Car struck by a train at Yarnton (nr Tackley) on 02/01/2013 & AHB Crossing Discussion

[francisoldfield]

yes its very bad luck to break down on the crossing but AHB's to me ARE fit for purpose. They have lights and warning sounds. When this happens don't drive past them, then you will be safe. I drive trains down the line between Haslemere and Petersfield and there are a couple of AHBs and if I had a pound for every car I have seen jump the lights...

I timed it once, on a straight I can see the gates go down. From when the yellow light comes on to me passing over is about 15-18 seconds. You have to be very impatient to jump them.

It is always tragic when someone dies in any circumstance but I am hearing far to often how people have ignored warnings on foot crossings or listening to ipods or similar and somehow NR are guilty and pay out millions.

People of Britain... Take responsibility for your lives. You only get one. If this car broke down get out of it. Try and push it clear.. Anything...

Sorry if this appears insensitive or a rant, but I am fed up with blame culture Britain. It is ALWAYS someone else's fault...

 

[princessdidi]

Sometime around 1545hrs, a vehicle was struck at a level crossing at Yarnton, near Tackley, which is just to the North of Oxford. All lines are blocked at this location, with ongoing delays as a result.

BTP & NR are in attendance. I have not heard any information on any casualties or the condition of the train & track.

FGW passengers may use XC & LU on reasonable routes, and XC passengers may use LM & Chiltern on reasonable routes.

Update: Two people are injured and were not trapped in the vehicle, according to the local press (Oxford Mail & Oxford Times). The train involved was supposedly a freight service and the incident occurred at around 1539hrs on Sandy Lane crossing.

StreetView seems to show an automatic half barrier crossing at this location. The road seems to have poor sightlines on approach to the crossing.

One person has died at the scene who was a male.
one other person was taken to Oxford's John Radcliffe Hospital with minor injuries.
two other people were checked over by paramedics but were not passengers in the car.

 

[Robsignals]

Speculation: outside possibility is Suicide or even Attempted Murder and Suicide if the car driver was waiting by the Crossing until the Yellow showed.

All serious LC accidents are reported on national news proving they are rare as reporters soon lose interest in frequent events and that AHB's are safe by any rational definition. If the news covered road crashes in the same way as rail crashes there wouldn't be time to report anything else. Full barriers don't physically prevent vehicles, or pedestrians, getting on the track if their drivers are determined or careless enough.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/articles/419999/20130102/man-dies-train-collides-car-oxford-crossing.htm

Good to know that the press have got the cause of the crash all worked out so soon. They should pass their findings on to RAIB and there will be no need for an investigation.

Could be read as Oxford being faulty.

 

[tsr]

One person has died at the scene who was a male.
one other person was taken to Oxford's John Radcliffe Hospital with minor injuries.
two other people were checked over by paramedics but were not passengers in the car.

The number of casualties and their condition has, I think, pretty much been implied by other posts, but nonetheless thanks for clearing that up!

On another note, if the vehicle had broken down, it would have been far more sensible to use the emergency phones as soon as the breakdown occurred (others have quoted the Highway Code to this effect). This is precisely the sort of situation they are designed for, and short of actually putting a train into emergency braking, the signaller will do everything in their power to block the line.

 

[phonoplug]

I live just round the corner from this crossing and was out and about when the accident happened. From what I have read about how the car was hit and where it ended up, and the direction of the train etc, it doesn't sound as though the driver would have been jumping the lights, unless he was deliberately driving towards/into the train as he saw it approaching.

Sounds a lot more like the car was parallel to the train as it hit - and it couldn't be at that angle if it had driven round the barrier. In fact, in that direction, bearing in mind the right angle bend in the road right at the crossing, it would actually be a pretty sharp manoever to get round the barrier to enter the crossing when its down.

If the car had broken down then surely you would get the hell out of there if the barriers came down. It was a freight train and they are generally running slower than the cross country trains that regularly pass, so you have a bit more notice after the barriers come down. That said the train was shorter than they usually are, and the fact that it came to a standstill while carriages were still at the crossing suggests a) it was not running very fast to start with, b) its probably mostly empty containers, and/or c) the driver had seen the obstruction from a distance (which is quite possible).

Dont know what to suggest otherwise. Another Ufton Nervet?

