Hey I've noticed when I'm on the X1 I've been hearing this beeping sound whenever it gets out of Gateshead Interchange and about to go over the Tyne Bridge heading into Newcastle.
Anyone know what it is?
example in this YouTube video at 0:39 (
http://youtu.be/SEg2gv-JOtU)
(06 Apr 2016, 3:27 am)digital_devilz wrote [ -> ]Hey I've noticed when I'm on the X1 I've been hearing this beeping sound whenever it gets out of Gateshead Interchange and about to go over the Tyne Bridge heading into Newcastle.
Anyone know what it is?
example in this YouTube video at 0:39 (http://youtu.be/SEg2gv-JOtU)
That's the low bridge warning sound. If a bus is within a certain radius of a low bridge, there will be a warning sound of some sort (there's various types depending on the bus - some beep, some shout 'WARNING', etc).
This serves as an alert to the driver, and makes them aware of the potential hazard.
(06 Apr 2016, 4:29 am)Dan wrote [ -> ]That's the low bridge warning sound. If a bus is within a certain radius of a low bridge, there will be a warning sound of some sort (there's various types depending on the bus - some beep, some shout 'WARNING', etc).
This serves as an alert to the driver, and makes them aware of the potential hazard.
Oh, I've seen them on other services GNE services before. They are made by Hanover if I'm not mistaken.
(06 Apr 2016, 1:19 pm)digital_devilz wrote [ -> ]Oh, I've seen them on other services GNE services before. They are made by Hanover if I'm not mistaken.
The ones on the newer vehicles are not, they are made by Timespace.
Beeping Noise = 6001-6007; 6049-6083
"STOP, LOW BRIDGE" = 6084-6121
Happens on the Angel examples all the time, either at afore mentioned Wellington St or entering the underpass at the end of the Tyne Bridge...incredibly annoying
Same for TENs around Metrocentre and somewhere else en route.
(17 Apr 2016, 9:10 am)northern156 wrote [ -> ]Same for TENs around Metrocentre and somewhere else en route.
They do it also on Redheugh Bridge under the signs and under the Bridge on Railway Street by Times Square Car Park
The Fab 56, Volvo B9TL's also beep when they approach the Wearmouth Bridge in Sunderland.
This all proves the system works then!
Happens on the 309/310 at cradlewell any reason theres no low bridge around?
(17 Apr 2016, 11:51 am)dannygee wrote [ -> ]Happens on the 309/310 at cradlewell any reason theres no low bridge around?
It could be for Benton Bank, which goes under the Coast Road as the bus is passing over Jesmond Dene?
(17 Apr 2016, 12:07 pm)BJ10VUS wrote [ -> ]It could be for Benton Bank, which goes under the Coast Road as the bus is passing over Jesmond Dene?
Correct, IIRC from driving under said Bridge, there is about 12ft of space. They also used to do it on Byker Bridge too, and I think Deckers may do it on the 93/94 when they go around Old Fold Estate.
(17 Apr 2016, 11:11 am)Mcitaro5284 wrote [ -> ]This all proves the system works then!
Say it was a new driver and he took evasive action to avoid the false warning at the end of the Tyne Bridge, surely that's not proof it works?
(17 Apr 2016, 5:18 pm)Ambassador wrote [ -> ]Say it was a new driver and he took evasive action to avoid the false warning at the end of the Tyne Bridge, surely that's not proof it works?
Surely the system is in place to alert drivers to take caution, rather than to take evasive action to avoid a low bridge which isn't even on the route of that service..?
I would anticipate that drivers are informed of the various systems which are in place on buses in the training process or the mentoring process.
(17 Apr 2016, 5:22 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]Surely the system is in place to alert drivers to take caution, rather than to take evasive action to avoid a low bridge which isn't even on the route of that service..?
I would anticipate that drivers are informed of the various systems which are in place on buses in the training process or the mentoring process.
Surely if the bus fits, it will always fit; so no need no take caution? I'm not aware of any bridges that shrink or buses that suddenly grow taller.
I'm not sold on this system being a good thing. either the noise from the false alarms becomes distraction or the opposite where the drivers hear it so much they begin not to take notice; even when the alarm would be useful.
(17 Apr 2016, 6:19 pm)James101 wrote [ -> ]Surely if the bus fits, it will always fit; so no need no take caution? I'm not aware of any bridges that shrink or buses that suddenly grow taller.
I'm not sold on this system being a good thing. either the noise from the false alarms becomes distraction or the opposite where the drivers hear it so much they begin not to take notice; even when the alarm would be useful.
A bus is sent on a diversion by lets say the Police due to a road closure (which has happened), and they did not think of a low bridge somewhere on the diversion, surely its a good thing to have something like Low Bridge Warning fitted.
I cannot believe that people think having such a device fitted is a waste of time.
(17 Apr 2016, 6:38 pm)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]A bus is sent on a diversion by lets say the Police due to a road closure (which has happened), and they did not think of a low bridge somewhere on the diversion, surely its a good thing to have something like Low Bridge Warning fitted.
