DOCSLIB.ORG

5 Level Crossings 4

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
5 Level Crossings 4 RSC-G-006-B Guidelines For The Design Of Section 5 Railway Infrastructure And Rolling Stock LEVEL CROSSINGS 5 LEVEL CROSSINGS 4 5.1. THE PRINCIPLES 4 5.2. GENERAL GUIDANCE 5 5.2.1. General description 5 5.2.2. Structure of the guidance 5 5.2.3. Positioning of level crossings 5 5.2.4. Equipment at level crossings 5 5.2.5. Effects on existing level crossings 6 5.2.6. Operating conditions 6 5.3. TYPES OF CROSSINGS 7 5.3.1. Types of crossing 7 5.3.2. Conditions for suitability 9 5.4. GATED CROSSINGS OPERATED BY RAILWAY STAFF 12 5.4.1. General description (for user worked gates see section 5.8) 12 5.4.2. Method of operation 12 5.4.3. Railway signalling and control 12 5.5. BARRIER CROSSINGS OPERATED BY RAILWAY STAFF (MB) 13 5.5.1. General description 13 5.5.2. Method of operation 13 5.5.3. Railway signalling and control 14 5.6. AUTOMATIC HALF BARRIER CROSSINGS (AHB) 15 5.6.1. General description 15 5.6.2. Method of operation 15 5.6.3. Railway signalling and control 16 5.7. AUTOMATIC OPEN CROSSING (AOC) 17 5.7.1. General description 17 5.7.2. Method of operation 17 5.7.3. Railway signalling and control 18 5.8. USER-WORKED CROSSINGS (UWC) WITH GATES OR LIFTING BARRIERS 19 5.8.1. General description 19 5.8.2. Method of operation 19 5.9. PEDESTRIAN CROSSINGS (PC) PRIVATE OR PUBLIC FOOTPATH 21 5.9.1. General description 21 5.9.2. Method of operation 21 5.10. BARROW PATH CROSSINGS (BP) STAFF SUPERVISED 23 5.10.1. General description 23 5.10.2. Method of operation 23 5.11. LOCAL MONITORING OF AUTOMATIC CROSSINGS (AHB & AOC) 24 RSC-G-006-B Page 1 of 53 RSC-G-006-B Guidelines For The Design Of Section 5 Railway Infrastructure And Rolling Stock LEVEL CROSSINGS 5.11.1. General description 24 5.11.2. Method of operation 24 5.11.3. Railway signalling and control 24 5.12. PROVISIONS FOR PEDESTRIANS AT PUBLIC VEHICULAR CROSSINGS 25 5.12.1. General description 25 5.12.2. Road markings 25 5.12.3. Audible warnings 25 5.12.4. Pedestrian signals 26 5.12.5. Tactile thresholds 26 5.12.6. Means to control the flow of pedestrians 26 5.12.7. Pedestrian categories 26 5.12.8. Pedestrian provisions 27 5.12.9. Train pedestrian value (TPV) calculation 27 5.13. ADDITIONAL MEASURES TO PROTECT AGAINST TRESPASS 28 5.13.1. General description 28 5.13.2. Cattle-cum-trespass guards 28 5.13.3. Fencing 28 5.14. THE CROSSING 29 5.14.1. Vertical profile 29 5.14.2. Measurement of safe profiles 29 5.14.3. Crossing surface 29 5.14.4. Crossing width 30 5.14.5. Provision of lay-bys 31 5.14.6. Crossing alignment 31 5.14.7. Crossing approaches 31 5.15. GATES, WICKET GATES AND BARRIER EQUIPMENT 32 5.15.1. Gates 32 5.15.2. Wicket gates 32 5.15.3. Barriers 32 5.15.4. Skew crossings 33 5.15.5. Barrier crossings operated by railway staff 33 5.15.6. User-worked crossings 33 5.15.7. Single barriers 33 5.15.8. Half barriers 33 5.16. TELEPHONES AND TELEPHONE SIGNS 34 5.16.1. General 34 5.16.2. At automatic crossings 34 5.16.3. At barrier crossings operated by railway staff 35 5.16.4. At gated crossings operated by railway staff 35 RSC-G-006-B Page 2 of 53 RSC-G-006-B Guidelines For The Design Of Section 5 Railway Infrastructure And Rolling Stock LEVEL CROSSINGS 5.16.5. At user-worked crossings 35 5.17. MINIATURE WARNING LIGHTS (MWL) 36 5.17.1. General description 36 5.17.2. Positioning of MWL 36 5.17.3. Equipment of MWL 36 5.17.4. Associated signs 36 5.17.5. Railway signalling and control equipment 36 5.18. TRAFFIC SIGNALS, TRAFFIC SIGNS AND ROAD MARKINGS 38 5.18.2. Road traffic light signals 38 5.18.3. Pedestrian signals 39 5.18.4. Traffic signs 39 5.18.5. Related to electrified lines (see section 3 Electric traction systems) 40 5.18.6. Related to risk of grounding 40 5.18.7. Road markings 40 5.18.8. Transverse and associated road markings 40 5.18.9. Longitudinal road markings 41 5.18.10. Double white Lines 41 5.18.11. Yellow box markings 41 5.18.12. Road studs 41 TYPICAL ROAD LAYOUTS 42 5.20. ROAD SIGNS 48 5.1.1. Level crossing road traffic light signals 48 5.20.1. 48 5.20.2. General level crossing signs 48 5.20.3. Manually controlled level crossings 49 5.20.4. Automatic level crossings 50 5.20.5. User worked crossings 51 5.20.6. Miniature warning lights. 