Lorry backs over LC and breaks barrier

[AlterEgo]

It was reported up thread that he is a very experienced driver. You don't think he could have contacted his office or Network Rail directly via mobile phone? Network Rail would have sent someone to assist.

Why not just put up a sign or provide a phone at the level crossing?

 

[68000]

I looked at the Google satellite view of the station and the crossing, do HGV drivers prepare for their journey by looking at the destination and any hazards that are there? You can clearly see that a lorry is going to struggle to turn and head back the way it came and you can also see the canal. Maybe the driver thought he could turn in the carpark. However when faced with the situation, I find it strange that the driver decided the best course of action was to reverse over a level crossing without informing anyone

 

[BrianW]

They are in a locked cabinet behind locked gates. Whilst not designed for public use, they can't be used in an emergency either. The idea is that the CCTV monitors the crossing, but it turns out no- one watches that...

The original question was why is it permitted to not observe the lowering sequence at CCTV crossings. The fact he had to reverse and was told to deliver to the station is irrelevant to that question. I wonder if it was an AHB and had caused a collision or if it was a road junction and he went into the side of someones car peoples opinions would be different. I accept at some point he would need to reverse but should be done in a safe manner.

It turns out the lorry was delivering to Network Rail at Wedgwood station. The phone at the crossing was locked so couldn't be used. The lorry driver was very experienced and has a wealth of, and many years HGV driving, experience. Network Rail have admitted that the crossing lights could not be seen by the reversing lorry driver. Its caused quite an uproar locally that noone appears to monitor crossings when lowering the barriers. All things considered, Network Rail haven't come out of this very well.

Does the road haulage firm contracted and paid by Network Rail to deliver a load not have a responsibility to establish where they are sending their large vehicle, and to brief their driver on what is required of them ?



The barriers at any AHB or AOCL+B crossing anywhere in the UK are not monitored when they descend either.

There has to be a point at which the railway can no longer be blamed for, or expected to provide for, every single possible eventuality (no matter how remote the likelihood) when others interract with the industry.

I'm floundering here now in a sea of 'alternative facts'?
Whose lorry/ driver/ instructions?
Experienced driver? How known? Why getting into that place? Why crashing a gate?
A lot of unknowns- known and unknown.
No=one died- but they might have.

 

[GB]

Why not just put up a sign or provide a phone at the level crossing?

Can you justify the extra and on going expense of adding phones to all CCTV crossings when there is zero or at most negligible, safety benefit? Though I agree a sign with the signallers phone number might be the better option but that can be prone to misuse in some places.

All those shocked that in a lot of cases the signaller isn't required to view the lowering process on CCTV crossings, are you also shocked that its cousin, the full barrier obstacle detection crossing, doesn't have CCTV to view the crossing at all?

 

[Deafdoggie]

I'm floundering here now in a sea of 'alternative facts'?
Whose lorry/ driver/ instructions?
Experienced driver? How known? Why getting into that place? Why crashing a gate?
A lot of unknowns- known and unknown.
No=one died- but they might have.

The lorry was delivering supplies to Network Rail at Wedgwood Station. I know not the company nor drivers name, but I don't see how it would help if I did.
There has been "local uproar" about Network Rails handling of this and it has been reported locally the driver is well experienced and British.
He went to the place agreed for delivery. Network Rail have since admitted the driver would not have been able to see the flashing lights. Nor would he have seen the falling barrier.
On a separate note there was a spate of suicides in the area. CCTV was installed and advertised and this reduced the number to virtually zero. With Network Rail now admitting it's not monitored it's not gone down well.

 

[GB]

On a separate note there was a spate of suicides in the area. CCTV was installed and advertised and this reduced the number to virtually zero. With Network Rail now admitting it's not monitored it's not gone down well.

Where was the anti suicide CCTV installed? If you think signallers should be watching CCTV all the time to prevent suicides then you have vastly underestimated their role and their workload. If the CCTV was installed at the station then that is up to the TOC to manage.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Where was the anti suicide CCTV installed? If you think signallers should be watching CCTV all the time to prevent suicides then you have vastly underestimated their role and their workload. If the CCTV was installed at the station then that is up to the TOC to manage.

