Red Cow crossing (Exeter) – safety questions

[125Spotter]

I travel over Red Cow (by rail, rarely by road) regularly and I often wonder what local safety arrangements are in place with drivers, crossing attendants and signallers to protect the users of the crossing and the way it's operated:

1. How do the crossing attendants get away with allowing pedestrians to cross while the barriers are down?
   
   
2. On the up direction, with trains running to a stand in the platform with the crossing open, how is the overlap with the crossing protected for 'up' stoppers at St Davids in case of a runaway/brake failure approaching the crossing while it's open and the protecting E37/237/etc. is on? Maybe speed-based approach release on the preceding signal?

For peds being waved across, I've watched the crossing attendant work and I'm fairly sure I've observed peds being allowed over even after the bell rings and the route(s) set over the crossing flash up on the display. Is that interlocked with the route being cleared over the crossing by the box and signals released to the approaching service?

'Up' freight and 'down' services regularly approach while the barriers are down. Are these services under local guidance to expect to stop short of any obstruction on the crossing? It doesn't feel to me as a passenger as if down services run into platforms at a speed they could stop short of the crossing if necessary, but this might just be perception.

I did a quick search of the forum but didn't see any relevant results on the safety case of Red Cow in particular, and so I'm interested in any insights and familiarity with local procedures. I imagine the way the crossing is worked, when considered alongside the frequency of service across it, has quite the risk assessment associated with it.

I know there are plenty of other crossings with both local attendant control for peds and with stopping services for the adjacent station likely to approach with protecting signals at danger and barriers open, so Red Cow is hardly unique in this mode of operation, and any general insight from the experts on this forum is appreciated for this enthusiast.

 

[Ashley Hill]

1. That’s what they’re there for. It allows pedestrians to use the crossing whilst the barriers are down hence the wicket gates. They then stop them crossing when a train approaches. When unstaffed the wicket gates are locked so pedestrians then wait for the barriers.
2. Crossings I believe are not considered an obstruction in the case of overlaps. I’m happy to be corrected if that’s not the case.

 

[TSG]

1. That’s what they’re there for. It allows pedestrians to use the crossing whilst the barriers are down hence the wicket gates. They then stop them crossing when a train approaches. When unstaffed the wicket gates are locked so pedestrians then wait for the barriers.
2. Crossings I believe are not considered an obstruction in the case of overlaps. I’m happy to be corrected if that’s not the case.

Regarding 2, that is correct. From memory, current standards require that either the crossing is closed when a train approaches, or there is enough distance from the protecting signal that the red lights can be brought on with sufficient warning to prevent danger to crossing users in the event of a SPAD. Obviously standards have changed over the years and this Red Cow sounds like a rather unconventional beast.

 

[Gloster]

When the crossing was controlled from Exeter Middle box it had an crossing keeper round the clock. I always presumed that the reason was that with the amount of rail traffic, particularly on summer Saturdays in the fifties and early sixties, there would have been unacceptably long waits for pedestrians, who would then have to play dodge the motor as there was a rush of road traffic (even then) every time the gates were opened to the road. There was also an expectation that pedestrians would obey the instructions of the gatekeeper and, if they didn’t and got hit, that was their own b****y silly fault.

 

[Deepgreen]

1. That’s what they’re there for. It allows pedestrians to use the crossing whilst the barriers are down hence the wicket gates. They then stop them crossing when a train approaches. When unstaffed the wicket gates are locked so pedestrians then wait for the barriers.
2. Crossings I believe are not considered an obstruction in the case of overlaps. I’m happy to be corrected if that’s not the case.

So the attendants use their judgement as to what constitutes a train 'approaching', i.e. the distance away and speed?

 

[Ashley Hill]

Yes,there’s good sighting on the down. They watch the platforms on the up. As noted in the OP the attendant has an indicator which shows them on which lines trains are approaching. The attendants were subsidised by the local council and maybe still are.

 

[Grecian 1998]

I'm not aware of any current passenger trains that don't stop at St Davids (although there have been services that did in the past - I remember around 2004 an XC service bizarrely omitted it yet stopped at Newton Abbot and Taunton) and there's not much freight. Any passenger trains heading north are therefore starting up; anything heading south will already be braking ready to stop in the platforms. The speed limit through St Davids is 30mph in any case IIRC.

I don't recall seeing any freight passing through, but possible more caution is displayed with a lengthy freight travelling at 30mph which couldn't stop quickly.

As @Gloster said, pedestrians would probably be in more risk from being hit by impatient drivers if they couldn't cross.

 

[Express380]

I travel over Red Cow (by rail, rarely by road) regularly and I often wonder what local safety arrangements are in place with drivers, crossing attendants and signallers to protect the users of the crossing and the way it's operated:

1. How do the crossing attendants get away with allowing pedestrians to cross while the barriers are down?
   
   
2. On the up direction, with trains running to a stand in the platform with the crossing open, how is the overlap with the crossing protected for 'up' stoppers at St Davids in case of a runaway/brake failure approaching the crossing while it's open and the protecting E37/237/etc. is on? Maybe speed-based approach release on the preceding signal?

For peds being waved across, I've watched the crossing attendant work and I'm fairly sure I've observed peds being allowed over even after the bell rings and the route(s) set over the crossing flash up on the display. Is that interlocked with the route being cleared over the crossing by the box and signals released to the approaching service?

