Level crossing stupidity...

[Welchester]

If the CPS had brought the alternate lesser charge of "carless driving"

 

Otherwise known as 'walking'.

 

[colin penfold]

The law says:

 

 

When you can use a phone in your vehicle

If you’re the driver, you can only use your phone in a vehicle if you:

 

• need to call 999 or 112 in an emergency and it’s unsafe or impractical to stop

• are safely parked

I would think that waiting at a barrier would be regarded as safely parked. And if not a silly law can be changed.

 

p.s. you may want to edit your post. I doubt that it's the being seen which is an offence.

 

Martin.

at a level crossing is not safely parked any more than being sat at a red traffic light. Safely parked means off the carriageway with the engine off.

[kevinlms]

 Probably like most people the first thought would be to try to move the car and myself out of harms way whilst looking down the line. I'm not sure if I would be thinking straight enough to go look for the phone and use it, though may just be thinking quick enough to suggest a passenger or bystander to do so.

As far as not thinking straight goes, a year or so ago I had some friends around to assist with some gardening. To cut the story short, one of them managed to cut the gas pipe. I went to investigate it & shut off the valve. I realised he was still standing behind me gaping, with his petrol powered implement still running. I was rather rude!

[kevinlms]

Instead of all these posts calling people idiots or saying they should know better (which solve nothing) how about some actual suggestions for what to do about the problem?

 

For example:

 

1. If the barriers were moved much further back from the railway, would it be possible to have full double barriers without risking trapping anyone on the track?

 

2. Instead of a roadside phone which the driver has to get out of the car to use, why not just a big sign with the phone number? Nearly everyone now has a mobile phone with them. The number could include a code for the crossing location.

 

3. Scrolling LED text message signs are now common. It should be possible to provide some additional information to road users when necessary -- if only "Sorry for the delay, the train is coming, please remain behind the barrier."

 

4. Warning alarm sounds or bells, as in America and elsewhere, would no doubt annoy the neighbours, but they do have a much stronger psychological effect than coloured lights.

 

I've no idea if any of this is practical, but someone somewhere will have a brilliant idea. Better than silly posts about Darwin.

 

Martin.

2/ A good idea for when mobile phones are universal & have coverage everywhere for all carriers. Until then a potential hazard when users struggle to use the things, without realising there is no coverage.

 

As another way of reporting incidents, certainly.

In Victoria bridges have phone numbers, so people can report 'bridge bashing'. Can still be misused though as my friend reported that one night some one rang to say they'd bashed into the bridge. When he asked what sort of vehicle, the drunk told him that he was walking!

[martin_wynne]

at a level crossing is not safely parked any more than being sat at a red traffic light. Safely parked means off the carriageway with the engine off.

 

Yes, but we are making suggestions here. Laws can be changed. There is no reason why being sat behind a physical barrier can't be included in the conditions.

[kevinlms]

The Russians have the best answer, already posted on here, of the "bus bollard" type plates that come up from the road and physically prevent you from driving any further.

 

That experiment was tried here on petrol drive away's without paying. AFAIK only one place tried it, as the cost of 'false detection' was simply too great!

[colin penfold]

Yes, but we are making suggestions here. Laws can be changed. There is no reason why being sat behind a physical barrier can't be included in the conditions.

yes but the emergency bit is already covered by the legislation. All you would achieve by changing the rest is to allow people to talk to their mates instead of paying attention to the job in hand - driving safely. A level crossing barrier may be more physical than a traffic light but it's just as temporary.

[Glorious NSE]

The sign could have a location code below the phone number (like some car parks when paying by phone). The signaller then asks the caller to quote the code shown on the sign. The code can include a verification character so that quoting a wrong code is almost impossible.

 

I believe that the existing phones put you through not just to the right box, but straight to the desk that controls the area the crossing is in - so in an emergency you could potentially speak to a critical person fairly quickly - if it were going to a national number, looking up a code then putting you through it slows that down.

 

(Although I do think that a lot of folk would be more likely to ring a posted emergency number on their own mobile rather than get out and investigate the phone provided...)

[martin_wynne]

I believe that the existing phones put you through not just to the right box, but straight to the desk that controls the area the crossing is in - so in an emergency you could potentially speak to a critical person fairly quickly - if it were going to a national number, looking up a code then putting you through it slows that down.

