Printable Version of Topic

Posted by: Blake Jan 12 2015, 11:37 AM

Had a **** of a delay at Thatcham level crossing today from about 9.20am and was very late for work. Three trains went and the barriers failed to open...at all! This is the second time in less than a year that this muppetry has happened and the rail company fails to tell drivers what on earth is going on, how long it will take to be fixed or if we need to do a U-turn and divert.

Instead, we are wholly dependent on the goodwill of fellow motorists who alert those further along what became a huge tail back that the barriers are broken.

Shameful performance. Time we had a bridge. It's the only rational solution.

Posted by: On the edge Jan 12 2015, 01:14 PM

Bad enough on the train! Mind, you don't get 'signal failures' every other day. It makes the 'wonderful investment in a modern railway' at Reading a big waste of money when they can't even get the basics right consistently.

Posted by: motormad Jan 12 2015, 04:13 PM

I went out for lunch the other week and was 45 minutes late, people were getting out of their cars or turning around.
Lucky that I passed over the crossing at around 9:10 then I suppose lol.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 12 2015, 04:21 PM

You guys need the http://levelx.info/!!

Good luck with it!!

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 12 2015, 04:24 PM

Were you told the barriers were broken or are you just assuming?
At about this time you have a Plymouth - Padd HST, an empty stock turbo returning to Reading after dropping passengers at Newbury and an all stations to Reading turbo, all in succession.

What do you want them to do? Open the barriers so you get hit by a train?
(If they did that I think it may constitute as "muppetry!)

If they opened the barriers between each train then you have the OTE's on board complaining that they "can't even get the basics right".

You have a crossing at this point of and increasingly busy road and an increasingly busy railway. Someone is bound to be delayed.

What you need is the http://levelx.info/!!


Agreed. (But highly unlikely.)

Posted by: Blake Jan 12 2015, 05:11 PM

No Biker1: Unless there is a miracle, I can't see how an app (which is pre-programed) can give up to the minute information, especially when the barrier is broken. I only expect the barrier to be open if there are no trains passing as it mostly does.
The fact that the rail company leaves a colossal traffic jam to build up for miles on each side of the tracks is a classic example of muppetry of the highest order! Surely they could invest in some electronic signs to advise of problems.

This is the second time in less than a year that I have experienced this total shambles. There is no excuse for this in the 21st century.

Posted by: On the edge Jan 12 2015, 05:13 PM

Actually Biker1, there would be a good few of us. Crossing gates are simply control equipment, or signalling and being serious for a moment, there is a serious issue here. We've had railway signalling for well over 100 years and electronics since the 1920s yet still we hear daily 'due to signalling problems' excuses. Yes, road traffic lights fail - but seemingly with far less frequency. On the face of it, road traffic lights are possibly more complex. It's not just round here of course, it's a national problem, indeed the London Underground seems to suffer even more. So, does this happen elsewhere? I've travelled by train in Europe and haven't noticed such failures. What's wrong with our UK engineers? Is it really 'lack of investment' or simply poor management?

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 12 2015, 06:59 PM

What is useful about the app is that you can get an overview of likely busy spots in the approaching hour. It is not full-proof, but it is the only thing we've got and likely to be the only thing we will get.

NOTE: this view is only available in Android it seems. iPhones have a slightly different view.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 12 2015, 07:10 PM

I was being facetious!

So the problem is?

I am not going to keep arguing the point but I'll have one last try............
The railway is busy, the road is busy. How do you suggest that NR "leaves a colossal traffic jam to build up for miles on each side of the tracks"?
Like it or not, trains have priority at level crossings.
They DO NOT purposely leave the barriers down when not necessary.
They CANNOT raise the barriers if a train is signalled through.
Do you suggest they stop 110 / 90 mph trains to let the traffic through?
If so, how do you suggest they do that?

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 12 2015, 07:15 PM

Railway signalling (MAS) is much, much more complex that road traffic signals.
http://www.railway-technical.com/sigtxt1.shtml is a starters if you are interested and have nothing else to do in bed tonight!!

Posted by: nerc Jan 12 2015, 07:42 PM

The crossing was still closed at 10.10am and some people sat there all that time instead of turning round.

Posted by: On the edge Jan 12 2015, 09:43 PM

OK Biker1 having at least scanned the write up, I agree!

