From: nilknocgeo@earthlink.net   
      
   "Adam H. Kerman"  wrote in message   
   news:mbt1k5$6rq$6@news.albasani.net...   
   > Marc Van Dyck  wrote:   
   >>rcp27g@gmail.com explained on 13-02-15 :   
   >   
   >>>or putting in positive singalling control on others (ie where the   
   >>>crossing is protected by railway signals that aren't cleared for the   
   >>>train until the barriers are down and the crossing positively checked   
   >>>to be clear).   
   >   
   >>This is perfectly feasable but requires to order the gates to go down   
   >>at a distance that is longer than the braking distance of the train.   
   >>This means there will be a long delay between the gate going down and   
   >>the train actually passing the grade crossing. As it has been   
   >>mentioned,   
   >>motorists are unpatient creatures; if the delay is too long, people   
   >>think the gates are faulty and start turning around them. You might end   
   >>up this way with a grade crossing that is inherently less safe, because   
   >>of human nature...   
   >   
   > Not only that, we don't care about the risk created by drivers that   
   > clear the grade crossing more than 20 seconds before the train gets there.   
   > It's the ones who violate the crossing within the last 10 seconds that   
   > cause all the mayhem, as this woman did.   
      
   A few years ago I stopped at a crossing where the automated gate was going   
   about halfway down and then back up again.  It did this for 5 minutes.  So I   
   phoned the number on the gate, and the woman there said she could not give   
   me permission to corss the tracks, although the signal was being worked on.   
   No one was visible, so the work must have been on a curve out of sight.  The   
   lights were also flashing.  Finally I just went on home, as did those behind   
   me. It was daylight.   
      
   --- SoupGate/W32 v1.03   
    * Origin: LiveWire BBS -=*=- UseNet FTN Gateway (1:2320/1)