Railway level crossings

modsandmockers

RedheadFred wrote: »

Surely it's common sense that a train has right of way on a railway track

Well yes - if you say so - but your fun story could easily have resulted in yet another avoidable fatality. If you had followed procedure and called the signal box, you would have been told to wait.

On the other hand, if normal procedure was that the train should always stop at the crossing, you would have been in no danger, and experienced no unnecessary delay.

esuhl

modsandmockers wrote: »

Well yes - if you say so - but your fun story could easily have resulted in yet another avoidable fatality. If you had followed procedure and called the signal box, you would have been told to wait.

The procedure for crossing a light-controlled level-crossing is to go by the lights! Can you imagine if every driver had to stop, get out of their car, phone the signal box. The tailback of cars at level-crossings would stretch for miles!

Do you really think this is what people are procedurally advised to do at a level-crossing?! No wonder you think it would be easier for the trains to stop for cars!

modsandmockers

esuhl wrote: »

The procedure for crossing a light-controlled level-crossing is to go by the lights! Can you imagine if every driver had to stop, get out of their car, phone the signal box. The tailback of cars at level-crossings would stretch for miles!

Do you really think this is what people are procedurally advised to do at a level-crossing?! No wonder you think it would be easier for the trains to stop for cars!

RedHead was referring to a farm crossing, and I assumed that the green light was for the train driver - road users generally have either a red light or no light at all.

An earlier contributor to this thread assured us that the railway currently operates a failsafe system.

Rolandtheroadie

Some users should be calling to cross, and the greens for road users

Think Redhead had started to cross, encountered a problem with the horse and the light had went to red. Horse possibly startled by the yodel?

timbo58

IMHO if you use 'avoidable deaths' as an argument point, then you'll be closing almost every road in the UK as well.

modsandmockers

scotsman4th wrote: »

Some users should be calling to cross, and the greens for road users

Think Redhead had started to cross, encountered a problem with the horse and the light had went to red. Horse possibly startled by the yodel?

According to the experts on this thread, it is the train which cannot be relied upon to stop where and when required, and therefore all other road users need to wait patiently for many minutes at a time. A compulsory stop sign on one side of the road, and a green light on the other side is just confusing - especially to horses.

timbo58 wrote: »

IMHO if you use 'avoidable deaths' as an argument point, then you'll be closing almost every road in the UK as well.

Railway branch lines close the road at regular intervals, but the deaths (and the delays) continue.

Norman_Castle

modsandmockers wrote: »

A compulsory stop sign on one side of the road, and a green light on the other side is just confusing - especially to horses.

Do horses read stop signs?.

wealdroam

Is a horse a vehicle?

armyknife

wealdroam wrote: »

Is a horse a vehicle?

It has HPs, so yes.

esuhl

modsandmockers wrote: »

A compulsory stop sign on one side of the road, and a green light on the other side is just confusing

You obviously don't drive then. A "stop" sign means "stop and give way". The green light means "it is safe to proceed". So both in combination mean that you should stop, confirm that it IS ACTUALLY safe to proceed, and continue. A red light would mean "stop and wait, regardless of whether it appears to be safe to proceed".

To reduce the chance of accident in case of a signal fault OR if a train is unable to stop as expected, the green light is a guide only.

modsandmockers wrote: »

- especially to horses.

Ha ha ha! Where do you come up with this stuff?! :rotfl: