On 13/04/2022 22:04, Recliner wrote:
> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:48:51 +0100, Bevan Price
>> <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 12/04/2022 13:24, Recliner wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:47:46 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:18:36 +0100, Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 12:11, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:23:03 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:08:35 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I think OP needs to rephrase the question.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I suppose the distilled question is, "Why are passengers allowed to
>>>>>>> walk across tram tracks, but not light railway
>>>>>>> tracks?".
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Because trams usually run on roads, and pedestrians are allowed to walk
>>>>>> across roads (and along them, even at level crossings). Light railways
>>>>>> generally seem to be fenced, perhaps because they used to be heavy rail.
>>>>>
>>>>> This is a circular argument. Pedestrians are allowed because trams
>>>>> run on roads. But on what basis are the trams allowed to run on a
>>>>> road? The question seems to be: what are the defining criteria?
>>>>
>>>> Trams in the UK usually run much more on segregated track than roads,
>>>> and they usually run faster on such sections. But
>>>> passengers can still walk across the tracks, particularly at stops.
>>>
>>>
>>> On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>> road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>
>>> That can make Metrolink progress painfully slow through Manchester city
>>> centre, and, for example, on parts of the Eccles route.
>>>
>> Trams are not a class of traffic to which the normal speed limit signs
>> apply; they are not mechanically propelled vehicles "intended or
>> adapted" for road use :-
>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tram-motor-vehicle-daniel-rothel
>>
>> The standard round signs also thus do not apply to e.g. pedal cycles
>> or horse/horse-drawn traffic. Trams have their own diamond-shaped
>> signs (in KPH not MPH) which can be used on or off a highway.
>> https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf
>> That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
>> than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
>> system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
>> 45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
>> much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.
>>
>
> The Croydon trams used to run at up to 80 km/h (now reduced), and I think
> other UK trams are similar(eg, NET, Metrolink 80 km/h, Sheffield 90 km/h).
>

I believe that some of the T3s in the Czech Republic can move at 80-100
kilometres.

On 13/04/2022 21:40, Charles Ellson wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:48:51 +0100, Bevan Price
> <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On 12/04/2022 13:24, Recliner wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:47:46 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:18:36 +0100, Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/04/2022 12:11, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:23:03 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:08:35 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I think OP needs to rephrase the question.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I suppose the distilled question is, "Why are passengers allowed to walk across tram tracks, but not light railway
>>>>>> tracks?".
>>>>>
>>>>> Because trams usually run on roads, and pedestrians are allowed to walk
>>>>> across roads (and along them, even at level crossings). Light railways
>>>>> generally seem to be fenced, perhaps because they used to be heavy rail.
>>>>
>>>> This is a circular argument. Pedestrians are allowed because trams
>>>> run on roads. But on what basis are the trams allowed to run on a
>>>> road? The question seems to be: what are the defining criteria?
>>>
>>> Trams in the UK usually run much more on segregated track than roads, and they usually run faster on such sections. But
>>> passengers can still walk across the tracks, particularly at stops.
>>
>>
>> On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>> road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>
>> That can make Metrolink progress painfully slow through Manchester city
>> centre, and, for example, on parts of the Eccles route.
>>
> Trams are not a class of traffic to which the normal speed limit signs
> apply; they are not mechanically propelled vehicles "intended or
> adapted" for road use :-
> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tram-motor-vehicle-daniel-rothel
>
> The standard round signs also thus do not apply to e.g. pedal cycles
> or horse/horse-drawn traffic. Trams have their own diamond-shaped
> signs (in KPH not MPH) which can be used on or off a highway.
> https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf
> That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
> than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
> system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
> 45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
> much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.

Many thanks for this.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:04:31 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:48:51 +0100, Bevan Price
>>> <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 12/04/2022 13:24, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:47:46 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:18:36 +0100, Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 12:11, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:23:03 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:08:35 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>>>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I think OP needs to rephrase the question.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I suppose the distilled question is, "Why are passengers allowed to
>>>>>>>> walk across tram tracks, but not light railway
>>>>>>>> tracks?".
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Because trams usually run on roads, and pedestrians are allowed to walk
>>>>>>> across roads (and along them, even at level crossings). Light railways
>>>>>>> generally seem to be fenced, perhaps because they used to be heavy rail.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> This is a circular argument. Pedestrians are allowed because trams
>>>>>> run on roads. But on what basis are the trams allowed to run on a
>>>>>> road? The question seems to be: what are the defining criteria?
>>>>>
>>>>> Trams in the UK usually run much more on segregated track than roads,
>>>>> and they usually run faster on such sections. But
>>>>> passengers can still walk across the tracks, particularly at stops.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>>> road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>>
>>>> That can make Metrolink progress painfully slow through Manchester city
>>>> centre, and, for example, on parts of the Eccles route.
>>>>
>>> Trams are not a class of traffic to which the normal speed limit signs
>>> apply; they are not mechanically propelled vehicles "intended or
>>> adapted" for road use :-
>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tram-motor-vehicle-daniel-rothel
>>>
>>> The standard round signs also thus do not apply to e.g. pedal cycles
>>> or horse/horse-drawn traffic. Trams have their own diamond-shaped
>>> signs (in KPH not MPH) which can be used on or off a highway.
>>> https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf
>>> That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
>>> than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
>>> system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
>>> 45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
>>> much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.
>>>
>>
>> The Croydon trams used to run at up to 80 km/h (now reduced), and I think
>> other UK trams are similar(eg, NET, Metrolink 80 km/h, Sheffield 90 km/h).
>>
> Wonkypaedia and others indicate 70kph/43mph as a general limit for
> Croydon which would be a near match to many 4-lane 40mph
> dual-carriageways if there are any on the system.
>

The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track, and nothing to
do with road speed limits. The accident occurred as a tram was coming off
such a section, going round a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street
urban section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only on
town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.

