Engineering solutions to incompetent motorists turning left/right at level crossings

[Egg Centric]

Someone managed to turn left onto a railway the other day.

Without too much regard to cost (but not being absurd) what engineering solutions could prevent this? The obvious one to me is a barrier across the railway but it would need to fail safe from the train perspective (especially at an AHB) which presumably means that you weight it so that it fails upright and if it somehow ended up still across the line it was safe for a train to hit, i.e. constructing it out of loo roll basically.

What else could we do?

 

[zwk500]

Lifting Bollards, especially with some lighting on the upper edge. Simple enough to fit a detection mechanism to prove them 'home' in the interlocking, many suppliers very active in the UK, looking at probably 3 per side so not exactly breaking the bank. Would be simple enough for engineering access to take local control.
Fitting in the 4ft may not be sanctioned, but could be fitted on the edge of the structure gauge and would still do the job.

 

[The Planner]

Lifting Bollards, especially with some lighting on the upper edge. Simple enough to fit a detection mechanism to prove them 'home' in the interlocking, many suppliers very active in the UK, looking at probably 3 per side so not exactly breaking the bank. Would be simple enough for engineering access to take local control.
Fitting in the 4ft may not be sanctioned, but could be fitted on the edge of the structure gauge and would still do the job.

Someone would still crash into those and require recovery of the vehicle. Potentially the Motspur Park car could have been driven off. Flashing or solid red cats eyes at the side of the road would still be a deterrent.

 

[twpsaesneg]

Boom gates like they used to have at Redcar!

Novel level crossing to be installed at West Dyke Road

A bespoke barrier which could change the appearance of level crossings across the country is set to be installed in Redcar.

www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk

Image of boom gates at Redcar, and link to Network Rail Source.

You'd need to come up with a robust modern equivalent form though!

 

[zwk500]

Someone would still crash into those and require recovery of the vehicle. Potentially the Motspur Park car could have been driven off. Flashing or solid red cats eyes at the side of the road would still be a deterrent.

A low speed collision into a bollard on the edge of the carriageway could be recovered in less than a minute as the car would likely still be driveable. No damage to rail infrastructure at all. They would also provide limited protection to footways on either side of the road while they're at it. One of the photos in the Motspur Park thread has a nasty-looking dent to the railhead that looks like it was caused by the car dropping down onto the ballast (although it's difficult to tell in the lighting conditions).
If you don't notice the railway, I struggle to believe a red Cat's eye is going to make you realise your mistake in time. Flashing lights are possible although their impact would be mitigated if they are constant rather than only activated when a risk is detected, but then how much warning would they give?

 

[Islineclear3_1]

I don't know whether the wig wags were flashing when the motorist at Motspur Park LC turned left - does anyone know? One wonders how this driver passed his driving test if he or she drove through a red light that clearly indicates STOP !

Apart from barriers lifting up from beneath the road surface this will always be a difficult one.

 

[Failed Unit]

Does anyone remember a top gear episode a number of years back when the car explodes if it went the wrong way down a motorway slip road

But to me, the punishment should be a permanent driving ban, as clearly if you make this kind of mistake you shouldn't be driving on a public highway. I can't see how anyone can do this my mistake. The guided busways have car traps, but more challenging to do at level crossing.

 

[AngusH]

In terms solely of potential improvements and without excusing the need to drive properly:


Looking at that specific incident, the road markings are old and worn (based on street view 2022 anyway),
it looks like the centre line in the roadway is missing along the middle of the crossing.

it might be a start to make sure all the lane markings are perfect
and the colour of the roadway is more consistent.

Maybe paint the footpath section either side entirely in white with little footpath icons?
Or use panels that are manufactured in that colour.
This provides a bigger contrast to the edge of the roadway.

Embed the road markings into the crossing surface, rather than painting them on.

Put traffic direction arrows in the roadway showing forward only in each direction.

 

[NSE]

The only slight mitigating circumstance is that the road goes immediately to the left right after the crossing and looks like a T junction, but it’s not for those traveling over the crossing. Bit awkward to explain it without a picture. It’s fairly straightforward when you see it though but I could understand why a new driver might get confused. That said, I could understand why the road layout could confuse someone in that they may indicate to turn left when you don’t need to or they may wait to let someone past when it’s their right of way, but not to physically turn onto the tracks!

Anyway, whilst I do agree there is very much a level of responsibility on the driver, could one possible, and much cheaper, solution be flood lights? Just big lights to show where the road and the railway is? May not be needed on a 90 degree right angle crossing but somewhere with a road junction in the near vicinity could benefit from it.

 

[swt_passenger]

I don't know whether the wig wags were flashing when the motorist at Motspur Park LC turned left - does anyone know? One wonders how this driver passed his driving test if he or she drove through a red light that clearly indicates STOP !

Apart from barriers lifting up from beneath the road surface this will always be a difficult one.

