Level crossing stupidity...

[Wickham Green too]

I feel a little hair-splitting is going on here ....... someone's going to say that the District, Circle and Hammersmith & City Lines aren't part of the same system next ( let alone the 'tube' lines ).

[Ian Smeeton]

I'll just throw Glasgow into the ring.

 

Gauge 4'7 3/4", so narrower than standard, although SG trains were run, particularly on the South Side of the city in Govan, to Fairfields and other shipyards using electric locos running using the tramways' overhead equipment.

 

From Elderslie in the west to Airdtie & Coatbridge in the East, over 100 route miles (160km) must put into the top two or three.

 

Regards

 

Ian

[melmerby]

3 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

But it wasn't part of ONE system, though, it was several separate systems which were interconnected. That's how it's measured, on individual systems, for instance, Birmingham, Walsall, Wolverhampton all being separate entities. All the railways in that area were all connected as well but that doesn't make them the same network, just interconnected. Many places in Europe are the same.

 

Can you show me your evidence is for your claim, please.

Birmingham ran trams in West Bromwich, Dudley and Wednesbury, Walsall also ran into Wednesbury

Dudley also had it's own operator (Dudley & Stourbridge), Wolverhampton also ran trams in Dudley, the lines were all connected.

More than one company's trams could be seen on the same piece of track.

Doesn't that make it a system?

[melmerby]

5 hours ago, Compound2632 said:

 

 

 

And since when has Wolverhampton been the Black Country, for that matter? Walsall is doubtful, too. It really was an Interurban system, connecting numerous distinct metropolises, each with its distinct dignity.

I'm going on what they are called in (admittedly modern) tramway volumes by LRTA, where it is all called Black Country Tramways outside the City of Birmingham (including BCT's routes there).

 

The problem is what exactly comprises the Black Country?

There is no standard definition, however with most defintions* Walsall is normally included, Wolverhampton often not.

 

*Based on the coal seams?

Edited November 13, 2021 by melmerby

[melmerby]

Back to Level Crossings:

 

The one in Cordele looks like it used to be a level crossing but the road surface has now been removed.

https://goo.gl/maps/tv6G5Rdv3rZkyGM49

Edited November 14, 2021 by melmerby

[melmerby]

And another:

 

[Hobby]

7 hours ago, melmerby said:

Back to Level Crossings:

 

Probably as well, Melmerby, though in answer to your question, No, that does not make them the same system, just as the pre 1923 railways in Birmingham and the Black Country, though all interconnected and having some trains than ran "through" were not part of the same system. Each company had it's own network and that's what is taken into account when looking at the largest, or smallest, come to that.

[rab]

9 hours ago, melmerby said:

Back to Level Crossings:

 

The one in Cordele looks like it used to be a level crossing but the road surface has now been removed.

https://goo.gl/maps/tv6G5Rdv3rZkyGM49

Interesting that in the first clip, both cars

drove off in opposite directions to the one

they were taking when they ended up on the track

[peterd777]

17 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Lets put this argument to bed with the largest extant narrow-gauge tramway system in the British Isles : - 

 

 

..... well, the Irish Standard Gauge is 5'3''  -  so the Luas must be narrow ! 

Love your post. If the big railways are 5’ 3” then by definition 4’ 8 1/2” is narrow.

Using the same logic I will raise you by nominating the Melbourne system mentioned above.

 

To bring things back on topic there are even level crossings with trams and trains and different overhead voltages.

 

Our tram drivers certainly do not do stupid things. But at such a crossing near me on slight hill I have seen grooves in the bitumen beyond the tram catch points !!!  

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, Hobby said:

....  No, that does not make them the same system, just as the pre 1923 railways in Birmingham and the Black Country, though all interconnected and having some trains than ran "through" were not part of the same system. ....

Can we, please, agree that there were / are two definitions of "system" - vis. 'Operational System' and 'Physical System' ........ a goods train crossing from one of the Big Four to another at midnight on 31st December 1947 would be running on a unified physical railway. While, theoretically, the crew suddenly changed from being servants of one or other independent Company to employees of the State ( though they'd have been too busy to worry about such things at the time ) the physical railway didn't change one iota.

 

( Incidentally, British Railways inherited a number of narrow gauge and otherwise isolated lines at that time and we can argue 'til the cows come home whether they formed part of the same 'system'.)