 

But we are not talking about an emergency. The idea is to encourage more use of the phone, for example in situations such as seems to have happened at Athelney -- a longer than usual wait so the driver believes the crossing has failed and drives round the barrier. Also I said nothing about a national number -- the phone number displayed would connect to the local panel and the location code quoted would identify which crossing on that panel.

 

Martin.

[Eggesford box]

  Being seen at the steering wheel of a car on an public road and using a phone is an offence.

 

Not everyone has a mobile phone.

 

I would guess that very few incidents on level crossings would have been prevented by the miscreant (Darwin or otherwise) phoning first. It would not have crossed their mind as part of their action.

 

What would I do if I broke down on a crossing? Probably like most people the first thought would be to try to move the car and myself out of harms way whilst looking down the line. I'm not sure if I would be thinking straight enough to go look for the phone and use it, though may just be thinking quick enough to suggest a passenger or bystander to do so.

Hi,

 

this was precisely the point I was trying to make (post 439) .The fact you are writing here shows you are more 'railway aware' than most members of the public yet instead of using the phones you would try to move your car first. After all when entering onto an AHB you would have passed a large blue and white sign informing drivers of large, low or slow moving vehicles to phone the signaller first before crossing so at least there is a reminder that phones are there to be used.

 

The incidents I was thinking of are Ufton Nervet and Somerton where in both cases other members of the public tried to persuade a suicidal person to move their cars. I do not know if there would have been time if once aware of the situation they had gone straight to the crossing phones the approaching train could have been stopped but there is a good chance it could have. I do not think it would be a good idea to provide signs with a BT contact number at the crossings (other than inside the existing telephone cabinets in case they failed). Apart from a chance of misunderstanding as to what crossing is involved (yes the phones in the cabinets are a direct line to the controlling signal box/panel/workstation and yes they do show what crossing they are coming in from) but you can bet if  somebody stalls on the crossing they will sit in their car dialling the number on their mobile, the last place you want them to be. 

 

Obviously, there would be legal implications as to the wording but what I was thinking of is large and garish signs pointing in and out of the crossing by the existing telephones warning of the dangers (obvious to most of us I know) and exhorting the road users to use the phones. Something along the lines of

 

'Trains pass over this crossing at 90mph (or whatever) whether your vehicle is on it or not phone the signalman first in case of emergency to stop trains running and stand clear of railway and vehicle'.

 

NB at Somerton the suicidal woman survived unlike the elderly passenger in a car that stalled on the crossing only a few weeks previously (which may have been what put the idea into her head)

[EddieB]

Posting a number too visibly would lead to abuse and abuse to failing to heed genuine reports.

 

Make the emergency phones orange, perhaps, like the motorway ones, and put a notice to the effect that motorists and pedestrians should only use if the gates haven't opened and no trains arrived after a wait of x minutes (existing emergency and large/slow moving vehicles rules apply).  Having to get out of the vehicle probably would restrict any such calls to one per queue, rather than an inundation from frustrated motorists on their mobile phones.

 

I also suggest that the Railway should always press for the maximum punishment for level crossing misuse.  Fines to pay for cameras installed at all AHB crossings.  Regardless of their innocence, the Railway suffers damage and delay thanks to the attitude of a selfish minority ("selfishness", sadly, includes suicides - where further punishment cannot be exacted, of course).

[SHMD]

As level crossings become increasing uncommon, then the public's familiarity with them will decrease. (I can't remember the last one I drove over. Certainly over a decade ago!)

This will result in an increase in crossings mistakes/miss-use/accidents. (If not in absolute numbers , then in a percentage of the number of crossings.)

 

Humans WILL err and systems/procedures/equipment WILL need to be put in place to help reduce such incidents in the future.

 

Standardised use by the public (procedure and equipment) is very important here.

You don't want to use one crossing (safely) one way only for that same way of working, at another crossing, to be dangerous.

Deterrents to miss-use are extremely important here AND must not be underestimated.

 

But you know what they say:

“Never underestimate the ingenuity of the average idiot!”

The aim should be for zero accidents/deaths, but I fear that will be impossible/impracticable.