 

[Silv1983]

As chance would have it I spent today learning about level crossings as part of my trainee driver training. This included several dvds showing people zig zagging through AHBC's with the barriers down. From the moment the amber light glows there is at least 27 seconds before the train passes.
Im afraid the "car broken down" theory is a load of *beep*. Cars do not stop dead on quiet roads when they break down - even if it is a Renault. They would have had to have stopped at an imaginary give way line at the crossing and stalled maybe when accelerating across - but this is extremely unlikely.
If this had happened by some miracle then there would be at least 27 seconds for the passengers to alight - as the blame junkies will surely agree they didn't ignore the warning lights!
Maybe im wrong, and I apologise unreservedly to the family and friends of the deceased passenger if I am: but my money is on the driver impatiently taking a chance.

 

[BestWestern]

When are all these AHBs going to be removed
IMHO they are not fit for purpose and never have been.
They are far to open for misuse leading to innocent lives lost.

I'd have to take issue with that sentence - anybody misusing a level crossing is far from 'innocent'. They are idiots who are putting other people's lives at risk, which is utterly unacceptable however little regard they might have for their own safety.

 

[Goatboy]

I'd have to take issue with that sentence - anybody misusing a level crossing is far from 'innocent'. They are idiots who are putting other people's lives at risk, which is utterly unacceptable however little regard they might have for their own safety.

I could not agree more. AHB's are totally safe - its people driving the cars that are not. You don't blame the red traffic light when somebody jumps it at a junction and collides with a truck so its unfair to blame a perfectly functioning AHB when somebody thinks the flashing red light is for everyone other than them.

 

[3141]

I agree with francisoldfield in post 31. If there are significant numbers of cases of trains hitting road vehicles on AHB crossings it's inconceivable that they happen because that's where all those vehicles break down. Far more likely that they are the result of drivers crossing when the lights and horns are telling them not to.

If this particular accident is an exception then it IS an exception and not an argument for the general closure or reorganisation of AHBs.

Unfortunately the advice in the Highway Code - whether it is to try to move a stalled car forward using the starter motor or more sensibly to get out fast and use the adjacent phone if there is time - is unlikely to be familiar to most drivers since very few people read the Highway Code regularly once they've passed the driving test. In fact, many people haven't a clue what to do if anything out of the normal routine happens when they're driving, because modern cars are so well-equipped and reliable and we imagine they will just get on with it. The same with blindly following the instructions of a satnav and ending up in a field.

 

[Tomnick]

Cars do not stop dead on quiet roads when they break down - even if it is a Renault. They would have had to have stopped at an imaginary give way line at the crossing and stalled maybe when accelerating across - but this is extremely unlikely.

I believe someone, in the early days of AHBs, did some calculations to determine the chance of a vehicle breaking down on such a level crossing, and the figure was - as you might expect - tiny. It's worth considering that a couple of factors increase the risk though, such as the possibility of a vehicle stalling on the crossing having started away from the stop line after the passage of a train. Even taking that into account, the chance of your vehicle becoming totally disabled on the crossing itself must be tiny.

I have noticed, though, a surprising number of folk who crawl up to crossings and creep across (often at a speed that brings them under the 'phone for permission' instructions at AHBs) or even stop on the crossing itself to check that nothing's coming. If that's not asking for trouble, I don't know what is!

 

[jon0844]

I'd have to take issue with that sentence - anybody misusing a level crossing is far from 'innocent'. They are idiots who are putting other people's lives at risk, which is utterly unacceptable however little regard they might have for their own safety.

When there is more than one person killed in a vehicle, the driver is not only an idiot but technically responsible for the death of everyone else in the car (or on the train, of course).

 

[rebmcr]

When there is more than one person killed in a vehicle, the driver is not only an idiot but technically responsible for the death of everyone else in the car (or on the train, of course).

Not just technically responsible; legally responsible. Even if the passengers were complicit.

 

[DXMachina]

Unless you actually cite the reference to that I won't believe it.

Rather, maybe this advice common sense should be taught more -
If in the unfortunate event of breaking down on a crossing, don't try and get it off by turning the engine over especially as it might not work. Get the * out of the vehicle, especially if the barriers come down!

The Highway code website now says as you suggest, my old copy does suggest using the starter, advice also found on some websites including this one. I'm undecided as to which is best - a strictly applied principle of greatest good to greatest number might suggest trying to move the car by any possible means - perhaps at the same time as insisting all passengers get out and preparing to bail .....