The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
<https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-72157676976959855/>

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 22:20:27 +0100, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
<hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:

>On 13/04/2022 22:08, Charles Ellson wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 15:19:17 +0100, "hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk"
>> <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 13/04/2022 13:31, Mark Goodge wrote:
>>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 11:43:33 +0200, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Am 12.04.2022 um 23:47 schrieb hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk:
>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 18:48, Bevan Price wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>>>>>> road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Really? I thought that unsgregated trams in the UK were subject to their
>>>>>> own signal signs and signals, which can differ from road regulations.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That is the case in Germany, AFAIK.
>>>>>
>>>>> Let's be very precise: In Germany, trams on the road have to obey the
>>>>> same road traffic rules as busses with the exception of not being able
>>>>> to chose which lane to drive in; I would strongly speculate this is the
>>>>> same in UK (and is one reason not to build any "trams on the road").
>>>>
>>>> It's not quite the same. For example, traffic lights don't apply to
>>>> trams - at light-controlled junctions, trams will always have their own
>>>> signals which will be the same as on off-road sections. Obviously, these
>>>> will change in sync with the traffic lights on shared sections, but both
>>>> will always be present.
>>>>
>>>> Signs giving instructions for mandatory or prohibited turns also don't
>>>> apply to trams, but other signs do, unless explicitly overridden by
>>>> tram-specific signs. That includes speed limits.
>>>>
>>>> There's a good example of that here on a shared section in Manchester:
>>>>
>>>> https://goo.gl/maps/MrKUvsd38qmvSaqs6
>>>>
>>>> The tram has a tram signal alongside the traffic lights, which don't
>>>> apply to trams. And if you zoom in on the sign you can see that the "All
>>>> traffic must turn left" instruction (the white on blue arrow) has an
>>>> exception for cycles, but not trams - because trams are exempt from any
>>>> signage instruction on where to go, because of course they cannot
>>>> possibly obey them anyway (or have no choice but to obey them). There's
>>>> also a separate tram speed limit here (the diamond 10), which overrides
>>>> the normal urban road speed limit.
>>>>
>>>> If you go a little further along, though, to the point where it ceases
>>>> to be shared by motor vehicles, we get this sign:
>>>>
>>>> https://goo.gl/maps/1x4F5Hy4FX7KxFxv7
>>>>
>>>> In this case, this "no entry" sign has an exception for both cycles and
>>>> trams, indicating that, unlike the "turn left" sign earlier, it would
>>>> apply to trams unless an exception was granted.
>>>>
>>>>> Other road traffic in Germany occasionally has special rules with
>>>>> respect to trams: a tram going straight ahead in the right lane has
>>>>> priority over a car turning right from the middle lane (just like a
>>>>> bicycle in the right bike lane has prirority over a car turning right
>>>> >from the main lane).
>>>>
>>>> The UK doesn't have that rule, but it does have a rule that you can't
>>>> pass a tram on the left when it has stopped to pick up passengers, even
>>>> if there is otherwise a lane between the tram and the kerb and passing
>>>> on the left would otherwise be allowed by the general rule permitting it
>>>> when traffic is slow-moving or stationary.
>>>>
>>>>> There are also special rules for passing trams at a tram stop in the
>>>>> middle of the road.
>>>>>
>>>>> Within the last 20-30 years, mixed traffic is mostly being replaced by
>>>>> separate tram lanes with separate traffic lights for busses and trams
>>>>> etc. Special lane theoretically can have special lane speed restrictions.
>>>>
>>>> The UK has, to a great extent, learned from European experience and only
>>>> has shared use lanes where the road simply isn't wide enough for
>>>> segregated traffic.
>>>>
>>>> Mark
>>>
>>>
>>> In a word, trams have their own operating rules. And cars have to afford
>>> them right of way.
>>>
>> Only if a sign or general rule requires it.I don't recall any
>> location in e.g. Croydon where a tram can randomly introduce itself
>> into road traffic without signage, traffic lights or a general rule
>> (traffic or otherwise) preventing it.
>
>All trams are subject to their signals and signal signs, like I said.
>But when they have permission to move, they have right of way
>
"Permission" implies signalling which (where there is a road junction
involved) should have coordinated road traffic lights. Otherwise tram
driving in the UK is generally unsignalled and without requirement for
a move to be "permitted".

Rule 305 of the Highway Code (for example) attributes no specific
right of way for a tram -
"Always give priority to trams, especially when they signal to pull
away from stops, unless it would be unsafe to do so. Remember that
they may be carrying large numbers of standing passengers who could be
injured if the tram had to make an emergency stop. Look out for people
getting off a bus or tram and crossing the road."

Note "unless", the absence of either "MUST [NOT]" or "SHOULD [NOT]" or
any reference to an Act/Regulation (unlike e.g Rules 302,303).