The "law of diminishing returns” may apply here in trying to attain zero mortality at level crossings.

 

 

Kev.

[RJS1977]

This is what I think they should do to the vehicles of people who abuse level crossings (and who have the fortune to not be in a collision as a result) :

 

Edited March 9, 2014 by RJS1977

[martin_wynne]

I do not think it would be a good idea to provide signs with a BT contact number at the crossings (other than inside the existing telephone cabinets in case they failed). Apart from a chance of misunderstanding as to what crossing is involved (yes the phones in the cabinets are a direct line to the controlling signal box/panel/workstation and yes they do show what crossing they are coming in from) but you can bet if  somebody stalls on the crossing they will sit in their car dialling the number on their mobile, the last place you want them to be.)

 

Currently in the Highway Code:

 

 

 

[Edwin_m]

RSSB did some research into median strips on the approach to crossings. 

 

http://www.rssb.co.uk/RESEARCH/Lists/DispForm_Custom.aspx?ID=98

[Eggesford box]

Currently in the Highway Code:

 

xing_phone.png

I am open to correction but I would imagine they would be provided at locally monitored crossings, ie where the train driver approaches the crossing at reduced speed and gets a white flashing light to proceed across the crossing.

 

Dohh, edit for just come in off nights, TMOBs can also have them

Edited March 9, 2014 by Eggesford box

[The Stationmaster]

I believe that the existing phones put you through not just to the right box, but straight to the desk that controls the area the crossing is in - so in an emergency you could potentially speak to a critical person fairly quickly - if it were going to a national number, looking up a code then putting you through it slows that down.

 

(Although I do think that a lot of folk would be more likely to ring a posted emergency number on their own mobile rather than get out and investigate the phone provided...)

That is correct - they are also required to 'initiate a distinctive and imperative ring at the monitoring point' - or in plain english, they make it very obvious that someone is using a 'phone at 'whichever' level crossing.  It is also a requirement that the name of the crossing should be displayed at or near each 'phone followed by a public telephone number to be used if the crossing 'phones are out of order.

 

If the idea of displaying the control/monitoring point public number were to be used it would discourage use of the proper emergency 'phones, and thus reduce the urgency (in the control point etc operator's mind) by turning it from a very noticeable call into something far more routine.  I don't know how quickly the numbers given on the bridge notices are answered and in any case I believe that in mot cases they go to Control Offices and not direct to signalboxes but there is in my experience always greater priority given to answering direct 'phones because they are associated with something rather than 'just about everything'.

[Fat Controller]

Many thanks for this report, which I am still going through. Perhaps it mentions it later on, but the key things the French here are focusing on to reduce road accidents generally are : overspeeding, driving over the drink/drugs limit and urban road layout design. Ignoring the last, being near to falling-down drunk (at any time of day) and driving stupidly fast is still culturally normal here, although becoming less so. The law of fencing railways is totally different too - there isn't one apart from LGV lines. However, there is no major move to "protect" drivers from their own stupidity by blaming the railway or communes/road agencies (other than the crazy idea gaining strength, to cut down many of the beautiful tree-lined avenues erected in Napoleonic times, as it seems the trees keep stepping out into the path of speeding cars.....). There is more of a move to catch such drivers at it - huge numbers of speed cameras are belatedly going up and the Gendarmerie are undertaking far more surprise road blocks for blow-in-the-bag tests. They have halved road deaths in recent years, but road accident injuries have risen slightly. We have many unprotected crossings (on "D" and unclassified roads) in this rural region (plus full barrier crossings in all the towns, but no half-barriers I can recall anywhere), but I have only seen one fatal accident, at a level crossing, reported in the local press in two years. I will read the rest of the report to see how it compares to the UK's approach on level crossings.

We get sent copies of the BEA-TT ( French equivalent of RAIB, though dealing with road transport as well) reports (a legacy of one or other of Lynne's jobs)- there seem to be relatively frequent level crossing incidents.

Thus far, action being taken includes:-

suppression of crossings whenever possible.

introduction of median strips to prevent 'slaloming'

looking at the height of warning lamps, and their positioning, to try and reduce the incidence of drivers passing rows of waiting vehicles, claiming that they 'thought they were parked'

One thing I have noticed is that the French do not seem to have an aversion to remote operation of full-barrier crossings, seemingly without CCTV coverage.

