Jump to content
 

Level crossing stupidity...


Recommended Posts

  • RMweb Premium
2 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

If it's an approved script, it can be a pre-recorded message.

 

Martin.

 

Except that would remove the interaction element.

 

Please remember that as with all safety critical communication it needs to be clear that both parties come to a clear understanding.

 

Simply listening to a recorded message isn't enough - it might be the message needs to be repeated more slowly for the user to understand it for example or it needs to be repeated / started again because some loud machinery passing by drowns it out.

 

A human reading a script can compensate for these factors - and ultimately make the decision as to whether the user has understood the message. Thats important because if they haven't then the signaller MUST start cautioning trains!

 

Finally its worth remembering that not all calls from phones at occupation crossings will necessarily be about people wanting to cross - you might find a railway maintenance crew using it or a member of the public to report a defect with the crossing surface for example. An automated facility would potentially struggle to cope with these sort of calls.

  • Agree 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Reorte said:

I think people are getting a little entrenched here.

 

Quite...

 

At least it produced a discussion even though it was shot down in flames!

Edited by Hobby
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
2 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

Except that would remove the interaction element.

 

Please remember that as with all safety critical communication it needs to be clear that both parties come to a clear understanding.

 

Simply listening to a recorded message isn't enough - it might be the message needs to be repeated more slowly for the user to understand it for example or it needs to be repeated / started again because some loud machinery passing by drowns it out.

 

A human reading a script can compensate for these factors - and ultimately make the decision as to whether the user has understood the message. Thats important because if they haven't then the signaller MUST start cautioning trains!

 

Finally its worth remembering that not all calls from phones at occupation crossings will necessarily be about people wanting to cross - you might find a railway maintenance crew using it or a member of the public to report a defect with the crossing surface for example. An automated facility would potentially struggle to cope with these sort of calls.

We all know how pathetic most call centre queues are with often none of the options, matching what you want to ask!

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 minutes ago, Compound2632 said:

 

Which is tantamount to saying that a sufficient command of English is a legal requirement to be permitted to use the crossing. How is that to be communicated?

 

I assume that in Wales, Welsh has the same standing as English for this purpose?

 

I point out that all road signs used on the Public highway MUST be in English or Welsh! Anything else is illegal (though I believe Gaelic may now be permissible in Scotland)

 

Similarly planning notices which get attached to lamp posts etc MUST be in English or Welsh (though translations can of course be requested from local councils)

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

I was going to comment that the crossing under discussion is in Wales so it would be perfectly acceptable (if unlikely) for a monoglot Welsh speaker to use the crossing. How do NR instructions cope with that?

Also, "particularly as occupation crossings are restricted to authorised users" was stated above. In this day and age is this requirement realistic? We are not talking about crossings between fields but sometimes the only access from a house to a public road. This is something which really must be addressed.

And on a lighter note, the Greeks shake their heads for yes and nod them for no. This caused real problems when a friend in Greece wanted to buy something and asked if the shop had any.

Jonathan

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
8 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

Quite...

 

At least it produced a discussion even though it was shot down in flames!

 

Not so - its perhaps more in the way things were presented.

 

The Railway runs on rules - and the penalty these days for breaking those can very easily be standing up in front of a guy in a curly wig!

 

Thus while there is indeed merit in considering other languages with respect to level crossing communication - its wrong to be having those discussions with front line railway staff who are not in a position to agree.

 

The people who such discussions are relevant to are in reality the DfT and the Home Office who put in place the legislation and legal environment by which railway staff are bound.

Edited by phil-b259
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
11 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

I point out that all road signs used on the Public highway MUST be in English or Welsh! Anything else is illegal (though I believe Gaelic may now be permissible in Scotland)

 

Similarly planning notices which get attached to lamp posts etc MUST be in English or Welsh (though translations can of course be requested from local councils)

It has been found necessary to have signs in Chinese. But remember there are 100s of people driving, not a seldom used level crossing.

 

But maybe such signs could be put up, during harvest season?

 

NOTE Although the headline, suggests it's a joke, it isn't the road authority did put up the Chinese signs.

 

https://au.news.yahoo.com/joke-fury-20km-h-speed-limit-aussie-tourist-road-040926344.html

Edited by kevinlms
More info
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
5 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

I was going to comment that the crossing under discussion is in Wales so it would be perfectly acceptable (if unlikely) for a monoglot Welsh speaker to use the crossing. How do NR instructions cope with that?