53 RSC-G-006-B Page 3 of 53 RSC-G-006-B Guidelines For The Design Of Section 5 Railway Infrastructure And Rolling Stock LEVEL CROSSINGS 5 LEVEL CROSSINGS 5.1. THE PRINCIPLES Principle 5.1 Safe for users and trains Where a right of way crosses the railway at track level, safety arrangements commensurate with the level of risk at that place should be determined and provided. Principle 5.2 Information to users Sufficient and appropriate information to enable crossing in safety should be presented to users. Principle 5.3 Safe crossing place The actual crossing place should be of adequate width, surface quality and profile for all reasonably foreseeable users to cross in safety. RSC-G-006-B Page 4 of 53 RSC-G-006-B Guidelines For The Design Of Section 5 Railway Infrastructure And Rolling Stock LEVEL CROSSINGS 5.2. GENERAL GUIDANCE 5.2.1. General description 5.2.1.1. This section gives general guidance on the positioning of, and equipment that applies at, all types of level crossings. 5.2.1.2. The guidance is applicable when alterations are made to the protection arrangements at existing crossings. When alterations are made at a public road level crossing, the protection arrangements are described in and authorised by a Regulation Order made under the relevant sections of the appropriate level crossing transport act. 5.2.1.3. Each level crossing should have a unique reference number (see Figure 13 of section 5.20- Road Signs), normally displayed on each side of the crossing. The crossing name may also be added. 5.2.2. Structure of the guidance 5.2.2.1. This level crossings section: a) establishes the crossing types and the conditions for suitability; b) provides general guidance applicable to each type of crossing; c) gives specific details of signalling and crossing controls for each type of crossing; and d) provides guidance on carriageway aspects and crossing equipment and signs. 5.2.3. Positioning of level crossings 5.2.3.1. The positioning of a crossing and its associated signalling arrangements should ensure that, during normal working, no part of a stationary train should stand obstructing the crossing. The proximity of a station to a level crossing may mean special arrangements are necessary. 5.2.3.2. A risk assessment should be made to determine the relative positioning of a crossing and its associated protecting signals, if provided. It should take into consideration the likelihood and consequences of a train passing the signals without authority. If it is not reasonably practicable to achieve the optimum positions, appropriate measures should be provided to reduce the potential risk to an acceptable level. 5.2.3.3. Where a crossing traverses electrified lines, additional measures are needed to protect road users. See section 5.19 for the positioning of the appropriate warning signs and section 3 Electric Traction Systems. 5.2.4. Equipment at level crossings 5.2.4.1. All equipment and controls used for the operation of crossing equipment should be designed and documented to appropriate safety standards. All crossing equipment should be installed clear of the railway structure gauge and at least 450mm clear of the edge of the carriageway. 5.2.4.2. At all automatic crossings, an alternative power supply should be provided to allow the crossing equipment to function fully under normal operating conditions in the event of the failure of the main power supply for a period of up to 12 hours. This will ensure the safe operation of the crossing until the main power supply is restored or an alternative arrangement is put in place. 5.2.4.3. Where trains run after dark, illumination of the crossing may be provided to ensure its safe operation. If the road approaches to a crossing are lit, the crossing should be illuminated to at least the same standard. Any lighting should not cause glare to either road users or train drivers, interfere with the visibility of railway signals nor cause avoidable annoyance to local householders. RSC-G-006-B Page 5 of 53 RSC-G-006-B Guidelines For The Design Of Section 5 Railway Infrastructure And Rolling Stock LEVEL CROSSINGS At crossings which are locally monitored by the driver of an approaching train, additional lighting may be necessary to enable the train driver to see that the crossing is unobstructed from the point at which the driver may have to brake the train. 