Vertical warning lights - how common?

[StevieG]

...I remember seeing one 'vertical' set, in around 2000, in 'Anglia', somewhere on the GE main line I think (Bentley crossing?): This was I'm sure, owing unsurprisingly to road width/proximity of road-side buildings.

[ex Probationer]

...I remember seeing one 'vertical' set, in around 2000, in 'Anglia', somewhere on the GE main line I think (Bentley crossing?): This was I'm sure, owing unsurprisingly to road width/proximity of road-side buildings.

This is Margaretting Church Lane CCTV crossing on the GE main line which has four 'narrow' light clusters on one side of the crossing. The road lights mentioned at Three Horse Shoes No1 & No3 AHBs and at Bentley AHB are of this 'narrow' type.

The roadlights mentioned at Lincoln High Street crossing are shown on Google maps - Street view with five 'standard' roadlights.

Margaretting Church Lane CCTV crossing

Photo taken by ex_Probationer on 15/05/2009

Elmswell CCTV crossing has row of vertical lights on the 'offside' of each approach which are very much more unusual. This type of light was used on the Up side road approach because of limited visibility caused by an adjacent warehouse obstructing the view of the crossing.

Elmswell CCTV crossing

Photo taken by ex_Probationer on 31/08/2011

[ex Probationer]

As an update, all the original roadlights at Elmswell CCTV level crossing have been removed and replaced with standard LED roadlights.

Elmswell CCTV crossing

Photo by ex Probationer on 27/03/2015

[John]

The narrow wig wags in the second photo are quite rare and are used where clearances do not allow the normal wig wag They need special authorisation from DfT. The vertical (in third picture) wig-wag is unlawful and always has been.

[Mike Hodgson]

The enforceability (apart from the obvious risk of physical enforcement by a train!) of lamps mounted vertically, where the flashing reds are above one another would be questionable, since the highway code shows them horizontal.

[JRB]

Ignoring an obvious warning, however unauthorised, could still constitute dangerous driving without the more specific offence.

[scarpa]

several crossings on the Isle of Man Steam railway are equipped with vertical wig wams resembling traffic lights.They also ensure the road barrier extends fully across the road or employ two barrier machines,On the Electric tramway AOCL s have wigwams and the crossings only employ Silec 59 treadles to operate the crossings

[John]

Ignoring an obvious warning, however unauthorised, could still constitute dangerous driving without the more specific offence.

Unlikely as the road signal has to comply with highway legislation; if it doe not comply the defendant has a case for dismissing any charge

[JRB]

It is dangerous to ignore a man frantically waving a red handkerchief. Convictions have been obtained for ignoring that sort of thing. Red handkerchiefs are however non-compliant.

[scarpa]

As well as the wig-wams there are the standard traffic road signs warning of level crossing ahead to advise motorists they are approaching a level crossing.An amendment to the Highway Code should be made.At one of the Isle of Man s level Crossing the road sign depicting the level crossing sign also had a traffic light in addition which when the vertical red lights were flashing displayed flashing yellows .The approach road was on a slight curve.

[Mike Hodgson]

The Isle of Man has its own peculiar laws which tend to follow mainland practice a bit loosely and sometimes a few years behind. I don't know whether the Highway Code is considered applicable there or if they have some local variant. I wouldn't be at all surprised if their courts took a different view from ours as regards things like non-standard wig-wags.

[AndyB]

DoT (or equivalent) can authorise non-compliant road signs on a site by site basis. Authority is granted under TSRGD (or equivalent in NI.)

The Highway Code doesn't pretend to cover all road signs, just the most common ones. While the illustrations in the Highway Code show a horizontal arrangement, the Isle of Man can presumably authorise other arrangements?

[LlaniGraham]

The narrow wig wags in the second photo are quite rare and are used where clearances do not allow the normal wig wag They need special authorisation from DfT. The vertical (in third picture) wig-wag is unlawful and always has been.

Can you provide documentary evidence of that statement, please?

[LlaniGraham]

The enforceability (apart from the obvious risk of physical enforcement by a train!) of lamps mounted vertically, where the flashing reds are above one another would be questionable, since the highway code shows them horizontal.

The Highway Code is not a legal document.
It MAY quote certain Legislation.

[LlaniGraham]

DoT (or equivalent) can authorise non-compliant road signs on a site by site basis. Authority is granted under TSRGD (or equivalent in NI.)

The Highway Code doesn't pretend to cover all road signs, just the most common ones. While the illustrations in the Highway Code show a horizontal arrangement, the Isle of Man can presumably authorise other arrangements?

Quite, but some people do not seem to realise that!