Written evidence from STRAIL (UK) (SLC 027)

STRAIL (UK) has supplied recycled rubber level crossing panels, manufactured by Kraiburg Rubber in Germany, for use in the UK since 1987. These come configured for a variety of load capacities and applications, including lightweight pedestrian crossings (pedeSTRAIL) and cycle friendly ones (veloSTRAIL).  There are also STRAILastic systems for embedded tramway rails.

Are current safety measures at level crossings adequate? How should they be improved?

The flatness of level crossings, and gaps between panels are, through the Railway Group standards very closely specified, and when new, crossings are designed to be free from trip hazards (no vertical step greater than 5mm between rail and road surface), and stable when driven over, either by a sleeper spacing independent system for pedestrian and light duty road crossings, or  .  However with the cyclic loading from heavy road traffic, the crossing panels can flex and wear out, especially where the points of support for the panels may settle or rise, as this can lead to a unit rocking as it carries the loads of road traffic, causing a deterioration in the quality of the surface.

Through the process of product development the registration system between panels and the locking (tie rod systems) have improved as has the delivery of a threshold between the crossing panels and road surface that is able to withstand increased road loadings from modern vehicles (Note).  Even with a robust regime of maintenance and inspection, a level crossing on a busy major road will have a finite life, and earlier types of crossing, some without through tie rod systems will benefit from a planned programme of renewals.

An example of how upgrading can make a difference is at Walton Street in Hull where the level crossing gained a notoriety as a place where cyclists regularly fell off . Whilst the hazard has not been totally eliminated by the current system , the improved registration between panels and positive clamping up has reduced the potential for gaps wider than 10mm and vertical edges greater than 5mm developing, and as a result substantially fewer cyclists are reported to be falling off.

The problem at Walton Street may be further mitigated by a product currently being evaluated by Network Rail – veloSTRAIL where the flangeway gap has an inster which can be compressed by the rail wheel flanges, but remains almost flush with the rail when a road vehicle crosses.  It is hoped to see an installation very soon on a crossing in North Yorkshire with a particularly bad reputation, which also happens to be on a heavily used trunk road.

In this example the rail operator is a heritage railway and they face a substantial cost of maintaining a crossing surface which has seen the main cause of the damage arising from the weights and speeds of road traffic using the crossing, in this instance especially aggravated by a major construction project to upgrade the nearby A1 increasing the use of the road by HGV’s by substantial amount.  For Network Rail the resources are generally found to keep the crossing in a state where all road traffic can safely keep using it but changes in the volume and type of road traffic can impose a substantial cost outside the control of the railway operator, especially for private and heritage lines.

The wear of a panel type crossing can be aggravated by changes in the supporting elements for the crossing panels in the track and the threshold beam or other arrangement to mate with the road surface.  There is a key requirement to have crossings managed by staff who have the specialist knowledge of how the crossings are meant to work, who can ensure that the vertical alignment of  track and road threshold beams is maintained to the correct tolerances and where appropriate the units are installed on correctly spaced sleepers. Failure to do this can allow the units to flex and present a surface which fails to meet the flatness and other standards leading to potentially hazardous surface ridges & dips. 

Note : The use of panel type level crossings which compress the units firmly together prevents the classic slot hazard that can trap narrow wheels of wheelchairs prams & cycles. The STRAIL design uses threaded tie rods to pull the panels together individually and as a whole to maintain a high integrity of the surface with regard to flatness, inter-panel gaps, and alignment with the rail head levels, all potentially liable to cause the wheels of cycles, wheelchairs and prams to be deflected, or to trip up a pedestrian.

In addition to bridges and underpasses what other cost-effective measures can be introduced to replace or improve safety at level crossings?

The incident at Victory LC near Plymouth highlighted the need to deliver the pedestrian side-strips of sufficient width and continuity.  The use of  costlier heavy duty road crossing panels to provide the pedestrian strips can be avoided by using the facility to fit the lighter weight pedestrian level crossing units at the edges as a composite crossing, and in a number of locations crossings may benefit from the provision of more generous width of the pedestrian margins by adding lightweight pedestrian level crossing units.

PedeSTRAIL level crossing units are also used for off-street light rail and tram lines to provide a basic infilling between the rails and on the outer areas for crossing points and under run protection at tram stops. The sleeper spacing independent system means that a rubber, non slip surface, for the 4 foot and the side approach areas, can be readily installed on almost any standard plain rack with modern flat bottomed rail, and equally easily removed for track maintenance wherever a safe footway crossing is required. Use of special rubber compatible paint means that the crossing edges can be defined by a contrasting white or yellow band, and the option to fit LED or reflective elements to the crossing panels to further highlight the route is available.

The pedeSTRAIL system has the advantage over some earlier designs in that it can be driven over by road-rail vehicles now widely used for maintenance patrols, without the risk of straining the high friction treated sheeting often used to form the top surface, and it provides a shallower, closer fitting slot for the flangeway.    

How should expenditure on improving safety at level crossings be prioritised in relation to other demands on the rail budget?

The many of the early level crossings using panel construction have been in use for over 20 years, and the use of the roads at some locations has also changed substantially.  The budget for renewal and upgrading the road surfaces of level crossings needs to be regularly reviewed to take account of the changing use of the roads.

At the same time there is the desirable replacement of earlier types of level crossing which inhibit the use of modern high output track maintenance equipment    A budget for renewal of panel-type crossings based on the levels of traffic and age is generally planned for, but the potential for improving the surfaces of earlier types of level crossing may be an area to consider by way of upgrading to offer a safer crossing surface. 

Is Network Rail giving sufficient priority to improving safety at level crossings?

Network Rail have the resources to deal with level crossing surface problems, and with a planned inspection regime and public reporting of problems they get feedback on this, but there are additionally private and heritage rail systems, and off-street light rail lines which cross public roads  and, in terms of the maintaining the quality of the road surface, some of the operators may be less well resourced than Network Rail.

Is Government policy and regulatory action by the Office of Rail Regulation (ORR) in relation to safety at level crossings adequate? What more should the Government and ORR do?

The life of a level crossing is not infinite, especially if the routine removal and reinstallation after track maintenance, or the settlement of the threshold between the road surface and crossing, can introduce an added element of wear & tear to the way the panels transfer the road loadings to the track. Significant incidents arising through direct structural failures are rare thanks to the diligence of those maintaining the crossings, but the specialist detail of this interface between road & rail and impact of the road use especially on the condition of the crossing makes it desirable that crossings are effectively recorded on the rail asset register, to ensure rapid response in the event of damage requiring panel replacement.

With the the constraints placed on track maintenance by older types of level crossing, which cannot be removed and replaced as a routine operation there may be merit in planning a programme of crossing upgrading to deliver a National inventory of crossings to a more closely defined standard. This may also speed the elimination, where these cannot be closed, of  the types of crossing where pedestrian trips and falls, or vehicles grounding, losing control (mainly powered 2 wheelers and cycles) are more likely to occur and road users are required to observe warning signs, or take special care.

The facility for the public at large, using level crossings to report effectively the condition, of the crossing and any incidents arising due to that condition should be encouraged

How should the legislation governing level crossings be updated?

How should public awareness of safety at level crossings be improved?

The public should be encouraged to report defects thorough the available channels mostly through the number 08457 11 41 41, but where a potentially serious hazard arises thorough detachment of parts of the crossing equipment, to use the direct telephone to the signaller.  Where the railway is not operated by Network Rail the difference to be made clear at the crossing. 

September 2013