Whistle boards and whistle usage at railway crossings

[BravoGolfMike]

I put it to you that you that you are just trolling.

Is the correct answer.

 

[JackClare]

First post, hi everyone!

I've noticed that between Crewe and Hereford, when onboard a 175 the driver typically only uses a single-tone horn. When onboard a 150/2 / 158 I've heard more two-tone horns. It may just be driver preference in some cases.

 

[A-driver]

First post, hi everyone!

I've noticed that between Crewe and Hereford, when onboard a 175 the driver typically only uses a single-tone horn. When onboard a 150/2 / 158 I've heard more two-tone horns. It may just be driver preference in some cases.

The rule book only now requires one tone unless you see people on the line.

Many drivers still use 2 tones , nothing wrong with that and nothing that you would be disciplined for. Many believe that 2 tones are much more obvious for anyone thinking of crossing. I have also heard drivers say they use 2 tones as it is possible to be deaf to certain frequencies so you could be unable to hear a single tone.

But it's just driver preference, just coincidence with different stock.

 

[jon0844]

The two tone is very recognisable, so I'd immediately know it's a train as against another horn from a vehicle nearby (depending of course where the crossing might be).

 

[Felim_Doyle]

I was going to reply to individual posts but imagine my surprise when I discovered this morning that my initial post had already generated three pages of replies!

Firstly, I hardly think that asking questions regarding safety is ‘moaning’ or ‘trolling’. Secondly, I find it ridiculous that someone who wasn't present at these two incidents and is not familiar with the visibility at the site can be so sure of what I did or did not see.

I also think it is very naïve, at best, of any train driver to think that their colleagues would not risk their lucrative career in such a manner. In any job, from truck drivers to brain surgeons, someone is always willing to take risks for their own convenience. As DXMachina so eloquently put it “every pack of cards has a few jokers”. It is against the law to operate a mobile phone except in hands-free mode while driving a road vehicle but many drivers, even professional drivers, still risk having an accident or (ultimately) losing their licence and potentially their job by doing so. We didn't even need a new law for that, as driving without due care and attention already covered it, but some people needed to be told specifically. (I know, somebody already made that point but I though that it needed reinforcing!)

The two specific cases I mentioned occurred during daylight hours on relatively overcast days this summer and my reports are based on my view of the front cab or locomotive of the approaching trains not the rear. There is a whistle board on that section of track, at least in the northbound Aylesbury direction. I'll take a photo of it some time and of the crossings too and I'll also try to post map details as requested.

In the case of the passenger train, due to the direction of travel, I had a clear view of the driver through the front windscreen and I am very sure that I observed him reading a tabloid format newspaper.

In the case of the freight train, there was glare on the front windscreen but, as the train passed, I had a clear view of the driver at only a few metres distance through the side window. He was holding a small white device to which a white cable was connected that split part way along and went to each of his ears. He was making a ‘scrolling’ gesture on the device so, unless this is the latest in Cab Secure Radio technology, I am reasonably certain that he was selecting tracks on an MP3 player or mobile phone most likely of the Apple variety or one of the many lookalikes.

The section of track in question is next to a primary school for children with learning and behavioural difficulties so they might not be the most observant pedestrians even with clear line of sight on a straight section of track. Drivers should not be relying on the common sense or observation skills of pedestrians, especially very small ones who shouldn't be there, or indeed motorists at crossings. I do occasionally hear trains making multiple audible warnings which I have always concluded was because the driver had seen people on or near the track. Even though it is a straight section of track, the crossings are often obscured by the surrounding trees, shrubbery and brambles.

Following the incident with the passenger train my intention was to inform Chiltern Railways or Network Rail but circumstances (family medical issue) dictated otherwise. By the time I was in a position to do so, I had not noted down sufficient details to be able to report it accurately.

My experience has been that, if a driver is looking up and ahead, he/she will notice and acknowledge a friendly gesture although I appreciate now that, strictly speaking, they should not. However, perhaps it helps to break the monotony and ensure that they are alert so maybe it is, in reality, a good thing.

