by ctclark1
As someone who works at a location where fencing for personal safety (both employees and guests) is of utmost importance, I can tell you that it doesn't matter the fence, someone who is determined to get through it will, whether by cutting or climbing or smashing... If someone is determined to trespass on that bridge, they will.
Besides, no matter how impressive the fence you put up around that bridge is, there will always be openings at the tracks, and someone will find them and walk their way in. Problem being the further back you place those fence openings the harder it is for someone who might get there to get off and out of the way before they get killed. Same goes for wildlife, which I'm sure was a concern as far as wanting to avoid trapping animals on the approaches to the bridges.
I'm also sure someone will bring up the possibility of placing movable gates at the approaches to the bridges, but where's your failsafe? Do you tie them into the signal system as if it was a Control Point? Nearest signals are over a mile away on both sides and they're currently both Automatic Block Signals (This is based on the 1999 Track Chart - Denton Corners Rd and Rt 436). If you convert them to Interlocked signals, that means the gates have to detect and open (and detect that they have in fact opened) when the train is almost two miles away (in the case of the one at Denton Cnrs), still allowing the determined trespasser who doesn't know anything about how the thing works to make their way onto the bridge and find themselves being chased by a train. (Oh, and the approach signals to these new absolutes would not be able to show anything higher than an approach aspect) The other option for the gates is requiring all trains to come to a near stop at the approach to the gates EVERY TIME to wait for them to open, which negates the point of the increases speed limit across the bridge.
There's no perfect answer, but more and bigger fencing won't really change much...
Besides, no matter how impressive the fence you put up around that bridge is, there will always be openings at the tracks, and someone will find them and walk their way in. Problem being the further back you place those fence openings the harder it is for someone who might get there to get off and out of the way before they get killed. Same goes for wildlife, which I'm sure was a concern as far as wanting to avoid trapping animals on the approaches to the bridges.
I'm also sure someone will bring up the possibility of placing movable gates at the approaches to the bridges, but where's your failsafe? Do you tie them into the signal system as if it was a Control Point? Nearest signals are over a mile away on both sides and they're currently both Automatic Block Signals (This is based on the 1999 Track Chart - Denton Corners Rd and Rt 436). If you convert them to Interlocked signals, that means the gates have to detect and open (and detect that they have in fact opened) when the train is almost two miles away (in the case of the one at Denton Cnrs), still allowing the determined trespasser who doesn't know anything about how the thing works to make their way onto the bridge and find themselves being chased by a train. (Oh, and the approach signals to these new absolutes would not be able to show anything higher than an approach aspect) The other option for the gates is requiring all trains to come to a near stop at the approach to the gates EVERY TIME to wait for them to open, which negates the point of the increases speed limit across the bridge.
There's no perfect answer, but more and bigger fencing won't really change much...