 

 

While the use of Welsh in Wales is probably permissible (given officialdom is quite happy with Bi-lingual road signs) I imagine English will be expected to be used in the first instance (i.e. when the signaller answers the phone) as English is the official language of the UK and spoken by everyone fro Scotland to Dover and Penzance where as Welsh speakers are usually only found in / close to Wales.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
14 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Finally its worth remembering that not all calls from phones at occupation crossings will necessarily be about people wanting to cross - you might find a railway maintenance crew using it or a member of the public to report a defect with the crossing surface for example. An automated facility would potentially struggle to cope with these sort of calls.

 

I said nothing about an automated system or call centres. Clearly the signaller would first listen to the call, and then decide whether to send a recorded message. If it's a frequent known user then obviously the normal conversation is fine.

 

Martin.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with level crossings is the public every form of help ,safety aids can be deployed but if the person using the crossing does not obey the rules not a lot can be done .Many of the public look on crossings ,red lights,etc as an attack on their personal space encouraged by idiots who should knoe better.  A recent incident of two women being stupid on a crossing in sussex is an example .I feel very sorry for train crew involved in an incident as they are imadiately in the blame firing line regardless if it was the users fault.  Most of these crossings without gates could proably be closed  I know that is a sweeping statement but it is a solution that must be considered.  The public will have to be treated as stupid or downright stroppy any other views will not solve the problems they cause.Signalers must dispair when they get an idiot on the phone but they are trained to be helpful and to instil safety.  Close the unnatended ones and ignore the groans from those who in the main dont use them.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Gold
1 hour ago, Hobby said:

But surely safety is all about a continuous learning curve where safety procedures develops over time, that's the way Railway Safety has developed anyhow. Decades ago East European workers were unheard of in the UK so our safety procedures were based around that premise, things have changed and such changes should be reflected in our future thinking.

 

It's clear that I'm on my own on this, I thought that at least NR would be considering such developments but it would seem not and as you are both coming across as defensive rather than taking it as a possible learning point (which is the way I intended it) and perhaps feeding back into the system, I shall bow out gracefully!

 

I think that you raise a perfectly valid point. Where I am (this week) near Hereford we have a very large population of East European workers and a lot of Spanish lorries bringing in fruit to a packing plant. I don't expect the signallers to speak these languages but a few signs in foreign languages might be worthwhile. If it only saves one incident, they will pay for themselves.

 

Social-distancing notices have been put up around the village in eight languages.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

I was going to comment that the crossing under discussion is in Wales so it would be perfectly acceptable (if unlikely) for a monoglot Welsh speaker to use the crossing. How do NR instructions cope with that?

Also, "particularly as occupation crossings are restricted to authorised users" was stated above. In this day and age is this requirement realistic? We are not talking about crossings between fields but sometimes the only access from a house to a public road. This is something which really must be addressed.

And on a lighter note, the Greeks shake their heads for yes and nod them for no. This caused real problems when a friend in Greece wanted to buy something and asked if the shop had any.

Jonathan

 

This is true - but as before the railway cannot simply go round changing things off its own batt.

 

Occupation crossings are a specific thing under UK law - many having been defined in the authorising acts of parliament when the railway got built so any changes will need the involvement of parliament and quite possibly legislative changes to amend the laws under which they are operated.

 

In fact as a whole the legal environment surrounding all level crossings is pretty arcane and due for reform

 

For example each public level crossing requires its own bespoke authorisation by the Secretary of State for Transport to exist (known by us the 'section 66' document) which lays down the exact details of EVERYTHING to do with the crossing in Lawyers terminology!

 

It is THAT document which will be used in court to determine where the crossing was working correctly NOT any of the engineering drawings / standards which Network Rail may have.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
25 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

If it's an approved script, it can be a pre-recorded message.

 

Martin.

The problem I see with that is that the recorded message will, in all likelihood, be a different voice to the signallers voice that answers the original call, the upshot being that the caller thinks they are now just communicating with a machine, so  hang up and use the crossing when it is potentially unsafe to do so. I say this from having over 46 years of working on UK railway telecommunications systems, including many level crossing telephone systems and voice recorder systems. 

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
  • Informative/Useful 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

Not so - its perhaps more in the way things were presented.

 

The Railway runs on rules - and the penalty these days for breaking those can very easily be standing up in front of a guy in a curly wig!

 

I was simply pointing out that times change, surprisingly other people have come up with other examples that I'd seen around but perhaps not registered, so some of those in charge are already looking at the wider implications of a multi cultural society...

 

As for the curly wigs, they also consider whether changes should have been made to take into account changes in society so it's not quite so cut and dried as simply saying "we followed the rules" if those rules haven't been looked at and if necessary had been updated to take into account changes in Society. I'm not saying my example would be valid, it wouldn't(!), but NR must be seen to have considered such changes if challenged in court and I would hope they do.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
6 minutes ago, corneliuslundie said:

I think the Welsh Language Commissioner would take a very dim view of that statement I am afraid Phil. In Wales you must be able to use Welsh. Jonathan

 

And what if its an English person who picks up the phone!

