Train Horns causing disturbance

[whole diary]

[grahame]

I went along to the Town Council's planning meeting last week to support TransWilts' application for additional car parking and conversion of the utility building into the "Melksham Hub" and delighted that that had unanimous support as a planning application.

One member of the public present, however, was very concerned at plans described to increase passenger train numbers (in coming years?) from 9 to 13 each way per day, citing the noise from the train horns as disturbing her and her children's sleeping pattern since they moved there. I suspect that the "culprit" is the passenger foot crossing some 400 metres behind her home, about 1 km north of Melksham Station on - it has to be admitted - a not overused path (especially after dark, I suspect)

Looking up on Wikipedia, I find there are High and Low horns and they can be soft or loud:

H/L; Loud; General warning to individuals on or about railway tracks.
H; Loud; Emergency warning to individuals who are on the track or workers who fail to acknowledge a train's presence (Sounded Repeatedly.).
L; Loud; Used at Whistle boards (Between 0700 and 2300).
L; Soft; Warning signal when operating in depots or on sidings.
H; Loud; Used for special/local signal.
H; Loud; Wrong-direction movements, against normal railway traffic flow (Sounded at frequent intervals.).

A note on the page suggests that 07:00 to 23:00 may now be 06:00 to 00:00.

I rather suspect something akin to a storm in a teacup here ... but just sharing this interesting research.  As I understand it (having been involved in some of the earlier work to help work out the extra 4 trains each way) only one round trip would be sleepy-times anyway.  I rather suspect it's the freights - which run 24 hours rather than with a daytime concentration - that are so disturbing anyway.

We also had concerns from the residents of Beanacre when the train service was about to go up from 2 to each way per day in December 2013.  But they have a trunk A road passing right in front of their houses, and the railway is a field's width away - haven't heard from them since and I suspect the issue was more as to what might be than what transpired.

[bobm]

I remember the good residents of Wokingham getting riled when SWT^▸ (South West Trains) brought in the Class 458 trains.

Being a modern train compared to the old slam door stock the horns were noticeably louder.   After some work the noise was reduced and made more directional but still did the job.

However you can't run a railway without the ability of a train to warn of its approach and perhaps even outside "permitted hours" in case of an emergency.

[Celestial]

I wonder how long before we have a grieving family complaining that if a horn had been sounded then their loved one would still be with them.

[SandTEngineer]

I would like to take these people out onto the track and let the trains come without any form of warning.  Trains these days are very quiet and you don't hear them coming.

Anyway, I thought research showed that if the human brain is subjected to repeated sounds that it starts to filter them out and not let you hear the sound anymore.

[Reading General]

What a nation of individuals. The railway should move not me.

[broadgage]

I would like to take these people out onto the track and let the trains come without any form of warning.  Trains these days are very quiet and you don't hear them coming.

Anyway, I thought research showed that if the human brain is subjected to repeated sounds that it starts to filter them out and not let you hear the sound anymore.

I thought that trains were so loud that "children are thrown from their beds" by the noise and vibration

[RA]

Following relaxation of the rule book in response to noise pollution complaints, the current rule book requirement is for the horn to be sounded at a whistle board between the hours of 06:00 and 23:59. The hours were extended about a year ago (previously 07:00 to 23:00) as it was found a significant number of crossings were being used outside of these times. The current requirement is for only one tone (low) to be sounded. ASLEF^» (Associated Society of Locomotive Engineers and Firemen - about) have recently recommended that their members use both tones at whistle boards and are actively lobbying the relevant authorities to reinstate this rule. Two tones is audibly and unequivocally a train. One tone could be any vehicle, road or rail, and is not easily identifiable as one or the other.

A crossing user using a crossing protected only with a whistle board has to make a decision on whether it is safe to cross or not. The fact that a whistle board is provided means that the sighting time of an oncoming train is insufficient for the slowest users to be able to cross safely on sighting an approaching train. The audibility and identification of a warning as an approaching train is critical in using such crossings safely.

