Jump to content

Talk:Level crossing

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Grade crossings in Ireland

[edit]

The Level crossing article has considerable info on Crossings around the world -- nothing on level crossings in Ireland, which is not a huge problem for me.

But I do have a very complete set of detailed photographs of an Irish grade crossing, including the resident 'flagman' and flagman's booth (exterior and interior), taken in 2003. If anyone is interested in having such pics, let me know on my talk page. I'll be glad to share them. N2e 00:27, 2 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

image at the top of the page

[edit]

Lovely as the animation is, even the thumbnail version is 2.2 MB, which is excessive for anyone not possessing a fast broadband connection. If no one opposes, I would like to remove the image soon. --Qviri (talk) 22:05, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. We also seem to have rather too many images that add little to the evidence other than to demonstrate that "we too have level crossings". I would propose a critical review of the available images and reduce down to those that add real value and information irrespective of their country of origin. My honest view is no a single one is really of the quality desired to clearly explain to a person unfamiliar with a level crossing exactly what this thing is. Velela 23:15, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, I looked through the page looking for a picture to replace the top one with, and couldn't really find a good one. The Montana one seems to come the closest, but there's too much sky in that one... --Qviri (talk) 23:17, 11 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I concur. Drop the LARGE animation. N2e 12:19, 14 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Surprised not to see a picture of the almost iconic UK gated level crossing; white gates, red disc, signal box etc. Surely that would greatly add to the article? Graldensblud 23:38, 27 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Last para of 2.7 United States

[edit]

Mixes Illinois and Connecticut. Unclear what is in place in CT, needs clarification, & references about crossing protection. Are four-quadrant gates used? :::Keo 03:50, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

School buses and other vehicles at grade crossings

[edit]

In most if not all U.S. states, as well as in Canada, I belive that all school buses, intercity buses, and vehicles carrying hazardous materials must come to a complete stop before crossing a railroad track. At least in the case of school buses, the driver must open the door and the driver's window in order to clearly see (and hear) that a train is not coming before attempting to proceed. This practice is observed (at least for school buses) even if gates and signals are present.

In the case of vehicles with manual transmissions, it is illegal to shift gears while on the railroad track, so the driver must start (and remain) in a low enough gear to clear the track before shifting.

Despite these precautions, accidents do occur, often with significant damage and loss of life. The results are often major lawsuits, criminal prosecutions, and further refinement of railroad-crossing practices.

What are the laws and practices in other countries regarding such vehicles crossing railroad tracks? 71.142.70.254 03:58, 1 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

This is a really old question, but I don't like to see unanswered questions. I'll answer this for the Netherlands and I expect most of Europe, or at least Central Europe, is similar.
We have no school buses. There are of course other buses and vehicles with hazmat. The official recommendation from the rail infrastructure manager is not to stop just before the crossing, unless required by traffic. Have enough speed, so you know you won't come to a stop on the crossing. Entering the crossing when there's not enough clear road on the opposite side to make it across at once is illegal; the fine is currently €220.
The vast majority of our level crossings are protected with barriers, lights and (electronic) bells. The typical speed of our trains is 140 km/h (87 mph), so looking and listening for the train itself doesn't give enough warning.
I don't think any of this has changed significantly in recent decades. PiusImpavidus (talk) 16:46, 25 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Consensus on Level Crossings

[edit]

The current version of the article says "The consensus in contemporary railway design is to avoid the use of level crossings."; I'm about to delete that text, because I do not believe is is accurate internationally. In the Boston area, the MBTA just opened the Greenbush Line for revenue service less than two weeks ago, after decades of there being no active railroad on that right of way, and it has a number of grade crossings, which I think demostrates that in the US there is still a great deal of tolerance for using grade crossings where they are convenient in new construction. (Perhaps the Greenbush line doesn't quite count as new construction, since it is built on a right of way that has been an active railroad in the past, however.) JNW2 10:27, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed; there are few railroads I can think of that have removed most grade crossings. The Northeast Corridor is the only one that has removed all crossings that comes to mind right now. With the exception of many single purpose subway rails which there isn't enough trackage to consider a consensus. --DP67 (talk/contribs) 20:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]
But the Northeast Corridor has grade crossings near New London, CT and in a few other places. JNW2 05:43, 9 November 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Traffic sign

[edit]

In case you can't see why, level crossing signals face road motorists (and not train drivers) and they therefore belong in Category:Traffic sign. Tabletop (talk) 03:20, 28 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Crossing Photo

[edit]

The photo http://wiki.riteme.site/wiki/File:Galesburg_mi_crossings_signal.JPG is unclear, owing to the viewing angle and the direction of the sunlight. It provides no unique information. I nominate it for removal. LorenzoB (talk) 15:08, 23 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Use of ped crossings "rare"

[edit]

"The use of pedestrian crossings at stations is now rare"-- I dispute this. I can think of at least two around here Dullingham railway station and Elsenham railway station-- the latter caused a fatal accident (I will cite if desired) where two teenage schoolgirls were killed, and I am sure there are several more around here.

