Use of Horns

[Tomnick]

Just for you, p'way are not allowed in a tunnel without a possession so there is no need for you to break the rules any longer. Whether you choose to is down to your professionalism.

Wrong again - they might be in there under a possession or line blockage of just one of the lines, or indeed red zone in certain tunnels if I'm not mistaken (although the only example that I'm aware of has TOWS to warn of a train's approach, albeit 'temporarily' out of use). It's perfectly possible for chaps to be in a tunnel when your train enters. They shouldn't, of course, be relying on trains whistling up as they enter the tunnel for their protection.

 

[Anchorman_02]

While it is true the prescribed use of the warning horn in the Rule book has been watered down in recent years the rule still carries the words whenever the Drivers deems necessary.

This means if I deem it necessary to sound the horn passing a signal at danger, passing through a station, entering/exiting a tunnel, a shunting move on an adjacent line or sounding both tones at Whistle boards (all removed from the book) then I will do. I treat each occasion on merit and if I decide to sound the horn then I will do. It doesn't show a lack of understanding it shows that I am capable of using my brain when presented with a situation. My use of the warning horn has never been called into question and you should never be shy of using it effectively.

I've got no problem with what you are saying in essence as of course there will be situations when you might need to use the horn under any of the situations you quote. However, I wouldn't condone you using the horn routinely without good cause in any of those situations either. Like you I would never hesitate to use the horn as a safety device which is it's sole purpose. It's use has been deemed pointless in the situations that have been removed from the rule book. Of course some will continue to do it just like some continue to use both tones at a whistle board even if there is nobody there.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Wrong again - they might be in there under a possession or line blockage of just one of the lines, or indeed red zone in certain tunnels if I'm not mistaken (although the only example that I'm aware of has TOWS to warn of a train's approach, albeit 'temporarily' out of use). It's perfectly possible for chaps to be in a tunnel when your train enters. They shouldn't, of course, be relying on trains whistling up as they enter the tunnel for their protection.

Isn't that what I said? I'm not after contradicting you, I'm just saying why using the horn in a tunnel has been taken out of the rule book. Other provisions have been made.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Hmmm, well it's a pity you haven't kept up with your rules knowledge. Sounding the horn when passing a train in a station wasn't removed in the last round of changes to the rules surrounding the use of the horn, it was removed years ago....

It's what happens when you aren't required to have a copy of the rulebook anymore.

....The railway is a safer place as a result....

The rules were there for a reason, I'm not sure how a railway is safer without them.

....Well it might be in that situation but it's academic because they won't be doing it if you are unlucky enough to find yourself in that situation. In any case, you know which line is safe to walk on and you know what to do if a train enters the tunnel or at least you should do....

You can be fairly sure which is most safe, but then I imagine those in the Clapham and Purley accidents thought the railway was safe. Yes I know they were a while ago and the railway is safer but the railway isn't a sterile enviroment.

....Just for you, p'way are not allowed in a tunnel without a possession so there is no need for you to break the rules any longer. Whether you choose to is down to your professionalism....

I didn't say they were inside the tunnel.

....You see the rule makers did think about it! Sounding the horn is pointless if there is nothing to sound it at. It's just a nuisance....

With respect, I disagree, but I'll leave it at that because I'm really not in the mood for that kind of discussion.

...It's their problem. That's a daft comment really....

Again I feel I have to disagree.

 

[Tomnick]

Isn't that what I said? I'm not after contradicting you, I'm just saying why using the horn in a tunnel has been taken out of the rule book. Other provisions have been made.

It's not really what you said (a possession of both roads, if that's what you meant, is completely different to working under a line blockage with one road open to traffic, and again different to working under traffic with TOWS - I just wanted to clarify that it's reasonable for a driver to expect to find a gang working in a tunnel. That, and the suggestion that gangs are always advised of a train's approach by the signalman (they aren't), might lead to dangerous assumptions by others otherwise. I do think that we agree in principle, though it's not my place to criticise a driver's use of the horn and I'd never do so!

