Tailgating (was: Opinions on smart motorways)

[Helvellyn]

Legally a red light is absolute other than for blue light emergencies - technically a police officer cannot beckon you to go through on red, but can stop you from passing on green.

Do you have a reference for that? I thought a police officer could override traffic lights, but level crossings are sacrosanct and cannot be overruled by the emergency services.

Is that down to a legalities of level crossings or the legalities of wig-wags?

[Chris Bertram]

Is that down to a legalities of level crossings or the legalities of wig-wags?

Level crossings, I think. Remember that technically it's rail infrastructure, not road.

[mikehindsonevans]

Is that down to a legalities of level crossings or the legalities of wig-wags?

More likely that PC Plod realises that, in an argument between 800 tons of HST doing 100mph (which is, I think the max line speed for level crossings to remain on a main line) and a 20-ton fire engine or three-ton ambulance asking for priority with its blue lights, the result is usually 1-nil.

Mike

[AndyB]

The wording of TSRGD says it applies to any wigwags, but as they're also used for lifting bridges and other occasions where disobeying them for any reason could be suicidal, that's not surprising.

Otherwise, yes, I imagine that it is everything to do with the railway having priority, as well as the fact that at AHBs train drivers expect the crossing to be clear, and at ABCLs and AOCLs train drivers expect the crossing to stay clear once they have made their visual check - in both cases, trains cannot stop on sight.

AHB maximum permissible railway speed limit is 100mph, ABCL and AOCL max speed is 55mph (less if necessary to ensure that when the crossing first comes in sight the driver can safely brake to a halt), but because full barrier crossings are fully signalled for trains and sealed off when closed to road traffic, there is no upper limit.

Direct instructions were issued some years ago to the various territorial police forces (and presumably also to BTP) that they must not under any circumstances signal road users through level crossings.

[J--M--B]

Is that down to a legalities of level crossings or the legalities of wig-wags?

Level crossings, I think. Remember that technically it's rail infrastructure, not road.

I thought it was a blanket rule for the wig-wags even though they are also used in other locations.

[J--M--B]

More likely that PC Plod realises that, in an argument between 800 tons of HST doing 100mph (which is, I think the max line speed for level crossings to remain on a main line) and a 20-ton fire engine or three-ton ambulance asking for priority with its blue lights, the result is usually 1-nil.

Mike

Though some police seem to have a grudge against some ambulance service (and similar) vehicles and many have been booked for speeding. So the an ambulance driver might get some satisfaction from getting a police driver booked for ignoring the wig-wag.

[J--M--B]

The wording of TSRGD says it applies to any wigwags, but as they're also used for lifting bridges and other occasions where disobeying them for any reason could be suicidal, that's not surprising.

But if the lights are fault at a swing bridge and the bridge is in position then there would be little danger in driving across with the speed they operate. I have seen a few times roadworkers at swing bridges leaving the wig-wags flashing in addition to their temporary traffic lights.

[AndyB]

It still needs to be verified that the bridge is locked in position and the lights are faulty.

(do I need to change the subject line again?)

[Rob590]

It's worth resurrecting this old article by Paul Ripley:

Slow Driving and Safe Driving

Ha! While a lot of that article is quite empty rhetoric, I did enjoy the line about

drivers who travel everywhere at a steady 40mph - 20mph below the speed limit on the open road, but 10mph above the limit in villages and towns -

The 'never not 40' driver as we call them in our family is always the most interesting and frustrating to spot!

[Fenlander]

Legally a red light is absolute other than for blue light emergencies - technically a police officer cannot beckon you to go through on red, but can stop you from passing on green.

Do you have a reference for that? I thought a police officer could override traffic lights, but level crossings are sacrosanct and cannot be overruled by the emergency services.

The level crossing thing is certainly true, we've had lots of problems with the new crossings in town (and the whole GNGE line in general) suffering from faulty sensors and 'failing safe', by which they mean nothing can proceed (the lights flash but the barrier doesn't come down). On many occasions the police have had to physically block the road to prevent people(*) from crossing when the red lights are flashing but the barriers are raised. An hour later an engineer arrives, clears the fault, the lights go out and everything starts moving again.

