Bluebell Railway General Discussion

Spoilsport.

 

Where does this right of way run? Your next sentence makes it sound as if it runs across the rails (the footbridge was presumably to carry people using it across the rails), but can that be - a public RoW across an operating railroad? Perhaps I'm just more confused than usual...

Noel

 

There are many such crossings in the uk. Usually because the railway crossed an existing pathway.

 

There are four footpaths (Tremains, Horsted House, West Hoathly and Birch Farm) and one farm occupation crossing (Deans Farm) over the railway, all on the level.

Tom

 

Erm. I would have assumed the act to set up the railway would have terminated any public RoWs that crossed it (except for things like roads, etc, where provision was made for a bridge or level crossing or whatever). But I guess not!

What do they do about safety? Can anyone just wander across the tracks anytime they feel like it? (Makes a bit of a mockery of the whole photo pass concept...) And if a train hits someone crossing the line, who's at fault?

Noel

 

Some photos of it not mine : -http://www.flickr.com/photos/trolleyfan/6544094037/ and http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/personal/jon-bowers/2004/e3.jpg

 

My understanding is there are usually a fair number of photographers around the station site but I've never been there.

People on the line and liability is another thread really. In the someone else is at fault culture that has come here from, some say the states, there are many attempts to blame the railways on the national rail system. I assume to date the Bluebell has escaped that kind of incident.

 

It's surprisingly difficult to revoke a right of way. And in any case, what would you do - short of creating bridges, which would come with their own problems. I guess the LBSCR weren't too bothered, given the service frequency...

We have warning signs to pedestrians up either side of each crossing on the footpath; whistle boards on the railway either side to give a warning and the crew keep a sharp look out.

Tom

 

See http://www.flickr.com/photos/trolleyfan/6544094037/. Yes it is a public right of way. People can safely take photos from either side of the crossing, behind gate/ fence see and a photo taken by me at this location http://paulsimpson.zenfolio.com/p729675915/h1ffb6206#h1ffb6206

 

This photo of mine shows the crossing at Horsted House Farm and in particular the pedestrian warnings.

http://www.bluebell-railway.co.uk/bluebell/pic2/wn-2008/1450_mets_tomj_24feb08a.jpg

Tom

 

Not that that would do much good if someone darted out - trains can't stop the way, say, automobiles do!

I'm really boggled that the legislation to set up the lines (back in the 1800s/early 1900s) didn't close the footpaths. I'm wondering, how many footpaths cross, say, the ECML (or did they in fact shut all of those, or put in pedestrian bridges on all of them, so that you didn't have people playing chicken with 100MPH+ trains)? And what about the third-rail electrified lines?

(Apologies for the off-tangent on a Bluebell thread.)

Noel

 

There are still some footpaths across mainlines. There are a few on the 100mph Brighton line between Horley and Earlswood, and I believe there are some on the ECML as well if memory serves me correctly. The video below was taken from such a crossing between Hassocks and Burgess Hill in the late 1990s.



Generally there are plenty of warning signs for both driver and pedestrians and people are encouraged to cross quickly and safely after looking both ways, much like crossing a road. Third rail is easy to deal with, just put a gap in like you would at a set of points or a road level crossing.

 

The problem is that the rights of way predate the railways. They are however proper crossings with a level surface unlike one I crossed in the Rockies which had nothing to help you cross.

 

there are thousands of footpath crossings on network rail.
i grew up in west sussex, and remember as a 'nipper' being told by my auntie how to read the semaphore signals of approaching trains at the footpath crossings near her home at east preston. you cant do that with colour light signals if not facing you. we were also told how to listen to the 'singing' of the rails if a train was approaching. in victorian times when the railways were built, rights of way across a track had to be provided for and the cost of footbridges was considered far too much. lots of busy 'crossings' have been replaced now with footbridges in recent years. i think from an HSE prespective all ought to replaced with footbridges on the mainlines.
cheers,
julian

 

Indeed - in English law rights of way are 'highways'. Highway engineers and lawyers have a maxim "once a highway always a highway". This is not strictly true since there are legal ways to extinguish or divert a highway but it is not a simple matter.