By the way, it does seem an interesting site, so I'll put off what I was thinking of doing in bed tonight......

Posted by: x2lls Jan 13 2015, 12:37 AM

Good argument Biker.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 13 2015, 01:31 AM

The biggest nuisance from a road user perspective are the slow moving trains. In particular, the Hanson trains and the like. I've frequently been held up for 3 to 5 minutes waiting for one of them to trundle past.

Posted by: x2lls Jan 13 2015, 02:06 AM

lol

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 13 2015, 09:02 AM

If that was the case then there was a problem with the barriers and I apologise for any misunderstanding.
When the barriers fail then I fully understand people's frustration.
In this high-tech world we seem to be even more susceptible to failure.
In the days of manual signalling when the signals were operated by levers and the crossing gates by a wheel in the adjacent signal box I bet things were more reliable!!

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 13 2015, 12:32 PM

But much better and safer than hundreds of heavy lorries on the roads holding things up eh?

Posted by: Washwaterman Jan 13 2015, 12:50 PM

My favourite subject... Having spent many an hour waiting at the level crossing I have come to the conclusion that the major problem is the length of time the crossing is down.
Waiting 5 minutes for a train to arrive at the station is unacceptable surely in these modern times drop the barriers 1 minute before the train arrives and as the train is stopped in the station raise the barriers.

Although this won't help when the barriers are down for some 20 minutes as the ghost train goes through then the barriers raise, or do we wait until people are killed or injured when a vehicle ploughs into a queue of unsighted cars south of the station.

But as always this subject is not treated with the importance it deserves.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 13 2015, 03:32 PM

We have them too.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 14 2015, 10:52 AM

No!, you don't say!!

No, can't do that. All to do with safe stopping distances etc. You need to look at facts a bit more before making assumptions.

They do. (If the trains is heading towards Reading and there is no other train coming).

20 minutes? The Ghost Train? what on earth are you talking about?
You need to look at facts a bit more before making assumptions.

By who? It's discussed on here enough.
http://www.networkrail.co.uk/level-crossings/?cd=1 is a page where you can submit comments / suggestions regarding the crossing to NR.

Posted by: Washwaterman Jan 14 2015, 12:29 PM

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 14 2015, 12:42 PM

Actually, just noticed the slogan at the top of the page on the link.
"Level crossings.
They're not time wasters, They're life savers."

Posted by: Washwaterman Jan 14 2015, 03:01 PM

Feel my life ebbing away the amount of time I spend waiting there

Posted by: motormad Jan 14 2015, 04:19 PM

they can be both.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 14 2015, 10:26 PM

I agree, it is a problem, but I get annoyed at some of the misunderstandings held by many of why the barriers are down for the time they are.
There is no easy (cheap) solution.
Crossings are a legacy from the past when roads were not a consideration when building a railway. (There was not much on them!)
All I know is that no more are being built (or have been for many years) and NR is keen to remove as many as possible. There are probably many other crossings that cause as much road congestion. (And probably much more in many cases.)
How far Thatcham is down the priority list for removal I would not know.
Perhaps WWMan's inquiries with NR may enlighten us.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 14 2015, 11:36 PM

I seems to me, despite your sneering, the most practical available tool is a gate down app. I was trialist and was unhappy about some of the ways it works, but I miss it. It is great to know if the next half hour are predicted as busy, and if you are caught, you can see roughly how longs you will be sat. This knowledge really does help to reduce the annoyance when held up.

Considering the relative modest expense, it as sad that Network Rail were not interested in help finance the development.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 15 2015, 10:18 AM

I agree, some sort of on-line system that can reliably tell people when the barriers will be down would be extremely useful.
The reason I "sneer" is that, due to the unpredictability of the railway operation, I fail to see how such a system can possibly reliable predict when the barriers will be down in sufficient time to allow users to plan and use an alternative route, or to change their planned travelling time.
I have, however, throughout wished the scheme "good luck"!

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 15 2015, 11:13 PM

OK, so this useful, but...


...this isn't?

Like I said, one useful feature is to recognise periods of the next hour that have high possibility of being caught and when I there is a low possibility. Another handy feature (for the millionth time) is that when sat there waiting, being able to see roughly how long you will be is half the battle against frustration.

Your apparent sarcasm with your good luck messages is obvious.