There’s no evidence presented yet in that thread that the LC had started a closing sequence at the time of the accident. Clearly it had closed by the time photos were being taken.

 

[mike57]

In terms solely of potential improvements and without excusing the need to drive properly:

And I would add to that have a set of standard for road marking, and apply them nationally. Then make sure they are properly maintained. Some crossings may not need them but if every crossing was the same that would help with recognition.

I watched a driver stop in the middle of a level crossing near Filey on the A165 a few years ago. Cars hooting and flashing seemed to have no effect, I was about to bail and ring the signalman as the Mrs was driving, when sanity/self preservation prevailed and he moved off. He didnt seem to realise it was a crossing.

 

[Nottingham59]

Without too much regard to cost (but not being absurd) what engineering solutions could prevent this?

6 inch kerbs along the edge of the carriageway or the footway, with gaps between them for the train wheels to pass through. What are the clearance requirements for track infrastructure in the four-foot and the six-foot?

 

[bubieyehyeh]

I seem to remember there was a incident a few year back near the south coast where someone turned left onto the line, because the satnav said turn left (persumely after the crossing).

 

[HSTEd]

Without re-litigating the discussion we've had for years, it doesn't help that level crossings use a set of markings and lights very rarely used elsewhere.

The only other place I'm aware of flashing lights being fitted for making vehicles stop is at fire/ambulance stations and I have never see those in use, so I'm not sure how well versed people actually are in their meaning.

My view would it would be better to fit level crossings as if they were traffic light controlled crossings, with solid red lights, "no left turn" and "no right turn" markings, and possibly a symbol for the specially trained ambulance/police drivers that they must not pass this light for any reason.

 

[Ken H]

Most level crossings use cast panels that make the road surface, either rubbery stuff or concrete.
Then the local authority come along and paint road markings on them, like double white lines or box junction.
Then the railway come backto work on the track, and the panels are not put back so the road markings become random. Kildwick nr Keighley was like that last time I went over it in a car.
How you force the rail staff to put it back properly, I dont know.

 

[swt_passenger]

Without re-litigating the discussion we've had for years, it doesn't help that level crossings use a set of markings and lights very rarely used elsewhere.

The only other place I'm aware of flashing lights being fitted for making vehicles stop is at fire/ambulance stations and I have never see those in use, so I'm not sure how well versed people actually are in their meaning.

My view would it would be better to fit level crossings as if they were traffic light controlled crossings, with solid red lights, "no left turn" and "no right turn" markings, and possibly a symbol for the specially trained ambulance/police drivers that they must not pass this light for any reason.

I pointed out it’s quite possible this had nothing whatsoever to do with the light sequence. Perhaps the error happened before the closure was initiated. Nobody has mentioned the driver ignoring lights.

 

[etr221]

Looking at the Google map, the adjacent road junction is not traffic light controlled. Possibly it should be - the traffic lights to work in conjunction with the level crossing.

And the road signs and markings should be reviewed to ensure the meaning is clear: straight on across, now left - which I don't think it currently is. Quite apart from remarks already made as to worn markings...

I don't think this is the only level crossing with adjacent road junction... what are the arrengements at others?

 

[Bald Rick]

Without re-litigating the discussion we've had for years, it doesn't help that level crossings use a set of markings and lights very rarely used elsewhere.

The only other place I'm aware of flashing lights being fitted for making vehicles stop is at fire/ambulance stations and I have never see those in use, so I'm not sure how well versed people actually are in their meaning.

My view would it would be better to fit level crossings as if they were traffic light controlled crossings, with solid red lights, "no left turn" and "no right turn" markings, and possibly a symbol for the specially trained ambulance/police drivers that they must not pass this light for any reason.

We’ve been round this many times before. Flashing red lights are also at airports, lifting / swing bridges, and on all managed motorways. Their meaning is clear. Research has shown them to be more conspicuous. Almost every country uses flashing lights for level crossings - and I don’t think they can all be wrong as well.

 

[Failed Unit]

Without re-litigating the discussion we've had for years, it doesn't help that level crossings use a set of markings and lights very rarely used elsewhere.

The only other place I'm aware of flashing lights being fitted for making vehicles stop is at fire/ambulance stations and I have never see those in use, so I'm not sure how well versed people actually are in their meaning.

My view would it would be better to fit level crossings as if they were traffic light controlled crossings, with solid red lights, "no left turn" and "no right turn" markings, and possibly a symbol for the specially trained ambulance/police drivers that they must not pass this light for any reason.

Again. If people don’t understand what they mean they shouldn’t be driving. Nothing should be passing these lights including emergency vehicles. Mainly because of the hazard they are protecting.

An emergency vehicle can pass a red traffic light. But the flashing reds are protecting a hazard that can’t be avoided.

