obstacle detection is a major fail - they should have been installed on the Crewe to Shrewsbury route and it has now been shelved indefinitely as the radar technology was sub-standard.

I'm not sure if you're familiar with the location of this level crossing but it is a particular nasty and Im not sure that all of the problems can be described as abuse. Ive certainly entered on to the crossing to find my way off blocked by a HGV suddenly turning right in front of me!
There is a you tube video which gives some idea of the proximity of the junction to the crossing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPSLIVMZikQ

 

[TDK]

I'm not sure if you're familiar with the location of this level crossing but it is a particular nasty and Im not sure that all of the problems can be described as abuse. Ive certainly entered on to the crossing to find my way off blocked by a HGV suddenly turning right in front of me!
There is a you tube video which gives some idea of the proximity of the junction to the crossing: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pPSLIVMZikQ

If this is the case and it is a dangerous level crossing it surely will have be closed, however once NR do their cost analysis on it a bridge or tunnel will not be in their budget no doubt. It all depends on what the risk is at the crossing and the number of incidents that will merit money being spent. After watching the video it seems that traffic turning or waiting to turn either left or right will cause a risk, just make those roads no entry.

 

[SussexSpotter]

You cannot have a full barrier automatic level crossing

I was following on from ''Southern313's'' post about it being under Barnham control in which case it would be CCTV operated not automatic.

I recon rising bollards is the only prevention for misuse of a LC, bollards that will allow cars off the crossing with sensors if a car gets stuck.

The bollards idea is interesting.....although it doesn't stop some idiots trying to drive down bus lanes.....:roll:

[youtube]O0wY-hvMC44[/youtube]

 

[TDK]

Do you mean sensors that detect an obstacle? I wouldn't want to rely on them! I'd say there's too great a chance of rising bollards disabling a vehicle (and leaving it foul of the running lines) weaving around the barriers just as they're starting to rise too.

.

I think rising bollards positioned a suitable distance from the running line would be a good idea, it will stop cars getting to the barriers to be able to breach them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The bollards idea is interesting.....although it doesn't stop some idiots trying to drive down bus lanes.....:roll:

[youtube]O0wY-hvMC44[/youtube]

They will only attempt it once though

 

[Tomnick]

I'm still not convinced - many crossings have something that'd prevent you putting rising bollards (or anything else) any distance away from the crossing: private driveways, road junctions and so on. Central islands on the approach to the crossing might work in some cases though, so it's not possible to weave around the barrier unless you start from a long way back?

 

[SussexSpotter]

They will only attempt it once though

Indeed

 

[TDK]

I'm still not convinced - many crossings have something that'd prevent you putting rising bollards (or anything else) any distance away from the crossing: private driveways, road junctions and so on. Central islands on the approach to the crossing might work in some cases though, so it's not possible to weave around the barrier unless you start from a long way back?

Some do however something needs to be done and I think Bollards will be better for cost efficiency rather than a tunnel, bridge or to reform the crossing as you need to take into account the delays costs etc. of the railway. Maybe an instant driving ban of a minimum of 1 year if caught breaching a red LC light and a £1000 fine would be the best method with a huge advertising champagne to go with it.

 

[transmanche]

with a huge advertising champagne to go with it.

Drunk-driving and jumping red lights at an LC?!?!?

 

[Tomnick]

Maybe an instant driving ban of a minimum of 1 year if caught breaching a red LC light and a £1000 fine would be the best method with a huge advertising champagne to go with it.

Leaving aside the possibility of champagne , I think that's the best way to go. A substantial and well-publicised deterrent (and more 'red light cameras') surely ought to make people think twice about it?

 

[SussexSpotter]

By the way, to give some insight into the sorts of incidents that have happened at Yapton in the past....this Audi driver getting stuck underneath the barrier for example:

Maybe an instant driving ban of a minimum of 1 year if caught breaching a red LC light and a £1000 fine would be the best method with a huge advertising champagne to go with it.

That sounds the right way to go....(but without the champagne of course )....tougher penalties if caught might do the trick!

 

[OuterDistant]

By the way, to give some insight into the sorts of incidents that have happened at Yapton in the past....this Audi driver getting stuck underneath the barrier for example:

Four wheel drive, large body, huge engine... and still stopped by a puny barrier

 

[SussexSpotter]

Four wheel drive, large body, huge engine... and still stopped by a puny barrier

 

[cjmillsnun]

Its always amazed me that this has been allowed to remain a AHB. The crossing is situated directly on a T junction from which articulated lorries emerge from the Nurseries and visibility across the crossing is very poor.
Its also interlocked with the adjacent signal so it is not unusual to drive across to find a 377 waiting feet away!
I wonder what sort of risk assessment was carried out when Barnham was resignalled a few years back

If that is the case, it would not be an AHB. When a train strikes in at an AHB crossing then it is too late for any signal to stop it if it's running at line speed.

 

[Tomnick]

If that is the case, it would not be an AHB. When a train strikes in at an AHB crossing then it is too late for any signal to stop it if it's running at line speed.

It is most definitely an AHB. Signals located within the controls for an AHB are 'interlocked' with the crossing to avoid the possibility of a train within the controls (but approaching the signal at danger) then arriving at the crossing too soon after the signal clears and the crossing sequence starts. Obviously the crossing will function normally if the signal is showing a proceed aspect when the train strikes in.

 

[paul1609]

If that is the case, it would not be an AHB. When a train strikes in at an AHB crossing then it is too late for any signal to stop it if it's running at line speed.

Trust me it is! If the down signal which is a few yards east of the crossing is not cleared, the crossing does not activate and the train comes to a halt at the signal. There is obviously a sequence which then activates the crossing before the signal clears.
Unusual I know but true.

 

[Tomnick]

Blimey, there's a bit of an echo in here!!