This is a picture of two railroad crossings, or two pictures in one of two railroad crossings (or if you want, it can be the same crossing, just updated.)
Anyway, in the picture, I have a crossing with flashing lights and bells, and a crossing with flashing lights, bells, and gates.
Both crossings illustrated are good crossings, at least to certain degrees since in all reality, all sorts of railroad crossings are dangerous, some more than others. But anyway, these are good crossings because both crossings are equipped with active and automatic warning devices, i.e. flashing lights and bells as mentioned.
However, the top crossing just has flashing lights and bells. It is a good crossing because it warns motorists (drivers), pedestrians, and bicyclists of an approaching train and signals anyone approaching the crossing to stop. Since it has active and automatic warning devices, the lights for visual warning and bells for audible warning, this is a good crossing.
The bottom crossing has flashing lights, bells, and crossing gates that go down and block traffic, which makes it a better crossing. The lights and bells not only warn that a train is coming but also warn that the gates are about to come down.
Admittedly, while crossing gates warn of an approaching train as do the flashing lights and bells, they were not made to stop cars. It is, therefore, the motorist's bicyclists, and pedestrian's decision as to whether or not to obey or disregard the activated warning devices in place. Usually crossing gates in place are ignored when people race underneath them or drive around them, and sadly, sometimes, motorists crash right through them, which I really do not like, although crossing gates are replaceable.
If the gated crossing isn't better than the gateless crossing by fact, and admittedly gated crossings are just as passable as gateless crossings since people can just easily ram through them, which I don't condone, but the gateless crossing is good in my opinion because it at least has flashing lights, and a bell, although I do like crossings with lights but no bells and prefer those over crossings with bells but no lights. I also like these kinds of crossing signals best. The gated crossing is better in my opinion, for looks, and they provide better warning, especially at multi-track crossings where second trains can come. I mean a crossing with lights and no gates on a multi-track crossing is good, but some drivers can immediately cross the tracks after one train passes even with the lights still flashing only to get hit by another train, and many crossings in the U.S. and other countries are equipped with forward and rear-facing lights instead of just forward-facing lights. Crossing gates can tell you better if another train is coming or not, usually. If a train has passed but the gates do not go back up, it usually means another train is on the way, but sometimes it can mean the signals are malfunctioning. At one track crossings it's not much of a problem because usually when one train passes on this type of crossing, there is no other train coming, but at a multi-track crossing where a second train is likely to come, if a someone walks through a crossing or drives around a gates while they're still down after a train has passed, that could be the last thing they ever do. I also like to have something between myself and the train, or between a stopped car and a train, that being the gate.
This picture, especially the top picture, was inspired by an instruction sheet I got when I ordered an ATLAS HO Scale crossing signal off of eBay and it talked about the automatic crossing flasher and how highway crossings were protected by flagmen, which I'm assuming are humans that guarded crossings. It also says that rising costs and shrinking profits called for the adoption of automatic signals, except at heavily trafficed crossings near rail terminals and yards, and at the time this instruction sheet was made, it was said that heavily trafficed crossings near terminals and yards were still presided over by watchmen. This was written back in 1962 mind you.
It goes on to say that seldom used branch lines and spurs, and crossings of little dirt country roads, rarely featured more than just the old familiar crossbuck ( X-shaped RAILROAD CROSSING sign) on a post, but a majority of the highway crossings were protected by what they call the A.R.A. flasher, after which the HO scale crossing signal, and the signals in my drawing, have been patterned. (Source Atlas Tool Co. Inc., Hillside N.J. 1962) If you also have the ATLAS crossing signals, you probably know what I mean already. I think though the ATLAS crossing signals are out of production so if you want them, you're best off getting them off of eBay if they're available.
Also in use were those wigwag signals with those swinging round banners, which resembled human flagmen, and I don't know when they stopped installing them but somewhere along the line, the crossing signals we see today became necessary. I do like the wigwags, especially the cantilever-type wigwags, but not half as much as I like the flashing light signals.
Bottom line, I like the crossing signals without gates and prefer them over all else, but I like the gated crossings better. I also do like gated crossings without lights but they're not as exciting, although I'm still having trouble deciding between a crossing with lights and a crossing with gates.
I also chose to make the gates with vertical stripes rather than diagonally striped gates due to new M.U.T.C.D. (Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices) standards
stop-traffic.com/reflexite-rai… and I made the gates red and white, though I could have made them black and white or black and yellow, but red and white is more me and it's more modern.
