Sorry, should have said 'with passenger fatalities'. Normally of course, the victims of level crossing accidents are in the vehicles.
Quote:
|
Yes we wish for safe railways
|
We've got safe railways - no passenger deaths last year, for instance. Since Ladbroke Grove we've got TPWS, which would have prevented it, we've got Network Rail taking maintenance away from cowboys like Jarvis which would have prevented Hatfield and probably Potters Bar, and with any luck we've got a realisation that mucking about with the structure of the railways to put profit first does nothing for the safety of passengers.
Replacing all level crossings isn't going to happen, too expensive for the accidents prevented (as I said, about one serious one every twenty years). Much better to invest in better junctions, better signalling, better train driver training and target the most dangerous level crossings (where the amount of road traffic has increased for instance) and *get the people who pay for the roads* to pay for them. Why should the already cash-strapped railway pay to prevent road users killing themselves?
Also it's worth remembering that trains have been derailed and people killed at bridges over railway lines, too, after cars and lorries have been driven off the bridge.
Quote:
|
Once the barrier is down the light goes green, and the train continues.
|
Actually, I don't think AHBs are interlocked with the signalling, the bigger crossings generally are. It's not usually convenient with modern signalling distances to have a signal at each LC - particularly in flat areas like the Kennet Valley where there are lots of LCs. Also, the amount of time the barriers are down is about 30 seconds (this is for the benefit of road users, who complained about the time taken to close the old swing gated crossings). This isn't enough time to avoid delaying the train, which will be about a mile away at 125mph, a bit closer at 100mph, which is well beyond the point at which it would be seeing yellows and having to slow down.