• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Dollands Moor incident 4Sep18

Status
Not open for further replies.

theageofthetra

On Moderation
Joined
27 May 2012
Messages
3,504
There are a few pics floating around on social media of a nasty incident involving a 66 and a 'small track maintenance vehicle' (I will guess an RRV?)

The front of the 66 has extensive burn damage and the operator of the smaller vehicle sadly has life changing injuries.

Unfortunately I can't post the pic at the moment so if anyone has a better link please put it up.

As ever thoughts with those involved.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Spartacus

Established Member
Joined
25 Aug 2009
Messages
2,928
Link here: https://www.kentlive.news/news/kent-news/man-left-life-changing-injuries-1968732
A man has been left with life changing injuries after a train crashed into a car at the Dollands Moor rail freight yard in Folkestone.

Passengers faced a morning of misery after trains were cancelled and replacement buses were put on because of a freight train that couldn't full enter the yard and was blocking the tracks.

Emergency services, including the air ambulance, rushed to the rail yard where the man was treated at the scene before being taken to hospital.British Transport Police were called to the yard at around 4am today (September 4).

A spokesman said: “Officers were called to Dollands Moor Railfreight Depot, Folkestone at 3.51am today after reports of a vehicle in collision with a train.
From what I've heard it's a shunter's vehicle that they use to get around the yard, a bit like a golf buggy as seen here https://www.flickr.com/photos/36034969@N08/32199556940
 
Last edited by a moderator:

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,771
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
There are a few pics floating around on social media of a nasty incident involving a 66 and a 'small track maintenance vehicle' (I will guess an RRV?)

The front of the 66 has extensive burn damage and the operator of the smaller vehicle sadly has life changing injuries.

Unfortunately I can't post the pic at the moment so if anyone has a better link please put it up.

As ever thoughts with those involved.

Sounds like a horrible incident. My thoughts are with all involved.
 

Richard Sears

New Member
Joined
5 Sep 2018
Messages
1
With regard to the very sad incident at Dollands Moor yesterday, please find a copy of the official statement issued by DB Cargo UK yesterday. Obviously it is the subject of an ongoing RAIB investigation, so we will not be issuing any other statements at this time. Thank you for all your messages of concern for our colleague, who remains in a serious condition in hospital I will pass on your messages.


In the early hours of this morning (Tuesday, Sept 4th) an operations supervisor from DB Cargo UK sustained serious injuries after being in a collision with a train at Dollands Moor freight yard in Kent.

The incident occurred at approximately 3.45am and the injured colleague was taken to King’s College Hospital in London where he is currently receiving treatment. His family has been notified and are receiving support from the company.

The driver of the train is also receiving medical attention and being supported.

Senior representatives from our safety and production teams are on-site and all Channel Tunnel operations through the site have been suspended.

The Rail Accident Investigation Branch is due on-site later this morning to investigate the accident circumstances and the Office of Rail and Road has also been notified.

The company will of course offer its full co-operation with the authorities.
 

Adlington

Member
Joined
3 Oct 2016
Messages
1,040
RAIB report: Collision between a train and utility vehicle at Dollands Moor freight yard, Kent 4 September 2018, revealing some dubious working practices :(
At about 03:39 hrs on Tuesday 4 September 2018, a train arriving at Dollands Moor freight yard struck a small petrol powered buggy which was stationary on a level crossing. The train driver only became aware of the buggy shortly before the accident and was unable to stop in time to avoid a collision. A shunter sitting in the buggy attempted to jump clear at the last moment, but suffered life-changing injuries.

Dollands Moor freight yard was built to serve the Channel Tunnel. From the outset, small buggies were provided to transport staff and equipment around the extensive site. A subway, which could accommodate the buggies, was provided at each end of the yard to allow staff access to individual sidings without crossing any tracks. Level crossings were also provided for emergency use by vehicles after railway signals had been set to stop trains approaching the crossings.