Posted by: Blake Jan 16 2015, 09:25 AM

But would an app tell you if the barriers were stuck down and broken?; that was the problem we all had on the 12th.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 16 2015, 10:03 AM

The emphasis being on the word "reliable" in both cases AC.
Seriously I wish it luck.
One of the rare cases where I would like to be proved wrong.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 16 2015, 12:02 PM

It is not 100% reliable, but it doesn't need to be. What happens is, after a while, you get to know times that are safer, that's how the app worked for me. If I did get caught out, I'd check the app and get an idea how long I will be waiting, I would then have a choice to bother going a different way, or just holding out.

The blurb is here: http://levelx.info/index.php/how-it-works

It's around 97% accurate, whatever that means.

My view is I like the idea, but I'm not keen on the solution (for iPhone).

Posted by: spartacus Jan 17 2015, 10:13 AM

It might ‘work’ but is it ‘useful’?

Why I see this app as being a waste of bandwidth is that whilst it might give some basic level of information on how long you might have to wait, that doesn’t of course take into account how far back you might be in the queue of traffic. Drivers have to factor in whether it’s worth waiting in the queue and whether the vehicles in front of them will get to the crossing before the barriers come down again. And even then, once you’ve committed to come down Crookham Hill on the assumption that you’ll make it to the crossing but then are faced with a long queue of cars, there’s not much you can do about it. Turning around on that narrow road isn’t an option (especially as you may be half way through a 3 point turn by the time the barriers open and a convoy of speeding and frustrated drivers from the Thatcham side race towards you.



It’s something to play with as you site in the car. Not really much use though.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 17 2015, 11:12 AM

You obviously don't read well.

No, it's not perfect, but I have already explained how it can be useful and it doesn't take a nuclear physicist to work out that if the app says the gates will be down from 0800 to 0815 and then again from 0816 to 0821 in the morning, the queue is gonna be big immediately after! Notwithstanding there are queues both sides, so while some of your councillor mates might struggle to 3 point turn their Vogues on Crookham Hill, that problem isn't so great the other side. Also, if you are in a long queue, if you check the app, you can check how long the barriers will be up, because if it is only for a minute or so before they go down again, you can decide to bail.

The point for all you dingbats is that it gives you easy and readable access to information that tells you the quietest periods in the hour. I found after a while I didn't really need the app as I had started to learn the time periods.

So to answer your question: yes, it is useful, but it is not perfect. My gripe is with the program, not the idea.


HOWEVER, it is the only available help we have with the problem.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 17 2015, 12:52 PM

But again I don't see how it can do this.
The gates are operated manually at the demand of approaching trains.
If one of those trains is late, or is delayed for some reason (or possibly even early!!) how can it predict a manual action?
It is often down to seconds as to whether the signaller keeps the barriers down between trains or raises them.
If the app. gives inaccurate information then surely it is a hindrance rather than a help?
I know trains run to a timetable but, as everyone knows, this can and does change.
There are so many factors which can influence this.
I am sorry but, having a knowledge of how railways and signalling work, I am finding it difficult to see how a system like this can predict accurately an operation which changes constantly as the situation demands.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 17 2015, 01:26 PM

It isn't necessarily about predicting accurately all the time; every time (although it would be nice)!!! If you get caught occasionally, so what, on average the system worked. Occasionally it didn't. I was able to see after a while when the high-risk times were and when the low risk times were: what is so freakin' hard to understand about that!!!

Take this image as an example.

]

I would look at this and think that between 0720 and 0725 is a good time to pick, given that trains are not often more than a few minutes late. If I was due at the crossing at 0710 then I'd consider an alternative route because it is waiting for two trains; however, if the down time was for a single HST, then I wouldn't be fussed because they usually only cause the barriers to be down for about 3 minutes.


Now that I don't have the app, I do miss it. That's all the endorsement it needs for me.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 17 2015, 10:31 PM

Only stating a fact AC.
I only said that because many show their ignorance on here of how it all works.
far be it from me to blow my own trumpet eh?
(Yourself excluded of course! )

You hear that OTE??

Posted by: On the edge Jan 18 2015, 08:46 AM

Yeah, I heard. Remember folks, the timetable is only for fun. Oh well, I suppose just like the trains, we have to put up with time expired technology trackside. Makes me (and a lot of others) question why we are investing in HS2 - when there is so much to put right on the old stuff.