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:34:57 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:04:31 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:48:51 +0100, Bevan Price
>>>> <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/04/2022 13:24, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:47:46 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:18:36 +0100, Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 12:11, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:23:03 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:08:35 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>>>>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think OP needs to rephrase the question.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I suppose the distilled question is, "Why are passengers allowed to
>>>>>>>>> walk across tram tracks, but not light railway
>>>>>>>>> tracks?".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because trams usually run on roads, and pedestrians are allowed to walk
>>>>>>>> across roads (and along them, even at level crossings). Light railways
>>>>>>>> generally seem to be fenced, perhaps because they used to be heavy rail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a circular argument. Pedestrians are allowed because trams
>>>>>>> run on roads. But on what basis are the trams allowed to run on a
>>>>>>> road? The question seems to be: what are the defining criteria?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trams in the UK usually run much more on segregated track than roads,
>>>>>> and they usually run faster on such sections. But
>>>>>> passengers can still walk across the tracks, particularly at stops.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>>>> road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> That can make Metrolink progress painfully slow through Manchester city
>>>>> centre, and, for example, on parts of the Eccles route.
>>>>>
>>>> Trams are not a class of traffic to which the normal speed limit signs
>>>> apply; they are not mechanically propelled vehicles "intended or
>>>> adapted" for road use :-
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tram-motor-vehicle-daniel-rothel
>>>>
>>>> The standard round signs also thus do not apply to e.g. pedal cycles
>>>> or horse/horse-drawn traffic. Trams have their own diamond-shaped
>>>> signs (in KPH not MPH) which can be used on or off a highway.
>>>> https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf
>>>> That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
>>>> than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
>>>> system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
>>>> 45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
>>>> much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The Croydon trams used to run at up to 80 km/h (now reduced), and I think
>>> other UK trams are similar(eg, NET, Metrolink 80 km/h, Sheffield 90 km/h).
>>>
>> Wonkypaedia and others indicate 70kph/43mph as a general limit for
>> Croydon which would be a near match to many 4-lane 40mph
>> dual-carriageways if there are any on the system.
>>
>
>The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track, and nothing to
>do with road speed limits. The accident occurred as a tram was coming off
>such a section, going round a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street
>urban section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only on
>town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>
>The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
><https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-72157676976959855/>
>
Some on-street signs visible in Google Streetview go down to 20 and
25kph.
I suspect there might be a general but unsigned speed limit lower than
70kph for on-street running. Most speed limits related to specific
types of road traffic are generally unsigned. In both cases it is
reasonable to expect that the drivers know their specific speed
limits.

Mark Goodge <usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 14:16:39 +0100, Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>
>> On 13/04/2022 13:31, Mark Goodge wrote:
>
>>> It's not quite the same. For example, traffic lights don't apply to
>>> trams - at light-controlled junctions, trams will always have their own
>>> signals which will be the same as on off-road sections. Obviously, these
>>> will change in sync with the traffic lights on shared sections, but both
>>> will always be present.
>>
>> Even that's not obvious. The signal on the right here shows green for
>> road vehicles but stop for trams (which would have to make a conflicting
>> move by turning left from the right lane to avoid a sharper curve).
>> <https://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/3863947>
>
> That's not shared use at that point, though. As you approach the signal,
> trams and road vehicles are in different, albeit adjacent, lanes. So the
> signals can differ, just as traffic lights can have different
> indications for traffic in adjacent lanes.
>
> That's more easily seen on Google street view; the trams have segregated
> lanes in the centre of the road but, at this point, need to cross the
> westbound vehicle lane at the junction.
>
> https://goo.gl/maps/uPgNKGAqKmEUxBQx5

There are a number of examples of shared lanes with traffic lights showing
different aspects for motor vehicles and trams around Atholl Place between
the West End and Haymarket, e.g.

<https://goo.gl/maps/n4qX9Huzf21JpwdN7>

They’re not really a very helpful example, though, since the tram signals
only change when a tram approaches and there is no conflict between the
tram and motor traffic so there is no evidence of any priority.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <t34dlg$89a$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 17:42:08 on Tue, 12 Apr
> 2022, muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 06:24:22 +0100
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <t3258p$4t6$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:06:33 on Mon, 11 Apr
>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> I thought 'light railways' (like preserved railways) were limited to 25mph,
>>>> whereas trams go up to 50mph (or more?). Yet tram stops, even in
>>>> segregated sections, allow passengers to freely walk across the tracks,
>>>> with no fences or barriers.
>>>
>>> Trams have many safety features to deflect pedestrians rather than crush
>>
>> I wouldn't want to put them to the test.
>>
>>> them, and when street-running ding their bell frequently.
>>>
>>> Wasn't the OP really asking about *miniature* railways like the one at
>>> Longleat?
>>
>> No. I was asking about where the dividing line is between railways where
>> people can meander along and across and ones where there is strict segregation.
>
> Even the ECML still has a couple of level crossings one can wander
> across.

I don’t know if they’re still there, but there certainly used to be
pedestrian crossings on the ECML near Belford in Northumberland with no
protection, just a stile. I’ve moaned before about one of them crossing a
siding with a rake of wagons parked on it. I don’t think that particular
siding exists any more, but there must be other places like that.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:49:05 +0100, Scott
> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 11:30:24 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:23:03 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:08:35 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>
>>>>> I think OP needs to rephrase the question.
>>>>
>>>> I suppose the distilled question is, "Why are passengers allowed to walk
>>>> across tram tracks, but not light railway
>>>> tracks?".
>>>>
>>>
>>> It’s probably slightly more complex than that. This place has a train:
>>>
>>> <http://www.eastlinks.co.uk/>
>>> <https://goo.gl/maps/hHmicsUZTCL9a2rj6>
>>>
>>> but the track is completely segregated and fenced except for two (or
>>> three?) places, either side of the single station, where footways cross the
>>> track. There is no protection for pedestrians except for the train
>>> announcing its presence, but there are partial fences and no entry signs
>>> for pedestrians at the crossings.
>>>
>>> So this is probably a light railway - it’s certainly not a tram - but
>>> pedestrians are allowed to walk across the tracks at certain, well
>>> specified points, with no gates and no warning other than the train’s
>>> whistle.
>>>
>> Are there any national rail stations where passengers can cross the
>> tracks? I certainly remember this from the past.
>>
> West Highland Line ?