I cannot believe that people think having such a device fitted is a waste of time.
A device which was effective in the way you describe would be fantastic.
My issue is with the device currently used which appears to be startled by so many false alarms which undermines it's effectiveness.
(17 Apr 2016, 6:43 pm)James101 wrote [ -> ]A device which was effective in the way you describe would be fantastic.
My issue is with the device currently used which appears to be startled by so many false alarms which undermines it's effectiveness.
DaveyBowyer was incorrect in suggesting that the "Red Kite" branded Volvo B9TLs announce "Stop - low bridge!" These say something along the lines of "Danger - low bridge. 400 yards ahead"
I think this is more effective. With older systems, you don't know how far away the bridge is, to know whether it's something worth taking caution for.
(17 Apr 2016, 5:22 pm)Dan wrote [ -> ]Surely the system is in place to alert drivers to take caution, rather than to take evasive action to avoid a low bridge which isn't even on the route of that service..?
I would anticipate that drivers are informed of the various systems which are in place on buses in the training process or the mentoring process.
The training covers some of the low bridges you may encounter whilst driving. The low bridges near to the Metrocentre are certainly covered and your attention is drawn to one or two others you may pass on test.
(17 Apr 2016, 6:38 pm)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]I cannot believe that people think having such a device fitted is a waste of time.
I know. As this thread primarily concerns the 'beeping' on the X1, I think its useful to examine the low bridges the service may encounter on-route. Off the top of my head, I can think of one which is the example near the Tyne Bridge. If the few 'beeps' near the Tyne Bridge prove to be an insurmountable distraction to the driver, then I'd suggest he or she is probably in the wrong profession as there numerous things more far more distracting than a sound warning of a potentially dangerous obstacle.
An anti-collision system is clearly a good thing.
I'm saying there's pros and cons to the finer details of how it works. It's not good of it's setting itself off at false alarms. I haven't a clue in the technicalities but if the system involves a device which emits a beam and activates the alarm of the beam is broken by an object. Maybe the solution would be to pitch the beam lower to ignore overhead signs etc.
Clearly safety comes before comfort but it must be startling for passengers who hear the 'Warning Low Bridge' message when in reality there's no danger.
Maybe we should just revert to tin cans on rope 100yds before a bridge?
(17 Apr 2016, 6:58 pm)MurdnunoC wrote [ -> ]If the few 'beeps' near the Tyne Bridge prove to be an insurmountable distraction to the driver, then I'd suggest he or she is probably in the wrong profession as there numerous things more far more distracting than a sound warning of a potentially dangerous obstacle.
If a driver is so unaware of the dimensions of their vehicle that they strike a low bridge, then I'd suggest he or she is probably in the wrong profession.
So startling that I've never even noticed it.
(17 Apr 2016, 8:05 pm)BusLoverMum wrote [ -> ]So startling that I've never even noticed it.
Me either.
(17 Apr 2016, 7:16 pm)James101 wrote [ -> ]If a driver is so unaware of the dimensions of their vehicle that they strike a low bridge, then I'd suggest he or she is probably in the wrong profession.
And yet it still happens.
(17 Apr 2016, 8:05 pm)BusLoverMum wrote [ -> ]So startling that I've never even noticed it.
(17 Apr 2016, 8:09 pm)Davie wrote [ -> ]Me either.
Irrespective of the efficacy of the system in the place, the majority of passengers probably won't notice the alarm. I honestly don't know why this has attracted so much debate.
(17 Apr 2016, 8:18 pm)MurdnunoC wrote [ -> ]Irrespective of the efficacy of the system in the place, the majority of passengers probably won't notice the alarm. I honestly don't know why this has attracted so much debate.
I appreciate the reason for it but passengers do notice it. Especially being stuck in traffic on Wellington St and you get constant loud beeping for about 5 minutes!
(17 Apr 2016, 8:21 pm)Ambassador wrote [ -> ]I appreciate the reason for it but passengers do notice it. Especially being stuck in traffic on Wellington St and you get constant loud beeping for about 5 minutes!
Ah you can blame the idiots who block the yellow box at the bottom of West Street for that problem.
(17 Apr 2016, 9:22 pm)GMitchelhill wrote [ -> ]Ah you can blame the idiots who block the yellow box at the bottom of West Street for that problem.
Amen...and those on Prince Consort Rd!
(17 Apr 2016, 6:38 pm)citaro5284 wrote [ -> ]I cannot believe that people think having such a device fitted is a waste of time.
I'm not sure that's the point, Citaro. I think the main point is if a device like this is constantly overused, then drivers might become complacent - a driver might get used to the beeping, so when they really need it (ie in your example earlier), the whole point of the system is missed.
A couple of railway collisions, IIRC, have happened this way with drivers 'chasing yellows' and resetting the AWS (Automatic Warning System) every time they pass a cautionary signal aspect. Doing this repetitively for any good period of time can lead to the actual meaning of the warning being missed and, before you know it, you're approaching a red too quickly and shoot past it.