The link you provided is fascinating. Has anyone thought of looking totally afresh at train control needs based on what is actually avaliable and safe today?

I still think UK railway engineering is amazing. For instance, it's amazing that a six year old kid can make a toy train go round a circle, but for all its clever investment TfL can't...

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 18 2015, 09:16 AM

http://www.networkrail.co.uk/aspx/12275.aspx is what we will have in the future on most main lines.
It will gradually be integrated into the new electric trains on GW.
I wonder if the timescales given will be achieved?.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 18 2015, 11:40 AM

Server Error in '/' Application.

Runtime Error
Description: An application error occurred on the server. The current custom error settings for this application prevent the details of the application error from being viewed remotely (for security reasons). It could, however, be viewed by browsers running on the local server machine.

Posted by: JeffG Jan 18 2015, 07:04 PM

Interesting stuff but I had to give up on the video after a short while. The thumping bass line hurt my ears and also drowned out the commentary. Shame, because it looked interesting.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 20 2015, 08:47 AM

http://www.ertms.net/
(Posted with the inherent danger of turning people to watching paint dry!! )

Posted by: Exhausted Jan 20 2015, 04:37 PM

That's the end of steam train excursions I guess, No room for the gizmos on the footplate.

Posted by: JeffG Jan 20 2015, 06:43 PM

I'm sure someone will develop an app for that.

Posted by: motormad Jan 22 2015, 12:15 AM

No, that posh git who has an LPG powered land rover (Hollister I think) was the most boring website I have read.

Posted by: Mr Brown Jan 22 2015, 07:24 PM

This can't come soon enough for me, delays are endemic and the usual excuse is signal failure.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 23 2015, 05:54 AM

ERTMS will NEVER fail of course!!

Posted by: NWNREADER Jan 23 2015, 08:02 AM

I learned a while ago 'signal failure' is often a euphemism for 'some scrote has nicked the cable'

Posted by: Mr Brown Jan 23 2015, 08:19 AM

Trains outside London are 'cast-offs' MPs say
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-30945127

Ummm.

Of course, when the new system goes in, the rail engineers will have learned from the problems of the old and critical circuits will be properly protected against cable theft etc....won't they?

Posted by: On the edge Jan 23 2015, 08:39 AM

Don't hold your breath! Nice to see that MPs have caught up at last and can see the clapped out trains we have to put up with round here, even after a cheap paint job, are just rubbish.

The start of the thread was about delays at Thatcham crossing. Nothing here suggests there is any help on the way, at all.

One of the usual responses to the issue, from the rail community, is that the traffic speeds and levels on road over the crossing has changed dramatically since it was first crossed by the railway! Actually, so has the railway. Does that mean that one realistic answer would be to impose some strict speed limits on the trains using the tracks through here? What's sauce for the goose.....

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 24 2015, 06:36 AM

Then we could keep our "clapped out" trains eh OTE?
No need for speed as they will all have to slow down for level crossings!
(Which actually means they would be down for longer .)
Unfortunately OTE there are many trains in other parts of the country that are older (or more "clapped out") than the ones we have. But we have had that debate before.
Personally I think the turbos are very reliable. Rarely is there a cancellation or even delay due to a mechanical problem.
Still, you are entitled to your view, and anyway, they will be gone soon. (Unless you are travelling West beyond Newbury!)

Posted by: On the edge Jan 24 2015, 07:48 AM

I certainly agree that delays due to mechanical failure are very few and far between. However, they are dirty, uncomfortable and noisy. Frankly, all issues that have been around for years and could be solved with some effective management attention and very little investment. Then again, why should they; it's only passengers affected after all and we all know what they can do if they don't like it. Trebles and bonuses all round!

Posted by: Mr Brown Jan 24 2015, 10:26 AM

As a regular user I agree with that. The seats are very uncomfortable and cramped, its also not that easy to just stand either. They do seem to have been very badly designed.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 24 2015, 10:45 AM

My biggest gripe is the constant feeling of not being sure you are on the right train. The people on the tannoy need to slow down and stop making excuses; they make me even more angry. Just say sorry it will be 'x' late. I heard one once: sorry for the delay, this was due to train failure!!! No sh*t!