 

[43066]

We’ve been round this many times before. Flashing red lights are also at airports, lifting / swing bridges, and on all managed motorways. Their meaning is clear. Research has shown them to be more conspicuous. Almost every country uses flashing lights for level crossings - and I don’t think they can all be wrong as well.

And the slip road to the Woolwich Ferry, interestingly enough, the consequences of ignoring those being a watery grave! Contrast with various tram “level crossings” which are traditional traffic lights, the difference being that trams are driven on line of sight and stop rather better than trains, of course.

The suggestion that traditional traffic lights should be used for heavy rail LCs is a very bad one. Drivers should be aware of the Highway Code and what wig-wags mean. If they aren’t, that’s suggestive of a problem with how we teach people to drive in this country, and addressing that would be a better solution than replacing wig wags with traffic lights.

 

[bluenoxid]

In terms of ideas

I think lighting the railway would be good potentially considering different types of light that could be used to put people off.

More outlandish ideas could include smoke or water curtains created if a vehicle breaches the threshold of the crossing (I am thinking water pumped into the air rather than dropped from a giant tank. A water curtain would require a local to the crossing isolation to be triggered either when the crossing was open or the device triggered.

I also wonder if we are reaching a point where geo-fencing/scanning linked to the ignition of the vehicle/accelerator/brakes could be used to stop a vehicle proceeding in certain scenarios. This could include onboard displays that highlight the crossing or audio notifications.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Not for AHBs because of blocking the railway, but traditional gates but powered would do it. I guess barriers are standard but cheaper.

Without re-litigating the discussion we've had for years, it doesn't help that level crossings use a set of markings and lights very rarely used elsewhere.

The only other place I'm aware of flashing lights being fitted for making vehicles stop is at fire/ambulance stations and I have never see those in use, so I'm not sure how well versed people actually are in their meaning.

My view would it would be better to fit level crossings as if they were traffic light controlled crossings, with solid red lights, "no left turn" and "no right turn" markings, and possibly a symbol for the specially trained ambulance/police drivers that they must not pass this light for any reason.

I fully agree. There's also the issue that wigwags don't fail safe - green is a blank signal - whereas if a traffic light is blank you know it's failed and that the situation reverts to what it would be if it wasn't there at all, i.e. "give way".

I think I've seen them in use at a fire station once. I don't overly see the point in anything being there as it's established to give way to emergency vehicles, and doing so is one thing that pretty much every driver does do. But even if we considered they didn't, again in this application normal traffic lights (just left on green* unless someone in the fire station presses a button to cause them to do otherwise) make more sense.

Again. If people don’t understand what they mean they shouldn’t be driving. Nothing should be passing these lights including emergency vehicles. Mainly because of the hazard they are protecting.

An emergency vehicle can pass a red traffic light. But the flashing reds are protecting a hazard that can’t be avoided.

@HSTEd said we could instead have a sign mounted on traffic lights which an emergency vehicle is not permitted to pass under any circumstances. That's much more intuitive, and those professionals would be taught what that sign was explicitly. To a "normal" driver a red traffic light and red wig-wags mean the self same thing - you must not pass. And the presence of barriers acts as a further enforcement in any case.

I see your overall point, but it feeds into a load of different things, e.g. "there's no such thing as dangerous junctions, just dangerous drivers" - but these things don't make sense, as we know drivers are humans, humans are fallible and so intuitive road and traffic signal design is a very sensible thing indeed.

 

[zwk500]

Not for AHBs because of blocking the railway, but traditional gates but powered would do it. I guess barriers are standard but cheaper.

Barriers are cheaper, lighter, require less energy to move, quicker to operate and easier to maintain, replace, and repair.
Not sure if they are more liable to trapping light runners or easier to release trapped people from though.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Barriers are cheaper, lighter, require less energy to move, quicker to operate and easier to maintain, replace, and repair.
Not sure if they are more liable to trapping light runners or easier to release trapped people from though.

The above Network Rail link also suggests strong winds are an issue with powered gates, to be fair, missed that originally.

This would be outside normal road signal specs so would require a change in the law, but if we accept @HSTEd's premise that level crossings should use standard traffic lights with an added sign to indicate that emergency services cannot pass them under any circumstances when on red (which is the only practical difference) then we could go one further and make the green into a straight-on "flow" arrow, emphasizing that turning left or right isn't allowed.

 

[zwk500]

I fully agree. There's also the issue that wigwags don't fail safe - green is a blank signal - whereas if a traffic light is blank you know it's failed and that the situation reverts to what it would be if it wasn't there at all, i.e. "give way".

I think I've seen them in use at a fire station once. I don't overly see the point in anything being there as it's established to give way to emergency vehicles, and doing so is one thing that pretty much every driver does do. But even if we considered they didn't, again in this application normal traffic lights (just left on green* unless someone in the fire station presses a button to cause them to do otherwise)

Wigwags warn of a higher level of hazard. The very fact that they are uncommon should mean drivers should approach them with greater caution. Red traffic lights are routinely ignored, and I would argue strongly against downgrading the risk of running a level crossing.