Until 2010, safety documentation included a requirement that subways be used by buggies crossing the sidings, but by 2012 this requirement was no longer included. By 2014, only one of the two subways remained open, but lighting in this subway had failed. Use of this subway was not enforced so most shunters chose to drive across the level crossings instead. There were no barriers, signs or written instructions indicating that vehicles were not allowed to use the level crossings unless signals were being used to stop any approaching trains. The injured shunter started work at Dollands Moor yard in 2018 and had been trained to cross the sidings using the level crossings without signal protection.

The RAIB has found that the buggy driver was unaware he was in an unsafe position, but there is insufficient evidence to determine why. The investigation also found that custom and practice at Dollands Moor yard had normalised use of the level crossings by buggies without signals being used to stop approaching trains, and that the buggy was not conspicuous so the train driver could not see it until it was too late to avoid an accident. The underlying factor was that DB Cargo’s management of the use of buggies, subways and level crossings at Dollands Moor yard was inadequate.
 
Last edited:

Chris M

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
1,057
Location
London E14
As happens frequently (due to human nature) working practices seem to have slipped from (slightly) inconvenient but safe to something that was more convenient but less safe. As the change was likely gradual it seems that it would be easy for those working with it day to day not to spot it.
However there were multiple opportunities for multiple people who came to it fresh to pick up on the fact that things were unsafe and almost every single one was missed. The only exception being the report highlighting the lack of formal competence in buggy driving - and even that was not implemented.
I'm slightly surprised that no mention was made in the report of what records the signal box had (or didn't have) regarding when signal protection was requested.
 

800002

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2019
Messages
689
I'm slightly surprised that no mention was made in the report of what records the signal box had (or didn't have) regarding when signal protection was requested.

Surely that would depend on if the box knew that the Subway tunnel(s) wernt being used? As far as the box was / is concerned, access to the depot roads was via safe means and not via 'emergency' crossing moves.
 

Chris M

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
1,057
Location
London E14
I wasn't suggesting that the box would know that the box would know the usual method of access was unsafe (they wouldn't), just that they would know when and how often signal protection was being requested/granted so the RAIB could establish how often crossing moves were being done with protection and how often they were being done without.
 

800002

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2019
Messages
689
I wasn't suggesting that the box would know that the box would know the usual method of access was unsafe (they wouldn't), just that they would know when and how often signal protection was being requested/granted so the RAIB could establish how often crossing moves were being done with protection and how often they were being done without.

I see your point there.

One would imagine that they simply took the shunters word that they never asked for permission / protection - especially as the east tunnel was virtually unusable.
 

tellytype

Member
Joined
25 Feb 2016
Messages
131
Does all rather beg the question as to why anyone would think, it was in any way sensible to, at any time, stop a vehicle of any kind, or a person, across any piece of track.

Its a bit like working on electrics & failing to assume that all conductors are live until you've proven otherwise, you just shouldn't be doing it if you have an ounce of common sense, surely?!
 

800002

Member
Joined
19 Jun 2019
Messages
689
Does all rather beg the question as to why anyone would think, it was in any way sensible to, at any time, stop a vehicle of any kind, or a person, across any piece of track.

I must, tentatively, agree. We shall probably never whatwas behind the decision making process of the individual concerned that night .
The whole incident gives rise to so many important qestions.
The guy does have to live with the choices he made, let us not overlook that point. I sincerely hope that his recovery is continuing to the best possible outcome for himself.

Its a bit like working on electrics & failing to assume that all conductors are live until you've proven otherwise, you just shouldn't be doing it if you have an ounce of common sense, surely?!

It is a worthy point to put accross. Shouldn't be doing anything unless you are trainNed aand competent. Clearly the company failed in that respect.
 

HSTEd

Veteran Member
Joined
14 Jul 2011
Messages
16,727
This yard doesn't seem the best designed in all honesty.

In hindsight it should not have been provided with underpasses - bridges would likely have been better in that they would be less likely to suffer from flooding and other problems.
In addition, shouldnt there be a single track section in the yard approach where the rolling inspection can be done? Then the shunter would always drive to the same place to do the inspection and then only drive past the train once it is already stopped.

(Maybe the paranoia imparted in me by nuclear engineering background is telling)

The images in the report really do show how important high colour rendering index lighting is - I hope the site will have it's Sodium Vapour lamps replaced with LEDs forthwith.
 