Posted by: motormad Jan 27 2015, 12:16 AM

They are also woefully under-carriaged for the given journey
Ever caught the 9:03 from Thatcham (starts at Bedwyn) going to London padding... you try getting a seat at Thatcham!!! always bloody full. 3 pathetic carriages in a tight train where i can't actually sit properly because the backs of the seats infront are bending my kneecaps back into my leg.

cheapskate pricks.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 27 2015, 09:09 AM

Agreed. But that still doesn't make them "clapped out"
Also they will now have less seats due to them being made DDA (wheelchair) friendly, although the 166 class had 16 seats changed from first to standard..

How do you suggest that more rolling stock is provided?
It is out of the TOC's hands as to how much rolling stock they are allocated.
They don't own them, they are leased by the three rolling stock leasing companies (ROSCOs): Angel Trains · Eversholt Rail Group · Porterbrook. (All owned by banking groups - not all British I believe.)
Also, there is an additional problem that the turnback siding at Bedwyn (which for some reason is a little village where most of the Paddington trains originate) can only accommodate 3 carriages.
Let's hope electrification improves things, well, unless you travel to Kintbury, Hungerford or Bedwyn!!

Posted by: On the edge Jan 27 2015, 11:45 AM

Yes MM I still use that train a lot, it's dreadful. As you say, just another coach would do, but that's wholly beyond the dim witted management of today's railway. Can you imagine what would be happening behind the scenes if one of the major supermarkets ran out of a basic product every day. ***** would be kicked and things put right. But on our monopoly service railway? No way, it's all too hard and it's all someone else's fault. As for the trains not being clapped out; how many of us still drive 1980s cars? Remember, these quaint old 'turbos' use road transport technology!

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 27 2015, 10:23 PM

How do you put an extra carriage in a 25 year old, fixed formation train?
Not quite as easy as ordering a few more loaves of bread is it?
The "dim witted" management is mainly the DFT who dictate most railway policy..
As from the new May timetable there is to be a new HST service to London at around 09:15 starting at Newbury.
I don't suppose that will keep you happy though as they are 1970's!!

Comparing trains with cars is ridiculous. They are built to last much longer. How many cars cost £3M each?
How many cars have done more that 4 million miles as have the HST's?
And no, the turbos don't use road technology except for the fact that the engines are also used in road transport in some instances.

Posted by: On the edge Jan 27 2015, 10:50 PM

Well, there you are! 25 years old 'fixed formation' trains. In other words, designed for very different traffic conditions, so now time expired.

OK but if the coaches are really built to the much more robust and heavy railway technology even thinking road engine technology would be suitable was shortsighted to say the least. Equally, the passenger (sure they don't count for much) layout is poor and suited for short 'bus type' journeys only - again, against the original design brief just about adequate.

The rail franchise managers have access to the same media as the DfT, yet we see no critisicim of policy makers, or the suppliers of equipment. Nice they are all in it together so to speak, but playing patsy with them keeps the gravy train train on track, even if it doesn't deliver customer service.

Posted by: Biker1 Jan 28 2015, 09:28 AM

Fixed formation trains are, and have been for the last 30 years, the norm for British and most others countries railways.

Road engine technology is now used in, I would estimate, 70% of UK passenger trains today. (The rest being electric or HST)

Agreed. The layout of modern trains is poor to say the least but the accountants no doubt want to cram as many in the space available. "Sweating the assets"?
Bit like the seats in economy air travel?

EDIT: Just had a thought OTE!
http://www.bringbackbritishrail.org/ a site that may interest you!

Posted by: On the edge Jan 28 2015, 10:26 AM

Now that's a good link!

As for rail design being in the hands of accountants, that's certainly what it looks like but that then fully justifies accusations of poor and inept management. Let's go to earlier private times, would Lord Palmer on the GWR have taken notice of accountants? I don't think so! Management means running the railway, not just taking the cash.

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 28 2015, 04:59 PM

All big business is run by bean counters. Sadly.

Posted by: On the edge Jan 28 2015, 06:57 PM

Another of those logical fallacies!

Posted by: Andy Capp Jan 29 2015, 12:32 PM

I fear you may need to research the meaning of the phrase!

Posted by: On the edge Jan 29 2015, 01:54 PM

No. 18 on the chart in our governors office, he spent a lot on that; I always thought it was a waste of money!