SimonTrew (talk) 16:58, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

1 other editor has agreed, none yet disagree. Suggested alternatives:

  • "becoming less common"
  • "being upgraded, over time, to split-grade crossings"
  • "Discouraged"
  • just cut the whole sentence

SimonTrew (talk) 23:14, 4 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Crossing gates

[edit]

I'm surprised that there are no images of the more traditional (in the UK) crossings with gates, operated manually by the signalman, either physically opening and closing them on foot, or from an adjacent signal box. A number of these are still in use in the UK, on the national rail network as well as on preserved lines. If nobody else has any, I will try to take some next time I'm near my local crossing gates. Regards, Lynbarn (talk) 13:01, 27 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Level crossing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 04:42, 17 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Lower cost -- a citation would be nice

[edit]

The update covering These improve safety by not lowering crossing barriers that may trap vehicles or pedestrians on the tracks, while signalling trains to brake until the obstruction clears... It would be nice if a citation was created for that, a link to a reference or citation that shows cost reduction, if any. The statement might not actually be accurate. Damotclese (talk) 22:47, 16 November 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Austria - see Germany??

[edit]

Already the first sentence there is wrong for Austria: A Level crossing is, officially, not called "Bahnübergang" (BÜ), but "Eisenbahnkreuzung" (EK). Also, on principle, I do not like it at all when Austria is "thrown in" with Germany. In the same vein, one could just say "United Kingdom - see United States". When I find time, I'll change this (the "esction" on Austria).

Also, wherefrom comes the idea that in Germany, "Most of these crossings usually have a lightning symbol on the crossbucks"? I live in Germany, but have never seen that! --User:Haraldmmueller 11:52, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Every german level crossing with an overhead wire ore other high voltage parts needs the lightning symbol. StVo Anlage 2 Abschnitt 1 lfd. Nr.1 Absatz 4 https://www.gesetze-im-internet.de/stvo_2013/anlage_2.html — Preceding unsigned comment added by 93.235.156.67 (talk) 16:37, 9 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You are most welcome to make these corrections, if you reference them to WP:RS. I agree that Austria should not be confused with Germany. Cheers! Reify-tech (talk) 19:04, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment comment

[edit]

The comment(s) below were originally left at Talk:Level crossing/Comments, and are posted here for posterity. Following several discussions in past years, these subpages are now deprecated. The comments may be irrelevant or outdated; if so, please feel free to remove this section.

Severely underreferenced. Slambo (Speak) 14:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Last edited at 14:09, 24 October 2006 (UTC). Substituted at 21:56, 29 April 2016 (UTC)

Shared bridges

[edit]

A road hazard related to the level crossing is a single-lane bridge shared by cars and trains. These still exist in New Zealand. The topic doesn't seem worth a separate article but probably ought to be mentioned somewhere.Bill (talk) 18:28, 6 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Interesting, I have never heard of these. Damotclese (talk) 16:03, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I first encountered them on the South Island of New Zealand. There are no signals or anything. You just take a long look and make sure you can't see or hear any trains. I'm told that there used to be some here in British Columbia but I don't think there are any more.Bill (talk) 04:30, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Interesting. Can you find any published WP:RS references? Reify-tech (talk) 04:51, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How's this? http://www.kiwirail.co.nz/projects/completed-projects/arahura-bridge.html And here's video of a train crossing one: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kZJV98upXPk Bill (talk) 08:06, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Wow, that's fascinating, I had no idea that this was a thing. Very interesting, I must share this with all my fellow railfans. :) Damotclese (talk) 15:27, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

New pages?

[edit]

I propose that this page be a base for all level crossings and has a basic description and possibly a small history of crossings in the country. I say that for each country that needs it has its own separate page, notably the UK and the USA, that are overly packed with information as opposed to the one sentence Russian article. Are there people in agreement? Nathan A RF (talk) 17:58, 8 April 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Level crossing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 19:36, 14 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Level crossing. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 02:02, 22 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Move-protection

[edit]

Due to this article being high-risk, I would like to propose a move protection. If I can get at least three aggreements, then I'll see. Lomrjyo 19:45, 14 May 2018 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by Lomrjyo (talk • contribs)

Don't think it's necessary. If anybody has an objection to this particular variant being used as title (note: of all English-speaking countries, the UK probably has the most extensive railway network, shouldn't come as a surprise...), they are free to object to it using the usual means, but I don't think there's grounds for protection at this stage. 107.190.33.254 (talk) 13:43, 24 October 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 18 May 2021

[edit]

Grammar needs to be fix 205.121.71.242 (talk) 15:29, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

 Not done: it's not clear what changes you want to be made. Please mention the specific changes in a "change X to Y" format and provide a reliable source if appropriate. ScottishFinnishRadish (talk) 15:33, 18 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Images

[edit]

The many images of actual crossings could be moved to a gallery to reduce clutter and encourage a greater diversity. In outback New South Wales many highway crossings are made "dogleg" style so dozy drivers drift off into the "bush", rather than collide with a train. I'd add a picture but don't want to extend an already overlong article. Doug butler (talk) 00:33, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate you stopping and thinking about if there are too many photos, instead of just blindly adding more. Photos might be a better fit at Level crossings by country which was created to deal with the excessive length of this article. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 01:56, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Horn

[edit]

No mention is made of the train's required horn signal ("q" in Morse code) when approaching a crossing. 71.219.1.220 (talk) 18:36, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]

That’s only in certain jurisdictions in certain countries - doesn’t really belong in a generalised article like this. Danners430 (talk) 20:59, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
In the UK, the drivers normally sound a morse "M", occasionally a "O", but both tones of the horn must be used. The relevant part of the rule book may be found at GERT8000-TW8. --Redrose64 🌹 (talk) 22:40, 24 November 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Talk:Level_crossing&oldid=1259395302"