It's trackside, and Network Rail operated. Regardless of who does, or doesn't, watch it it's a spectacular own-goal by Network Rail. You can't expect non-railway people to understand cameras pointing along the track are watched, and those that watch the road/rail interface aren't.

 

[WestRiding]

The lorry was delivering supplies to Network Rail at Wedgwood Station. I know not the company nor drivers name, but I don't see how it would help if I did.
There has been "local uproar" about Network Rails handling of this and it has been reported locally the driver is well experienced and British.
He went to the place agreed for delivery. Network Rail have since admitted the driver would not have been able to see the flashing lights. Nor would he have seen the falling barrier.
On a separate note there was a spate of suicides in the area. CCTV was installed and advertised and this reduced the number to virtually zero. With Network Rail now admitting it's not monitored it's not gone down well.

Anti suicide cctv is very different to level crossing cctv. Monitored by totally different people for starters.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Anti suicide cctv is very different to level crossing cctv. Monitored by totally different people for starters.

But again, non-railway people won't appreciate this difference. If Network Rail say the cameras aren't watched and a lorry rips a barrier off as a result what are they to make of that?

 

[SamYeager]

Having read the last couple of pages it seems clear that Network Rail is absolutely and positively NEVER at fault, it's always some other non railway personnel or company.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

You Tube videos aren't necessarily representative of actual numbers, but there do seem to be quite a lot of at-grade crossing collisions between trains and road vehicles, especially semis. How does that stack up with your experience.

There have been a few but I personally have never even seen a close call.

 

[AM9]

There have been a few but I personally have never even seen a close call.

It does seem to be small town rust belt America that provides most of the incidents.

 

[Falcon1200]

Having read the last couple of pages it seems clear that Network Rail is absolutely and positively NEVER at fault, it's always some other non railway personnel or company.

I would say that Network Rail certainly is at fault in some instances, and I do have to agree that the seeming lack of any signage, at all, at this particular LC is strange. But the fact remains that the lorry driver reversed his large vehicle, not just over the LC but along a public road, with no-one to assist him in controlling the move and with a very poor view of what he was reversing towards, which apart from the LC could easily have included other vehicles, cyclists, pedestrians etc. And the fact also remains that Network Rail's safety procedures for a damaged/misused LC worked as designed.

 

[Dr Hoo]

“As designed” is not necessarily the same as “fit for purpose”. Various railway operational and signalling concepts (including earlier versions at many level crossings) have worked as designed but subsequently been tightened up with the benefit of experience.

 

[zwk500]

“As designed” is not necessarily the same as “fit for purpose”. Various railway operational and signalling concepts (including earlier versions at many level crossings) have worked as designed but subsequently been tightened up with the benefit of experience.

Although equally 'not fit for purpose' is not the same as 'not as good as it could be'. Something could still be safe and fit for purpose, but just not as good as a newer system. Fundamentally, the crossing being broken did not lead to death or injury. It fulfilled it's ultimate purpose. However the whole sequence of events caused disruption that was avoidable, so it could be better.

 

[LAX54]

How does he do that, without a crossing phone?

If there was an accessible level crossing phone and he didn't use it then I would be very much in agreement with you.

ALL Auto/CCTV Crossings have a phone, AHB's are quite obvious, on a CCTV crossing there is a plate that gives the Signalbox number to use if required, and they do very often if the barriers are down 'too long' !

How do you watch 2 screens at the same time? (if two crossings or even 3 or 4 need to be lowered at the same time)

And what do you do if you miss the full lower sequence of an Auto Lower because you were dealing with something else? Do you raise them and start again?

You have to scan the crossing (using a figure of 8 with your eyes) before you press crossing clear, you do not press the button until you know its clear, also if something untoward is happening, you tend to catch it in the corner of your eye anyway.
Normally when you get the call, you have time to (if not auto lower) put for example 2 sets down independently, and still get a green when required.

