The Forum > General Discussion > Level crossings
Level crossings
- Pages:
-
- Page 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- 5
-
- All
Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 6 January 2009 9:15:25 AM
| |
Hi Ludwig.
I think the problem is that QLD is a 'behind state'. The population isnt that great and much government borders on the 3rd world. I expect things will improve as time passes and QLD gets thrust into the 1st world. When we went to country QLD in the early 1980's it was like another time. It was like we had walked through a portal into a the mists of a bygone era. In our town, it took over 2 decades to see improvements that NSW towns already had 2 decades and more earlier. Posted by Gibo, Tuesday, 6 January 2009 11:07:44 AM
| |
GDay Gibo
I travel interstate a lot by road. I can agree that in some ways Qld is backward with road-safety issues, not least in speed-limit signage. New South Wales has signs everywhere that indicate a lower speed zone ahead, well ahead of signs that indicate the actual change in speed limit. Victoria has double double speed limit signs all over the place. That is; two signs, one on each side of the road indicating that you are entering a lower speed limit zone, quickly followed by two more signs 100 metres or so up the road. But Qld mostly just has one sign….and an overall terrible paucity of speed limit signage. When I first came to Qld in the early 80s, it did seem quite backward. Crikey, the state’s main highway; the Bruce Hwy, was a narrow goat track with innumerable one-lane bridges all the way from at least Rockhampton to Cairns! But it has all changed greatly over the years. When it comes to level crossings, it seems that Qld is no worse than other states. In fact, Victoria has the highest level of injuries at level crossings. http://www.abc.net.au/news/stories/2008/08/15/2336205.htm Posted by Ludwig, Tuesday, 6 January 2009 11:28:06 AM
| |
Ludwig. Good story.
I think much of the problem is that State governments have become estranged from the bush. Much of the budgets go to the big cities and the greater number of voters. Thus country hospitals, roads and rail infrastructures, community needs and the like get put aside and neglected Posted by Gibo, Tuesday, 6 January 2009 11:51:16 AM
| |
I think that is the right approach Ludwig.
I think one of the problems is the low number of trains on many routes, these days. People get used to never seeing a train, on the tracks, or at crossings, & stop expecting them. Your suggestions to make people aware that a train is near should stop, all but the most stupid drivers, getting into trouble. Posted by Hasbeen, Tuesday, 6 January 2009 6:13:31 PM
| |
I think that all rail crossings and school crossings for that matter should have the audible lines running across the road on the approach side for say 50 to 100 meters. This would be a rather inexpensive solution and would make anyone aware that they were approaching a potenially dangerous part of the road.
All that is needed is one or two stips say 300mm appart for say 50 to 100 meters. If you miss that then perhaps you are beyond help! Posted by rehctub, Tuesday, 6 January 2009 8:06:37 PM
|
This follows a double fatality just a bit further south near Cardwell a few weeks earlier. http://www.truveo.com/9RAW-Two-killed-in-levelcrossing-crash/id/2393167961
There have also been numerous reports of near-misses….and a long history of this sort of accident across Australia.
The touted solutions are;
Huge overpasses on open highway crossings and boom gates on just about all crossings.
I reckon both of these ideas miss the mark terribly.
In my experience, the major problem is that drivers all too often don’t even register a level crossing in front of them until they are just about on top of it! Driving back to Townsville from central Queensland on Sunday, I passed through numerous level crossings. Even though I was very mindful of the recent tragedies, and I am very tuned in to road-safety all the time, I found myself repeatedly acknowledging a level crossing only at the last second.
OK, if the lights had been flashing (they all have lights on highway crossings), then I would probably have seen them a lot sooner, unless the sun was behind them, or perhaps if the sun was high behind me and shining strongly on the lights, or perhaps just in the middle of any bright sunny day they could be a bit hard to see.
The solution to me seems very simple; all crossings need very prominent signage and flashing lights set well back from the crossing.
We’ve got ‘stop-sign ahead’ signs on some intersections, ‘80kmh ahead’ and ‘60kmh ahead’ signs throughout New South Wales and school speed zone signs with big bright orange borders. Each of these exists because there have been problems with people not seeing signs or not seeing them soon enough to react in time.
And yet with level crossings this basic notion that you simply MUST have unmissable signage (most significantly; flashing lights) SET WELL BACK FROM CROSSINGS has just eluded our illustrious authorities.
Is the answer really this simple?