Joined
9 Nov 2017
Messages
260
In hindsight it should not have been provided with underpasses - bridges would likely have been better in that they would be less likely to suffer from flooding and other problems.
It would have to have been a pretty significant bridge in order to provide clearance to the OLE, with long approach ramps to scale the height. Given the yard is sandwiched between the local and HS1 lines, I doubt there would have been the space for such a structure.
 

Meerkat

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2018
Messages
7,534
This is a clear example of what happens when H&S doesn’t ‘go mad’.......
I can’t believe the buggies didnt have flashing orange lights at bare minimum!

Curious why the RAIB don’t question why the train horn wasn’t sounded in the five seconds between the brakes going on and the collision. Not trying to blame the driver as DBC and the shunter caused the accident but a couple of seconds warning might have lessened the consequences.
 

aleggatta

Member
Joined
28 Sep 2015
Messages
545
Curious why the RAIB don’t question why the train horn wasn’t sounded in the five seconds between the brakes going on and the collision. Not trying to blame the driver as DBC and the shunter caused the accident but a couple of seconds warning might have lessened the consequences.

Likewise, if the horn had been sounded then the occupant might have been able to move himself clear, with or without the buggy, with those extra seconds.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,445
Location
UK
Curious why the RAIB don’t question why the train horn wasn’t sounded in the five seconds between the brakes going on and the collision. Not trying to blame the driver as DBC and the shunter caused the accident but a couple of seconds warning might have lessened the consequences.

Quotes taken from the RAIB report.
41 As the train was approaching the level crossing, the driver saw the buggy obstructing the line ahead and, at 03:39:41 hrs, applied the brake when the train was about 50 metres from the level crossing. He did not sound the train’s horn. Immediately before the collision, he saw a person in orange overalls sitting in the buggy, who appeared to be reading a document and then looked up at the last moment before attempting to dive out.

Suggesting the Driver only saw the Shunter at the last second.

80 The train driver applied the brake when the train was about 50 metres (equivalent to about five seconds travelling time) from the level crossing. He saw the buggy but initially believed it was empty as no lights were visible. He did not sound the horn

Confirming the Driver believed the buggy was empty.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
Believing it empty is still not really an excuse not to blow the horn.
 

ComUtoR

Established Member
Joined
13 Dec 2013
Messages
9,445
Location
UK
Believing it empty is still not really an excuse not to blow the horn.

I don't sign the area and neither am I familiar with it. I assume this is because of the context ?

If I saw an object (irrespective or what it is) I'm not sure I'd blow up for an inanimate object. 100% for a person.
 

GB

Established Member
Joined
16 Nov 2008
Messages
6,457
Location
Somewhere
But its a vehicle, so while it "may" be empty, there is still a chance of people milling around the area.
 

aleggatta

Member
Joined
28 Sep 2015
Messages
545
But its a vehicle, so while it "may" be empty, there is still a chance of people milling around the area.
This is the bit that gets it for me, someone could easily not be in it and walk back to it, thinking that a train wouldn't be approaching if the buggy was in the 4ft
 

Taunton

Established Member
Joined
1 Aug 2013
Messages
10,087
This is a clear example of what happens when H&S doesn’t ‘go mad’.......
DB's insurers are certainly going to have a thing to say ...

Part of why there are H&S managers and regular H&S audits in hazardous industries like railways, construction sites, etc, is because the insurers insist on this as a condition of giving insurance in the first place. So they will want to see all the H&S audits for the past few years. THis is part of why H&S have to keep records. There are a whole group of "tough guy" loss adjusters/assessors who come round from the insurance company after cases like this where they are in for big bucks, and who pull no punches.

Those underpasses would not have been an insignificant cost to construct, but seemingly were gradually allowed to go out of use. The lighting being left defective, rendering them useless, would be something any H&S audit would have picked up in a moment, likewise staff crossing on the level where there was a directly adjacent safe route provided. Even the absence of instruction to use the underpass should have been picked up, or if they did exist, not being followed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top