Does it say that in the article ?
This is my thoughts. Foot hard to the throttle and carry on ahead would surely be quicker"at first not realising the Southeastern service was coming, had to slam on his brakes while on the track and reverse to avoid being struck"
Not knocking the car driver and nothing more than a musing haven glanced at it and there would have been a lot of gut reaction in there - but if you find yourself already on a crossing and a trains coming and you already have some inertia in a direction - I'd have thought get your foot down
just seems like quite a lot to do otherwise (brake, come to a halt, find reverse, get moving sufficiently to get out of the way). It's a lot to do when the rails are four foot apart
And if you look closely at the photos you've posted, you'll see a treadle in advance of the signal, which will activate the level crossing's red lights should a train pass the signal at danger
They'll have trigger equipment in case there's a signal passed at danger
That's very 'logical' but in the 'real world'? The railway is a controlled environment in which risks are identified and eliminated, or if not, mitogated, and personnel are trained, and kept up-to-date. Not so car drivers. A driving test, maybe some time ago, without testing of this situation. Don't panic- easily said. Hopefully the RAIB will investigate and report, with (unenforceable?) recommendations regarding 'learning points'. I'm glad it wasn't me and I feel for all those involved.
Read through the thread. The issue here was a SPAD. The crossing is fitted with equipment which will cause the red road lights to come on if the signal is passed at danger without going through the normal operating sequence of the crossing. There seems to be no suggestion that anyone on the road has done anything wrong or failed to pay attention.
No, what I wrote was not in the article.
Except as previous posted, the red lights did not come on straight away. It was the amber first and still amber when the second coach was on the crossing.
Okay so we'll leave it at that and for Network Rail/Southeastern to carry out their own investigation
Exactly!
Not at all crossings!
Sandwich is a two track railway. If a train crosses the far track as you enter a crossing, braking on the near track and then reversing off the near track is a perfectly reasonable response."at first not realising the Southeastern service was coming, had to slam on his brakes while on the track and reverse to avoid being struck"
Not knocking the car driver and nothing more than a musing haven glanced at it and there would have been a lot of gut reaction in there - but if you find yourself already on a crossing and a trains coming and you already have some inertia in a direction - I'd have thought get your foot down
just seems like quite a lot to do otherwise (brake, come to a halt, find reverse, get moving sufficiently to get out of the way). It's a lot to do when the rails are four foot apart
Probably the driver was in shock and thought they were in the wrong legally, and tried to reverse their "error" by going back the way they came."at first not realising the Southeastern service was coming, had to slam on his brakes while on the track and reverse to avoid being struck"
Not knocking the car driver and nothing more than a musing haven glanced at it and there would have been a lot of gut reaction in there - but if you find yourself already on a crossing and a trains coming and you already have some inertia in a direction - I'd have thought get your foot down
just seems like quite a lot to do otherwise (brake, come to a halt, find reverse, get moving sufficiently to get out of the way). It's a lot to do when the rails are four foot apart
Indeed, some journalistic licence may have been used to create an image of a hairsbreadth escape. It's possible, particularly with the way the crossing is angled, that the car driver saw the train moving before they were on the crossing, thought something was awry and so were at snail's pace and stopped before they were on any track. Another factor is that by reversing, they would be able to much more easily block the crossing for someone else approaching from behind.
That's a slightly different situation, I think, as you don't expect the train to appear for a while after the lights start. Hitting the barrier seems like more of a worry, and your vehicle may already be preventing the crossing on your side from dropping.
That sentence was probably based on the first witness they quote, who only saw the car reversing off the track before the train appeared, and may not have been close enough then to tell exactly where the car was.
Even if loops were installed, they wouldn’t necessarily prevent any such incident. It sounds like the signal is close to the crossing, and if the driver is already braking at maximum then TPWS would make no difference. Of course if this is not the case then TPWS may help, but that would depend on how high a risk this particular crossing/signal is considered as.
There are some 'noise abatement' (usually residential) areas where they have negotiated either full-time or night-time horn bans, usually in exchange for making other safety improvements like closing some of the crossings in the area. You've still got bells and flashing 'ditch' lights on the trains of course.
