Ufton Nevert Rail Safety Petition, Please sign this petition to stop this happening again Options

[theonlywayisnewb...]

Saw this on Radio Berkshire

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/make...-crossing-safer

Seems like a very sensible proposal to put a safety barrier and CCTV on the Ufton Nevert rail crossing.

[Biker1]

Saw this on Radio Berkshire

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/make...-crossing-safer

Seems like a very sensible proposal to put a safety barrier and CCTV on the Ufton Nevert rail crossing.

If this crossing is not safe then what about the other 484 AHBC's in the country?
Do we change all those as well?
Why is Ufton more dangerous than the others?
If Network Rail modify this one then they will be admitting that automatic half barrier crossings are unsafe and will leave themselves wide open to having to modify all the hundreds of others.
The only way round it is if they use the excuse of general rail improvements on the line. In this case they could use the excuse of electrification to modify the crossing without having to admit that AHBC's are unsafe.
Not the crossing at fault but the user.
They should try reading this, it's simple!

[x2lls]

Seems it's already being considered if the BBC are correct. Also saw a mention on Meridian tonight.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-berkshire-18736317

[Nothing Much]

I thought they were widespread across Europe.
Is there a statistic guide for dimwits in DCVs or troubled folk at Ufton Nervet?

Don't bother, I think dimwits have no boundaries and troubled folk have lost the plot.
The Highway code seemed simple enough, thanks for the info Biker1.. Tractor drivers probably know the timetables.
But they do seem to get it wrong quite often.

2 bridges on the mainline to Newbury would get a lot of votes for Benyon.
ce.

[Biker1]

I thought they were widespread across Europe.

They are.

[Andy Capp]

If this crossing is not safe then what about the other 484 AHBC's in the country?
Do we change all those as well?
Why is Ufton more dangerous than the others?
If Network Rail modify this one then they will be admitting that automatic half barrier crossings are unsafe and will leave themselves wide open to having to modify all the hundreds of others.
The only way round it is if they use the excuse of general rail improvements on the line. In this case they could use the excuse of electrification to modify the crossing without having to admit that AHBC's are unsafe.
Not the crossing at fault but the user.

That is of no comfort to the victims.

[Strafin]

Are we here to offer comfort to the victims? When we are talking people who have died can we really offer them comfort? Good luck with the petition, and I have no issue with it being posted, I don't necessarily agree with it though.

[Andy Capp]

Are we here to offer comfort to the victims? When we are talking people who have died can we really offer them comfort?

That wasn't point. My point was that blaming drivers for misusing an unsecured level crossing is of no comfort to rail users who are injured by those drivers actions. It is also for the benefit of rail users that level crossing security is improved.

[Biker1]

That wasn't point. My point was that blaming drivers for misusing an unsecured level crossing is of no comfort to rail users who are injured by those drivers actions. It is also for the benefit of rail users that level crossing security is improved.

You're right of course but how far does one go in providing for people's stupidity.
I am sure most road accidents would not happen if people didn't do such stupid things.
Personally I think that the money spent on upgrading 485 level crossings could be better spent on life saving projects of different kinds.
Or, again, is it just Ufton that for some reason is worse than all the others and deserves special treatment?

[Andy Capp]

You're right of course but how far does one go in providing for people's stupidity.
I am sure most road accidents would not happen if people didn't do such stupid things.
Personally I think that the money spent on upgrading 485 level crossings could be better spent on life saving projects of different kinds.
Or, again, is it just Ufton that for some reason is worse than all the others and deserves special treatment?

Perhaps priority could be given to the busiest high speed lines?

[blackdog]

You're right of course but how far does one go in providing for people's stupidity.
I am sure most road accidents would not happen if people didn't do such stupid things.
Personally I think that the money spent on upgrading 485 level crossings could be better spent on life saving projects of different kinds.
Or, again, is it just Ufton that for some reason is worse than all the others and deserves special treatment?

Have there been any accidents at Ufton crossing?

[JeffG]

Have there been any accidents at Ufton crossing?

I am assuming (hoping) that is a rhetorical question.

[spartacus]

Have there been any accidents at Ufton crossing?

I assume the point you're making is that they have pretty much all been deliberate actions. Half barrier or full barrier wouldn't prevent someone doing something desperate when they are that low..

[Biker1]

Have there been any accidents at Ufton crossing?

I would assume the last incident was an "accident" in that it would appear the guy was trying to run the barriers and got stuck.
Will have to wait the outcome of the investigation to get an idea of what actually happened though.

[blackdog]

I assume the point you're making is that they have pretty much all been deliberate actions. Half barrier or full barrier wouldn't prevent someone doing something desperate when they are that low..

Full barriers and CCTV would detect someone parking on the crossing and could have saved a lot of lives.

[blackdog]

I assume the point you're making is that they have pretty much all been deliberate actions. Half barrier or full barrier wouldn't prevent someone doing something desperate when they are that low..

Indeed. However full barriers and CCTV could detect would be suicides. If nothing else they could stop someone killing innocent rail passengers by parking on the crossing.

[Biker1]

Full barriers and CCTV would detect someone parking on the crossing and could have saved a lot of lives.

Indeed. However full barriers and CCTV could detect would be suicides. If nothing else they could stop someone killing innocent rail passengers by parking on the crossing.

Like I said before, why Ufton?
Do we do the same to the hundreds of other AHBC's too?
Just because you may stop someone doing something stupid at Ufton doesn't mean they can't go somewhere else.

[blackdog]

Like I said before, why Ufton?
Do we do the same to the hundreds of other AHBC's too?
Just because you may stop someone doing something stupid at Ufton doesn't mean they can't go somewhere else.

True. But Ufton has a history in this context - and is on a very quiet road, where a car parked on the tracks is less likely to be spotted in time to stop the trains. I would suggest that quiet crossings like this have technology installed to protect train passengers.

CCTV seems a simple and pretty cheap option. An alternative to full gates would be an optical or radar scanner that would check the roadway is clear after the half gates were down. Shouldn't be too much of a technical challenge to design such a device and installation should also be cheap enough.

CCTV would also deter the idiots who drive round the half gates - if people know they will get a three month ban they will think twice about doing it.

And yes - do it to all AHBCs - why not?

[Biker1]

True. But Ufton has a history in this context - and is on a very quiet road, where a car parked on the tracks is less likely to be spotted in time to stop the trains. I would suggest that quiet crossings like this have technology installed to protect train passengers.

All AHBC's fit this category. They are used on "quiet" roads.

CCTV seems a simple and pretty cheap option.

Define "cheap" there are 485 of them.

And yes - do it to all AHBCs - why not?

The cost - 485 X £??? As I said before the money could be better spent on other life saving measures.
For example, how much hospital equipment / wards could you buy with the money?
They were installed to save money in the first place.
Back in the old manual signalling days this type of crossing, including Ufton, had a crossing keeper to look after them.

[NWNREADER]

The cost - 485 X £??? As I said before the money could be better spent on other life saving measures.
For example, how much hospital equipment / wards could you buy with the money?

Is it better to seek to reduce the need, or be able to service the outcome?