I have the utmost respect for train drivers but, having seen these two cases of ‘laxity’ in safety, I felt the need to raise the alarm. However, I wanted to be better aware of the procedures and so I came here to ask those in the know. I will probably contact Network Rail, as suggested, so that a general ‘heads up’ can be issued reminding drivers to be more attentive at crossings and to observe whistle boards. Even if a driver has a clear view ahead, I imagine that stopping a train to avoid a collision is neither easy nor desirable and sounding an audible alert, regardless of the presence or absence of any visible danger ahead, is preferable.

Oh, and, just because I have a life and couldn't respond to replies straight away, does not make this a ‘trolling’ thread nor does it being my first post in the forum.

I think some of the respondents here are in serious denial but I appreciate all of the constructive comments!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

<hotlinked image snipped>

Please don't hotlink directly to images on my website. That is considered bad form.

In any case, nobody will see the image in your post unless it was already present in their web cache.

Oops! Sorry but I thought I had rectified that before I created the thread. I had even downloaded the image but apparently forgot to insert it into the post.

I did have concerns about copyright infringement so, now that I have your attention, may I have permission to use your photo please? Let me know and I'll edit the original post accordingly. Please don't make me go out in the rain today to take my own photo!

Great site though!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The two tone is very recognisable, so I'd immediately know it's a train as against another horn from a vehicle nearby (depending of course where the crossing might be).

I absolutely agree and feel that any relaxing of rules is irresponsible.

The recent Network Rail awareness campaign surely strengthens the case.

 

[455driver]

Always strikes me as funny that it is dangerous for me to phone the missus and ask whats for tea while doing 90 in the middle of nowhere running on greens but its okay to receive a safety critical message from the signalman while doing 60 mph in suburban land while running on double yellows!

Which one is the most distracting and/or dangerous?

 

[DXMachina]

I guess from your username that you drive older units: It does seem that if all trains had a computer interface in the cab as modern stock does, it would be better for signallers messages to come up on there in text, with some sort of 'please notify receipt' action to acknowledge the driver seeing them.

 

[lincolnshire]

Always strikes me as funny that it is dangerous for me to phone the missus and ask whats for tea while doing 90 in the middle of nowhere running on greens but its okay to receive a safety critical message from the signalman while doing 60 mph in suburban land while running on double yellows!

Which one is the most distracting and/or dangerous?

as you say whats wrong with the above, he could have been doing 70 mph down rhe motorway going home asking whats for tea or even texting here whilst doing 70 mph. You see both happening on the road, so whats wrong with the driver on rhe train on the phone? At least the train will always stick to the rails and only go where they take it and at least you can see whats happening in front of you, not some nutter in next lane on rhe phone. If you miss anything signal wise or deadmans reminder at least the train will stop not like rhe car/ lorries which could hit anything.

Now lets wait for the comments from thr goody two shoes who never do anything wrong.

 

[455driver]

I guess from your username that you drive older units: It does seem that if all trains had a computer interface in the cab as modern stock does, it would be better for signallers messages to come up on there in text, with some sort of 'please notify receipt' action to acknowledge the driver seeing them.

We have to repeat the message back to the signaller so that wouldnt work, most of the time I drive more modern units now (Desiro 444 and 450s) but prefer the 455s best and 458s second, dont rate the Desiros at all.

 

[GB]

<snip>....you see both happening on the road, so whats wrong with the driver on rhe train on the phone?

I imagine the two main factors are public image and incident mitigation.

 

[Tomnick]

I guess from your username that you drive older units: It does seem that if all trains had a computer interface in the cab as modern stock does, it would be better for signallers messages to come up on there in text, with some sort of 'please notify receipt' action to acknowledge the driver seeing them.

At least with GSM-R, we can send a 'contact signaller' (text) message, so the driver can choose a more appropriate moment. The ability to send text messages (other than that and 'wait signal') has been disabled though, probably because of the risk of an oopsie if an important instruction was passed by thatmethod ("pass sig @ dgr lol"...!!).