 

[tsr]

NR are now saying via the BBC that they believe the crossing was fully functional, and that it had been repaired following a treadle malfunction within the past year or so.

I don't think, though, that we can discount the possibility that the crossing may have failed or that the vehicle had broken down until the final RAIB report is released. Slim as the chances may be, they do exist.

As an additional note: looking at the publicly-available images from the scene, I would suggest that the vehicle involved has been pushed with some force into the lineside infrastructure, and that some signalling equipment may have been damaged as a result of this.

 

[CallySleeper]

Trying to 'move the car on the starter moment' isn't synonymous with 'bailing'/phoning the signalman/police. Either believe one or the other but not both. If it's not in the HC, don't take it for red. The latter will have a much greater potential of safety and success.

 

[tsr]

The line is now open past the incident site. There may be speed restrictions - I am not sure just now. That, to me, looks like excellent service recovery by NR and emergency services in difficult circumstances.

 

[OxtedL]

If the railway is clearly not at fault and moreover were it to emerge that the driver of the car was in some way reckless to the extent that the RAIB decided there were no reasonable learning points to gain (not that I'm suggesting this), could we say with confidence that there would actually be an RAIB investigation?

Is it possible that it is even too early to say there will be even be one, let alone tell everyone else to wait for one to be published?

 

[BestWestern]

I've no idea of the inner workings, but I would think one is inevitable. A death has occurred, and level crossings have been under much scrutiny of late, so I would imagine it would be though churlish not to investigate what has taken place here.

 

[hwl]

I have used this crossing many many times in the past when I used to live in Oxford.

It is impossible to stay on the correct side of the road if going eastbound if doing more than 15 mph through the two 90degree bends just before the crossing. If you tried to do more than 25mph round the 2nd bend you would end up going through of the crossing on the wrong side of the road.

The signalling sections are fairly long so the barriers can be down for a while and there can be big queues in rush hour but may be only 3 vehicles at other times.

Sandy lane is fairly narrow and needs extreme care if passing other vehicles. If the other vehicle is 7.5t or larger you need to use the passing bays.

The video footage of the aftermath (a little unusual?*) on the BBC showed the car had been travelling eastbound, the barrier down and intact on the west side and lights functioning correctly. The damage to the car seems to indicate it was across both lines when hit. (*BTP / NR being more proactive and pointing out the crossing to be working on TV to counteract any press reports of faulty crossings?)

This crossing has to have one of the worst sight lines if travelling eastbound but if you are only doing 15mph this shouldn't matter.
The road is very narrow so if 2 7.5 ton lorries meet each other after one has just crossed there is a very high probability you will get stuck on the crossing. The road probably needs widening by 1.5m for 150m either side of the crossing to allow freer flow of traffic but the locals will object because it might mean more traffic (they would probably object to a bridge for that reason too!).

If memory serves the weight restriction on the hump back canal bridge east of the railway line is 10t so you can't drive too fast over that either if you want the wheels to stay on the road.

Something just doesn't add up based on what has emerged so far...

 

[Tomnick]

The signalling sections are fairly long so the barriers can be down for a while and there can be big queues in rush hour but may be only 3 vehicles at other times.

AHBs operate independently of their protecting signals (with the exception of a few where there would otherwise be the possibility of a train approaching too soon), so the length of the signal sections approaching the crossing is irrelevant to the length of time for which the barriers are down.

 

[Robsignals]

If the railway is clearly not at fault and moreover were it to emerge that the driver of the car was in some way reckless to the extent that the RAIB decided there were no reasonable learning points to gain (not that I'm suggesting this), could we say with confidence that there would actually be an RAIB investigation?

Is it possible that it is even too early to say there will be even be one, let alone tell everyone else to wait for one to be published?

The Inquest will have to be completed before RAIB can publish a report, if the verdict holds the driver soley responsible then there won't be anything more to be learnt.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

AHBs operate independently of their protecting signals (with the exception of a few where there would otherwise be the possibility of a train approaching too soon), so the length of the signal sections approaching the crossing is irrelevant to the length of time for which the barriers are down.