 

Noel - crossings are an issue with both HSE and Network Rail. There are proposals to close Level crossings but fully closing a right of way is difficult. There are instances where a road crossing is closed but a footpath remains. Unfortunately there are a number of fatalaties on public crossings on Network Rail lines.

Below is a link to RAIB who investigate incidents in UK.

http://www.raib.gov.uk/home/index.cfm

 

We old codgers should not underestimate the culture shift that has occurred. There are now two generations in which the majority assume that someone else has responsibility for their safety. This can be seen in many different activities not just crossing railways.

 

Presumably Parliament can do so without too much trouble, though? Hence my reference to doing it in the Act which set up a railway (back when each railway needed its own separate act).

I was more thinking of people who get out onto the track and then wander around a bit. Yes, yes, I know, if someone acts like an idiot, 'think of it as evolution in action', but it seems slightly contradictory to have all the requirements to have electrified lines fenced, but then allow people to wander out onto the line at RoW level crossings! Surely the logical thing would have been to require footbridges for RoWs across such lines. (And yes, I know that's expensive, but what's the point of locking your door and leaving the window wide open? I suppose it does minimize the chances of accidents, though.)

I was just going to mention 'Elf&Safety! I'll bet footpath RoW level crossings give them heart-attacks - especially on the national network, where the speeds are so much higher (most preserved railways being only 25MPH).

Noel

 

Most foot crossings are laid out in a way similar to the one at the bluebell, ie there are planks of wood arranged such that only the most determined would leave the crossing on to the tracks.

 

Noel I am sort of assuming from your location you're not a UK resident?

Revoking rights of way is not that easy. Yes Parliament can (and does from time to time) vary or end rights of way, but common law and other ancient laws, plus the political attitudes in the UK make it very unusual to extinguish a right of way. The majority of Britain's railways were built before 1890 and attitudes then wouldn't have considered there to be a necessity to extinguish a right of way just because it crossed a railway on the level. In the earliest days the risks were not even appreciated, later the fact that Joe Public might wander out in front of a train and be mown down was not a huge matter of concern. Life was cheaper then. Bear in mind also that England has over 100,000 miles of footpaths, so crossing a railway is hardly unusual.

Really puzzled by the notion that people get onto the track and wander about a bit. Of course it happens, but it isn't all that common. By and large people understand the dangers and don't do it in the UK. I have seen much more trespass in the USA where of course the railway is generally unfenced and people cross wherever they like. Most foot crossings here are provided with a boarded walk way and often a sort of cattle grid either side to discourage any thought of walking toward the third rail. See below....it is pretty clear where you are supposed to walk, and very difficult to walk anywhere else.


Network Rail is tending to eliminate level crossings of all sorts wherever possible, but there are over 6,000 so it isn't going to be a quick matter, and in some places the risk is so low that they will never be modified. The risk overall is really very low thanks to a fully fenced railway education programmes in schools and arrangements like that in the picture there were only 4 deaths in 2012/13 when a train struck a pedestrian or cyclist, and 10 collisions with a motor vehicle resulting in 5 deaths. (9 deaths in total). Whilst this is obviously something to continue to reduce, it is hardly the sort of think that gives HSE people a nightmare. What does give them cause for concern is that the biggest risk to safe train operation is vehicle incursion onto the railway.....incidents like Great Heck for example. We should get this into perspective though. There are 3.6 deaths per billion vehicle km in the UK each year (1754 last year in total, 2.75 per 100,000 population). In the US the figure is 8.5 deaths per billion vehicle km (33 808 deaths in total or 10.4 per 100,000 population). Thus in neither country are the railways all that risky in contrast to the roads, though all things considered I think the 3rd rail region of the UK looks more favourable.