 

[muz379]

What if, like me, you bought a house near the airport but not under the flight path, then the airport changed the flight paths so now planes fly directly over the house? I'm not bothered - the noise doesn't bother me and the airport is very convenient for weekends away But some of my neighbors who have lived here for 30 years + are unhappy and I sympathise.

Not as bad as my last house though which I rented - directly under Heathrow's flight path but I did both viewings when the ash cloud problem had closed the airport.

Like I say, not really bothered, it's part and parcel of modern life. The same as train noise.

Personally I would not buy a house anywhere near an airport for the very reason that flight paths can and do change so what might now not be on the flightpath could soon be right under the flight path .

 

[driver9000]

I've got no problem with what you are saying in essence as of course there will be situations when you might need to use the horn under any of the situations you quote. However, I wouldn't condone you using the horn routinely without good cause in any of those situations either. Like you I would never hesitate to use the horn as a safety device which is it's sole purpose. It's use has been deemed pointless in the situations that have been removed from the rule book. Of course some will continue to do it just like some continue to use both tones at a whistle board even if there is nobody there.

Good cause is down to individual judgement and whether you condone the choice a Driver makes is irrelevant. The Driver has made the decision to sound the horn as they are perfectly entitled to do so within the rules even if it isn't one of the specifically prescribed actions. One of the lines I worked over had Whistle boards removed but as the crossings were off blind bends I continued to sound the horn as I deemed it necessary. Even my boss agreed. The low tone of horn change at W boards was done purely as noise abatement and no safety reasoning put behind it. They said as much at the time and I personally didn't agree with this but there you go. I've had conversations about warning horn use with varying levels of Driver management and they all said my thoughts are perfectly acceptable and sensible. Good enough for me.

 

[HSTfan!!!]

That seems odd when they've only recently changed it as an industry standard to use of the single tone of the horn. Do you know of such a location or better still a photo? Why would we need two boards if it was an industry standard and why is two tones better at some crossings than others?

I'm sure I've seen something published about it in the area of Stroud and Kemble but it's not a route I sign.

 

[ComUtoR]

... they wouldn't necessarily associate the sounding of a horn with the presence of a whistle board (which should with very few exceptions, be removed IMO). Imagine what that would mean for those people that have kids or are on shift work. ...

Rules changes aren't done for the sake of it or to confound the opinion of those that think they know better - they are done for a reason and by people that think carefully about changing them and are highly qualified to do so. The railway is a safer place as a result.

By your own words, your opinion really doesn't count.

Of course some will continue to do it just like some continue to use both tones at a whistle board even if there is nobody there.

A recent notice was sent out to all Drivers due to a incident at a crossing. It was a reminder that you should sound your horn at the whistle board. Without pulling my rule book out (although I might have a quick shufty through later) I'm sure it doesn't say that blowing of the horn is dependent on whether the crossing is in use or not.

Not my opinion, it is the rules.

With the whistle boards situation they reviewed the boards and started removing some where it was deemed that crossing users would be able to sight a train. I know a crossing where a whistle board was removed but had to get reinstated because the one that got removed was on a blind 50mph bend. Blanket removal of the rule with very few exceptions is a poor viewpoint. Whistle board placement is being reviewed in line with safety. Most of the boards near me are all on curvatures where the crossing cannot be seen. Personally, and I reiterate, personally. I would remove all those foot crossings and replace with a footbridge. At minimum I would have them as MRG crossings. However; I got lambasted about my lack of consideration as to the price that safety comes at.

The Thames is a couple of miles as the crow flies from where I live. When the fog settles in the barges at ships etc sound their foghorns. I still remember the first time I heard that. I have kids and work shifts. However; I still would not consider complaining and asking them to have a rule about sounding their foghorns during the night.

 

[starrymarkb]

Interesting aside, in France trains must sound their horn when passing the rear of another train.

 

[theageofthetra]

Could someone clarify the single tone to acknowledge a raised hand from a track worker. Will check with my DI tmmr but he hasn't mentioned it so far.