Unless there's a station nearby that reduces the average speed of calling trains. DfT require that less than 50% of trains exceed the 27 second timing so if all trains in one direction are accelerating a PSR has to be imposed from second train 'strike-in' point (39 s) to crossing so they're at a constant speed for timing.

 

[Tomnick]

If there is a station within the crossing controls, then there will (without any exception that I'm aware of) be a signal 'protecting' the crossing along with stopping/non-stopping controls to keep that signal at Danger and delay the crossing sequence for stopping trains. Not sure if that's what you're referring to - apologies if you mean a station (just) outside the crossing controls.

 

[Robsignals]

Well before the 'strike-in' point.

 

[phonoplug]

The crossing is almost exactly half way between Oxford and Tackley stations. Each is about 5 miles from this crossing.

Also to the east of the crossing there is sharp hump back bridge that has a 3T weight limit, so the only 'large traffic' that would be using the crossing is agricultural vehicles coming from, or going to the adjacent fields, or road repair vehicles working on the stretch between the crossing and bridge.

BBC website now has a picture of the wrecked car, again confirming that the car must have been slap bang inbetween the two lines at the time of impact.

 

[Sidious]

If the railway is clearly not at fault and moreover were it to emerge that the driver of the car was in some way reckless to the extent that the RAIB decided there were no reasonable learning points to gain (not that I'm suggesting this), could we say with confidence that there would actually be an RAIB investigation?

As the facts point to a potential criminal offence being committed, the primacy of the investigation should rest with the Police and not the RAIB, however that's not to say the RAIB won't have any involvement.

In the absence of any evidence suggesting that the crossing was not working, I would be looking at investigating the driver of the car for causing death by dangerous driving, and get his account under caution in interview as to why his car was on the crossing at the same time as the train. If he then comes up with a defence that the lights and barriers were not working then that would be part of the investigation to be proved or disproved.

The fact that the crossing was apparently 'faulty' at some point in the last year does not mean it was faulty yesterday.

 

[D1009]

Unless there's a station nearby that reduces the average speed of calling trains. DfT require that less than 50% of trains exceed the 27 second timing so if all trains in one direction are accelerating a PSR has to be imposed from second train 'strike-in' point (39 s) to crossing so they're at a constant speed for timing.

It has to be remembered that this busy line carries a mix of fast passenger, stopping passenger and freight, and it is common for trains to be checked by signals meaning that the time the barriers are down can be extended.

 

[jopsuk]

I have used this crossing many many times in the past when I used to live in Oxford.

It is impossible to stay on the correct side of the road if going eastbound if doing more than 15 mph through the two 90degree bends just before the crossing. If you tried to do more than 25mph round the 2nd bend you would end up going through of the crossing on the wrong side of the road.

So you're saying that, regardless of the precence of the crossing, doing more than 15mph round those bends is frankly dangerous driving?

 

[bangor-toad]

So you're saying that, regardless of the precence of the crossing, doing more than 15mph round those bends is frankly dangerous driving?

I used to live on Sandy Lane and yes, more than 15mph around the 90 degree corner next to the crossing is just dangerous. That's not because of the level crossing, but it is due to a very sharp corner with poor sightlines on a narrow road.


Pure speculation here:
If the driver was going around the corner too fast they could have easily skidded off the crossing surface and ended up stuck partly on the tracks with no way to drive or reverse off. This would present the passenger door to an oncoming southbound service.
This certainly seems to match the published pictures and that the passenger was killed.

Jason

 

[FGW_DID]

So you're saying that, regardless of the precence of the crossing, doing more than 15mph round those bends is frankly dangerous driving?

Do you live local and use Sandy Lane? I live nearby and use this road and it is narrow and twisty and some of the bends on the Yarnton side do require low speed / low gear to negotiate safely especially with incoming traffic. To do otherwise would, in my opinion be at least reckless!

 

[Robsignals]

It has to be remembered that this busy line carries a mix of fast passenger, stopping passenger and freight, and it is common for trains to be checked by signals meaning that the time the barriers are down can be extended.

Oxford and Tackley stations are far enough away not to have any effect but Wolvercote Jct is ~2 miles south so trains, especially southbound, will be slowed by associated signal checks.

Wonder what the usage figures are? Looks like a classic rat-run with reasonable alternatives, the crossing should be closed to vehicles immediately - users can lobby the Council for a bridge, democratic process etc.