As some of you seem to have got all excited and blinkered about my comment earlier about the thought of AHB LCs not being fit for purpose let me explain a few facts.
They were introduced in the 60s and 70s as a way of cutting costs by removing the thousands of crossing keeper boxes and rationalising the other signal boxes. Previous to that, short of human error on the part of trained and skilled railway employee, the level crossing was very safe and fit for purpose. This responsibility was then shifted over to the general public on foot, bike or vehicle. However traffic conditions and train operation have changed a lot since their introduction and many are now having to be replaced by full CCTV monitored and interlocked barriers.
A case in point being my own LC at Brooke rd in Oakham This was converted in the 70s from a gated crossing keeper box to AHB.
For years, I said this was dangerous and contrary to the regulations, and after meeting the head of Rutland Highways, the relevant bodies were involved carried out an audit and found that AHBs were not suitable at this location now due to increase in rail and road traffic and the real risk of queuing traffic being trapped on the LC with a train approaching due to poor visibility of the exit with parked cars especially when moving in a long line of traffic over the LC. The crossing was changed to CCTV full barriers worked from Oakham box and although it has created a much greater delay to road users, it is now 100 % safe if there are no SPADS or errors or errors on the part of the Oakham signalman. (Oakham main LC was subject to a serous SPAD in the 90s with an HST going through on route training with barriers still up although sequence had just been started by the signalman fortunately,. (Which is why even on full barrier you stop on the yellow starting), The RAIB enquiry resulting in the protecting signal being moved and operational procedures changed.
It has even prevented a tragedy when recently a lorry caught and knocked off one barrier at the start of the sequence but the Oakham box got a barrier warning plus the CCTV and kept the protecting signal on
If anyone is in any doubt as to what is now expected of the rail industry , have a read here
You will see they also say what I was saying and no I have not quoted the rail regulator before
http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.2797
It doesnt matter if it is public mistakes or misfortune, it is not acceptable to leave the status quo Period it has to change
It should also be remembered that CCTV was in its infancy in the 60s and technology allows much easier solutions today in place of AHB
In response to all the head in the sand blame the motorists, if you were unfortunate to skid off the LC onto the edge of the track or collide with another vehicle, and the sequence started at that moment, could you get everyone out in under 30 seconds, bearing in mind seat belts were not in use in the 60s nor central locking or airbags going off and stunning the driver. Especially if elderly or confused. I doubt it very much
Yep it will cost ultimately the British tax payer but safety is always about risk management and the scales have gone over now to sorting this out for good. There are a number of MPs demanding the removal of AHB now and this latest tragedy will only add to it especially if what I am hearing is true.
Cost in delays and railway time alone will be many thousands plus police etc not to mention a lost life .
Local locking slam door stock were fit for purpose when they were designed but you wouldnt contemplate them today even though it is only misuse that creates an issue
Off my soap box now
All thoughts are my own
They were introduced in the 60s and 70s as a way of cutting costs by removing the thousands of crossing keeper boxes and rationalising the other signal boxes. Previous to that, short of human error on the part of trained and skilled railway employee, the level crossing was very safe and fit for purpose. This responsibility was then shifted over to the general public on foot, bike or vehicle. However traffic conditions and train operation have changed a lot since their introduction and many are now having to be replaced by full CCTV monitored and interlocked barriers.
A case in point being my own LC at Brooke rd in Oakham This was converted in the 70s from a gated crossing keeper box to AHB.
For years, I said this was dangerous and contrary to the regulations, and after meeting the head of Rutland Highways, the relevant bodies were involved carried out an audit and found that AHBs were not suitable at this location now due to increase in rail and road traffic and the real risk of queuing traffic being trapped on the LC with a train approaching due to poor visibility of the exit with parked cars especially when moving in a long line of traffic over the LC. The crossing was changed to CCTV full barriers worked from Oakham box and although it has created a much greater delay to road users, it is now 100 % safe if there are no SPADS or errors or errors on the part of the Oakham signalman. (Oakham main LC was subject to a serous SPAD in the 90s with an HST going through on route training with barriers still up although sequence had just been started by the signalman fortunately,. (Which is why even on full barrier you stop on the yellow starting), The RAIB enquiry resulting in the protecting signal being moved and operational procedures changed.
It has even prevented a tragedy when recently a lorry caught and knocked off one barrier at the start of the sequence but the Oakham box got a barrier warning plus the CCTV and kept the protecting signal on
If anyone is in any doubt as to what is now expected of the rail industry , have a read here
You will see they also say what I was saying and no I have not quoted the rail regulator before
http://www.rail-reg.gov.uk/server/show/nav.2797
It doesnt matter if it is public mistakes or misfortune, it is not acceptable to leave the status quo Period it has to change
It should also be remembered that CCTV was in its infancy in the 60s and technology allows much easier solutions today in place of AHB
In response to all the head in the sand blame the motorists, if you were unfortunate to skid off the LC onto the edge of the track or collide with another vehicle, and the sequence started at that moment, could you get everyone out in under 30 seconds, bearing in mind seat belts were not in use in the 60s nor central locking or airbags going off and stunning the driver. Especially if elderly or confused. I doubt it very much
Yep it will cost ultimately the British tax payer but safety is always about risk management and the scales have gone over now to sorting this out for good. There are a number of MPs demanding the removal of AHB now and this latest tragedy will only add to it especially if what I am hearing is true.
Cost in delays and railway time alone will be many thousands plus police etc not to mention a lost life .
Local locking slam door stock were fit for purpose when they were designed but you wouldnt contemplate them today even though it is only misuse that creates an issue
Off my soap box now
All thoughts are my own