[newbryford]

What we really need is a new topic titled "Level crossing stupidity thread drift".

[Hobby]

1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said:

Can we, please, agree that there were / are two definitions of "system" - vis. 'Operational System' and 'Physical System'.

 

No problem at all with that, it's what I've been saying all along! It's what I pointed out in relation to the railways per 1923 in that area...

Edited November 14, 2021 by Hobby

[melmerby]

4 hours ago, Hobby said:

 

Probably as well, Melmerby, though in answer to your question, No, that does not make them the same system, just as the pre 1923 railways in Birmingham and the Black Country, though all interconnected and having some trains than ran "through" were not part of the same system. Each company had it's own network and that's what is taken into account when looking at the largest, or smallest, come to that.

Not true (the big railway analogy is too simple and does not apply)

What about West Bromwich, Tipton & Wednesbury tramways? None of them ran trams, but they owned track that others operators used.

Dudley & Stourbridge was a private company, not a municipal but ran trams in two Authorities. They did not own the track.

Birmingham, Wolverhampton & Walsall were municipal tramways and their services ran into other authorities areas. They only owned the track within their boundaries but the route length counted is that used by them.

e.g. Birminghams 80.42 miles includes the Black Country routes in other authority's areas and that is the accepted length of City of Birmingham tramways.

 

IMHO you are just tring to split, already split hairs.

 

 

 

[Hobby]

No I am not trying to split hairs, when taking into account the biggest system the definition is the company who runs it, that's it, that's how they define it, I don't make up the rules so if you have an issue with that perhaps you need to discuss it with them!

 

I asked you for proof earlier on, and also provided details of other, longer, networks in Europe but I forgot all about the biggest, namely the SNCV, Belgian Vicinal network, operated by one company and interconnected, mostly meter gauge with some 1067mm and at one point extending to nearly 2500 miles!

 

Have a nice day!

Edited November 14, 2021 by Hobby

[kevinlms]

4 hours ago, rab said:

Interesting that in the first clip, both cars

drove off in opposite directions to the one

they were taking when they ended up on the track

Panicked and just wanted to get away, before the cops turned up!

[corneliuslundie]

But in all three cases there seemed to be no awareness that a train might turn up. Though it is possible that the guy in the high viz jacket might have been from the railway, I suppose.

Was one of them a taxi? If so the driver should have known the roads.

What is there about that Ashland crossing which seems to confuse to many drivers.

And I don't mind thread drift if it means there are no level crossing incidents to report.

Jonathan

[Wickham Green too]

2 hours ago, newbryford said:

What we really need is a new topic titled "Level crossing stupidity thread drift".

Maybe we'll have to start a new thread when someone really IS stupid at a level crossing ................ hopefully never !

[Hobby]

I love your optimism, though no doubt we'll get one shortly, I can't remember the bridge bash one having many recent entries either!

 

Tempting fate?!

[Mark Saunders]

1 hour ago, corneliuslundie said:

But in all three cases there seemed to be no awareness that a train might turn up. Though it is possible that the guy in the high viz jacket might have been from the railway, I suppose.

Was one of them a taxi? If so the driver should have known the roads.

What is there about that Ashland crossing which seems to confuse to many drivers.

And I don't mind thread drift if it means there are no level crossing incidents to report.

Jonathan

There is a mini roundabout near where I live is recorded as having no incidents but near miss is not recorded as they are never reported/reported!

[Dunsignalling]

7 hours ago, rab said:

Interesting that in the first clip, both cars

drove off in opposite directions to the one

they were taking when they ended up on the track

"Looks like we're having a bad day, let's go home?"

 

John

[Grimly Feendish]

A bit of an oopsie here!

 

 

 

https://jalopnik.com/amazon-delivery-van-cut-in-half-by-amtrak-train-1848054297

 

[Hobby]

Rather an appropriate name on the front, though perhaps for the train rather than the van!

[Dunsignalling]

That guy avoided death by no more than three inches....

[Michael Hodgson]

One half of a cut and shut.

[jcredfer]

Since the driver was aware that he was deaf in one ear, it might have occurred to him that a careful view up the line on that side may have been called for.  Then he claimed that he tried to accelerate out of the way, which must have been aware in time to do that.

 

Not quite sure I fully believe his explanation.....