5.2.4.4. Any failure or damage to the equipment at a level crossing, which may lead to incorrect or unsafe operation, should be evident to the control or monitoring point or the user of the level crossing within a reasonable time of the occurrence.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A New Signalling System for Automatic Block Signal Between Stations Controlling Through an IP Network
    A New Signalling System for Automatic Block Signal between Stations Controlling through an IP Network 1R. Ishima, 1Y. Fukuta, 1M. Matsumoto, 2N. Shimizu, 3H. Soutome, 4M. Mori East Japan Railway Company, Saitama, Japan1; Daido Signal Co.,Ltd., Tokyo, Japan2; Hitachi, Ltd., Hitachinaka, Japan3; Toshiba Corp., Tokyo, Japan4 Abstract This paper describes a new signalling system which controls signalling field devices of automatic block signal between stations through an IP network. The system improves the method of the system already installed to Ichikawaono station on the Musasino line in February 2007. The Logic Controller (LC), placed in a signal house, exchanges the command and feedback data with the Field Controller (FC), placed near each automatic block signal, through the Ethernet Passive Optical Network (E- PON). Following the command data, the FC electrically controls signalling field devices such as signals, track circuits, transponders of the Automatic Train Stop (i.e. Automatic Train Protection) system with Pattern (ATS-P), transponders of the S-type of ATS (ATS-S), and output relays. Only optical fiber cable requires between the LC and the FC. The system has high reliability because the LC, the FC, and the data paths of E-PON are all duplex. The system provides sufficient maintenance information through the IP network. The system can realize higher reliability, less wire-connection- work, less amount of cable, cost cutting, and faster troubleshooting. A prototype system was under evaluation on the Joban Rapid Service line between Mabashi and Kitakashiwa from August 2006 to January 2008. Evaluating the results of the field test, we conclude that the prototype system is technically suitable for signal control.
    [Show full text]
  • European Road Safety Observatory
    European Road Safety Observatory Road Safety Thematic Report Railway level crossings This document is part of a series of 20 thematic reports on road safety. The purpose is to give road safety practitioners an overview of the most important research questions and results on the topic in question. The level of detail is intermediate, with more detailed papers or reports suggested for further reading. Each report has a 1-page summary. Contract This document has been prepared in the framework of the EC Service Contract MOVE/C2/SER/2019-100/SI2.822066 with Vias institute (BE) and SWOV Institute for Road Safety Research (NL). Version Version 1.1, January 2021 Author Kas Kamphuis (SWOV) Internal review Philip Temmerman (Vias institute) External review Tim De Ceunynck (Independent road safety expert) Editor Heike Martensen (Vias institute) Referencing Reproduction of this document is allowed with due acknowledgement. Please refer to the document as follows: European Commission (2021) Road safety thematic report – Railway level cross- ings. European Road Safety Observatory. Brussels, European Commission, Direc- torate General for Transport. Source The document is based on and partly cites SWOV fact sheet Railway level cross- ings of December 2020: https://www.swov.nl/en/facts-figures. Disclaimer Whilst every effort has been made to ensure that the material presented in this document is rele- vant, accurate and up-to-date, the (sub)contractors cannot accept any liability for any error or omission, or reliance on part or all of the content in another context. Any information and views set out in this document are those of the author(s) and do not neces- sarily reflect the official opinion of the European Commission.