Replacement of crossings with alternatives  is the desired solution. Cost is the limiting factor. The expense of upgrading crossings with telephones or red and green lights is considerable. The cost of completely eradicating a crossing with a footbridge or underpass even more so. Closing rights of way and severing footpaths by just closing the crossing with no alternatives is not acceptable with crossing users.

[Bmblbzzz]

Horns might not be effective for deaf or hard of hearing crossing users. Red and green lights not for the visually impaired or colour blind. A combination of the two should reach almost everybody.

[grahame]

Expressing purely my own view.   Hmmmm ... I do feel that if someone moves, of their own choice, into a location where there's noise (we did that under the flight path of Luton Airport), smell (our house between the pig farm and the jam factory) or pitch blackness (the last house in the last village before Salisbury Plain) already existing or planned, they should expect and take any actions to modify their home. So - double glazing, sound / wind break hedge ...

But yet ... I cannot really imagine anyone using certain public footpaths in the hours of pitch blackness and just like there's a (very) few stations that are "daytime only" I wonder if that could be arranged for footpaths.

There are four foot crossings that I know of between Thingley Junction and Bradford Junction. The one mentioned here is the closest to a residential area.  One other has more limited residential not far from it; the other two are in a business area, and in the countryside.   I could guess at numbers using them and the numbers are all very low - cost would be thousands of pounds per person crossing on three of them if significant work were to be done.

[Bmblbzzz]

Without any barriers to lock, how would a crossing time limit be enforceable?

[grahame]

Without any barriers to lock, how would a crossing time limit be enforceable?

Goodness only knows ... I admit.   But then there are other rules (fewer in recent years) where enforcement comes largely from people simply following the rules.   Sign. "This crossing is open from 06:30 to 20:30 only. Outside those hours, members of the public on the crossing will be regarded as trespassing on the railway, and will be subject to a fine of up to £1000"

[broadgage]

Without any barriers to lock, how would a crossing time limit be enforceable?

It could not be enforced in practice, but the idea still has some merit IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion). Advertise the permitted hours of use and anyone crossing outside of those hours does so at their own risk, and as above might be prosecuted for trespass.

[Bmblbzzz]

I'm not sure of the legal status of a crossing. Is it part of the road or (in this case) footpath or is it legally part of the railway? Or both? I suspect probably both, but I don't know. Anyway, the legal costs of passing such a traffic order (or whatever the legal mechanism is) might be significant. More to the point, while it might cover the railway legally, if someone was killed on a crossing outside permitted hours the legal point would hardly console relatives and friends, nor I should think the train driver.

I'm not sure this is a practical answer to train horn disturbance at whistle boards, but then I'm not sure what is. Perhaps double glazing? I suspect that in practice a lot of people just get used to it, as suggested earlier.

[broadgage]

Perhaps the rules on sounding the train horn for crossings could be relaxed if the crossings were equipped with visual warnings.
The presently used miniature red and green lights are not ideal for those with colour blindness. Several alternatives come to mind.
Firstly, what about a horizontal line of red lights for stop, and a vertical line of green lights for go ? (A bit like tramway signals, but with coloured lights)
Or alternatively a steady green light for go, and a flashing red light for stop ?
Both would be discernible by the colour blind, but still retain the traditional red-green colours.
Or red for stop and bluish green for go, as used for traffic lights in Japan. Almost all colour blind people can see these colours.

Any of the above are readily achieved with LED lighting.

[CyclingSid]

I seem to remember some years ago there were similar complaints about Sonning Cutting.

On the wider complaints issue, I can remember when Greenham Common was an active airfield, people moving in and then complaining about the aircraft noise??

I had the reverse problem this morning cycling to work, having been cut up by a car I happen to look over my shoulder to find an ambulance on my tail with blues on but no horns. Usually they sound the horns if there is anybody within sight.