As for lincolnshire's post - the rails might keep you going in a straight line, the AWS might disturb you occasionally and the deadman's might check you're awake, but that didn't stop one driver (in the depths of Lincolnshire, funnily enough), but that didn't stop one driver running through a set of crossing gates (having passed the protecting signal at danger) whilst distracted by his mobile phone call...

 

[jon0844]

("pass sig @ dgr lol"...!!)

That really made me laugh out loud!

 

[Felim_Doyle]

At least the train will always stick to the rails and only go where they take it and at least you can see whats happening in front of you ...

Sadly the tragic fatal derailment at Santiago de Compostela in Spain tells us otherwise. Although the full report from the enquiry has yet to be published, I think it is fair to say that a communication call between the driver and the control centre was a contributing factor in terms of distracting the driver. So, unless it is a matter of imminent danger, 455driver is right in saying that it's an unnecessary distraction and can wait till the next stop!

Now lets wait for the comments from thr goody two shoes who never do anything wrong.

I'm not sure what the opposite of a ‘goody two shoes’ is but surely they are the ones at whom your wrath should be targeted not the ones who obey the rules and avoid risk. Most accidents, be they on the road, on the rails or in the air, result from a combination of factors where, had only one not occurred, there would have been no ‘incident’.

<Seems-Like-Off-Topic-But-Relevant>In 1961 the US had a ‘broken arrow incident’ in which two B-52 Stratofortress aircraft broke up in mid-air and five of the six fail-safe mechanisms on a nuclear device failed. It really does just take that one extra failure to make a disaster. (OK, I admit it, I watch a lot of Air Crash Investigation on National Geographic Channel and other documentaries.<\Seems-Like-Off-Topic-But-Relevant>

P.S. For those conspiracy theorists who dubbed me as a moaner, a liar and a troll: the fact that I posted under my own name and attached a signature which includes my name and general location seems to have escaped your attention; perversely the scathing responses came from posters hiding behind nom de plumes. Apologies will be accepted in writing.

 

[Felim_Doyle]

That really made me laugh out loud!

I'm not a “raily” or whatever the appropriate term is for railway workers or railway enthusiasts is but I'm willing to learn the lingo! I am a railway enthusiast, just not in the usual anorak, leaky biro, negative sense of the term!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Hmm! That's interesting. My last post appeared instantaneously but a previous one, from a few minutes earlier, has to be moderated!

 

[Muzer]

Just a play on the idea of text-speak (as in SMS text messages) being used in a safety critical environment - "pass signal at danger lol [laugh out loud]".

 

[Felim_Doyle]

So are “we” admitting that British Rail are responsible for ‘text speak’?

 

[DXMachina]

good job it isn't MMS over GSMR

[driver] - Do i proceed? :-\

[signaller]

 

[Tomnick]

Thanks both - I'm glad to have largely avoided the awkward situation of having to explain my own humour . The process of (verbally) instructing a driver to pass a signal at danger, or indeed any other safety-critical instruction, is rightly rather convoluted: firstly establishing that both parties know who they're speaking to (most importantly that it's the correct train at the correct signal), then passing the instruction and having it read back to confirm understanding, before finally authority is given for it to be carried out. An SMS message somehow doesn't do that justice, so thankfully at least the operating function of BR (and successors) isn't responsible for the gradual takeover of "txt spk" in all walks of life...!

 

[Felim_Doyle]

Also, while I think of it, at the weekend my wife travelled from Aylesbury to London Marylebone and there was someone smoking in the carriage. I don't want to start a debate in this thread, I'm just looking for a link to a thread where such issues are discussed (or disgusted)!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
As trains leave Aylesbury Maintenance Depot the two lines ‘fork off’ but perhaps I'm too much of a newbie to be using rail ‘txt spk’ just yet!

 

[TDK]

I do occasionally hear trains making multiple audible warnings which I have always concluded was because the driver had seen people on or near the track. Even though it is a straight section of track, the crossings are often obscured by the surrounding trees, shrubbery and brambles.