 

[Tomnick]

Could someone clarify the single tone to acknowledge a raised hand from a track worker. Will check with my DI tmmr but he hasn't mentioned it so far.

Not a Rule Book requirement, but very courteous and saves him wondering whether you've seen his acknowledgement!

 

[driver9000]

Could someone clarify the single tone to acknowledge a raised hand from a track worker. Will check with my DI tmmr but he hasn't mentioned it so far.

Not required as a mandatory action but is seen by many as a courtesy. It's up to you really.

 

[ComUtoR]

If your in a 375/376 then the depot whistle comes in handy when being polite and reduces the nuisance of the horn.

Of course. You should also be aware that failure to acknowledge your warning means you need to use short blasts on the high tone ? (now I really gotta refresh my horn rules)

 

[Llanigraham]

Wrong again - they might be in there under a possession or line blockage of just one of the lines, or indeed red zone in certain tunnels if I'm not mistaken (although the only example that I'm aware of has TOWS to warn of a train's approach, albeit 'temporarily' out of use). It's perfectly possible for chaps to be in a tunnel when your train enters. They shouldn't, of course, be relying on trains whistling up as they enter the tunnel for their protection.

Sorry, but I don't think there are any tunnels that "Red zone" working is allowed.

 

[ComUtoR]

When I first started a Red Flag would be hung at the entrance to the tunnel to signify they were working inside. Does that still happen ?

 

[Llama]

Sough tunnel, just over a mile long, between Bolton and Blackburn regularly has gangs in it. It is however a double-line width bore that was singled in the 1970s.

 

[Antman]

I think you are confusing 'excessive' with 'unnecessary'. I have no problem with unnecessary noise being eliminated, but I think that priorities have been shifted in a bad way - take (for example) the removal from the rule book of the need to blow the horn when entering a tunnel. It keeps the locals happy, as they can enjoy their picnic in the back garden with no interruption. However, for that one-in-a-million time, somebody has to protect their train and is entering a tunnel. The horn would echo through and give them a chance to get into a refuge.

We were taught to work to the worst case scenario in every situation - what could happen, rather than what normally happens. Odds of one in a million are good, but try telling that to the family of that one when they have to identify his / her body.

Yes they are both the same thing really, isn't this sounding of the horn when entering a tunnel just a relic from a bygone era?

 

[Tomnick]

Sorry, but I don't think there are any tunnels that "Red zone" working is allowed.

They've recently been looking at the refuges in one of our tunnels with a view to reinstating the TOWS and permitting red zone working. Surely it wouldn't then be unique?

 

[Llama]

Use of the horn in a tunnel is also a good way of checking the horn actually works without causing noise nuisance. Lights should be checked prior to a journey, obviously having every train test their horn in a built up area wouldn't be ideal so the first convenient place would usually be the first tunnel encountered.

Every now and then the argument that somebody might be performing emergency protection ahead rears its head, thus sounding the horn entering a tunnel could make a vital few seconds difference, as unlikely as the scenario is. But then we have incidents such as the most recent Summit Tunnel derailment to remind us how things can quickly go wrong.

 

[WCMLaddict]

Love the discussion
Maybe there should be a separate thread to discuss recent rules changes?
Is everyone aware of recent small changes to TBW speed rules?

 

[driver9000]

Love the discussion
Maybe there should be a separate thread to discuss recent rules changes?
Is everyone aware of recent small changes to TBW speed rules?

According the PONs I have the modified TBW and SLW rules for passing through points up to 50mph apply to LNW, LNE and Scottish regions only.

 

[Anchorman_02]

It's not really what you said (a possession of both roads, if that's what you meant, is completely different to working under a line blockage with one road open to traffic, and again different to working under traffic with TOWS - I just wanted to clarify that it's reasonable for a driver to expect to find a gang working in a tunnel. That, and the suggestion that gangs are always advised of a train's approach by the signalman (they aren't), might lead to dangerous assumptions by others otherwise. I do think that we agree in principle, though it's not my place to criticise a driver's use of the horn and I'd never do so!

