Level crossing gate query

[Wickham Green too]

3 hours ago, Artless Bodger said:

... East Farleigh was a delightful place with the Egyptian style waterworks building adjacent and overlooking the mediaeval bridge and lock on the Medway Navigation. There was a nice pub too on the bank above the railway. ...

If anyone wants me to go off topic - for a purely layout planning purpose, of course - I did photograph the waterworks, bridge and The Victory on the same occasion ............ the latter, unlike so many pubs, still seems to be in business.

[Michael Hodgson]

5 hours ago, VIA185 said:

An accident at East Farleigh in 2015 in which the signalman received life-changing injuries cost Network Rail a £200,000 fine and £86,000 in costs. (CJL)

I have the deepest sympathy for the signalman who suffered a broken neck, but its seems to me the car driver (or his insurance company) should have borne the cost.

[VIA185]

Looking back to the OP, I suspect we should ask what era the OP is modelling? I suspect there would be a lot more precise examination of the the site and assessment of a safety case on the modern, or more recent railway, than back in the steam era when the crossing is more likely to have simple 'evolved' from Victorian times. (CJL). 

[Ray H]

30 minutes ago, VIA185 said:

Looking back to the OP, I suspect we should ask what era the OP is modelling?

 

The time line is around late 1950's - 'cos the local (railcar operated) passenger service is still in green with no sign of even the smallest yellow panel on the ends but I'm no too fussed about being more or less precise regarding the date.

 

[Wickham Green too]

1 hour ago, Ray H said:

... the local (railcar operated) passenger service is still in green with no sign of even the smallest yellow panel ...

I'd guess it was old enough to have grown whiskers ??!? 🧔

[DLT]

The subject of level crossings is a fascinating one.  The variations seem to be endless, especially when it comes to light railways and narrow gauge.

Here's an example of the setup described by Ray,  Horham, Mid Suffolk Light Railway

I want to build a skew level crossing like this, but It'll need a new layout.

Cheers, Dave.

[DLT]

Where the Lynton & Barnstaple Railway threaded through Barnstaple there were two crossings ever wide roads.  Both had four gates, which overlapped each other when closed accross the railway.  Details and photos on this page:  Lynton & Barnstaple Signalling 

[DLT]

The Isle of Man Railway standardised on hand-operated four-gate crossings, but seemingly always installed so they were parallel to both road and railway.

Here's a classic example, Mill Road Crossing at Peel Station

[phil-b259]

12 hours ago, Michael Hodgson said:

I have the deepest sympathy for the signalman who suffered a broken neck, but its seems to me the car driver (or his insurance company) should have borne the cost.

 

The reason NR got fined was this wasn't the first time a signalman had received injuries from impatient motorists at East Farleigh  - it was a known problem but NR had not done anything to resolve the problem and protect their employee AS REQUIRED  under Heath & Safety legislation.

 

THAT was why it got fined.

 

One would hope that the motorist was also prosecuted under motoring laws however.

Edited April 17, 2023 by phil-b259

[phil-b259]

18 hours ago, Tom Burnham said:

And as I understand it initiated a programme to convert remaining crossings with gates to lifting barriers - East Farleigh and Wateringbury on the Medway Valley line have been done in recent years, as have the remaining gated crossings on the Ashford to Canterbury line. I believe East Farleigh still has local control, partly I guess because of the complicated layout  of the fairly busy road as mentioned above - a steep narrow road one side and a single track medieval bridge on the other.

 

As a result of the East Farleigh incident those busy crossings which retained gates (as opposed to being converted to barriers as that can take quite a while to do) have since been retro-fitted with wig-wags and red light cameras.

[Ben B]

I find the crossings on the Gobowen-Oswestry-Llynclys line interesting; not least because the need to replace them is what's mainly standing in the way of reopening.

 

The angled level crossing over a busy bypass road (lights and barriers) is unusual enough... then there's the very angled crossing at Llynclys which was protected only by crossbuck signs and a man with a flag, whilst mineral trains propelled over it. Given the speeds car drivers take that at the moment I'm not surprised the railway can't just re-open it.. 

[62613]

On 12/04/2023 at 11:37, VIA185 said:

Double gates each side of the line were the norm where I lived, though they were all wheel-operated from an adjacent signal box. They were of SR (Thorpe Lane, Pooley Green, Egham) and GWR (Colnbrook) origin. Hand-worked gates could be 2 or 4 and sometimes when there was a width difference between railway and road, they would be closed over one another in one direction. Whilst two large gates might make hand-operation easier, hand-worked double gates were also quite common. 

West Street Crossing, between Belvedere and Erith, was four gates, hand - worked; traffic crossing to/from Battle Road/Pembroke Road wasn't much (up to the mid - 60s, so the crossing keeper often lefy two gates across the road, and two closed to the railway. I think the Keeper got train running information from the two boxes either side, Harrow Manorway and Erith Station. I'm not sure of the complete signalling arrangements, but London - bound was a succession of distants under homes for the entire length between the two stations.

 

The crossing was abolished in the Dartford Loop resignalling in 1970.

 

[Artless Bodger]

21 hours ago, Jeremy C said:

although the stepped arrangement of the edge of the roadway is worth noting.

Perhaps due to the infill being panels?