'Up' freight and 'down' services regularly approach while the barriers are down. Are these services under local guidance to expect to stop short of any obstruction on the crossing? It doesn't feel to me as a passenger as if down services run into platforms at a speed they could stop short of the crossing if necessary, but this might just be perception.

I did a quick search of the forum but didn't see any relevant results on the safety case of Red Cow in particular, and so I'm interested in any insights and familiarity with local procedures. I imagine the way the crossing is worked, when considered alongside the frequency of service across it, has quite the risk assessment associated with it.

I know there are plenty of other crossings with both local attendant control for peds and with stopping services for the adjacent station likely to approach with protecting signals at danger and barriers open, so Red Cow is hardly unique in this mode of operation, and any general insight from the experts on this forum is appreciated for this enthusiast.

I've been waved across when the down the down train is already in sight before obviously didn't hang about

 

[125Spotter]

Thanks all. I appreciate the insight, particularly the point that the 30 mph speed limit and the fact almost all services will be braking to a stand means the risk of overrun is low as it is.

I've been waved across when the down the down train is already in sight before obviously didn't hang about

Indeed, this was kind of what I was getting at in my original post – the question of how the crossing keepers make the decision of when to allow pedestrians to cross is really interesting from a safety and liability point of view to me. I know they are experienced signallers from the local area, so they're very familiar with the local operations, but it feels like too many unknowns to not know how the pedestrian is going to perform as they cross...

For future reference, I watched the crossing last night, indeed the platform indicator used by the crossing keeper is tied into the corresponding route being cleared across the crossing. The bell rings as the signal clears (on the up, anyway).

 

[Express380]

Indeed, this was kind of what I was getting at in my original post – the question of how the crossing keepers make the decision of when to allow pedestrians to cross is really interesting from a safety and liability point of view to me. I know they are experienced signallers from the local area, so they're very familiar with the local operations, but it feels like too many unknowns to not know how the pedestrian is going to perform as they cross...

I have to say it was an interesting one myself having an invisible physical disability which sometimes can affect the speed in which I move so it felt slightly nerve-racking to go across when there is already a train in sight however I didn't want to disobey the crossing keepers instruction, it is a good question on how they decide when to signal people across and when not too

 

[Amlag]

I think Red Cow CCTV operated LC is unique on NR in that it has an attendant on two shifts for Pedestrian useage, because it is such a busy and wide LC ..it has 6 tracks.

I have been a road and rail user of this LC for over 50 years and have never become aware of a
an adverse safety related incident with a pedestrian.

 

[occone]

I was on my bike the first time I encountered this, was waiting at the barriers as you do, then saw they waved people on foot through even though the road barriers were down.

Hopped off my bike, walked it to the pedestrian gate and waited, sure enough was waved though too. Then hopped on the bike again on the other side.

Very much felt like cheating.

 

[Class800]

I travel over Red Cow (by rail, rarely by road) regularly and I often wonder what local safety arrangements are in place with drivers, crossing attendants and signallers to protect the users of the crossing and the way it's operated:

1. How do the crossing attendants get away with allowing pedestrians to cross while the barriers are down?
   
2. On the up direction, with trains running to a stand in the platform with the crossing open, how is the overlap with the crossing protected for 'up' stoppers at St Davids in case of a runaway/brake failure approaching the crossing while it's open and the protecting E37/237/etc. is on? Maybe speed-based approach release on the preceding signal?

For peds being waved across, I've watched the crossing attendant work and I'm fairly sure I've observed peds being allowed over even after the bell rings and the route(s) set over the crossing flash up on the display. Is that interlocked with the route being cleared over the crossing by the box and signals released to the approaching service?

'Up' freight and 'down' services regularly approach while the barriers are down. Are these services under local guidance to expect to stop short of any obstruction on the crossing? It doesn't feel to me as a passenger as if down services run into platforms at a speed they could stop short of the crossing if necessary, but this might just be perception.

I did a quick search of the forum but didn't see any relevant results on the safety case of Red Cow in particular, and so I'm interested in any insights and familiarity with local procedures. I imagine the way the crossing is worked, when considered alongside the frequency of service across it, has quite the risk assessment associated with it.

I know there are plenty of other crossings with both local attendant control for peds and with stopping services for the adjacent station likely to approach with protecting signals at danger and barriers open, so Red Cow is hardly unique in this mode of operation, and any general insight from the experts on this forum is appreciated for this enthusiast.

I'm a local, it's not a problem, the staff know what they're doing. It's just the margins for cars are greater. It's annoying that the side gate isn't open out of hours, but it's the way modern world has to be it seems.

 

[125Spotter]

I'm a local, it's not a problem, the staff know what they're doing. It's just the margins for cars are greater. It's annoying that the side gate isn't open out of hours, but it's the way modern world has to be it seems.

Thanks, Class800. My choice of language was suboptimal there – in no way intended to imply the attendants don't know what they're doing! I was more interested in the formal safety case, and any considerations that had been made to reduce risk such as introduction of local procedures, given the rather unusual setup of this crossing and the extent of traffic (foot, car, rail) that could come into conflict across it. From a liability point of view it feels to a casual observer like there are plenty of places NR could be picked up here safety-wise in the event of an incident.