Level crossing stupidity...

[phil-b259]

A super wizzo experimental fixed safety system with sirens and yellow flashing lights triggered by the trains was set up on the curves north of Leighton Buzzard on the WCML some years ago at vast expense, (£ millions). The head office people responsible brought some representatives of the RAIB out to see it, and I heard that they were somewhat un-impressed to find a local PW maintenance gang working in the middle of it under the protection of a lookoutman.

 

So presumably the S&T could do the same if anybody reported it as broken.

 

Availability of spares and training to use the system are just as important as the system physically being present. You cannot just 'turn up' and use any old system that happens to be there. For There are over 10 types of track circuit in existence and unless you have been on a training course for that type then even a S&T person cannot work on them.

[phil-b259]

So long as you don't find out that it's broken the hard way....

 

Any 'safe system of work' must be tested before use - and furthermore all automated systems must have continuous feedback to the operator that all is OK. This might be a device like that gives a continuous set of clicks (like a Geiger counter) to reassure users that it is powered up and working (and thus will correctly issue a warning if the equipment fails IN ANY WAY or if it detects a train.

 

Simply sticking yellow lights on poles and having them flash only when a train approaches is not safe.

[The Stationmaster]

A super wizzo experimental fixed safety system with sirens and yellow flashing lights triggered by the trains was set up on the curves north of Leighton Buzzard on the WCML some years ago at vast expense, (£ millions). The head office people responsible brought some representatives of the RAIB out to see it, and I heard that they were somewhat un-impressed to find a local PW maintenance gang working in the middle of it under the protection of a lookoutman.

 

So presumably the S&T could do the same if anybody reported it as broken.

 

FATCOWS? (which did have a continuous safety tone) 

Edited November 18, 2017 by The Stationmaster

[corneliuslundie]

I have often said that if tomorrow someone invented the motor vehicle for the first time it would never be allowed on the roads as far, far too dangerous.

But there is dangerous current trend: "I know my rights2 combined with "I don't have to look after myself, it is the job of others". While we have this mix we shall never make much progress on issues such as those we are discussing.

Jonathan

[lmsforever]

Latest item on this in todays news about Polegate crossing an 89yr old lady was hit on the head the gate and knocked to the ground claimed not enough time to get over ,and last year another elderly person was trapped between the gates.A picture attached showed a bystander running to help this lady ,residents say the time for crossing is not enough 16 seconds it does seem a short time.Surely the signal person was watching and could have intervened or have they no means of doing but I would have thought they could?

[Coryton]

I have often said that if tomorrow someone invented the motor vehicle for the first time it would never be allowed on the roads as far, far too dangerous.

 

 

 

It was fine until they got rid of the person walking in front with a red flag...

[Colin_McLeod]

I heard that he got run over.

 

Serves him right - walking in the traffic like that.

[peanuts]

getting us back onto level crossings colleague at work chatting about coming to a level crossing red wig -wags lit but barriers raised trafic building up after 5 mins and no train many started to cross. he didnt (he was driving an artic  untill he was waived across by a couple of local plod who had arrived at the scene iirc are the plod NOT empowered to do that unless acting on the instructions of a railway officer ?

[phil-b259]

 getting us back onto level crossings colleague at work chatting about coming to a level crossing red wig -wags lit but barriers raised trafic building up after 5 mins and no train many started to cross. he didnt (he was driving an artic  untill he was waived across by a couple of local plod who had arrived at the scene iirc are the plod NOT empowered to do that unless acting on the instructions of a railway officer ?

 

 

NOBODY CAN AUTHORISE ANYTHING PAST FLASHING WIG WAGS. IT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE TO DO SO.

 

That INCLUDES ALL RAILWAY STAFF AND ALL POLICE OFFICERS!

 

 

Even 'Blue Light' first responders such as the fire service are NOT EXEMPT - they MUST FIND AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE THAT AVOIDS THE CROSSING!

 

 

The ONLY way a Railway person can 'help' the Police in such a situation is chuck dark plastic bags over ALL wig wag heads such that none can be seen to be flashing, or have a qualified S&T technician remove the fuses to blank them. - A point I had to spell out to the RAIB a few years ago when one of their reports suggested otherwise.

 

If a signaller is contacted by ANYONE (including the Police) to advise that the red wig wags are flashing then they MUST NEVER SAY ANYTHING THAT COULD BE INTERPRETED AS GIVING PERMISSION TO CROSS. All they are allowed to say is "Thank you for the report, I will advise route control who will dispatch a Technician, in the meantime please turn round and use an alternative route" If the person persists then the signaller MUST tell them to "Obey the flashing wig wags and do not cross" REGARDLESS of the situation with trains.