You concluded? Could be permanent way workers or S & T on track, unfortunately you cannot conclude as I feel you cave concluded on most of your findings without solid evidence.

Following the incident with the passenger train my intention was to inform Chiltern Railways or Network Rail but circumstances (family medical issue) dictated otherwise. By the time I was in a position to do so, I had not noted down sufficient details to be able to report it accurately.

Do you call the police when you see a car driver on the mobile phone? I still feel you do not have sufficient details to report anything.

My experience has been that, if a driver is looking up and ahead, he/she will notice and acknowledge a friendly gesture although I appreciate now that, strictly speaking, they should not. However, perhaps it helps to break the monotony and ensure that they are alert so maybe it is, in reality, a good thing.

Perhaps it does not help. I do not wave at enthusiasts or people at level crossings as I feel there is no need to.

I imagine that stopping a train to avoid a collision is neither easy nor desirable and sounding an audible alert, regardless of the presence or absence of any visible danger ahead, is preferable.

As quoted earlier there are strict rules on the sounding of the warning horn. If someone runs across a level crossing ignoring the signs and unfortunately gets hit with or without a whistle board you cannot blame the driver of the train.

Oh, and, just because I have a life and couldn't respond to replies straight away, does not make this a ‘trolling’ thread nor does it being my first post in the forum.

I beg to differ.

You offer yourself as a railway enthusiast and in my opinion your attitude and also comments can only reiterate why some drivers do not like enthusiasts.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Always strikes me as funny that it is dangerous for me to phone the missus and ask whats for tea while doing 90 in the middle of nowhere running on greens but its okay to receive a safety critical message from the signalman while doing 60 mph in suburban land while running on double yellows!

Which one is the most distracting and/or dangerous?

I don't know about your particular company rules 455 but the company I work for will not permit you to use any on board communications equipment if you or any driver deems it to not be safe to do so, so if a signaller sends a message and a driver feels it is unsafe to answer they should stop their train to answer the call.

 

[lincolnshire]

I imagine the two main factors are public image and incident mitigation.

yes the usual these days Public Image and incident mitigarion.

Public Image, the bankers got away with it, make a co** up of lending money and the goverment bails you out and you still have your job.

 

[Tomnick]

What have bankers got to do with drivers managing distractions?

I don't know about your particular company rules 455 but the company I work for will not permit you to use any on board communications equipment if you or any driver deems it to not be safe to do so, so if a signaller sends a message and a driver feels it is unsafe to answer they should stop their train to answer the call.

Seems fair to me, and that's why I prefer to send the 'contact signaller' message (when I remember how to do it!) rather than initiating a call at a potentially bad moment. Without checking the good book, my understanding (possibly just with an urgent call?) is that the call will be answered automatically after five seconds if the driver, for good reason, ignores it - is that correct?

 

[455driver]

Never had a 'contact signaller' message, had the GSMR crack into life dozens* of times approaching a red and all I could hear was the siggy sighing at the other end because I hadnt answered it straight away because I was concentrated on stopping the right side of it. Impatient lot arent they!

* might not be dozens but its quite a few.

 

[O L Leigh]

Seems fair to me, and that's why I prefer to send the 'contact signaller' message (when I remember how to do it!) rather than initiating a call at a potentially bad moment.

Interesting.

I stopped at a red outside your box at the weekend due to problems at the neighbouring box. Sensing it was an unusual event I decided to initiate a call myself, so I was busily navigating the various menus on the GSM-R in order to select the phone number (which is a very long and laborious process) when the "Contact Signaller" message came through. This caused a certain amount of swearing as it put me straight back to the very start of the process of negotiating the menus in order to comply with this instruction. I got halfway there again when the phone actually started to ring as the signaller called me up.

Never had a 'contact signaller' message, had the GSMR crack into life dozens* of times approaching a red and all I could hear was the siggy sighing at the other end because I hadnt answered it straight away because I was concentrated on stopping the right side of it. Impatient lot arent they!

* might not be dozens but its quite a few.

I've had that too in the good old days of CSR.

