I suspect one reason there has never been a revival of the
service between Chingford and Stratford despite the new
station in Leyton is that the Highams Park level crossing would
become even busier and traffic chaos would inevitably result.

In message , at 04:17:18
on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked:
In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
09:47:06 on Fri, 24 Nov 2017, remarked:

with 5 times as many cars, travelling 5 times as many miles, I find
it neither surprising nor wholly reprehensible that people are no
longer content to wait for the signalman to change the signals, then
come down from the box to open the gates. And those figures are
national. In London and the SE the changes have been greater.

That level crossing model, while normal in the 1960s, largely went out
long ago. So signalling is as likely as not automatic or controlled by
route setting. 5 crossings are supervised from Cambridge PSB by CCTV.
Almost no crossing gates require a signalman to come down from his box to
open the gates now.

Littleport station crossing!

With an underpass like at Ely!

Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil).

But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too high:
https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm

How much traffic does that crossing get?

Very little. Since the bypass (a while ago now) it's on a road
essentially from nowhere to nowhere.

--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
04:17:18 on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked:
In article , (Roland
Perry) wrote:

In message , at
09:47:06 on Fri, 24 Nov 2017, remarked:

with 5 times as many cars, travelling 5 times as many miles, I find
it neither surprising nor wholly reprehensible that people are no
longer content to wait for the signalman to change the signals, then
come down from the box to open the gates. And those figures are
national. In London and the SE the changes have been greater.

That level crossing model, while normal in the 1960s, largely went out
long ago. So signalling is as likely as not automatic or controlled by
route setting. 5 crossings are supervised from Cambridge PSB by CCTV.
Almost no crossing gates require a signalman to come down from his box
to open the gates now.

Littleport station crossing!

With an underpass like at Ely!

Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil).

But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too
high: https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm

2.51m at Littleport compared to 2.7m at Ely. That van would just about get
under judging by the amount of clearance visible there. Although judging by
what's on Google Streetview, their car probably couldn't get under it.

How much traffic does that crossing get?

Very little. Since the bypass (a while ago now) it's on a road
essentially from nowhere to nowhere.

So it comes low down the priority list for replacing the gates,
unsurprisingly.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , at 09:30:44
on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked:
Littleport station crossing!

With an underpass like at Ely!

Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil).

But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too
high: https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm

2.51m at Littleport compared to 2.7m at Ely. That van would just about get
under

You reckon there's 20cm extra clearance here - really??

https://goo.gl/maps/hso9PDgdviT2

judging by the amount of clearance visible there. Although judging by
what's on Google Streetview, their car probably couldn't get under it.

The best I can find is that the streetview cameras are "at 8.2ft". It's
not clear if that's the height of the lens, or perhaps the lenses are at
8ft and the top of the camera housing at 8.2ft.

That's so close to 2.5m it's not obvious which measuring system they
were designed for.

But when this last came up I mentioned that same view above, which is
pretty much along the line of the roof of the white van, so I'm inclined
to think the 8.2ft/2.5m is the lens (despite being designed in
imperial-measuring USA), and hence the top of the housing is more like
8.4ft = 2.6m
--
Roland Perry

In article , (Roland Perry)
wrote:

In message , at
09:30:44 on Sat, 25 Nov 2017, remarked:
Littleport station crossing!

With an underpass like at Ely!

Don't mention Ely! (You'll annoy Basil).

But the underpass is even lower. So a van like this probably too
high: https://goo.gl/maps/3LiuoCLXQZm

2.51m at Littleport compared to 2.7m at Ely. That van would just about
get under

You reckon there's 20cm extra clearance here - really??

https://goo.gl/maps/hso9PDgdviT2

I see now. I was going by the van body and reckoning that the view showed
the minimum bridge height. I didn't notice the things on the roof, so no,
there isn't another 19cm there.

judging by the amount of clearance visible there. Although judging by
what's on Google Streetview, their car probably couldn't get under it.

The best I can find is that the streetview cameras are "at 8.2ft".
It's not clear if that's the height of the lens, or perhaps the
lenses are at 8ft and the top of the camera housing at 8.2ft.

That's so close to 2.5m it's not obvious which measuring system they
were designed for.

But when this last came up I mentioned that same view above, which is
pretty much along the line of the roof of the white van, so I'm
inclined to think the 8.2ft/2.5m is the lens (despite being designed
in imperial-measuring USA), and hence the top of the housing is more
like 8.4ft = 2.6m

2.5m = 8'2½". It's the maximum width of buses (or was). I suppose the 2.51m
on the sign would be 8'3", what the other sign on the bridge shows.

--
Colin Rosenstiel