Whistle boards and whistle usage at railway crossings

[455driver]

A question I have for you and anyone else reading this is: Is it mandatory for a driver to sound the whistle when approaching a crossing, when that crossing has a 'WHISTLE' or 'W' sign on its approach? I am asking this as my entire argument and support of the OP relies on this being the case?

We have a couple of whistle boards which are no longer in use, one I can think of is on the approach to Witley on the down.

 

[Bijgc]

Dear A-driver, I’m sorry that you didn’t like my last post. You are correct, I am neither a rail-enthusiast, nor employee, just someone with a passing interest in trains, especially when they are conveying me to work. I don’t claim to ‘know it all’, hence my qualification that it ‘appears’ the warnings were mandatory – subsequent postings have clarified the position.

As was mentioned, the safety concerns raised were not using audible warnings at whistle boards. We have ascertained that there is a whistle board at the relevant crossing (post 1) and that use of a horn at marked crossings is mandatory (post 62 and 89) and that the whistle board was ignored (Post 1). We have also noticed that you ‘won’t always bother to whistle…’ at some crossings with boards (post 8), so it is clear that some drivers, yourself included, make a choice not to follow the relevant safety protocols with respect to these boards. Regarding the subsequent claims, I cannot see why many on this thread discount the possibility that other safety protocols are also ignored, especially when you yourself state that you ‘sort of half agree with…’ the assertation that making a call or changing a track when driving a train is ‘no big deal’ (post 72) – although I grant that you also state that this is strictly prohibited and make it clear that you are not a culprit.

The OP gives a very detailed description of the track and what he saw (post 35). I am sure that his view was many times clearer than ours – why so much disbelief, accusation and belittling on the presumed basis that the driver could do no wrong? It is this that I find shameful – especially when concerns relate to safety.

I am also sorry that some members on here feel that there is an air of driver-bashing. I wonder if ridiculing a first-time poster raising safety concerns without conceding that their first-hand account may have some truth to it will do anything to alleviate this?

 

[A-driver]

Dear A-driver, I’m sorry that you didn’t like my last post. You are correct, I am neither a rail-enthusiast, nor employee, just someone with a passing interest in trains, especially when they are conveying me to work. I don’t claim to ‘know it all’, hence my qualification that it ‘appears’ the warnings were mandatory – subsequent postings have clarified the position.

As was mentioned, the safety concerns raised were not using audible warnings at whistle boards. We have ascertained that there is a whistle board at the relevant crossing (post 1) and that use of a horn at marked crossings is mandatory (post 62 and 89) and that the whistle board was ignored (Post 1). We have also noticed that you ‘won’t always bother to whistle…’ at some crossings with boards (post 8), so it is clear that some drivers, yourself included, make a choice not to follow the relevant safety protocols with respect to these boards. Regarding the subsequent claims, I cannot see why many on this thread discount the possibility that other safety protocols are also ignored, especially when you yourself state that you ‘sort of half agree with…’ the assertation that making a call or changing a track when driving a train is ‘no big deal’ (post 72) – although I grant that you also state that this is strictly prohibited and make it clear that you are not a culprit.

The OP gives a very detailed description of the track and what he saw (post 35). I am sure that his view was many times clearer than ours – why so much disbelief, accusation and belittling on the presumed basis that the driver could do no wrong? It is this that I find shameful – especially when concerns relate to safety.

I am also sorry that some members on here feel that there is an air of driver-bashing. I wonder if ridiculing a first-time poster raising safety concerns without conceding that their first-hand account may have some truth to it will do anything to alleviate this?

All that I find hard to believe is that the OP claims he has witnessed different drivers doing different things. There is if course the odd driver out there who will break rules but for the OP to have witnessed so many is unbelievable and leads me to believe he is embellishing the truth.

 

[Mugby]

We have a couple of whistle boards which are no longer in use, one I can think of is on the approach to Witley on the down.

When I worked on the P/Way, a driver approached our supervisor about a pair of whistle boards on a branch for a crossing which hadn't been used for a number of years, in fact it had been fenced off and was no longer accessible.
The driver wondered if the boards could be removed because they were whistling for nothing.

Apparently though, it's not a simple matter, we were told that crossings and all the paraphernalia that goes with them required an Act of Parliament when they were first laid in and conversely, to remove one requires virtually the same procedure. Now it's almost impossible to keep account of all crossings, particularly some in very remote locations and no doubt many have been removed without following the correct procedure but we concluded that it was too much hassle after being advised by the people in the legal department. This is the reason that many road crossings retain rails in situ even when the track either side has been removed on a closed line.

 

[O L Leigh]

As was mentioned, the safety concerns raised were not using audible warnings at whistle boards. We have ascertained that there is a whistle board at the relevant crossing (post 1) and that use of a horn at marked crossings is mandatory (post 62 and 89) and that the whistle board was ignored (Post 1).

The OP gives a very detailed description of the track and what he saw (post 35).

We have ascertained that there is one whistle board, but that is all. However, the OP clearly doesn't feel that this is adequate given that there is more than one crossing and a special school in the vicinity. Whatever his concerns, his beliefs about the provision of whistle boards do not mean that the railway is being negligent about safety, especially as the detailed description given suggests that the sightlines should be very good indeed thereby removing the need for whistle boards.

I am sure that his view was many times clearer than ours – why so much disbelief, accusation and belittling on the presumed basis that the driver could do no wrong? It is this that I find shameful – especially when concerns relate to safety.

My own concerns have already been outlined. The OP can take his concerns to the train operator so that the matter can be dealt with under the company's disciplinary procedures but, for whatever reason, he hasn't. Instead he's brought them here to be aired. As such he should be prepared for them to be discussed.

I am also sorry that some members on here feel that there is an air of driver-bashing. I wonder if ridiculing a first-time poster raising safety concerns without conceding that their first-hand account may have some truth to it will do anything to alleviate this?

How about the OP conceding that just possibly his allegations might just be unfounded...?

O L Leigh

 

[GB]

.if you are driving a car with no traffic it people about do you still indicate...

In all honesty yes. Just because I haven't seen anyone doesn't mean there isn't anyone there.

 

[Mintona]

We've got a whistle board on our network that is only visible at this time of year (not covered by foliage) for a crossing that was removed before I started driving trains. I sound the horn when I see it, but I can see why a lot of drivers wouldn't bother, especially as the reason for it being there (the crossing) is long gone.

It could be the case that the instruction to sound the horn at the crossing in question has been removed, but nobody has bothered removing the sign, and so some drivers will still sound the horn as they are the 'W' whereas others don't bother as they know they don't have to anymore.

 

[KA4C]

The OP gives a very detailed description of the track and what he saw (post 35). I am sure that his view was many times clearer than ours – why so much disbelief, accusation and belittling on the presumed basis that the driver could do no wrong? It is this that I find shameful – especially when concerns relate to safety.

I am also sorry that some members on here feel that there is an air of driver-bashing. I wonder if ridiculing a first-time poster raising safety concerns without conceding that their first-hand account may have some truth to it will do anything to alleviate this?

And the OP makes a first post in which he accuses drivers on the route of reading newspapers, adjusting ipods and having a generally lax attitude to safety (on which he does not seem to enlarge unless I missed it). All things of which he could not possibly be certain from his position lineside

If he has genuine safety concerns then is this the place to raise them, how does he expect them to get addressed on here?

not bad for a first post, eh?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

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.

You are probably not aware that currently serving railwaymen do not show their actually identity for very good reason and this is accepted on virtually every railway forum. It is either that or they do not use such forums