In message , at 09:53:42 on Fri,
17 Dec 2004, John Rowland
remarked:
It was originally proposed that the tramline would be inside the barriers.
This was scrapped because of the high frequency of the trams.

There's about one every 8 minutes - hardly "high" frequency. But as I
said, there are no barriers at any of the other hundred or so places
that the tram intersects a road, so why would this one be special?
--
Roland Perry

In message , at 11:12:16 on Fri, 17 Dec
2004, Paul Terry remarked:
The trams don't have barriers at any road "crossing", that's the way
trams are.

http://www.nettrams.net/PictureGallery/PGDriverView/DVPages/BUHUP04F.htm

Those are primarily for the railway line, but congratulations you have
provided the classic Usenet-counterexample. Now go look at all the other
places with no barriers throughout the City Centre.
--
Roland Perry

Hi Guys,

My old stomping ground, London Bridge Signalling Area has a manned
level crossing at Charlton Lane near Charlton. This surely is the
busiest Crossing Keeper job. There are a total of 12 trains per hour
or more if the extra freight and loco movements are included, during
off peak weekdays and saturdays, this can increase to 24 during the
peak periods due to extra services and empty stock going to or coming
from Slade Green Depot and if memory serves me well it does exceed
this at one point in the morning peak, if all services run.

Christine


On 13 Dec 2004 14:13:54 -0800, wrote:

Because I'm that sort of person, this question has
been bugging me for a while.

Where is London's busiest level crossing in terms
of off-peak weekday trains per hour? Where ever
in London it is, is it the busiest level crossing in
the UK? In Europe? Anywhere?

By level crossing, I mean where a railway line
crosses a public road on the level -- depots, tracks
between fields, pedestrian crossings and such
don't count.
Your suggestions greatly appreciated,


Matt Ashby
www.mattashby.com


Life without sex just isn't life.
Make love not war!

In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:53:42 on Fri,
17 Dec 2004, John Rowland
remarked:
It was originally proposed that the tramline would be inside the barriers.
This was scrapped because of the high frequency of the trams.

There's about one every 8 minutes - hardly "high" frequency. But as I
said, there are no barriers at any of the other hundred or so places
that the tram intersects a road, so why would this one be special?

I understood the concern was that cars might queue across the tramline
when the heavy rail barriers came down. This is a very busy crossing for
road traffic. I didn't read why this one ended up with barriers only for
heavy rail, yet the less busy one at Carey Road has the tramline inside
the barriers. The latter crossing is of course two single tracks where
David Lane is two double tracks. I could well believe it was just the
ease of conversion, keeping the barriers in the same place as when the
Robin Hood line occuppied the whole trackbed.

Nick
--
http://www.leverton.org/ ... So express yourself

"Nick Leverton" wrote in message
...
In article ,
Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:53:42 on Fri,
17 Dec 2004, John Rowland
remarked:
It was originally proposed that the tramline
would be inside the barriers. This was scrapped
because of the high frequency of the trams.

There's about one every 8 minutes - hardly "high"
frequency. But as I said, there are no barriers at
any of the other hundred or so places that the tram
intersects a road, so why would this one be special?

I understood the concern was that cars might queue
across the tramline when the heavy rail barriers came down.
This is a very busy crossing for road traffic. I didn't read why
this one ended up with barriers only for heavy rail, yet the less
busy one at Carey Road has the tramline inside the barriers.
The latter crossing is of course two single tracks where
David Lane is two double tracks. I could well believe it was
just the ease of conversion, keeping the barriers in the same
place as when the Robin Hood line occuppied the whole trackbed.

That may be an issue, but AFAIK the main issue was that there is a tram
junction between the two crossings, and one of the crossings has
significantly more trams than the other. At the crossing with fewer trams,
the tramlines are inside the barriers, whereas at the crossing with more
trams the tram tracks were required to be outside the barriers, pothrerwise
the barriers would be closed for too much of the time.

--
John Rowland - Spamtrapped
Transport Plans for the London Area, updated 2001
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Acro...69/tpftla.html
A man's vehicle is a symbol of his manhood.
That's why my vehicle's the Piccadilly Line -
It's the size of a county and it comes every two and a half minutes

In article ,
John Rowland wrote:
just the ease of conversion, keeping the barriers in the same
place as when the Robin Hood line occuppied the whole trackbed.

That may be an issue, but AFAIK the main issue was that there is a tram
junction between the two crossings, and one of the crossings has
significantly more trams than the other. At the crossing with fewer trams,
the tramlines are inside the barriers, whereas at the crossing with more
trams the tram tracks were required to be outside the barriers, pothrerwise
the barriers would be closed for too much of the time.

One of the pics referred to somewhere up there said the latter barriers
went up and down like a bride's nightie .... *searching wildly for utl
relevance* It's a good thing TABAWTKB didn't have a level crossing !

Nick
--
http://www.leverton.org/ ... So express yourself

if memory serves me correct( and I havent been to London since 1997)

the tracks for the Piccadilly line and District line are right next to each
other at Acton Town


"Colin Rosenstiel" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(Brimstone) wrote:

Paul Terry wrote:
In message , Henry
writes
"Martin Underwood" wrote

Can I ask a supplementary question? Whereabouts in London (or even
in the whole of Britain) is the closest pair of level crossings in
terms of the length of road (not railway) between them? I'm talking
about separate crossings with separate sets of barriers. I can
think of a pair which are very close, but I want to see if you
suggest the same ones.

To kick this one off Martin. There are two in Crawley about 500
metres apart.

I can't imagine that they are the closest though - any better out
there?

Vine Road, Barnes - there's room for only about 6 cars between the
level crossing on the Hounslow loop line and the level crossing on
the Windsor line:

http://www.multimap.com/map/browse.c...ale=5000&icon=
x

Not forgetting the two in Bollo Lane Acton just south of South Acton
station.

http://streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=...=520250,179250
&st=4&ar=Y&mapp=newmap.srf&searchp=newsearch.sr f

The number of trains per off-peak hour is somewhat fewer there than at
Barnes, however.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Ed Webb wrote:

In article ,
(Brimstone) wrote:

Not forgetting the two in Bollo Lane Acton just south of South
Acton station.


http://streetmap.co.uk/newmap.srf?x=...=520250,179250
&st=4&ar=Y&mapp=newmap.srf&searchp=newsearch.sr f

[I assume your comments were in response to the above, but as you
top-posted, this was not clear.]

if memory serves me correct( and I havent been to London since 1997)

the tracks for the Piccadilly line and District line are right next
to each other at Acton Town

True, but there are no level crossings over them. The Bollo Lane
crossings that Brimstone referred to are on the North London Line and
the Kew East-South Acton freight link.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)