There is TOWS in a tunnel on a route that I sign but it is a single track in a double bore. They won't allow it otherwise unless a Signaller controls movements accordingly and or drivers are warned first. That's why the rules were changed and in any case, the last thing they would want to hear is a train horn. It's an almighty din without.

 

[WCMLaddict]

According the PONs I have the modified TBW and SLW rules for passing through points up to 50mph apply to LNW, LNE and Scottish regions only.

The change was to do with speed over secured points. Used to be 50 all day long if they're secured. Now it's 50 unless you're the first train into the block. If you are the first train you have to do max 15 over them even if they have been secured.

 

[Jamesb1974]

Could someone clarify the single tone to acknowledge a raised hand from a track worker. Will check with my DI tmmr but he hasn't mentioned it so far.

As previously stated, not a Rule book requirement, but I want to know that they've heard and seen me as I'm barreling towards them at 60mph.

 

[driver9000]

The change was to do with speed over secured points. Used to be 50 all day long if they're secured. Now it's 50 unless you're the first train into the block. If you are the first train you have to do max 15 over them even if they have been secured.

Having re-read my post I missed the 15mph if you're first train. My mistake.

 

[Anchorman_02]

I've got no problem with what you are saying in essence as of course there will be situations when you might need to use the horn under any of the situations you quote. However, I wouldn't condone you using the horn routinely without good cause in any of those situations either. Like you I would never hesitate to use the horn as a safety device which is it's sole purpose. It's use has been deemed pointless in the situations that have been removed from the rule book. Of course some will continue to do it just like some continue to use both tones at a whistle board even if there is nobody there.

Good cause is down to individual judgement and whether you condone the choice a Driver makes is irrelevant. The Driver has made the decision to sound the horn as they are perfectly entitled to do so within the rules even if it isn't one of the specifically prescribed actions. One of the lines I worked over had Whistle boards removed but as the crossings were off blind bends I continued to sound the horn as I deemed it necessary. Even my boss agreed. The low tone of horn change at W boards was done purely as noise abatement and no safety reasoning put behind it. They said as much at the time and I personally didn't agree with this but there you go. I've had conversations about warning horn use with varying levels of Driver management and they all said my thoughts are perfectly acceptable and sensible. Good enough for me.

Most driver managers are ex drivers. They don't make the rules and don't necessarily interpret them correctly. The rules surrounding foot crossings are very strict and very detailed. Each one is risk assessed and ranked, even the tiny little trails that officially cross the line. Whistle boards are part of that assessment and they are placed at a precise distance from the crossing depending on line speed and viewing. It's very rare for whistle boards to be removed unless it's done by residents (somebody at Ashton Moss must have about 50 in his shed). To be removed officially the crossing must have reduced in ranking due to things like its usage changing (factory closure, access been cut off by other development etc) or the viewing has been improved by the removal of structures or trees, or because some alternative means to cross have been provided. In some cases, the risk assessment has turned up additional risk and they will imposed a "permanent TSR" that brings trains down to a speed that provides a minimum viewing time to a crossing user. They never add whistle boards in this latter case. Some TOCS have their own company rules for certain crossings and will mandate the use of both tones but I'm not sure how legal these are technically. The horn code for a whistle board is universal. The low tone of the horn between the hours of 7-11 (23:00) unless you see somebody there outside those hours. You justifying the use of both tones by using the "any other time necessary" or quoting somebody else's incorrect opinion is neither correct and probably a violation of the use for that reason if you do it routinely at crossings you have done your own misinformed risk assessment on.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The change was to do with speed over secured points. Used to be 50 all day long if they're secured. Now it's 50 unless you're the first train into the block. If you are the first train you have to do max 15 over them even if they have been secured.

The change is from 15 over any points, switches or swing nosed points to 50 as long as they are clamped and locked. That change to 50 came at the same time as "unless you are the first train through the section".
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Why on earth does this double post prevention system gang up all your posts!!!