 

All voice communication with signallers are logged and ARE admissible as evidence in court and would prove damning unless the Signaller could be shown to be following the rule book should some get hit while ignoring Wig Wags. Similarly any railway person on the ground giving such 'permission' is committing a criminal offence and will be dealt with just as harshly if things go wrong.

 

PS the reason its all in bold / capitals etc is not a dig at you Peanuts - its to emphasise the realities and make very sure people on here absorb the truth. The fact that some Police don't seem to know it and are encouraging law breaking is more than a little worrying.

Edited December 21, 2017 by phil-b259

[MarkC]

NOBODY CAN AUTHORISE ANYTHING PAST FLASHING WIG WAGS. IT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE TO DO SO.

 

That INCLUDES ALL RAILWAY STAFF AND ALL POLICE OFFICERS!

 

 

Even 'Blue Light' first responders such as the fire service are NOT EXEMPT - they MUST FIND AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE THAT AVOIDS THE CROSSING!

 

 

The ONLY way a Railway person can 'help' the Police in such a situation is chuck dark plastic bags over ALL wig wag heads such that none can be seen to be flashing, or have a qualified S&T technician remove the fuses to blank them. - A point I had to spell out to the RAIB a few years ago when one of their reports suggested otherwise.

 

If a signaller is contacted by ANYONE (including the Police) to advise that the red wig wags are flashing then they MUST NEVER SAY ANYTHING THAT COULD BE INTERPRETED AS GIVING PERMISSION TO CROSS. All they are allowed to say is "Thank you for the report, I will advise route control who will dispatch a Technician, in the meantime please turn round and use an alternative route" If the person persists then the signaller MUST tell them to "Obey the flashing wig wags and do not cross" REGARDLESS of the situation with trains.

 

All voice communication with signallers are logged and ARE admissible as evidence in court and would prove damning unless the Signaller could be shown to be following the rule book should some get hit while ignoring Wig Wags. Similarly any railway person on the ground giving such 'permission' is committing a criminal offence and will be dealt with just as harshly if things go wrong.

 

PS the reason its all in bold / capitals etc is not a dig at you Peanuts - its to emphasise the realities and make very sure people on here absorb the truth. The fact that some Police don't seem to know it and are encouraging law breaking is more than a little worrying.

The fact that some "in authority" are apparently ignorant of this HUGELY important issue is, frankly, scary.

[peanuts]

NOBODY CAN AUTHORISE ANYTHING PAST FLASHING WIG WAGS. IT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE TO DO SO.

 

That INCLUDES ALL RAILWAY STAFF AND ALL POLICE OFFICERS!

 

 

Even 'Blue Light' first responders such as the fire service are NOT EXEMPT - they MUST FIND AN ALTERNATIVE ROUTE THAT AVOIDS THE CROSSING!

 

 

The ONLY way a Railway person can 'help' the Police in such a situation is chuck dark plastic bags over ALL wig wag heads such that none can be seen to be flashing, or have a qualified S&T technician remove the fuses to blank them. - A point I had to spell out to the RAIB a few years ago when one of their reports suggested otherwise.

 

If a signaller is contacted by ANYONE (including the Police) to advise that the red wig wags are flashing then they MUST NEVER SAY ANYTHING THAT COULD BE INTERPRETED AS GIVING PERMISSION TO CROSS. All they are allowed to say is "Thank you for the report, I will advise route control who will dispatch a Technician, in the meantime please turn round and use an alternative route" If the person persists then the signaller MUST tell them to "Obey the flashing wig wags and do not cross" REGARDLESS of the situation with trains.

 

All voice communication with signallers are logged and ARE admissible as evidence in court and would prove damning unless the Signaller could be shown to be following the rule book should some get hit while ignoring Wig Wags. Similarly any railway person on the ground giving such 'permission' is committing a criminal offence and will be dealt with just as harshly if things go wrong.

 

PS the reason its all in bold / capitals etc is not a dig at you Peanuts - its to emphasise the realities and make very sure people on here absorb the truth. The fact that some Police don't seem to know it and are encouraging law breaking is more than a little worrying.

ta knew i was correct just couldnt remember exact wording from signaling school

[martin_wynne]

NOBODY CAN AUTHORISE ANYTHING PAST FLASHING WIG WAGS. IT IS A CRIMINAL OFFENCE TO DO SO.

 

That INCLUDES ALL RAILWAY STAFF AND ALL POLICE OFFICERS!

 

So the S&T Technician arrives by road, and can't get to the equipment cabinet on the far side because the wig-wags are flashing?

 

Martin.

[JDW]

I know you're mocking Martin, but I'd sincerely hope that the technician has things like his PTS which give him authority to be on and around the track on any part of the railway...!  

