Thank you Network rail and Thatcham level crossing Options

[Washwaterman]

I would like, along with the other several hundred drivers thank Network rail and the Thatcham Level crossing for wasting 35 minutes of my life today.

I can only imagine how long I would have been stuck there if they had not spent 80 grand on the new improvements .

When will someone wake up to this problem that it's now a major route and get something done.

[Andy Capp]

It's only going to get worse.

[On the edge]

Sadly, our local Council think otherwise.

Apparently, in spite of all the monies they've extracted from developers over the years, it would be far too costly to build a bridge. Equally, in civil engineering terms, that would be wholly impossible too.

Equally, the road the other side of the bridge is of no strategic importance as very few people would want to get to Basingstoke or the M3. Lorries don't use the route because they are too heavy and it's far better that they go through Newbury anyway.

Similarly, that route would at some stage be of interest to Hants CC. Councils are not allowed to liaise with each other, let alone come up with joint strategies.

Having a bridge might also encourage developers to build the other side of the canal. We can't have that because the Council rightly never ever goes against it's strategic plans.

So there you have it! I can't imagine you would have been doing anything important, after all, you could be like your Council betters and work from home as the mood suits.

[motormad]

To be fair building (homes) on the other side of the railway/canal is only going to make things worse.
That road cannot take much more traffic, it's already falling apart.
It floods regularly.
The area is already overpopulated (with Kennet Heath, etc).


The bridge discussion has come up time and time again.
It's no issue for me as I never go down that way anyway, I'd always go to Newbury - A339 .

[Biker1]

I would like, along with the other several hundred drivers thank Network rail and the Thatcham Level crossing for wasting 35 minutes of my life today.

I can only imagine how long I would have been stuck there if they had not spent 80 grand on the new improvements .

When will someone wake up to this problem that it's now a major route and get something done.

Why blame NR?
I suppose they could have opened the crossing for you but I think if they had done that you would have wasted more than 35 minutes!!
The crossing has been there for 150 years, it's something they inherited, I'm sure they would like to be rid of it as much as you.
Also, it was not they who spent the money on "improvements".
I am sure they and the local authorities would dispute that it is a "major route" and would not want it to become so.

[Strafin]

Don't network rail control when the barriers go up and down then?

[Andy Capp]

Don't network rail control when the barriers go up and down then?

That exacerbates the issue, slow trains contribute significantly to hold ups.

[Lee]

Only going to be worse if Siege Cross goes ahead.... 500houses within half a mile of Level Crossing
http://forum.newburytoday.co.uk/index.php?showtopic=2683

[JeffG]

I have to confess I don't know why that road is so important. Maybe because I don't use it. Seeing as Siege Cross would be the population (i.e. Thatcham) side of the crossing, why would that make a difference?

What is on the south side that people need to get to - apart from the Football Club?

[Washwaterman]

What is on the south side that people need to get to - apart from the Football Club?
[/quote]

How about Basingstoke, Southampton, Winchester, the M3, M25 to name a few places

[Andy Capp]

What is on the south side that people need to get to - apart from the Football Club?


How about Basingstoke, Southampton, Winchester, the M3, M25 to name a few places

...also there's Tesco, Greenham Common and New Greenham Park.

[Biker1]

Don't network rail control when the barriers go up and down then?

Well you have to let the trains through, or do they stop them until the traffic stops?
(Someone is bound to say yes! )

[Biker1]

That exacerbates the issue, slow trains contribute significantly to hold ups.

Could speed them up I suppose and not stop them at any stations!

[Andy Capp]

Could speed them up I suppose and not stop them at any stations!

Or leave the barriers up longer.

[Biker1]

Or leave the barriers up longer.

We've been through all that Andy in great depth.
I'm not going to spell it out again.
Haven't got time to trawl through and find the thread again either.
It would be interesting, if at all possible, to arrange a visit to Colthrop Crossing Signal Box for those who don't understand how the crossing / signalling works so that they could see for themselves the issues involved and may be less inclined to make statements such as "leave the barriers up longer".
The ONLY solution is a bridge whether on the current site of the crossing (technically difficult) or elsewhere (maybe at Colthrop itself).
In conjunction with that, in order to cope with the inevitable increase in traffic, the whole route to the junction with the A339 would have to be improved thus creating what would then effectively be an Eastern by-pass.

[Andy Capp]

We've been through all that Andy in great depth.
I'm not going to spell it out again.
Haven't got time to trawl through and find the thread again either.
It would be interesting, if at all possible, to arrange a visit to Colthrop Crossing Signal Box for those who don't understand how the crossing / signalling works so that they could see for themselves the issues involved and may be less inclined to make statements such as "leave the barriers up longer".
The ONLY solution is a bridge whether on the current site of the crossing (technically difficult) or elsewhere (maybe at Colthrop itself).
In conjunction with that, in order to cope with the inevitable increase in traffic, the whole route to the junction with the A339 would have to be improved thus creating what would then effectively be an Eastern by-pass.

I know we have been through it all before, but that doesn't stop the fact that the problem of the barriers is exacerbated by the slow trains, and that would be mitigated if the barriers were left up longer. It's a fact of life, not a serious proposition.

[Strafin]

I have never heard a good reason for the barriers to go down 10 minutes before a train comes through, or why they can't open them between trains.

[Biker1]

I know we have been through it all before, but that doesn't stop the fact that the problem of the barriers is exacerbated by the slow trains, and that would be mitigated if the barriers were left up longer. It's a fact of life, not a serious proposition.

Obviously you don't understand so I'll leave it there.

[Biker1]

I have never heard a good reason for the barriers to go down 10 minutes before a train comes through,

They don't
With the "slow" trains they lower as the train is between the Racecourse Station and the signal on Thatcham Moors. (this is the one that protects the crossing.)
In the other direction they lower as the train is between Midgham and Colthrop. How is that 10 minutes either way?

or why they can't open them between trains.

They do. (If there is sufficient time to do so.)

Like I said, it would be useful for all you disbelievers to have a visit to the Box as you would see how it all works and see that no more delay than is necessary is made to road traffic.

[Strafin]

I've sat there by the gates for 10 minutes at a time plenty of times. Often a lot more, and I've timed it, because I know it can feel a lot longer. When do they go down for a "fast train"