See the several previous answers to this posting!

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <2lbe5h9bhsb8sph9b4ukcno79vbruhkeb8@4ax.com>, at 21:40:27 on
Wed, 13 Apr 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
remarked:

>https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf

>That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
>than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
>system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
>45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
>much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.

There are numerous UK tramways built for 80kph operation, and while
several operated certain sections at that speed, recently most (eg
Nottingham, Croydon, Sheffield) have reportedly reduced their maximum
speed to 70kph, apart from Metrolink.

It's mainly to do with line-of-sight operation, as far as I can tell,
not safety of pedestrians crossing the line (which typically they are
allowed to do at stations, even on off-road sections).
--
Roland Perry

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 22:03:31 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:49:05 +0100, Scott
>> <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 11:30:24 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
>>> <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:23:03 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:08:35 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I think OP needs to rephrase the question.
>>>>>
>>>>> I suppose the distilled question is, "Why are passengers allowed to walk
>>>>> across tram tracks, but not light railway
>>>>> tracks?".
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It?s probably slightly more complex than that. This place has a train:
>>>>
>>>> <http://www.eastlinks.co.uk/>
>>>> <https://goo.gl/maps/hHmicsUZTCL9a2rj6>
>>>>
>>>> but the track is completely segregated and fenced except for two (or
>>>> three?) places, either side of the single station, where footways cross the
>>>> track. There is no protection for pedestrians except for the train
>>>> announcing its presence, but there are partial fences and no entry signs
>>>> for pedestrians at the crossings.
>>>>
>>>> So this is probably a light railway - it?s certainly not a tram - but
>>>> pedestrians are allowed to walk across the tracks at certain, well
>>>> specified points, with no gates and no warning other than the train?s
>>>> whistle.
>>>>
>>> Are there any national rail stations where passengers can cross the
>>> tracks? I certainly remember this from the past.
>>>
>> West Highland Line ?
>
>See the several previous answers to this posting!
>
I saw yours for Arisaig but I thought there were one or two other
stations with island platforms and no footbridge.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:17:49 +0200
Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>Am 13.04.2022 um 17:53 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com:
>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:41:10 +0200
>> Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>> Am 13.04.2022 um 17:22 schrieb Recliner:
>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>> On 13/04/2022 11:46, Peter Johnson wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:50:15 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Didn't Leeds play with a guided bus system?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I don't think so. It did get powers to build a tram system but it
>>>>>> wasn't build because it couldn't get funding.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's up with the ULR project in Coventry, BTW?
>>>>>
>>>>> Or is that just another pipe dream?
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> It seems to be trundling along, but I suspect the funding for actual
>>>> construction hasn't been secured yet. So it's really more of a
>>>> proof-of-concept research project at the moment than a real, committed
>>>> project:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
><https://www.railway-technology.com/analysis/coventrys-very-light-solution-appr
>
>>> oaches/>
>>>
>>> To be blunt, it's a research project with little expected real-life
>>> benefit compared to the existing alternative solutions:
>>>
>>> Battery-powered electric busses would be cheaper and more flexible,
>>
>> I think the jury is still out on whether they'll be cheaper over the lifetime
>
>> of the bus because how long the very expensive batteries will last before the
>
>> range falls to a point where they need to be changed is still unknown.
>
>But that's the same issue whether you use battery-powered busses or a
>battery-powered tram.

True. Though I think battery powered trams are an absurd idea. Their only
raison d'etre is to stop nimbies complaining about overhead wires yet there
already are a number of discrete embedded 3rd rail systems for trams which
could be used instead. The most obvious one has been used since electric trams
were invented.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 19:35:40 +0100
Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>In message <t34g4k$1dtr$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 18:24:21 on Tue, 12 Apr
>2022, muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:48:51 +0100
>>Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>On 12/04/2022 13:24, Recliner wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:47:46 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>wrote:
>>>> Trams in the UK usually run much more on segregated track than roads, and
>>>they usually run faster on such sections. But
>>>> passengers can still walk across the tracks, particularly at stops.
>>>
>>>
>>>On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>>road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>
>>>That can make Metrolink progress painfully slow through Manchester city
>>>centre, and, for example, on parts of the Eccles route.
>>
>>For the (current) price of the waste of money called HS2, Manchester, Brum,
>>Leeds and [pick a couple more cities] could have built proper underground
>>systems built, not just cut price trams (except for leeds which got nothing
>>and AFAIK is the largest connurbation in europe without a local rail PT
>>system of any sort).
>
>That'll come as news to my friend who lived in Headingly and took the
>train into work (in the City Centre).

You seem to get confused very often these days. Since when does a line heading
to York count as local rail? Perhaps Sheffield shouldn't have bothered with
its tram, its got the BR Meadowhall station after all. Thats PT sorted, right?

