Last night we stopped behind an artic at a crossing Pat will know, at Holme, south of Peterborough. The train passed, the barriers rose,and the artic moved off quite slowly.
I'm very cautious about following anything too closely on one of these so having trundled up to the open barrier I hung back until it was across the tracks and clearing the other side. A last glance at the lights and they were flashing! I had a moment of wondering whether they just hadn't gone off yet after the barriers lifted, and quickly dismissed that as in my experience they stop as the barriers rise.
Now I am not going to drive on to a crossing with lights flashing so I stayed put - a couple of seconds later the barrier nearly removed my front number plate, and a minute or so after that two trains flashed by, one in each direction.
Now we all know that there can be a second train, so you should never drive round half barriers (these were full width - so had I followed the artic I could have been stranded) - but what is the minimum interval for the barriers to be open?
I don't think I did anything stupid - quite the opposite - but I still feel as if I have had a near miss.
|
I know that crossing well Manatee and you did exactly the right thing.
A loaded artic doesn't take off very quickly and it's common for those gates, and the ones at Tallington, to come down again very quickly.
Pat
|
It is, or should be, a fundamental principle of driving that you don't enter a hazard until you know you'll be able to get out. What Manatee did was exactly right - especially now I've re-read his piece and seen the barrier 'nearly removed' his number plate not, as I first saw, 'neatly removed' it.
}8---)
|
|
For a level crossing my rule is to not only ensure that there is space on the exit of the hazardous area but to ensure that the car has enough kinetic energy to complete the transit for a simple engine failure. Ok, a complete mechanical failure eg a propshaft UJ at the front failing, could stop you 'dead', but you can only minimise risk, not remove it totally!
|
Absolutely, that's what I do.
I'm even aware of conserving momentum in slightly less dangerous circumstances, eg when pulling across a main road. I think it comes instinctively from sailing - the thought is always there, what would happen if the wind dropped?
|
>> For a level crossing my rule is to not only ensure that there is space
>> on the exit of the hazardous area but to ensure that the car has enough
>> kinetic energy to complete the transit for a simple engine failure. Ok, a complete mechanical
>> failure eg a propshaft UJ at the front failing, could stop you 'dead', but you
>> can only minimise risk, not remove it totally!
>>
Totally agree. As I understand it, in America the onus is on the traffic to keep clear of the crossing rather than the train to stop, and their view seems to be that if you mess with trains in any way shape or form then it's your own stupid fault and Darwinism rules.
It's a pity the same mindset cannot be installed into the British population. I get tired of seeing the railway companies dragged over the coals every time a member of the public is so stupid as to try and cross a railway line without looking out for oncoming trains etc. The railways can only do so much without severely compromising their operating efficiency.
|
>> I get
>> tired of seeing the railway companies dragged over the coals every time a member of
>> the public is so stupid as to try and cross a railway line without looking
>> out for oncoming trains etc. The railways can only do so much without severely compromising
>> their operating efficiency.
>>
There should be bridges or underpasses for ALL pedestrian crossings of railways. Modern trains are far faster than when the concept was designed.
You wouldn't expect your kids to cross a motorway...so why a rail track?
|
>> There should be bridges or underpasses for ALL pedestrian crossings of railways. Modern trains are
>> far faster than when the concept was designed.
Because we can't afford it, spending too much money policing the worlds problems like you want us to. ]
Clearly you have never seen a flat country like the fens, there are thousands of crossings, foot road and track. All work well. Its the responsibility of the parents to teach kids to use the things.
|
>> my rule is to not only ensure that there is space on the exit of the hazardous area but to ensure that the car
>> has enough kinetic energy to complete the transit for a simple engine failure.
I got whumped up the back end by a car on a level crossing once. The Galaxy in front of me slowed from 50mph to 5mph very suddenly to cross the bumpy rails, I anchored up accordingly but the driver of the Xantia following me was looking along the line for trains and not at my brake lights... BANG! With the surprise of the impact, I found myself rolling across the crossing at 5mph, freshly mashed back bumper and lights etc hanging off, gathering my wits and quickly realising that I'd better keep rolling until I reached the safety of the other side. Luckily(!) the Xantia, or what remained of it, had come to a halt on the road before the barrier.
>> Ok, a complete mechanical failure eg a propshaft UJ at the front failing, could stop you 'dead'
Even if that happened, the wheels would lock and skid but you wouldn't come to an instant halt.
|
>> Ok, a complete mechanical failure eg a propshaft UJ at the front failing, could stop you 'dead'
>>Even if that happened, the wheels would lock and skid but you wouldn't come to an instant halt.<<<
It stops you 'dead' when the front of the prop shaft drops and and is constrained by the side of a rail! OK so it might only rip off the rear axle and allow the body shell to slither to a halt.
|
>> It stops you 'dead' when the front of the prop shaft drops
Wasn't the the premise of the TV Series "On The Line"?
www.imdb.com/title/tt1126316/
|
>> It is, or should be, a fundamental principle of driving that you don't enter a
>> hazard until you know you'll be able to get out. What Manatee did was exactly
>> right.........
>>
Its a pity more people don't apply that principle to box junctions.
And I suppose not blocking side roads when stopped in traffic would be too much to expect. :-)
Last edited by: Old Navy on Wed 4 Apr 12 at 14:26
|
|
I know all the crossings along that stretch, they are up and down like a w hores drawers. Its a busy old line. Tallington is a terrible crossing, but Helpston is a real monster.
|
>> (these were full width - so had I followed the artic I could have been stranded)
Ah, the age-old conundrum. Half-width barriers mean you cannot get stranded in the middle and are thus safer from that perspective.
Opposite side of that coin is that idiots go around them.
Personally I reckon that half is the way to go. Suffering the loss of a few idiots while preserving the lives of the merely unfortunate and / or inattentive has to be the right approach.
As for the question, it depends on what you define as "really safe". If that's safe as in "not dangerous, if the rules are followed", then yes. If that's the "elf 'n safety" version, as in "can't hurt you, no matter what you do", then no. If the latter approach is taken, there are more staircases to worry about than level crossings.......
|
|
We have two level crossings across "Country lanes" that are Auto-half barriers, and two across the main road out of town that are still full-gated, operated by a Man!! - who spends all the time between trains either sat "Snuggled" in his hut with a coal-stove, or sat outside in a deck-chair !.
|
There are still a number of crossings in Norfolk without lights where you have to ring the signal box yourself before opening the wooden gate, like this one:
s0.geograph.org.uk/geophotos/02/73/79/2737985_06f463d6.jpg
|
|
Plenty of those on the line from Norwich to Peterborough.
|
|
and on the branch line from Norwich to Sheringham
|
|
Blimey - how do the locals cope with that? Is it enough to lift the handset and talk, or do they have to dial a number too?
|
>> Blimey - how do the locals cope with that? Is it enough to lift the
>> handset and talk, or do they have to dial a number too?
>>
It's easy to remember; a six-figure number, one for each finger. ;-)
|
>> Personally I reckon that half is the way to go. Suffering the loss of a
>> few idiots while preserving the lives of the merely unfortunate and / or inattentive has
>> to be the right approach.
>>
While agreeing with those sentiments, there is the issue of the train driver and what splattering people across the track does to them.
Even if you could ignore the emotional aspect, AFAIK for a driver it's three strikes and you're out (well, not driving any more, which is awkward as that's what you do did for a living.)
|
Is a level crossing ever really safe? - Pat
