Re: level crossing near misses, was Re: problems at ringwood

[David Guymer <davidmg@optusnet.com.au>]

david wrote:

> I think the  IDEA is  level crossing camera a good one, but first to the
> previous posts.
>
> Dave Proctor wrote:
>
> > Peter Dwyer <peter.dwyer@qr.com.au> wrote in message
> > 7vnpv8$jhh1@inet6.citec.com.au">news:7vnpv8$jhh1@inet6.citec.com.au...
> >
> > > The police look after the Red Light Cameras, not the Railways, and the
> > > fatality levels at level crossings pale in comparison to the daily road
> > > carnage, so they put their Red Light cameras where they feel they would do
> > > the most good.
> >
> > I thought they put them where they can get the most revenue (like at the
> > bottom of hills).
> >
> > --
> > DaveProctor
> > thadocta AT dingoblue.net.au
>
> Hillside and  Bayside may not wish to fund such a camera themselves, but I am
> sure the cameras would generate substantial revenue over time. If they got TAC
> into the act or might deter most people in the way they seem to worry about most
> - the hip pocket.
>
> The railway companies may also save on repair costs to trains and
> infrastructure,  and most importantly to the human costs ( driver support ) as
> well.......
>
> so,
>
> we save a few lives,
> the railway/TAC get money long term
> safty is improved
> money is saved
>
> Good idea David Proctor. Now to hear from those who can decide on it....
>
> Regards,
> David Head

The Level crossing belong to VicTrack (State Govenment) not Bayslde\Hillside
(Tenants) or VicRoads/TAC. Since the crossings don't belong to Vicroads or
Bayside/Hillside, why would they spend the money for such messures?
David G.