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:11:40 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:17:49 +0200
>Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>Am 13.04.2022 um 17:53 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com:
>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:41:10 +0200
>>> Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>>> Am 13.04.2022 um 17:22 schrieb Recliner:
>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 13/04/2022 11:46, Peter Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:50:15 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Didn't Leeds play with a guided bus system?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think so. It did get powers to build a tram system but it
>>>>>>> wasn't build because it couldn't get funding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's up with the ULR project in Coventry, BTW?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or is that just another pipe dream?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems to be trundling along, but I suspect the funding for actual
>>>>> construction hasn't been secured yet. So it's really more of a
>>>>> proof-of-concept research project at the moment than a real, committed
>>>>> project:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>><https://www.railway-technology.com/analysis/coventrys-very-light-solution-appr
>>
>>>> oaches/>
>>>>
>>>> To be blunt, it's a research project with little expected real-life
>>>> benefit compared to the existing alternative solutions:
>>>>
>>>> Battery-powered electric busses would be cheaper and more flexible,
>>>
>>> I think the jury is still out on whether they'll be cheaper over the lifetime
>>
>>> of the bus because how long the very expensive batteries will last before the
>>
>>> range falls to a point where they need to be changed is still unknown.
>>
>>But that's the same issue whether you use battery-powered busses or a
>>battery-powered tram.
>
>True. Though I think battery powered trams are an absurd idea. Their only
>raison d'etre is to stop nimbies complaining about overhead wires yet there
>already are a number of discrete embedded 3rd rail systems for trams which
>could be used instead. The most obvious one has been used since electric trams
>were invented.

Conduit in the LCC area.

I thought it was far more heavy maintenance than overhead wires and
less reliable.

Nimbys my a45e. I like the overhead wires as an art form and an
addition to the streetscape.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:59:28 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
<ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:

>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <t34dlg$89a$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 17:42:08 on Tue, 12 Apr
>> 2022, muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 06:24:22 +0100
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <t3258p$4t6$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:06:33 on Mon, 11 Apr
>>>> 2022, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> I thought 'light railways' (like preserved railways) were limited to 25mph,
>>>>> whereas trams go up to 50mph (or more?). Yet tram stops, even in
>>>>> segregated sections, allow passengers to freely walk across the tracks,
>>>>> with no fences or barriers.
>>>>
>>>> Trams have many safety features to deflect pedestrians rather than crush
>>>
>>> I wouldn't want to put them to the test.
>>>
>>>> them, and when street-running ding their bell frequently.
>>>>
>>>> Wasn't the OP really asking about *miniature* railways like the one at
>>>> Longleat?
>>>
>>> No. I was asking about where the dividing line is between railways where
>>> people can meander along and across and ones where there is strict segregation.
>>
>> Even the ECML still has a couple of level crossings one can wander
>> across.
>
>I don’t know if they’re still there, but there certainly used to be
>pedestrian crossings on the ECML near Belford in Northumberland with no
>protection, just a stile. I’ve moaned before about one of them crossing a
>siding with a rake of wagons parked on it. I don’t think that particular
>siding exists any more, but there must be other places like that.
>
Que? Why would you moan about that?

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 13:31:46 +0100, Mark Goodge
<usenet@listmail.good-stuff.co.uk> wrote:

>On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 11:43:33 +0200, Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de>
>wrote:
>
>>Am 12.04.2022 um 23:47 schrieb hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk:
>>> On 12/04/2022 18:48, Bevan Price wrote:
>>
>>>> On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>>> road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Really? I thought that unsgregated trams in the UK were subject to their
>>> own signal signs and signals, which can differ from road regulations.
>>>
>>> That is the case in Germany, AFAIK.
>>
>>Let's be very precise: In Germany, trams on the road have to obey the
>>same road traffic rules as busses with the exception of not being able
>>to chose which lane to drive in; I would strongly speculate this is the
>>same in UK (and is one reason not to build any "trams on the road").
>
>It's not quite the same. For example, traffic lights don't apply to
>trams - at light-controlled junctions, trams will always have their own
>signals which will be the same as on off-road sections. Obviously, these
>will change in sync with the traffic lights on shared sections, but both
>will always be present.

Is that definitely right? I thought it was quite common for the tram
to have its own phase, in effect a filter lane for the trams.

<Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:17:49 +0200
> Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>> Am 13.04.2022 um 17:53 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com:
>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:41:10 +0200
>>> Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>>> Am 13.04.2022 um 17:22 schrieb Recliner:
>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> On 13/04/2022 11:46, Peter Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:50:15 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Didn't Leeds play with a guided bus system?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I don't think so. It did get powers to build a tram system but it
>>>>>>> wasn't build because it couldn't get funding.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What's up with the ULR project in Coventry, BTW?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Or is that just another pipe dream?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> It seems to be trundling along, but I suspect the funding for actual
>>>>> construction hasn't been secured yet. So it's really more of a
>>>>> proof-of-concept research project at the moment than a real, committed
>>>>> project:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>> <https://www.railway-technology.com/analysis/coventrys-very-light-solution-appr
>>
>>>> oaches/>
>>>>
>>>> To be blunt, it's a research project with little expected real-life
>>>> benefit compared to the existing alternative solutions:
>>>>
>>>> Battery-powered electric busses would be cheaper and more flexible,
>>>
>>> I think the jury is still out on whether they'll be cheaper over the lifetime
>>
>>> of the bus because how long the very expensive batteries will last before the
>>
>>> range falls to a point where they need to be changed is still unknown.
>>
>> But that's the same issue whether you use battery-powered busses or a
>> battery-powered tram.
>
> True. Though I think battery powered trams are an absurd idea. Their only
> raison d'etre is to stop nimbies complaining about overhead wires yet there
> already are a number of discrete embedded 3rd rail systems for trams which
> could be used instead. The most obvious one has been used since electric trams
> were invented.
>

The whole idea of this system is to have lightweight, shallow track that's
much cheaper and quicker to install than normal tramways in this country.
Most underground services won't need to be disturbed and no OHLE will be
required. That takes away most of the objections to normal trams.