 

[driver9000]

Most driver managers are ex drivers. They don't make the rules and don't necessarily interpret them correctly. The rules surrounding foot crossings are very strict and very detailed. Each one is risk assessed and ranked, even the tiny little trails that officially cross the line. Whistle boards are part of that assessment and they are placed at a precise distance from the crossing depending on line speed and viewing. It's very rare for whistle boards to be removed unless it's done by residents (somebody at Ashton Moss must have about 50 in his shed). To be removed officially the crossing must have reduced in ranking due to things like its usage changing (factory closure, access been cut off by other development etc) or the viewing has been improved by the removal of structures or trees, or because some alternative means to cross have been provided. In some cases, the risk assessment has turned up additional risk and they will imposed a "permanent TSR" that brings trains down to a speed that provides a minimum viewing time to a crossing user. They never add whistle boards in this latter case. Some TOCS have their own company rules for certain crossings and will mandate the use of both tones but I'm not sure how legal these are technically. The horn code for a whistle board is universal. The low tone of the horn between the hours of 7-11 (23:00) unless you see somebody there outside those hours. You justifying the use of both tones by using the "any other time necessary" or quoting somebody else's incorrect opinion is neither correct and probably a violation of the use for that reason if you do it routinely at crossings you have done your own misinformed risk assessment on.

Network Rail removed the boards without any alteration to the approaches. They were removed for noise abatement, they admitted as much at the time. I know of one crossing that Network Rail have added an instruction to sound both tones at the W board and another has had a TSR imposed because the low tone doesn't give sufficient warning to some users. The change to low tone only in 2007 was done following complaints about noise there was no safety aspect behind it. I didn't agree with the change but had to go along with except on occasions I deemed both tones appropriate as circumstances presented themselves. I do not need to justify my use of the warning horns as we are permitted to use them as and when we see fit. The any time necessary clause gives us that freedom to make professional judgement so there is no violation or "misinformed risk assessment" just what I as an individual seems appropriate at the time. If you have interpreted the rule in TW1 to be so strict that you are limited in its use then that is you. I will continue to use my warning horns as I see fit just as I always have done knowing I have the freedom to do so within the context of the rule and having never been pulled up on or questioned about my use of a safety device.

 

[Yew]

I think, thaat the usual sentiment when horn use comes up, is that drivers would rather be called to a meeting with their manager for using the horn too much, than for using the horn too little..

 

[Anchorman_02]

Network Rail removed the boards without any alteration to the approaches. They were removed for noise abatement, they admitted as much at the time. I know of one crossing that Network Rail have added an instruction to sound both tones at the W board and another has had a TSR imposed because the low tone doesn't give sufficient warning to some users. The change to low tone only in 2007 was done following complaints about noise there was no safety aspect behind it. I didn't agree with the change but had to go along with except on occasions I deemed both tones appropriate as circumstances presented themselves. I do not need to justify my use of the warning horns as we are permitted to use them as and when we see fit. The any time necessary clause gives us that freedom to make professional judgement so there is no violation or "misinformed risk assessment" just what I as an individual seems appropriate at the time. If you have interpreted the rule in TW1 to be so strict that you are limited in its use then that is you. I will continue to use my warning horns as I see fit just as I always have done knowing I have the freedom to do so within the context of the rule and having never been pulled up on or questioned about my use of a safety device.

Fair enough buddy. I knew this might be emotive when I broached it and I am quite sure you don't go about your day with anything but good intention.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think, thaat the usual sentiment when horn use comes up, is that drivers would rather be called to a meeting with their manager for using the horn too much, than for using the horn too little..

Err, I think most drivers would prefer not to get called into a meeting for any negative reason let alone doing something whether it's too wrong or not enough wrong.

 

[driver9000]

Fair enough buddy. I knew this might be emotive when I broached it and I am quite sure you don't go about your day with anything but good intention.

As I am sure you do. Debate brings out other people in the same professions opinions whether on here or in a mess room and that can only be good