(*) I say people, mostly drivers won't cross as they've got licences at risk but cyclists and pedestrians haven't so they'll chance it on the basis that they can see far enough down the line to know there's no train.

[Big L]

It still needs to be verified that the bridge is locked in position and the lights are faulty.

(do I need to change the subject line again?)

Not until there is another massive thread drift. Stay one behind !!

[ais523]

My bicycle operates loops if you cycle over the embedded wires, but I imagine it would be different if it was carbon fibre.

Legally a red light is absolute other than for blue light emergencies - technically a police officer cannot beckon you to go through on red, but can stop you from passing on green - but the police are reasonable in any situation without a camera where loops do not detect you. Benefit of the doubt and all that.

There was a situation in Northfield a while ago (the junction complex between the old and new routes of the A38, and the B4121) in which a technical failure had somehow caused the lights to go red in every direction and get stuck there.

What happened was long queues waiting at the lights for several minutes, then eventually traffic from some direction concluding that they'd failed, and all going through in a platoon. Eventually someone sufficiently far back to have missed the original commotion would see the red light and stop, leading to another minutes-long waiting game.

Were all the drivers in the area breaking the law? Or is there an exception for cases in which the lights are clearly malfunctioning?

[AndyB]

My opinion is that it's illegal according to the letter of the law, but the police appear to be pragmatic about it unless some idiot causes a collision.

There is a reason why I didn't consider going through a normal traffic light clearly stuck on red due to a fault, prepared to stop before someone can crash into you to be suicidal

[ManomayLR]

What happened to our title?

[crowntown100]

What happened to our title?

+1. Surely the Tailgating and Level Crossing discussions should be split (or have I missed the explanation)?

[Jeni]

My opinion is that it's illegal according to the letter of the law, but the police appear to be pragmatic about it unless some idiot causes a collision.

There is a reason why I didn't consider going through a normal traffic light clearly stuck on red due to a fault, prepared to stop before someone can crash into you to be suicidal

As with everything, common sense has to apply. I had to drive through a no entry today because the other way out of our 'estate' was closed for resurfacing. The other option was to sit and wait until the weekend when they finished resurfacing!

[ManomayLR]

My opinion is that it's illegal according to the letter of the law, but the police appear to be pragmatic about it unless some idiot causes a collision.

There is a reason why I didn't consider going through a normal traffic light clearly stuck on red due to a fault, prepared to stop before someone can crash into you to be suicidal

As with everything, common sense has to apply. I had to drive through a no entry today because the other way out of our 'estate' was closed for resurfacing. The other option was to sit and wait until the weekend when they finished resurfacing!

Yes of course common sense prevails...

[Bendo]

So a lorry driver has been jailed for killing Anthony Marston whilst testing on the M6 around J10 whilst the hard shoulder was being used as a running lane.

Not great that the safety systems identify a stopped vehicle so quickly and close the lane, instead you are reliant entirely on people paying full attention.

[Chris5156]

Not great that the safety systems identify a stopped vehicle so quickly and close the lane, instead you are reliant entirely on people paying full attention.

I think you're always reliant on people paying full attention. People causing accidents by not paying full attention happens on all kinds of road, not just Smart Motorways.

[ais523]

I was pleasantly surprised when I drove through M1 J28-32 last month that they have been very conservative on barriering off the verge, a lot of the hard shoulder is exactly as it was before the scheme except for some new surfacing and new markings, which is better than the HSR/ALR schemes down south which have perfectly good verge blocked off. Of course, if you break down you should exit the vehicle and be up on the embankment so if the vehicle doesn't get hit there's no risk of injury to yourselves.

Now that the M6 J2-J4 scheme has changed over to working on the central reservation rather than the verge, it's become clear that they're using the same technique. There's a verge barrier, but it's easily far enough away from Lane 1 that you could open a passenger door in between. (The space in between is mostly taken up by a very large drain; the consultation feedback discussed the need for better drainage, and that's presumably how it's being implemented.)