Level crossing in the GB operated by a human operator, looking carefully if the crossing is clear using CCTV, closing the barriers, double checking that it is still clear and then finally signalling proceed to the train. 🙄

And I always thought it is the train which has priority on a level crossing, not the other way around.

https://youtu.be/UCXav-ptPeA?si=0L_LYrhElR_I8YU7&t=595 (time 09:55)

@Oskar456 Barriers under signal protection are fairly common. Drawback is the long closing time, which is why in many cases they get replace by half-width automatic barriers which have less risk of someone getting boxed in.

@partim Yeah fair. I was just surprised by the amount of technology involved yet still requiring a human in the loop.
I remember such crossings with a person operating the crank from a glass booth.

As soon as buttons were involved, the crossings became automatic and only signal back the closed state which is a requirement for proceed signal if the track is occupied - no visual check of the crossing was/is done.

@Oskar456 I obviously can’t speak for all juristdictions, but I would imagine most require a check that the crossing is clear. In Germany they developed a radar system for this purpose.

@partim As far as I know, in Czechia, it is required to have equipment to check horizontal position of the barriers on "level crossings **exceptionally** built on tracks designed for speed over 120 km/h" - on the main line between Praha and Ostrava, there are 88 such crossings.

Also once the conditions are fulfilled and proceed signal is given, even breaking the conditions (like lifting the barrier) will not change the signal.

@Oskar456 Well... train has a priority should not mean "it is okay to hit stationary vehicle". Good to see someone got that right.

@pavel the flip side is then longer time between warning start and arrival of the train. Aren't those times already unacceptably long here in CZ?

@Oskar456

@djasa @Oskar456 Too long time between warning and train is caused by railway people simply not caring. Cars can wait :-(. They base warning on distance, not on time, which means you wait longer for slower trains. Do you remember "auta stoji, vlaky jedou"? That's their strategy :-(.

@pavel @djasa yeah, there's this saying that: "better closed railway crossing than closed (jailed) designer."
But it's slowly getting better.

As a pedestrian, I have a similar feeling about traffic lights designers in Czechia. Those people have to absolutely hate pedestrians.

@pavel @Oskar456

This only makes sense until you delve into implementation and its regulatory boundaries.

Like. From railway side, it would require signalling to convey movement authorities for trains with a different speeds 1. for the driver and 2. for the automatic train control with speed enforcement and 3. you need to integrate crossing equipment with other parts of signalling/interlocking. What's the status of these requirements in infrastructure and vehicles...?

@djasa @pavel also, why would you run a train significantly lower than the design speed of the track in the first place? Such cases should be exceptions, not regular operations.

@Oskar456 @djasa Happens regulary in some places. You have high-speed passanger trains and low-speed cargo trains. Plus of course, railways are willing to stop cards for train staying in station...

@pavel stations' interlockings in past not so few decades are done in a way to minimize need to close the crossing (you can spot it looking for signals including "dwarf" ones), however crossing in a station also means that crossing length (road-wise) is significant and thus clearing time is significant (keyword: "nejpomalejší vozidlo")

@Oskar456