Edited March 9, 2014 by Fat Controller

[PhilJ W]

Our local bus stops have a digital sign saying when the next bus is due and how many minutes to wait. Surely something similar could be installed at level crossings so that drivers are aware that another train is approaching and how many minutes/seconds they have to wait? On the subject of half barrier crossings some could be made full barrier with say a two second delay on the 'exit' side to give time for anyone on the crossing to escape. If there is space available perhaps an 'escape road' could be installed where a vehicle could be driven off the crossing. This is a small piece of road rather like a driveway such as is installed on steep hills in case of a mechanical/brake failure.

[Fat Controller]

Our local bus stops have a digital sign saying when the next bus is due and how many minutes to wait. Surely something similar could be installed at level crossings so that drivers are aware that another train is approaching and how many minutes/seconds they have to wait? On the subject of half barrier crossings some could be made full barrier with say a two second delay on the 'exit' side to give time for anyone on the crossing to escape. If there is space available perhaps an 'escape road' could be installed where a vehicle could be driven off the crossing. This is a small piece of road rather like a driveway such as is installed on steep hills in case of a mechanical/brake failure.

The problem with the 'count-down' clock is that some idiots would be tempted to 'beat the clock'. Remember that the sort of person we're dealing with includes some one who left her drive, a few yards from the crossing, through a gap in the waiting traffic, then drove down the wrong side of the road and onto the crossing, where her car was hit by a train. She could hardly claim to be a stranger,as she used the crossing several times a day.

[Catkins]

[i don't know how quickly the numbers given on the bridge notices are answered and in any case I believe that in mot cases they go to Control Offices and not direct to signalboxes but there is in my experience always greater priority given to answering direct 'phones because they are associated with something rather than 'just about everything'.[/i]

I did have cause to report a bridge strike once, and the phone was answered by the relevant signalling control centre rather quickly, and action was taken to stop the rail traffic until the bridge was inspected.

[kevinlms]

Our local bus stops have a digital sign saying when the next bus is due and how many minutes to wait. Surely something similar could be installed at level crossings so that drivers are aware that another train is approaching and how many minutes/seconds they have to wait?

This design of traffic control was used in parts of Melbourne.

 

http://museumvictoria.com.au/collections/items/408344/traffic-control-signal-marshalite-1940-1960

[Fat Controller]

This design of traffic control was used in parts of Melbourne.

 

http://museumvictoria.com.au/collections/items/408344/traffic-control-signal-marshalite-1940-1960

We saw a similar arrangement, albeit with LED indications, when visiting Copenhagen; almost all pedestrian crossings have them, both for drivers and pedestrians. If you try jumping one, it's quite likely someone will grab you by the collar, or at least admonish you.

[talisman56]

Our local bus stops have a digital sign saying when the next bus is due and how many minutes to wait. Surely something similar could be installed at level crossings so that drivers are aware that another train is approaching and how many minutes/seconds they have to wait? On the subject of half barrier crossings some could be made full barrier with say a two second delay on the 'exit' side to give time for anyone on the crossing to escape. If there is space available perhaps an 'escape road' could be installed where a vehicle could be driven off the crossing. This is a small piece of road rather like a driveway such as is installed on steep hills in case of a mechanical/brake failure.

 

AFAIR full barrier crossings (presumably you mean the ones with two half barriers on each side) already have a delay on the exit side barrier. The last such one I used, albeit several years ago, had a several second delay after the closure of the one in front of me before the corresponding one on the other carriageway closed. The presence of standing traffic and flashing lights still did not deter an idiot lycra-lout (cyclist) from trying to weave around the barriers - the barrier came down just in front of him and the only thing that stopped him being wrapped around it was a sharp application of the brakes...

Edited March 9, 2014 by talisman56

[Richard E]

The presence of standing traffic and flashing lights still did not deter an idiot lycra-lout (cyclist) from trying to weave around the barriers - the barrier came down just in front of him and the only thing that stopped him being wrapped around it was a sharp application of the brakes...

Lycra, like hivis, makes them immortal, didn't you know?