[Michael Hodgson]

3 hours ago, Ben B said:

I find the crossings on the Gobowen-Oswestry-Llynclys line interesting; not least because the need to replace them is what's mainly standing in the way of reopening.

 

The angled level crossing over a busy bypass road (lights and barriers) is unusual enough... then there's the very angled crossing at Llynclys which was protected only by crossbuck signs and a man with a flag, whilst mineral trains propelled over it. Given the speeds car drivers take that at the moment I'm not surprised the railway can't just re-open it.. 

When a crossing has been closed for a long time, the locals get used to the idea that there isn't a railway here any more, so re-opening is something of a shock to people who think they know if's safe to roar down the road without worrying about the possibility that there might now be a train crossing it - this especially an issue if the corssing is ungated.

[uax6]

I believe that the remaining OCL crossings have been upgraded to now include half barriers, but are now classed as OCL-B's (I think....)!

 

Don't forget that the crossing gates don't have to be the same size on each side of the railway, this was discovered here one night when they had both old gates off, and discovered that one of the old ones was 18" longer than both the new replacement gates.... they had to put the old long gate back on, until some 18" packing pieces were delivered to pack the hinge end out...

 

The East Farleigh gates at the time of the accident were steel ones, which are probably one of the reasons the bobby was hurt so badly. The upshot of that incident on every other Bobbie that operated crossing gates was that we were no longer allowed to just wear a hi-vis vest, we had to be in full orange. Originally we were going to have to wear hard hats and safety glasses too, but for once common sense prevailed and these two items were not required in the end. 

 

Andy G

[Tom Burnham]

19 hours ago, 62613 said:

West Street Crossing, between Belvedere and Erith, was four gates, hand - worked; traffic crossing to/from Battle Road/Pembroke Road wasn't much (up to the mid - 60s, so the crossing keeper often lefy two gates across the road, and two closed to the railway. I think the Keeper got train running information from the two boxes either side, Harrow Manorway and Erith Station. I'm not sure of the complete signalling arrangements, but London - bound was a succession of distants under homes for the entire length between the two stations.

 

The crossing was abolished in the Dartford Loop resignalling in 1970.

 

My photo of Pembroke Road crossing in Aug 1970 and an earlier view (from Bexley Archives) circa 1900, with a typical North Kent line crossing keeper's cottage.  The change in the surfacing of the roadway over the crossing is interesting.  Incidentally, a gap remained in the conductor rail for at least 10 years after the crossing was removed on the up line.

[62613]

2 hours ago, Tom Burnham said:

My photo of Pembroke Road crossing in Aug 1970 and an earlier view (from Bexley Archives) circa 1900, with a typical North Kent line crossing keeper's cottage.  The change in the surfacing of the roadway over the crossing is interesting.  Incidentally, a gap remained in the conductor rail for at least 10 years after the crossing was removed on the up line.

Both from the footbridge. That second one must have been close to the end.

[Michael Hodgson]

11 hours ago, uax6 said:

I believe that the remaining OCL crossings have been upgraded to now include half barriers, but are now classed as OCL-B's (I think....)!

 

Most AOCLs had barriers added retrospectively and are now called AOCL+B.  These behave in exactly the same way as ABCLs as seen by drivers of both road and rail vehicles, although there are internal differences in the control circuitry and timings between these two types.

 

Some got converted to other types such as full barriers, CCTV, Obstacle Detection or perhaps even replaced by a bridge.

[bécasse]

3 hours ago, Tom Burnham said:

...... Pembroke Road crossing ....... an earlier view (from Bexley Archives) circa 1900, with a typical North Kent line crossing keeper's cottage.  The change in the surfacing of the roadway over the crossing is interesting.  

 

It is almost certainly not a change in surfacing material over the road width of the crossing as it superficially appears to be but more a reflection on the state of the roadways either side of the crossing, with the wheels on carts crossing from right to left bringing more mud onto the crossing than those crossing from left to right. At that period road surfaces in a suburban area were almost certainly macadam (graded stones without tar - and the most common), tarred wood blocks (mounted with the grain running vertically) or granite setts. The latter two were relatively clean, macadam wasn't and could quickly accumulate mud. Interestingly it rather looks as if the crossing itself may have been surfaced in (presumably engineering) brick.

[DLT]

Heres a couple more single-line, single-gate skew crossings:

Shipston Lane on the Shipston -on-Stour branch (a rich source of level crossings!)

Bullocks Mill on the Leominster-Kington line,  Bullocks Mill again.

[Tom Burnham]

47 minutes ago, bécasse said:

It is almost certainly not a change in surfacing material over the road width of the crossing as it superficially appears to be but more a reflection on the state of the roadways either side of the crossing, with the wheels on carts crossing from right to left bringing more mud onto the crossing than those crossing from left to right. At that period road surfaces in a suburban area were almost certainly macadam (graded stones without tar - and the most common), tarred wood blocks (mounted with the grain running vertically) or granite setts. The latter two were relatively clean, macadam wasn't and could quickly accumulate mud. Interestingly it rather looks as if the crossing itself may have been surfaced in (presumably engineering) brick.

I was thinking of the change in surfacing between the Edwardian period (brick or stone setts as you suggest) and 1970 (timber).

[Tom Burnham]

At the risk of stereotyping, there's the old story about the Irish crossing keeper who, when asked why one crossing gate was across the road and the other across the railway, replied that he was half expecting a train...