    [Show full text]
  • Communication Technologies Support to Railway Infrastructure and Operations
    Downloaded from orbit.dtu.dk on: Oct 06, 2021 Communication Technologies Support to Railway Infrastructure and Operations Sniady, Aleksander Link to article, DOI: 10.11581/DTU:00000010 Publication date: 2015 Document Version Publisher's PDF, also known as Version of record Link back to DTU Orbit Citation (APA): Sniady, A. (2015). Communication Technologies Support to Railway Infrastructure and Operations. DTU Fotonik. https://doi.org/10.11581/DTU:00000010 General rights Copyright and moral rights for the publications made accessible in the public portal are retained by the authors and/or other copyright owners and it is a condition of accessing publications that users recognise and abide by the legal requirements associated with these rights. Users may download and print one copy of any publication from the public portal for the purpose of private study or research. You may not further distribute the material or use it for any profit-making activity or commercial gain You may freely distribute the URL identifying the publication in the public portal If you believe that this document breaches copyright please contact us providing details, and we will remove access to the work immediately and investigate your claim. Communication Technologies Support to Railway Infrastructure and Operations Aleksander Sniady Ph.D. Thesis May 2015 Communication Technologies Support to Railway Infrastructure and Operations Aleksander Sniady´ Ph.D. Thesis Networks Technology & Service Platforms DTU Fotonik Technical University of Denmark May 2015 To my parents and grandparents. Supervisors: José Soler Lars Dittmann Technical University of Denmark DTU Fotonik Department of Photonics Engineering This thesis is a part of RobustRailS project, Ørsteds Plads, Building 343, which is funded by The Danish Council for 2800 Kongens Lyngby, Denmark Strategic Research.
    [Show full text]
  • BACKTRACK 22-1 2008:Layout 1 21/11/07 14:14 Page 1
    BACKTRACK 22-1 2008:Layout 1 21/11/07 14:14 Page 1 BRITAIN‘S LEADING HISTORICAL RAILWAY JOURNAL VOLUME 22 • NUMBER 1 • JANUARY 2008 • £3.60 IN THIS ISSUE 150 YEARS OF THE SOMERSET & DORSET RAILWAY GWR RAILCARS IN COLOUR THE NORTH CORNWALL LINE THE FURNESS LINE IN COLOUR PENDRAGON BRITISH ENGLISH-ELECTRIC MANUFACTURERS PUBLISHING THE GWR EXPRESS 4-4-0 CLASSES THE COMPREHENSIVE VOICE OF RAILWAY HISTORY BACKTRACK 22-1 2008:Layout 1 21/11/07 15:59 Page 64 THE COMPREHENSIVE VOICE OF RAILWAY HISTORY END OF THE YEAR AT ASHBY JUNCTION A light snowfall lends a crisp feel to this view at Ashby Junction, just north of Nuneaton, on 29th December 1962. Two LMS 4-6-0s, Class 5 No.45058 piloting ‘Jubilee’ No.45592 Indore, whisk the late-running Heysham–London Euston ‘Ulster Express’ past the signal box in a flurry of steam, while 8F 2-8-0 No.48349 waits to bring a freight off the Ashby & Nuneaton line. As the year draws to a close, steam can ponder upon the inexorable march south of the West Coast Main Line electrification. (Tommy Tomalin) PENDRAGON PUBLISHING www.pendragonpublishing.co.uk BACKTRACK 22-1 2008:Layout 1 21/11/07 14:17 Page 4 SOUTHERN GONE WEST A busy scene at Halwill Junction on 31st August 1964. BR Class 4 4-6-0 No.75022 is approaching with the 8.48am from Padstow, THE NORTH CORNWALL while Class 4 2-6-4T No.80037 waits to shape of the ancient Bodmin & Wadebridge proceed with the 10.00 Okehampton–Padstow.