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 09:17:38 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

><Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:17:49 +0200
>> Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>> Am 13.04.2022 um 17:53 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com:
>>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:41:10 +0200
>>>> Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>>>> Am 13.04.2022 um 17:22 schrieb Recliner:
>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> On 13/04/2022 11:46, Peter Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:50:15 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Didn't Leeds play with a guided bus system?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I don't think so. It did get powers to build a tram system but it
>>>>>>>> wasn't build because it couldn't get funding.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> What's up with the ULR project in Coventry, BTW?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Or is that just another pipe dream?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It seems to be trundling along, but I suspect the funding for actual
>>>>>> construction hasn't been secured yet. So it's really more of a
>>>>>> proof-of-concept research project at the moment than a real, committed
>>>>>> project:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>> <https://www.railway-technology.com/analysis/coventrys-very-light-solution-appr
>>>
>>>>> oaches/>
>>>>>
>>>>> To be blunt, it's a research project with little expected real-life
>>>>> benefit compared to the existing alternative solutions:
>>>>>
>>>>> Battery-powered electric busses would be cheaper and more flexible,
>>>>
>>>> I think the jury is still out on whether they'll be cheaper over the lifetime
>>>
>>>> of the bus because how long the very expensive batteries will last before the
>>>
>>>> range falls to a point where they need to be changed is still unknown.
>>>
>>> But that's the same issue whether you use battery-powered busses or a
>>> battery-powered tram.
>>
>> True. Though I think battery powered trams are an absurd idea. Their only
>> raison d'etre is to stop nimbies complaining about overhead wires yet there
>> already are a number of discrete embedded 3rd rail systems for trams which
>> could be used instead. The most obvious one has been used since electric trams
>> were invented.
>>
>
>The whole idea of this system is to have lightweight, shallow track that's
>much cheaper and quicker to install than normal tramways in this country.
>Most underground services won't need to be disturbed and no OHLE will be
>required. That takes away most of the objections to normal trams.

Surely it is the weight of the tram not the track that is the main
issue? I assume battery powered trams will be heavier.

On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:34:57 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
<recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:

>Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:04:31 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:48:51 +0100, Bevan Price
>>>> <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 12/04/2022 13:24, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:47:46 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:18:36 +0100, Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 12:11, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:23:03 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:08:35 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>>>>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I think OP needs to rephrase the question.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I suppose the distilled question is, "Why are passengers allowed to
>>>>>>>>> walk across tram tracks, but not light railway
>>>>>>>>> tracks?".
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Because trams usually run on roads, and pedestrians are allowed to walk
>>>>>>>> across roads (and along them, even at level crossings). Light railways
>>>>>>>> generally seem to be fenced, perhaps because they used to be heavy rail.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> This is a circular argument. Pedestrians are allowed because trams
>>>>>>> run on roads. But on what basis are the trams allowed to run on a
>>>>>>> road? The question seems to be: what are the defining criteria?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Trams in the UK usually run much more on segregated track than roads,
>>>>>> and they usually run faster on such sections. But
>>>>>> passengers can still walk across the tracks, particularly at stops.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>>>> road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>>>
>>>>> That can make Metrolink progress painfully slow through Manchester city
>>>>> centre, and, for example, on parts of the Eccles route.
>>>>>
>>>> Trams are not a class of traffic to which the normal speed limit signs
>>>> apply; they are not mechanically propelled vehicles "intended or
>>>> adapted" for road use :-
>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tram-motor-vehicle-daniel-rothel
>>>>
>>>> The standard round signs also thus do not apply to e.g. pedal cycles
>>>> or horse/horse-drawn traffic. Trams have their own diamond-shaped
>>>> signs (in KPH not MPH) which can be used on or off a highway.
>>>> https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf
>>>> That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
>>>> than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
>>>> system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
>>>> 45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
>>>> much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.
>>>>
>>>
>>> The Croydon trams used to run at up to 80 km/h (now reduced), and I think
>>> other UK trams are similar(eg, NET, Metrolink 80 km/h, Sheffield 90 km/h).
>>>
>> Wonkypaedia and others indicate 70kph/43mph as a general limit for
>> Croydon which would be a near match to many 4-lane 40mph
>> dual-carriageways if there are any on the system.
>>
>
>The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track, and nothing to
>do with road speed limits. The accident occurred as a tram was coming off
>such a section, going round a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street
>urban section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only on
>town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>
>The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
><https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-72157676976959855/>

I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo goes up to
140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously permitted.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
> In message <2lbe5h9bhsb8sph9b4ukcno79vbruhkeb8@4ax.com>, at 21:40:27 on
> Wed, 13 Apr 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
> remarked:
>
>> https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf
>
>> That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
>> than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
>> system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
>> 45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
>> much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.
>
> There are numerous UK tramways built for 80kph operation, and while
> several operated certain sections at that speed, recently most (eg
> Nottingham, Croydon, Sheffield) have reportedly reduced their maximum
> speed to 70kph, apart from Metrolink.
>
> It's mainly to do with line-of-sight operation, as far as I can tell,
> not safety of pedestrians crossing the line (which typically they are
> allowed to do at stations, even on off-road sections).