 

There is no requirement that you HAVE to use Welsh in Wales - all the law says is that if the person wants to communicate in Welsh then it should be facilitated by officialdom.

 

Determination against Welsh speakers, while obviously not being permitted is not the same thing as responding in English if you grew up outside Wales and don't know the language.

 

Which does rather beg the question if someone applies for a signallers job in Wales do they have to speak Welsh? What about an English signaller looking to relocate?

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
12 minutes ago, Joseph_Pestell said:

 

I think that you raise a perfectly valid point. Where I am (this week) near Hereford we have a very large population of East European workers and a lot of Spanish lorries bringing in fruit to a packing plant. I don't expect the signallers to speak these languages but a few signs in foreign languages might be worthwhile. If it only saves one incident, they will pay for themselves.

 

Social-distancing notices have been put up around the village in eight languages.

That's why those LED Signs should work well - in areas where the 'foreign' language spoken is predominant, otherwise back to square one.

Link to post
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, kevinlms said:

How many, which order and how do you stop it once you've heard the bit relevant to you? Note heard is not the same as understood!

 

Good points, plus how long will an impatient van or lorry driver stand listening to a recorded message until the section in their language (If it is even included) commences ? And if they still don't understand and require clarification from the Signaller, we are back to square one ! 

  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
10 minutes ago, Hobby said:

 

I was simply pointing out that times change, surprisingly other people have come up with other examples that I'd seen around but perhaps not registered, so some of those in charge are already looking at the wider implications of a multi cultural society...

 

As for the curly wigs, they also consider whether changes should have been made to take into account changes in society so it's not quite so cut and dried as simply saying "we followed the rules" if those rules haven't been looked at and if necessary had been updated to take into account changes in Society. I'm not saying my example would be valid, it wouldn't(!), but NR must be seen to have considered such changes if challenged in court and I would hope they do.

 

But as is so often the way in the legal world, we will only know when somebody decides to mount a legal challenge.

 

However NRs legal team are unlikely to be misreading the current legal situation - and as I have indicate the whole area of level crossings is a particularly complex one with much rigidly defined / proscribed by legislation which requires acts of parliament to change.

 

The latter factor is particularly important - because although Judges can strike down laws, there needs to be pretty compelling evidence for them to do so as the whole basis of a parliamentary democracy is that creation and drafting of laws remains the remit of Parliament.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Edited by phil-b259
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
4 minutes ago, Hobby said:

I'd have thought that it would be in the job description for that post, if it is felt that speaking Welsh would be useful or even necessary then it would be there?

Wouldn't it depend on whether the actual position required discussion with members of the public?

 

Most signallers would mostly deal only with railway people. I assume that there is a requirement for all train crews, for instance, to be able to speak/read English, or is that incorrect?

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium

As currently the signaller would presumably be based in Machynlleth Welsh would be very useful, though I agree not essential, for general living.

Road signs must be bilingual so I assume that the signage for crossings must also be bilingual. But you didn't answer my basic question. What happens if a monoglot Welsh speaker phones up from a level crossing in Wales and the signaller speaks only English?

(I note that there is a proposal currently to drop the English name for Wales's highest mountain. Though I don't think it will happen.)

Yes, I understand the point about the legal basis for level crossings but that does not mean that things should not change. I suspect though that it will be an uphill struggle to persuade civil servants who don't understand anything about the subject that anything needs to change, and that 19th century legislation is no longer up to the job.

And as an aside, what happens when we get autonomous vehicles doing deliveries and one wants to cross such a level crossing? I assume that there are no private crossings in Milton Keynes.

Jonathan

  • Like 1
  • Agree 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

  • RMweb Premium
1 hour ago, martin_wynne said:

 

I said nothing about an automated system or call centres. Clearly the signaller would first listen to the call, and then decide whether to send a recorded message. If it's a frequent known user then obviously the normal conversation is fine.

 

Martin.

If you answer in a real voice, then change to a recorded voice, is likely to confuse some people into thinking they've been transferred to a queue.

 

The whole thing about crossing a railway line, is clarity to as many people as possible, in the shortest time frame practical.

 

If you make the process long and convoluted, aren't you risking people are going to ignore the whole system and cross anyway? The last thing anyone should want.

 

Edit to add.

 

The cost ought not be an essential criteria, but of course we live in a real world, where bean counting cannot be ignored.

Edited by kevinlms
More info
  • Agree 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...