    [Show full text]
  • Birkenhead RO-2008-001 Final
    2008 5 March Australia, South Birkenhead, Collision, Crossing Level ATSB TRANSPORT SAFETY REPORT Rail Occurrence Investigation RO-2008-001 Final Level Crossing Collision Birkenhead, South Australia 5 March 2008 ATSB TRANSPORT SAFETY REPORT Rail Occurrence Investigation RO-2008-001 Final Level Crossing Collision Birkenhead, South Australia 5 March 2008 Released in accordance with section 25 of the Transport Safety Investigation Act 2003 - i - Published by: Australian Transport Safety Bureau Postal address: PO Box 967, Civic Square ACT 2608 Office location: 62 Northbourne Avenue, Canberra City, Australian Capital Territory Telephone: 1800 020 616; from overseas + 61 2 6257 4150 Accident and incident notification: 1800 011 034 (24 hours) Facsimile: 02 6247 3117; from overseas + 61 2 6247 3117 E-mail: [email protected] Internet: www.atsb.gov.au © Commonwealth of Australia 2009. This work is copyright. In the interests of enhancing the value of the information contained in this publication you may copy, download, display, print, reproduce and distribute this material in unaltered form (retaining this notice). However, copyright in the material obtained from other agencies, private individuals or organisations, belongs to those agencies, individuals or organisations. Where you want to use their material you will need to contact them directly. Subject to the provisions of the Copyright Act 1968, you must not make any other use of the material in this publication unless you have the permission of the Australian Transport Safety Bureau. Please direct requests for further information or authorisation to: Commonwealth Copyright Administration, Copyright Law Branch Attorney-General’s Department, Robert Garran Offices, National Circuit, Barton ACT 2600 www.ag.gov.au/cca ISBN and formal report title: see ‘Document retrieval information’ on page v.
    [Show full text]
  • Crossing Protection with Indicators for Train Movements
    Crossing Protection With Indicators For Train Movements By G. K. Zulandt Assistant Signal Engineer Terminal Railroad Association of St. louis St. louis. Mo. New Installations, on Terminal Railroad Asso­ ciation of St. Louis, include special color-light This indicator, 50 ft. from the crossing, dwarf signals, known as crossing protection in- . has a key-controller on top dicators, which inform ·enginemen whether f Iash in g -I i g h t signals and gates are operat­ ing, and give advance notice of time cut-outs main tracks are about 750 ft. long. The fastest train which was checked consumed 24.4 sec. from the tiirie it shunted its approach until it foul­ .ed the crossing. The flashing-light THE first of seven highway crossing being left open. The new flashing­ signals operated 4.6 se~-as a .pre­ gate installations to be made on light signals and gates at Lynch warning before the gates were r~:­ the Illinois Transfer Railway, oper­ avenue are controlled automatically leased; and the gates desc~nded 'in ated by the Terminal Railroad As­ by track circuits but, on account of 10.5 sec. Thus, the.gates were down sociation of St. Louis, has been switching moves. to serve industries, 9.3 sec. before the train arrived at placed in service recently at Lynch and because of other unusual op­ the crossing . ,Conventional direc­ avenue in East St. Louis, Ill. A traf­ erations, special cut-out features are tional stick relays are used to clear fic count for 24 hours over this necessary. , the gates for receding train moves.
    [Show full text]
  • Deliverable D3.1 Virtual Coupling Communication Solutions Analysis
    Ref. Ares(2020)7880497 - 22/12/2020 Deliverable D3.1 Virtual Coupling Communication Solutions Analysis Project Acronym: MOVINGRAIL Starting Date: 01/12/2018 Duration (Months): 25 Call (part) Identifier: H2020-S2R-OC-IP2-2018 Grant Agreement No.: 826347 Due Date of Deliverable: Month 10 Actual Submission Date: 25-09-2020 Responsible/Author: Bill Redfern (PARK) Dissemination Level: Public Status: Issued Reviewed: No G A 8 2 6 3 4 7 P a g e 1 | 63 Document history Revision Date Description 0.1 03-07-2020 First draft for comments and internal review 0.2 24-09-2020 Second draft 1.0 25-09-2020 Issued 1.1 22-12-2020 Update following comments from the Commission, added new section 4.2.1 Report contributors Name Beneficiary Details of contribution Short Name John Chaddock PARK Primary Curation. Identification and collation of source documentation. Document review. Bill Redfern PARK Literature review and solutions research. Requirements identification. Analysis of requirements and potential solutions. Descriptions and conclusions. John Marsden PARK Literature review and solutions research. Michael Duffy PARK Literature review and solutions research. Mark Cooper PARK Literature review and solutions research. Analysis. Format/editing. Andrew Wright PARK Document review. Lei Chen UoB Document review. Mohamed Samra UoB Document review. Paul van Koningsbruggen Technolution Document review. Rob Goverde TUD Document review, quality check and final editing. Funding This project has received funding from the Shift2Rail Joint Undertaking (JU) under grant agreement No 826347. The JU receives support from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme and the Shift2Rail JU members other than the Union.