There are multiple mentions above by presumably informed personnel that in auto-lower the gates descending are not monitored. Can it be that there are different procedures in different areas?

If so many CCTVs have been put together for one signaller, along with their other responsibilities, that they can't reliably monitor the process adequately, that's a railway problem - in fact one that should come to the attention of the RSSB.

You can see on Google Earth there's no public phone or number to call at the crossing, nor the notice about large/slow vehicles.

Wedgwood Dr - Google Maps

That's just AHBs have those.

as you say there appears to be no contact number, yet in my old area, all crossings have a number, and they are also checked a couple of times a year to ensure the number is still correct. we had 20 xings over 6 workstations ( 8 panels/workstations in box) however there is a max of 4 on a workstation, and then only 2 need to be lowered at the same time, but both screen are next to each other (no auto lower)

Having read the last couple of pages it seems clear that Network Rail is absolutely and positively NEVER at fault, it's always some other non railway personnel or company.

I'd say 99 times out of 100 its the road user at fault, ignore the yellow at your peril !

 

[Taunton]

ALL Auto/CCTV Crossings have a phone, AHB's are quite obvious, on a CCTV crossing there is a plate that gives the Signalbox number to use if required, and they do very often if the barriers are down 'too long' !

Possibly, using the Google Streetview link, you could point this out to us, as others cannot see it.

Wedgwood Dr - Google Maps

 

[LAX54]

Possibly, using the Google Streetview link, you could point this out to us, as others cannot see it.

Wedgwood Dr - Google Maps

above the KEEP CROSSING CLEAR

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.co.uk

 

[WestRiding]

You have to scan the crossing (using a figure of 8 with your eyes) before you press crossing clear, you do not press the button until you know its clear, also if something untoward is happening, you tend to catch it in the corner of your eye anyway.

So you don't have to watch the full lowering sequence (post 108). If you DID you would have to raise them and start again, to observe the sequence, not just do the figure of 8 to check its clear.

 

[mpthomson]

above the KEEP CROSSING CLEAR

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.co.uk

It's already been stated that the only phone was locked and behind a locked gate.

Also if you think that sign above 'Keep Crossing Clear' is appropriately sized and visible in terms of lettering to read from a vehicle then you must have the eyes of a falcon.

 

[LAX54]

So you don't have to watch the full lowering sequence. If you DID you would have to raise them and start again, to observe the sequence, not just do the figure of 8 to check its clear.

At my old location, we had instructions to watch al lowering sequences, press stop if needed, anything trapped in the middle, we used to raise again and 'free' them, person trapped, again raise the barriers, and restart the sequence.

It's already been stated that the only phone was locked and behind a locked gate.

Also if you think that sign above 'Keep Crossing Clear' is appropriately sized and visible in terms of lettering to read from a vehicle then you must have the eyes of a falcon.

well all I can say is that it is a BT number, and it can't be that hard to read, as we got / get many calls complaining the crossing was 'closed' too long !
also the driver in this instance did not obey / adhere to the Highway Code:

Rule 293​

Controlled Crossings. Most crossings have traffic light signals with a steady amber light, twin flashing red stop lights (see ‘Light signals controlling traffic’ and ‘Traffic signs’) and an audible alarm for pedestrians. They may have full, half or no barriers.

• You MUST always obey the flashing red stop lights.
• You MUST stop behind the white line across the road.
• Keep going if you have already crossed the white line when the amber light comes on.
• Do not reverse onto or over a controlled crossing.
• You MUST wait if a train goes by and the red lights continue to flash. This means another train will be passing soon.
• Only cross when the lights go off and barriers open.
• Never zig-zag around half-barriers, they lower automatically because a train is approaching.
• At crossings where there are no barriers, a train is approaching when the lights show.

Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 40

 

[mpthomson]

At my old location, we had instructions to watch al lowering sequences, press stop if needed, anything trapped in the middle, we used to raise again and 'free' them, person trapped, again raise the barriers, and restart the sequence.


well all I can say is that it is a BT number, and it can't be that hard to read, as we got / get many calls complaining the crossing was 'closed' too long !
also the driver in this instance did not obey / adhere to the Highway Code:

Rule 293​

Controlled Crossings. Most crossings have traffic light signals with a steady amber light, twin flashing red stop lights (see ‘Light signals controlling traffic’ and ‘Traffic signs’) and an audible alarm for pedestrians. They may have full, half or no barriers.

• You MUST always obey the flashing red stop lights.
• You MUST stop behind the white line across the road.
• Keep going if you have already crossed the white line when the amber light comes on.
• Do not reverse onto or over a controlled crossing.
• You MUST wait if a train goes by and the red lights continue to flash. This means another train will be passing soon.
• Only cross when the lights go off and barriers open.
• Never zig-zag around half-barriers, they lower automatically because a train is approaching.
• At crossings where there are no barriers, a train is approaching when the lights show.

Laws RTA 1988 sect 36 & TSRGD regs 10 & 40

Yes, because your examples were already stopped OUTSIDE the barriers and therefore had the time to get out as they felt (rightly or wrongly) that they'd waited too long, squint to read it as the font is tiny and then get back in to make the call.

How's a reversing HGV driver who's realised that he's stuck across a crossing going to do that? They're not, are they? They're just going to reverse straight off to avoid causing an accident. If he'd gone straight on he'd also have not been obeying the HC.

 

[zwk500]

Yes, because your examples were already stopped OUTSIDE the barriers and therefore had the time to get out as they felt (rightly or wrongly) that they'd waited too long, squint to read it as the font is tiny and then get back in to make the call.

How's a reversing HGV driver who's realised that he's stuck across a crossing going to do that? They're not, are they? They're just going to reverse straight off to avoid causing an accident. If he'd gone straight on he'd also have not been obeying the HC.

There was room for the lorry to clear the crossing on the far side. As evidenced by the fact the video starts with the lorry out of shot and the lorry enters the frame already in the middle of the road. He wasn't trapped on the crossing. However, I can entirely understand that the driver wouldn't be aware there is even a phone number posted at the crossing, given the (as you say) tiny sign that must be barely visible let alone legible from his driving position.

EDIT: And, at this specific crossing, there appears to be no sign at all to give the number. Or is Google Street View out of Date?

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Just to clarify, is the pic of the "Keep Crossing Clear" sign (and the info immediately above it) at Wedgwood?

 

[zwk500]

Just to clarify, is the pic of the "Keep Crossing Clear" sign (and the info immediately above it) at Wedgwood?

No - the road sign points to Colchester. Post #137 has the link to Wedgewood itself.

 

[Taunton]

above the KEEP CROSSING CLEAR

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.

www.google.co.uk

Just for those skimming this thread I'll point out that's a different crossing.

The fact the lorry was reversing is incidental. It could equally have been a slow tracked excavator or similar, taking the same time to cross. This crossing is just along the line from Hixon, so one would expect the local team to be more than aware of large, slow vehicles sometimes crossing the line.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

No - the road sign points to Colchester. Post #137 has the link to Wedgewood itself.

Thanks. Is there a similar info plate at Wedgwood?

 

[BrianW]

I note this information regarding this Private level crossing:

Wedgwood Station Level Crossing - The ABC Railway Guide

Wedgwood Station Level Crossing at the ABC Railway Guide.

abcrailwayguide.uk

As the driver was at work will this be covered by the Health & Safety Executive?
Has anyone posted info regarding a formal investigation?
Hopefully someone is looking after the driver following this traumatic incident. Was he 'employed'?
A lot of duty of care, liability and responsibility issues here.

 

[zwk500]

Thanks. Is there a similar info plate at Wedgwood?

Not that Google street view shows, although you'd need somebody local to go out and confirm the current situation.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Not that Google street view shows, although you'd need somebody local to go out and confirm the current situation.

Possible then that one has been added after the incident (which is the subject of this thread)?