I believe Edinburgh’s are max 70 kph. While the offroad sections of track
are not fenced except where they cross agricultural land, the landscaping
doesn’t encourage walking, and in some places there are deterrents like “no
pedestrians” signs and zig-zag boarding.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:34:57 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 21:04:31 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
>>> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:48:51 +0100, Bevan Price
>>>>> <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 13:24, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:47:46 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:18:36 +0100, Certes <none@nowhere.net> wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 12/04/2022 12:11, Recliner wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 09:23:03 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> On Mon, 11 Apr 2022 22:08:35 +0100, Charles Ellson
>>>>>>>>>>> <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> [snip]
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> I think OP needs to rephrase the question.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I suppose the distilled question is, "Why are passengers allowed to
>>>>>>>>>> walk across tram tracks, but not light railway
>>>>>>>>>> tracks?".
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Because trams usually run on roads, and pedestrians are allowed to walk
>>>>>>>>> across roads (and along them, even at level crossings). Light railways
>>>>>>>>> generally seem to be fenced, perhaps because they used to be heavy rail.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> This is a circular argument. Pedestrians are allowed because trams
>>>>>>>> run on roads. But on what basis are the trams allowed to run on a
>>>>>>>> road? The question seems to be: what are the defining criteria?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Trams in the UK usually run much more on segregated track than roads,
>>>>>>> and they usually run faster on such sections. But
>>>>>>> passengers can still walk across the tracks, particularly at stops.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>>>>> road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> That can make Metrolink progress painfully slow through Manchester city
>>>>>> centre, and, for example, on parts of the Eccles route.
>>>>>>
>>>>> Trams are not a class of traffic to which the normal speed limit signs
>>>>> apply; they are not mechanically propelled vehicles "intended or
>>>>> adapted" for road use :-
>>>>> https://www.linkedin.com/pulse/tram-motor-vehicle-daniel-rothel
>>>>>
>>>>> The standard round signs also thus do not apply to e.g. pedal cycles
>>>>> or horse/horse-drawn traffic. Trams have their own diamond-shaped
>>>>> signs (in KPH not MPH) which can be used on or off a highway.
>>>>> https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf
>>>>> That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
>>>>> than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
>>>>> system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
>>>>> 45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
>>>>> much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> The Croydon trams used to run at up to 80 km/h (now reduced), and I think
>>>> other UK trams are similar(eg, NET, Metrolink 80 km/h, Sheffield 90 km/h).
>>>>
>>> Wonkypaedia and others indicate 70kph/43mph as a general limit for
>>> Croydon which would be a near match to many 4-lane 40mph
>>> dual-carriageways if there are any on the system.
>>>
>>
>> The former 80 km/h limit was on segregated, former BR track, and nothing to
>> do with road speed limits. The accident occurred as a tram was coming off
>> such a section, going round a tight right-angle bend to enter the on-street
>> urban section. The Croydon trams have little on-street running, only on
>> town centre roads probably with a 30mph limit or lower.
>>
>> The speedo shows how 80 km/h was previously permitted:
>> <https://www.flickr.com/photos/recliner/31194316805/in/album-72157676976959855/>
>
> I'm not sure it shows anything of the sort. My car speedo goes up to
> 140 mph but this does not show this speed was previously permitted.
>

The speedos in trams and trains aren't like cars. In any case, 140mph is
permitted on some roads in some countries.

The Croydon trams did go up to 80 km/h (I've measured it) in the past, but
no longer.

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>> In message <2lbe5h9bhsb8sph9b4ukcno79vbruhkeb8@4ax.com>, at 21:40:27 on
>> Wed, 13 Apr 2022, Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com>
>> remarked:
>>
>>> https://uktram.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/TGN32-Signing_of_Tramways_2.pdf
>>
>>> That guidance says that a tramway speed limit _should_ not be higher
>>> than that for other traffic. There will also presumably be a
>>> system-wide absolute limit which could be set lower than 30mph (e.g.
>>> 45kph). A tramway could also feasibly have a higher (but maybe not by
>>> much) speed limit with e.g. central reserved track at a crossroads.
>>
>> There are numerous UK tramways built for 80kph operation, and while
>> several operated certain sections at that speed, recently most (eg
>> Nottingham, Croydon, Sheffield) have reportedly reduced their maximum
>> speed to 70kph, apart from Metrolink.
>>
>> It's mainly to do with line-of-sight operation, as far as I can tell,
>> not safety of pedestrians crossing the line (which typically they are
>> allowed to do at stations, even on off-road sections).
>
> I believe Edinburgh’s are max 70 kph.

Yes, it was always so.