    [Show full text]
  • Planning for Pedestrian Accessibility at Level Crossings and Railway Stations, Melbourne, Victoria Walks
    Planning for Pedestrian Accessibility at Level Crossing Removals and Railway Stations. December 2016 i | P a g e This report was prepared by Dr David Mepham for Victoria Walks Inc. December 2016. The report analyses level crossing removal and railway station improvement projects, and concept designs for elevated rail on the Cranbourne/Pakenham Line, in Melbourne, to make recommendations to ensure pedestrian accessibility in future projects. Notwithstanding the consultation undertaken with government agencies in preparing this report, it is independent of any agency and represents the views of the author and Victoria Walks only. Victoria Walks Inc. is a walking health promotion charity working to get more Victorians walking every day. Our vision is for vibrant, supportive and strong neighbourhoods and communities where people can and do choose to walk wherever possible. Victoria Walks is supported by VicHealth. Dr David Mepham is the Director of DMC, a Melbourne based consultancy. Previously at the City of Gold Coast he was 'City Building Manager' for the Gold Coast Light Rail Project, leading planning and urban design outcomes. He was also the architect of the innovative Gold Coast City Council - City Parking Plan as the Coordinator Transport Futures. In drafting this report he draws on his interest and experience in walking, station access and the idea of transit oriented development with a view to realising attractive station places and more accessible communities. Email [email protected] December 2016 © Victoria Walks Inc. Registration No A0052693U Level &, 225 Bourke Street, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000 P: 03 9662 3975 E: [email protected] www.victoriawalks.org.au Recommended Citation Mepham D.
    [Show full text]
  • Australasian TETRA Forum
    TETRA & CRITICAL COMMUNICATIONS ASSOCIATION Study on the relative merits of TETRA, LTE and other broadband technologies for critical communications markets Final version 1.1: February 2015 P3 communications GmbH Am Kraftversorgungsturm 3 (Alter Schlachthof) 52070 Aachen Germany www.p3-group.com/en/communications-gmbh-46867.html Version 1.1 P3 communications GmbH February 2015 Page 1 of 29 TCCA study on TETRA, LTE and other broadband technologies for critical communications markets Table of contents 1 Executive summary .............................................................................................. 4 2 Introduction .......................................................................................................... 8 2.1 Background .................................................................................................. 8 2.2 Study objectives ............................................................................................ 8 2.3 Scope ........................................................................................................... 8 3 The Critical Communications market by sector ...................................................10 3.1 PPDR / Public Safety ...................................................................................10 3.2 Transport .....................................................................................................10 3.3 Utilities .........................................................................................................12 3.4 Industrial
    [Show full text]
  • Assessment of Safety at Level Crossings in UNECE Member Countries and Other Selected Countries and Strategic Framework for Improving Safety at Level Crossings
    Informal document SC.2 No. 5 (2016) Distr.: General 16 November 2016 English only Working Party on Rail Transport Seventieth session Geneva, 22–24 November 2016 Item 17 of the provisional agenda Group of Experts on improving Safety at Level Crossings Assessment of safety at level crossings in UNECE member countries and other selected countries and strategic framework for improving safety at level crossings Submitted by the Drafting Group of the Group of Experts on Improving Safety at Level Crossings Summary This document presents an assessment undertaken by the Group of Experts on Improving Safety at Level Crossings of safety at level crossings in UNECE member countries and other selected countries (Part one). It further presents a strategic framework prepared by the Group for enhancing safety at level crossings (Part two). This document was finalized by the Drafting Group of the Group of Experts on Improving Safety at Level Crossings. It is submitted for consideration and endorsement by the Group of Experts at its ninth session. Due to administrative reasons on length of documents accepted for translation, this document, in Part one contains only conclusions from the assessment of key factors contributing to unsafe condition at level crossings in UNECE member countries and other selected countries as well as recommendations resulting from these conclusions. The assessment of the key factors (chapters B to I of Part one) is provided in Annex III to this document (in chapters I to VIII) in English only. Informal document SC.2 No. 5 (2016) Part one Assessment of safety performance, conclusions from assessment of key factors contributing to unsafe condition at level crossings in UNECE member countries and other selected countries and recommendations A.
