Should we follow suit given that many other countries also have level crossing signs with no text? This appears to include all European countries including the U.K and Ireland.
Do you really think the text on our signs has anything to do with it? The U.S has texted crossbucks too! Canada used to but got rid of it…And Canada still has lots of level crossing incidents.
I don't know if (mainland) Europe ever has.Europe is not a country. There are 50 countries in Europe, most of which would each have their own national policy or set of second-level policies regarding level crossing signage (five EDIT: six have no reason for such a policy).
Australia has a relatively low rate of level crossing incidents. The USA and Canada should be following our lead.And so do the U.K and Germany, and maybe many other European countries.
And Canada still has lots of level crossing incidents.What about the United States?
If the lack of text has something to do with it, then it's a bad policy which we shouldn't copy here. If the lack of text doesn't make a difference, then it's a meaningless policy which we shouldn't copy here because we should only spend money on making changes if they will have a positive impact.Is there evidence that the lack of text has something to do with it. Licenced drivers are expected to know what a crossbuck means, where they know how to read the text on the sign or not.
Have you verified if this is a national policy which applies to all railroads across Canada or if it is actually the domain of provincial government?Before I get into that, remember, it isn't just Canada, see below.
Europe is not a country. There are 50 countries in Europe, most of which would each have their own national policy or set of second-level policies regarding level crossing signage (five EDIT: six have no reason for such a policy).This is what I mean; To my knowledge, crossbucks in all European countries are without text:
Pretty picture album. Unfortunately for you, that's quite a fuzzy and unpersuasive way to make your case. You will do better if you provide some detailed information to support the claim you are making, such as a peer-reviewed study showing that level crossing collisions decreased in a particular jurisdiction following the removal of text from crossbucks.As far as I know, it doesn't make a difference, and if it doesn't, why bother with the text, on new signs that is? We have already got rid of text from signs restricting turns, such as no-right-turn signs. Besides, the pictures were just to show that crossbucks without text are more common internationally.
I don't think anyone would be interested in even funding a study to determine if changes are required to level crossing signage given the high level of safety of our level crossings. You certainly won't find a government willing to make the massive expenditure to replace all the signs without there being any evidence that the alternative design is actually better - and I mean real scientifically valid evidence, not fuzzy nonsense like a picture gallery of other level crossings.Well, first of all, a change in signage is a pretty minor change, especially if only a few are changed at a time, and as I said, we have already done this with other signs and signals, pedestrian signals used to consist of text, now they are a red and green man, as far as I know, changes to pedestrian signals and turning restriction signs over the years were done a little at a time.
Besides, the pictures were just to show that crossbucks without text are more common internationally.So what? We have to copy someone else? Which one do you want to copy out of all the different ones in your pictures? WHY? WHY? WHY? - you still haven't given one good reason.
You have still not answered why it needs to change.Well, crossbucks in many tram-savvy European countries are without text and check out both railway and tramway level crossings in these countries. Here is a tramway level crossing in the Netherlands:
The current signs work well as shown by the ONRSR statistics I quoted above, the printing of the text doesn't add anything to the cost (the whole surface of the sign is printed) and there's no research to show that text-free signs actually do a better job.
No need to shift away from what is a winning option. Spend the money on something that would actually provide a real benefit to users of the transport system such as better real time service updates for public transport users, better cycle lanes in the inner suburbs or fixing more potholes for road users.
Plus, I do think that the ability to know whether you're looking at a railway or tramway could occasionally be handy if you're trying to find your way around somewhere and your phone battery has gone flat.