> While the offroad sections of track
> are not fenced except where they cross agricultural land, the landscaping
> doesn’t encourage walking, and in some places there are deterrents like “no
> pedestrians” signs and zig-zag boarding.
>
> Sam
>

Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 09:17:38 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
> <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> <Muttley@dastardlyhq.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 18:17:49 +0200
>>> Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>>> Am 13.04.2022 um 17:53 schrieb Muttley@dastardlyhq.com:
>>>>> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 17:41:10 +0200
>>>>> Rolf Mantel <news@hartig-mantel.de> wrote:
>>>>>> Am 13.04.2022 um 17:22 schrieb Recliner:
>>>>>>> hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk <hounslow3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> On 13/04/2022 11:46, Peter Johnson wrote:
>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 19:50:15 +0100, Graeme Wall
>>>>>>>>> <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Didn't Leeds play with a guided bus system?
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't think so. It did get powers to build a tram system but it
>>>>>>>>> wasn't build because it couldn't get funding.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> What's up with the ULR project in Coventry, BTW?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Or is that just another pipe dream?
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> It seems to be trundling along, but I suspect the funding for actual
>>>>>>> construction hasn't been secured yet. So it's really more of a
>>>>>>> proof-of-concept research project at the moment than a real, committed
>>>>>>> project:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>> <https://www.railway-technology.com/analysis/coventrys-very-light-solution-appr
>>>>
>>>>>> oaches/>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> To be blunt, it's a research project with little expected real-life
>>>>>> benefit compared to the existing alternative solutions:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Battery-powered electric busses would be cheaper and more flexible,
>>>>>
>>>>> I think the jury is still out on whether they'll be cheaper over the lifetime
>>>>
>>>>> of the bus because how long the very expensive batteries will last before the
>>>>
>>>>> range falls to a point where they need to be changed is still unknown.
>>>>
>>>> But that's the same issue whether you use battery-powered busses or a
>>>> battery-powered tram.
>>>
>>> True. Though I think battery powered trams are an absurd idea. Their only
>>> raison d'etre is to stop nimbies complaining about overhead wires yet there
>>> already are a number of discrete embedded 3rd rail systems for trams which
>>> could be used instead. The most obvious one has been used since electric trams
>>> were invented.
>>>
>>
>> The whole idea of this system is to have lightweight, shallow track that's
>> much cheaper and quicker to install than normal tramways in this country.
>> Most underground services won't need to be disturbed and no OHLE will be
>> required. That takes away most of the objections to normal trams.
>
> Surely it is the weight of the tram not the track that is the main
> issue? I assume battery powered trams will be heavier.
>

The whole point of these new trams is that they're very light. That's why
they're called Coventry Very Light Rail (CVLR).

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 22:03:31 -0000 (UTC), Sam Wilson
> whistle.
>>>>>
>>>> Are there any national rail stations where passengers can cross the
>>>> tracks? I certainly remember this from the past.
>>>>
>>> West Highland Line ?
>>
>> See the several previous answers to this posting!
>>
> I saw yours for Arisaig but I thought there were one or two other
> stations with island platforms and no footbridge.
>

Bridge of Orchy had access from an underpass rather than a bridge when I
visited yonks ago
as a mate had acquired use of the buildings to turn into a walking hostel
though he soon sold the business to a couple who were best described as a
bit Marmite if their reviews were anything to go by.
Don’t know about the others or how access via steps is got around by those
with disabilities.

GH

In message <t38le6$1ojs$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 08:19:18 on Thu, 14 Apr
2022, Muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>On Wed, 13 Apr 2022 19:35:40 +0100
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.co.uk> wrote:
>>In message <t34g4k$1dtr$1@gioia.aioe.org>, at 18:24:21 on Tue, 12 Apr
>>2022, muttley@dastardlyhq.com remarked:
>>>On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 18:48:51 +0100
>>>Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>On 12/04/2022 13:24, Recliner wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 12 Apr 2022 12:47:46 +0100, Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk>
>>>>wrote:
>>>>> Trams in the UK usually run much more on segregated track than roads, and
>>>>they usually run faster on such sections. But
>>>>> passengers can still walk across the tracks, particularly at stops.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>On unsegregated track, trams in UK have to obey the locally applicable
>>>>road regulations, including speed limits, traffic lights, etc.
>>>>
>>>>That can make Metrolink progress painfully slow through Manchester city
>>>>centre, and, for example, on parts of the Eccles route.
>>>
>>>For the (current) price of the waste of money called HS2, Manchester, Brum,
>>>Leeds and [pick a couple more cities] could have built proper underground
>>>systems built, not just cut price trams (except for leeds which got nothing
>>>and AFAIK is the largest connurbation in europe without a local rail PT
>>>system of any sort).
>>
>>That'll come as news to my friend who lived in Headingly and took the
>>train into work (in the City Centre).
>
>You seem to get confused very often these days. Since when does a line heading
>to York count as local rail?

When the line has local railway stations for local people.

>Perhaps Sheffield shouldn't have bothered with its tram, its got the BR
>Meadowhall station after all. Thats PT sorted, right?

The Sheffield tram is good, for those routes it serves. I've used it
many times.
--
Roland Perry

On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 09:53:47 +0100
Scott <newsgroups@gefion.myzen.co.uk> wrote:
>On Thu, 14 Apr 2022 08:11:40 -0000 (UTC), Muttley@dastardlyhq.com
>wrote:
>>>But that's the same issue whether you use battery-powered busses or a
>>>battery-powered tram.
>>
>>True. Though I think battery powered trams are an absurd idea. Their only
>>raison d'etre is to stop nimbies complaining about overhead wires yet there
>>already are a number of discrete embedded 3rd rail systems for trams which
>>could be used instead. The most obvious one has been used since electric trams
>
>>were invented.
>
>Conduit in the LCC area.
>
>I thought it was far more heavy maintenance than overhead wires and
>less reliable.

There's a system used in france that has the 3rd rail flush with the ground
and is only energised when a tram is over it. They use it in Angier in the
historic centre. Probably costs a fair amount over OHLE but then I imagine so
do batteries.