    [Show full text]
  • Level Crossings: a Guide for Managers, Designers and Operators Railway Safety Publication 7
    Level Crossings: A guide for managers, designers and operators Railway Safety Publication 7 December 2011 Contents Foreword 4 What is the purpose of this guide? 4 Who is this guide for? 4 Introduction 5 Why is managing level crossing risk important? 5 What is ORR’s policy on level crossings? 5 1. The legal framework 6 Overview 6 Highways and planning law 7 2. Managing risks at level crossings 9 Introduction 9 Level crossing types – basic protection and warning arrangements 12 General guidance 15 Gated crossings operated by railway staff 16 Barrier crossings operated by railway staff 17 Barrier crossings with obstacle detection 19 Automatic half barrier crossings (AHBC) 21 Automatic barrier crossings locally monitored (ABCL) 23 Automatic open crossings locally monitored (AOCL) 25 Open crossings 28 User worked crossings (UWCs) for vehicles 29 Footpath and bridleway crossings 30 Foot crossings at stations 32 Provision for pedestrians at public vehicular crossings 32 Additional measures to protect against trespass 35 The crossing 36 Gates, wicket gates and barrier equipment 39 Telephones and telephone signs 41 Miniature stop lights (MSL) 43 Traffic signals, traffic signs and road markings 44 3. Level crossing order submissions 61 Overview and introduction 61 Office of Rail Regulation | December 2011 | Level crossings: a guide for managers, designers and operators 2 Background and other information on level crossing management 61 Level crossing orders: scope, content and format 62 Level crossing order request and consideration process 64 Information
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Cost-Effective Systems for Railway Level-Crossing Protection
    ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMISSION FOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC EVALUATION OF COST-EFFECTIVE SYSTEMS FOR RAILWAY LEVEL-CROSSING PROTECTION UNITED NATIONS ECONOMIC AND SOCIAL COMMISSION FOR ASIA AND THE PACIFIC EVALUATION OF COST-EFFECTIVE SYSTEMS FOR RAILWAY LEVEL-CROSSING PROTECTION UNITED NATIONS New York, 2000 ST/ESCAP/2088 ______________ The opinions, figures and estimates set forth in this report were supplied by the respective railway administrations. They are the responsibility of the author and should not necessary be considered as reflecting the views or carrying the endorsement of the United Nations. The designations employed and the presentation of the material do not imply the expression of any opinion whatsoever on the part of the Secretariat of the United Nations concerning the legal status of any country, territory, city or area or of its authorities, or concerning the delimitation of its frontiers or boundaries. Mention of firm names and commercial products does not imply the endorsement of the United Nations. This publication has been issued without format editing. CONTENTS ! Page ! CHAPTER 1 INTRODUCTION """""""""""""""##""""###"##!!!!$! ! CHAPTER 2 SCALE AND SEVERITY OF RAILWAY LEVEL CROSSING ACCIDENT PROBLEM IN SELECTED COUNTRIES OF THE REGION"""""""""""""""""""""""##""#!!!!%! ! &#$! '()(*+,!""""""""""""""""""""""####!!!!%! ! &#&! -(.(,!/*0112)3!4+5(67!2)!8)92+!""""""""""""#####!!!!%! &#&#$! 4:;;+*7!"""""""""""""""""###"#!!!!!%! &#&#&! -(.(,!<*0112)3!1+5(67!*(<0*9!"""""""""###"#!!!!=! &#&#%! -(.(,!<*0112)3!<>+*+<6(*2162<1!+)9!(55(<62.()(11!""##!!!!?!
    [Show full text]