Was approaching a red protecting a crossing. I'd only just passed the single yellow after a station stop and was nowhere near the protecting signal when the CSR crackled into life. I just did as I was taught and ignored it until I'd brought the train to a stop, during which time I was treated to her saying "Hello...? Hello driver...?" before launching into the following tirade as she presumably turned aside to talk to a colleague. She said *Sigh* "I don't know what's wrong with these f***ing drivers. They never f***ing answer the f***ing radio when I f***ing call them up." Then the line went dead.

And a good thing too because I was getting mighty miffed and almost launched into a tirade of my own along the lines of "I can't comment on behalf of my f***ing colleagues, but I haven't reached your f***ing signal yet. And until I f***ing do, I'm not going to f***ing talk to you." As it was I had to contend with calling her back once I'd got to the signal and dealing with the matter in hand in a calm and professional manner.

O L Leigh

 

[ainsworth74]

And people say the railway family is dead

 

[Bald Rick]

I've had that too in the good old days of CSR.

Was approaching a red protecting a crossing. I'd only just passed the single yellow after a station stop and was nowhere near the protecting signal when the CSR crackled into life. I just did as I was taught and ignored it until I'd brought the train to a stop, during which time I was treated to her saying "Hello...? Hello driver...?" before launching into the following tirade as she presumably turned aside to talk to a colleague. She said *Sigh* "I don't know what's wrong with these f***ing drivers. They never f***ing answer the f***ing radio when I f***ing call them up." Then the line went dead.

And a good thing too because I was getting mighty miffed and almost launched into a tirade of my own along the lines of "I can't comment on behalf of my f***ing colleagues, but I haven't reached your f***ing signal yet. And until I f***ing do, I'm not going to f***ing talk to you." As it was I had to contend with calling her back once I'd got to the signal and dealing with the matter in hand in a calm and professional manner.

O L Leigh

Ah yes. If you mean who i think you mean, she's known for being etiquettely challenged.

 

[O L Leigh]

I don't know her name, but she was certainly infamous amongst the drivers. I know one former colleague had a bit of a run-in with her about something over the CSR. She ignored his repeated calls, even when he initiated an emergency call just to try and get her attention. All a bit naughty, really.

I heard she went away for a while and then came back again. She was certainly "to the point" although I never had any further problems with her.

O L Leigh

 

[Tomnick]

Interesting.

I stopped at a red outside your box at the weekend due to problems at the neighbouring box. Sensing it was an unusual event I decided to initiate a call myself, so I was busily navigating the various menus on the GSM-R in order to select the phone number (which is a very long and laborious process) when the "Contact Signaller" message came through. This caused a certain amount of swearing as it put me straight back to the very start of the process of negotiating the menus in order to comply with this instruction. I got halfway there again when the phone actually started to ring as the signaller called me up.

Sorry . As you'll know, one of the problems at our place is that the GSM-R won't put you through to the right box, so I try to be proactive in avoiding the confusion caused by a call ending up next door (which does happen fairly often). Interesting to note that an incoming SMS kicks you out of what you're doing at your end - it showed as 'failed' on the terminal in the box. Frustrating, given the convoluted process at our end too (we can select your train from a list of trains in the area, and initiate a normal priority call, but for anything else we have to go into a different menu and type the headcode in). Thanks for the brief insight anyway - it's always useful to understand some of the issues on your side!

 

[O L Leigh]

It's not just on your stretch of line that you risk getting the wrong box. It's happened to me twice previously on lines controlled by much bigger power boxes and IECCs, so now I try to select the box I want from out of the phonebook on the GSM-R. The problem is that it is very slow and dim-witted.

So was that you I was speaking to on Sunday morning...?

O L Leigh

 

[Railsigns]

I did have concerns about copyright infringement so, now that I have your attention, may I have permission to use your photo please? Let me know and I'll edit the original post accordingly. Please don't make me go out in the rain today to take my own photo!

That shouldn't be a problem but for what purpose? If you just want to include it in a post here, that's fine; otherwise, you'd best tell me what it's for in a PM.