 

Certainly a very important issue though, and scary that so many are ignorant of it - although possibly understandable that to non-railway minded people it isn't an issue they'd give much thought to.  Sadly these days most people just want to get where they need to go as quickly as possible, with potentially little thought for the safety of the railway they are about to cross.

[Colin_McLeod]

Strewth. Whatever happened to "common sense"

[LMS2968]

It just isn't that common.

[phil-b259]

Strewth. Whatever happened to "common sense"

 

Lawers - and the very real threat of being jailed for giving advice that turns out to be wrong.

 

Its all very well saying use 'common sense' but the last time I looked the term 'common sense' means nothing to the legal profession - they demand rules are put in place precisely because 'common sense' varies considerably between individuals. What might be blindingly obvious to one person is not necessarily the case for others - leaving lots of room for ambiguity.

 

Its worth remembering WHY wig wags are an 'Absolute Stop' - namely the risk of death and serious injury is far grater than ordinary traffic lights. True a railway is perhaps not in quite the same league as a swing bridge but the deciding factor is the ability of the 3rd party to take avoiding action if you do pass the red light and in turns out that puts you in danger. Motor vehicles and to a large extent pedestrians can stop quickly or swerve out the way - I have yet to see a swing bridge suddenly whip back to prevent you landing in the water or a train severing round someone on a level crossing.

 

Of course underpinning the whole situation in the UK as regards level crossings is the presumption that the railway must go to great lengths to keep people off its infrastructure at all times. It stands to reason that if you demand the railways be comprehensively fenced in, Level Crossings - which provide a break in the fence line - require particular attention. In countries like France, where fencing is fundamentally there to prevent delay, vandalism and such like rather than a legal obligation to keep people out, a different legal approch is necessary.

Edited December 22, 2017 by phil-b259

[Dagworth]

Strewth. Whatever happened to "common sense"

"Common sense" would tell you that if a police officer tells you to go past the red flashing lights then you can go. The LAW tells you that you can't, and that the police officer has broken the law by using his "common sense"

 

Andi

[martin_wynne]

Of course underpinning the whole situation in the UK as regards level crossings is the presumption that the railway must go to great lengths to keep people off its infrastructure at all times. It stands to reason that if you demand the railways be comprehensively fenced in, Level Crossings - which provide a break in the fence line - require particular attention.

 

The main reason for the original requirement for railway fencing was to protect farm livestock from the railway. To comply with the spirit of that law, instead of barriers and wigwags, level crossings should be provided with cattle grids.

 

Martin.

[The Stationmaster]

Strewth. Whatever happened to "common sense"

 

We had the opposite example an the AOC(L) on our branch one day - police car approached the level crossing, no lights flashing but car stops and one copper gets out then walks onto the crossing, looks both ways then waves his mate who is driving the car over the crossing.

 

I presume this 'common nonsense' was down to the fact that there had been several interfaces between road vehicles and trains on the crossing and presumably said copper was insufficiently informed to know that all such incidents had been a consequence of road vehicle drivers ignoring the red lights on the wig-wags.

[JDW]

"Common sense" would tell you that if a police officer tells you to go past the red flashing lights then you can go. The LAW tells you that you can't, and that the police officer has broken the law by using his "common sense"

 

Andi

 

Exactly, and the danger being that because he is a person in authority, few will ever question him.  Or his psychic ability to know there isn't a train approaching at 80mph just behind that tree...

[phil-b259]

The main reason for the original requirement for railway fencing was to protect farm livestock from the railway. To comply with the spirit of that law, instead of barriers and wigwags, level crossings should be provided with cattle grids.

 

Martin.

 

This is indeed partially true (the other big factor in keeping any trespassing public or indeed railway staff OUT of wealthy landowners property / country estates)

 

HOWEVER  the courts have made it VERY CLEAR that such legislation MUST now be read in terms of preventing HUMANS from accessing railway infrastructure. It doesn't matter what the original intention may have been - thanks to English common law principles things do change over time. This is what can drive the 'over the top' replacement of post and wire fencing with Palisade / High Mesh fencing in some places - if livestock were the only concern then there would be no need for such extravagant measures.

[royaloak]

Strewth. Whatever happened to "common sense"

No win no fee Ambulance chasers and everyone's insistence on trusting technology instead of their own eyes put paid to that.

 

A technician arriving on site the wrong side would use his training (and PTS) to get to the correct side.

[rab]

The main reason for the original requirement for railway fencing was to protect farm livestock from the railway. To comply with the spirit of that law, instead of barriers and wigwags, level crossings should be provided with cattle grids.

 

Martin.

But these days a lot of people

do tend to behave like lost sheep.

[meil]

But these days a lot of people

do tend to behave like lost sheep.

I think that is overstating their intelligence.

[royaloak]

I think that is overstating their intelligence.

I thought it was rather derogatory to sheep as well!