The above Network Rail link also suggests strong winds are an issue with powered gates, to be fair, missed that originally.

1 additional disbenefit, that is more than offset by their advantages in daily use.

This would be outside normal road signal specs so would require a change in the law, but if we accept @HSTEd's premise that level crossings should use standard traffic lights with an added sign to indicate that emergency services cannot pass them under any circumstances when on red (which is the only practical difference) then we could go one further and make the green into a straight-on "flow" arrow, emphasizing that turning left or right isn't allowed.

The problem is that a level crossing isn't a standard intersection, because the driver won't be able to see you until its way too late to do anything about it.
Functionally, a wigwag is a temporary road closure, not a traffic controlling measure.

 

[HSTEd]

We’ve been round this many times before. Flashing red lights are also at airports, lifting / swing bridges, and on all managed motorways.

Of the three uses, two are probably even rarer than level crossings (I think I've driven over a swing bridge once), and as far as I know the third only uses flashing read lights when a lane is closed.

Obviously in that final case the flashing red lights are often accompanied by a giant bright red "X" (sometimes I think a picture of a 'No Entry' sign?), which probably amplifies the effect!

Their meaning is clear. Research has shown them to be more conspicuous. Almost every country uses flashing lights for level crossings - and I don’t think they can all be wrong as well.

The problem is that they are a sign that most drivers only rarely see, and which they are far less conditioned to obey than a red traffic light.
It is quite possible to learn to drive and never actually see a flashing light signal in operation, indeed I am not sure I've seen one in person since I learned to drive and that was nigh on a decade ago at this point.

A signal that is more conspicious but is far less engrained in the driver is not necessarily superior to a signal that drivers obey all the time without thinking.

EDIT:

The one moving bridge I remember driving over is the bridge at Glasson Dock in the lock to access the basin.
And it turns out that isn't even fitted with flashing lights [google maps link], it has barriers and ordinary traffic lights!

 

[zwk500]

A signal that is more conspicious but is far less engrained in the driver is not necessarily superior to a signal that drivers obey all the time without thinking.

You are having an absolute laugh there. Plenty of drivers run reds all the time very deliberately.
Is there any indication the crossing lights were active in this situation anyway? Because the issue here was not that a driver ran the lights, but physically turned at the wrong time. Having different lights would normally make zero difference to that error.

 

[Bald Rick]

The problem is that they are a sign that most drivers only rarely see, and which they are far less conditioned to obey than a red traffic light.

The research shows otherwise. (I can‘t find it annoyingly).

It’s why emergency services have flashing lights on their vehicles - often red flashing lights too. It‘s why lamber lights flash outside schools, also in other industry why aircraft have flashing marker lights, along with lots of other examples.

Whilst you say ‘most drivers rarely see’ flashing red lights, that’s not really relevant. The important things are that a) its in the highway code and drivers are expected to know it, and b) ‘most drivers’ tend to drive similar routes regularly, and therefore those that see these will be well aware of them.


In other news, I was very, very nearly mown down by a driver running a red light at a pedestrian crossing yesterday - it had been red at least 5 seconds.

 

[Falcon1200]

which they are far less conditioned to obey than a red traffic light.

How could any road vehicle driver possibly think flashing red lights meant anything other than STOP?!!

 

[Failed Unit]

How could any road vehicle driver possibly think flashing red lights meant anything other than STOP?!!

If you look at them ones on the overhead on motorways, may drivers think they mean proceed with caution. (even professional ones) then expect to force there way in when they get to the emergency services attending the incident that closed the lane(s) in the first place.

The high street level crossing in Lincoln actually used to be normal traffic lights when it was gates (the one Brayford Wharf one no traffic control at all they just shut the gates when the traffic was clear). When the High Street was converted to barriers the traffic lights were replaced by the more standard flashing lights. However the outcome was the same, when the lights activated speed up (including the pederstrains on the footpath). People used to complain they were down too long, but because of the mis-use of the crossing, they had to start the sequence sooner to ensure the crossing was clear. I am sure the signallers had a few stories to tell. From memory most gated crossing I recall in Lincolnshire either have no lights or standard traffic light. The gates of course in most cases prevent this kind of incident as they cover the track, except on single track roads where they only cover one side of the track.

One point that did interest me was the if the crossing fails then no lights, so the user won't know there are in an danger. Would I be correct in saying that if the crossing can't activate then the signal won't clear anyway? I do remember a case a few years ago where Network Rail got into some trouble because of an accident on the Gainsborough - Doncaster line. The lights were not bright enough for the motorist to see. (I assume they went through the barrier) But I don't think the standard traffic light would have prevented that situation.