ChatterBank0 min ago
Just How Far Should We Go?
13 Answers
http://
http://
It appears that only around 10 deaths a year are happening in the uk at level crossings. Ok, extremely sad for those it happens to but given that it costs about £1M to build a bridge or underpass on average (some more some less) and it would be virtually impossible to get deaths to 0% how much should we spend. and lets face it many more are killed on our roads.
So fares would undoubtedly rise, quite considerably. Would you be willing to pay more?
http://
It appears that only around 10 deaths a year are happening in the uk at level crossings. Ok, extremely sad for those it happens to but given that it costs about £1M to build a bridge or underpass on average (some more some less) and it would be virtually impossible to get deaths to 0% how much should we spend. and lets face it many more are killed on our roads.
So fares would undoubtedly rise, quite considerably. Would you be willing to pay more?
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by youngmafbog. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
-- answer removed --
^
presumably they would be incremental to any works already budgeted for by Network Rail in the existing subsidy calculations. So increased charges to Operators which would be passed on to passengers.
Or increased subsidy to Network Rail from the taxpayer.
Bridges would also prevent queues of traffic at crossings but at £1 million a pop that's also hard to justify
presumably they would be incremental to any works already budgeted for by Network Rail in the existing subsidy calculations. So increased charges to Operators which would be passed on to passengers.
Or increased subsidy to Network Rail from the taxpayer.
Bridges would also prevent queues of traffic at crossings but at £1 million a pop that's also hard to justify
i've moved to a different building now but at the old place there was a roundabout junction with the classic 4 feeds at 12, 3, 6, 9. All roads had two lanes each road has an underpass crossing 4 lanes of traffic. Sadly there are regular accidents and death because pedestrians would walk across the road to save 10 yards rather than use the provided underpass. There where often deaths and injuries. I suppose we need US style jaywalking laws for the terminally stupid, or perhaps we are just strengthening the gene pool!
-- answer removed --
I don’t actually know what Network Rail has to apologise for. As I have said in answers to questions on this topic before, the vast, vast majority of accidents on level crossings in the UK are due to road user misuse.
There are over 6,000 level crossings, of many different types, in Great Britain. On average, there are 9 deaths, 7 major injuries and 23 minor injuries on them each year. The average number of deaths represent about 0.3% of all road deaths. Well over 90% of incidents involving death or serious injury on level crossings are attributable to user error, meaning that on average less than one death per annum can be attributed to the design or operation of the crossings themselves.
Whilst any death of course is regrettable the capital cost of converting a level crossing to a separated arrangement is enormous (on average about £1m a throw). There are far more accidents involving (for example) pedestrians at traffic-light controlled crossings or between cars at uncontrolled flat junctions and these incidents have various causes but could probably, in the main, be avoided. But nobody is suggesting the elimination of those situation at enormous cost.
There are over 6,000 level crossings, of many different types, in Great Britain. On average, there are 9 deaths, 7 major injuries and 23 minor injuries on them each year. The average number of deaths represent about 0.3% of all road deaths. Well over 90% of incidents involving death or serious injury on level crossings are attributable to user error, meaning that on average less than one death per annum can be attributed to the design or operation of the crossings themselves.
Whilst any death of course is regrettable the capital cost of converting a level crossing to a separated arrangement is enormous (on average about £1m a throw). There are far more accidents involving (for example) pedestrians at traffic-light controlled crossings or between cars at uncontrolled flat junctions and these incidents have various causes but could probably, in the main, be avoided. But nobody is suggesting the elimination of those situation at enormous cost.
I don't understand at all why there's a suggestion that NR are not treating the families of those killed with respect (that's how it came over on the radio earlier).
As has been said, many of these incidents are the deceased's own fault for trying to run the lights/barriers. From my days in insurance, I remember that if a company rectified a fault immediately because the process was deemed unsafe, it was almost immediately taken as an admission of liability. Have NR been found negligent in these sad cases?
As has been said, many of these incidents are the deceased's own fault for trying to run the lights/barriers. From my days in insurance, I remember that if a company rectified a fault immediately because the process was deemed unsafe, it was almost immediately taken as an admission of liability. Have NR been found negligent in these sad cases?
1 to 13 of 13
Latest Posts
Crosswords1 min ago
Film, Media & TV19 mins ago
Road rules20 mins ago
I Can't Find A Santa Emoji Anywhere.
ChatterBank30 mins ago