57009 & level crossing incident at Lingwood (LGD) Norfolk

[jamesontheroad]

Happening now, a freight train has collided with part of a level crossing at Lingwood in the Norfolk Broads, on the Norwich - Great Yarmouth line.

There's a photo here, it appears to be DRS 57009 and the old fashioned wood gates appear to have been wrecked...

https://twitter.com/br3n_d0nn/status/528199728006430720/photo/1

The Eastern Daily Press have quoted BTP as saying this was not a passenger service.

BREAKING: Train crash in Lingwood. British Transport Police have said it was not a passenger train. No injuries.

Another pic from the reverse angle here. Station Road in Lingwood is, understandably, closed.

 

[ushawk]

http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/H31538/2014/10/31/advanced

0920 Stowmarket D.G.L. to Stowmarket D.G.L.

This is the service involved - isnt that a RHTT ?

 

[MCR247]

The loco looks very dirty from the pictures - so yes it does like it was an RHTT

 

[jamesontheroad]

The loco looks very dirty from the pictures - so yes it does like it was an RHTT

The schedule on RTT makes sense for a RHTT. Although it was due to pass Lingwood twice, before and after calling at Acle. I presume we can see 57009 at the back of the train after it has come to a halt, but I don't know Station Road so I can't tell whether this happened heading east or west.

Edit... RTT seems to erroneously report it passing Whitlingham Junction westbound at 1354, but that appears to be the eastbound time, followed by a pass at Brundall at 1400. I'm guessing this happened on the eastbound journey to Acle.

 

[bolli]

The schedule on RTT makes sense for a RHTT. Although it was due to pass Lingwood twice, before and after calling at Acle. I presume we can see 57009 at the back of the train after it has come to a halt, but I don't know Station Road so I can't tell whether this happened heading east or west.

Edit... RTT seems to erroneously report it passing Whitlingham Junction westbound at 1354, but that appears to be the eastbound time, followed by a pass at Brundall at 1400. I'm guessing this happened on the eastbound journey to Acle.

RTT doesn't like journeys that have the same destination twice, I've seen that several times...

 

[transportphoto]

A report from BBC News, picutres show Norfolk Constabulary on scene, though one would assume that this was a first response and that the scene would now have been handed over to British Transport Police, I would suspect that RAIB will also be involved.

Here's the response, click anywhere within the quote to go to BBC Website (source):

A train used for clearing leaves off the line has crashed through a level-crossing in Norfolk.

The rail-head treatment unit "went through the barrier" at Lingwood station about 14:20 GMT, said Network Rail. There are no reports of injuries.

The barriers were closed on Station Road in the village to allow traffic across the line when the train hit.

Services between Norwich and Great Yarmouth are being diverted through Reepham, said Greater Anglia.

The train did not derail, said an eyewitness. An investigation is now under way.

The train crashed through two wooden manual swing gates
Ben Bephell, from Lingwood Parish Council, told BBC Radio Norfolk: "There's bits of wood, debris, metal and all sorts all over the places, nobody will be going across it in a hurry.

"The gates were closed until it ploughed straight through... one has disappeared completely with bits strewn everywhere, the other is hanging on its hinges, most of it is destroyed.

"It's a very busy road, we've been trying to get a crossing for pedestrians across the railway line as the crossing at this point where the road is is very busy.

"We're fortunate as we're out of school time, but the school is only 200 yards along the road."

 

[Sleepy]

A report from BBC News, picutres show Norfolk Constabulary on scene, though one would assume that this was a first response and that the scene would now have been handed over to British Transport Police, I would suspect that RAIB will also be involved.

Here's the response, click anywhere within the quote to go to BBC Website (source):

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-norfolk-29847811

:grin::grin::grin::grin::grin::grin: Excellent work by Greater Anglia to relay the track at Reepham ! Seems a bit of a detour to me and Bure valley railway might get upset. The BBC strike again ???

 

[455driver]

Why is everyone saying it is 57009, that one is on the back of the train!

 

[ST156]

I believe the loco on the front of the train is 57010.

 

[dk1]

Will all come out in the wash. Lots of speculations.

 

[tjlrailblue]

does the crossing keeper have to change a signal when the gates are shut? how does it work where you have a manual crossing not next to a signal box?

glad no one hurt in this incident

 

[Tomnick]

does the crossing keeper have to change a signal when the gates are shut? how does it work where you have a manual crossing not next to a signal box?

glad no one hurt in this incident

Not wishing to fuel any speculation, but my understanding is that this crossing is provided only with distant signals (worked by the crossing keeper). The red targets on the gates effectively act as the protecting (stop) signals. Most commonly at crossings of this type, the block bells and/or indications are repeated at the crossing to provide an indication of approaching trains to the crossing keeper.

 

[GB]

It has been reported that the distant was hanging wrong, showing off (at least as far as the driver is concerned) when it obviously should have been on.

 

[fgwrich]

Why is everyone saying it is 57009, that one is on the back of the train!

I believe the loco on the front of the train is 57010.

If the RHTT is routed as I believe via Norwich's Wensum curve, then 57009 should be leading the return service from Acle.

 

[Tottenham Flyer]

I believe the loco on the front of the train is 57010.

You are indeed correct. There's a little damage to the front.

 

[jamesontheroad]

Might this be an opportune moment to replace the gates with automated barriers? I presume the ones that were destroyed were quite old?

 

[Bald Rick]

Not wishing to fuel any speculation, but my understanding is that this crossing is provided only with distant signals (worked by the crossing keeper). The red targets on the gates effectively act as the protecting (stop) signals. Most commonly at crossings of this type, the block bells and/or indications are repeated at the crossing to provide an indication of approaching trains to the crossing keeper.

Correct. In this case there are two crossings close to each other. Station Rd and Chapel Road. The Station Rd keepers hut was moved a few years ago, nevertheless I bet he/she got a surprise.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Might this be an opportune moment to replace the gates with automated barriers? I presume the ones that were destroyed were quite old?

New gates can be sorted within days, very cheaply. Although this crossing is scheduled for conversion to barriers, it is linked in to the resignalling. Doing it now would cost well over a million and take months.

 

[david_VI]

I just spoke to one of the other Stowmarket drivers and he said carpenters are already making some new gates identical to the old ones, thought that was nice!

He was on his way to remove the 57 that ploughed through which is still there.
Also he couldn't say what happened, it's still not clear. I was surprised there are only 6 drivers at Stowmarket!!

 

[TheEdge]

Might this be an opportune moment to replace the gates with automated barriers? I presume the ones that were destroyed were quite old?

I believe new wooden gates are already on sight. Apparently sourced from Manea.

 

[wheelnrail]

I believe new wooden gates are already on sight. Apparently sourced from Manea.

When I first saw the photos, i thought, yep, automatic gates within a few weeks or months. Glad to know some spare wooden gates are still around!

 

[carriageline]

When I first saw the photos, i thought, yep, automatic gates within a few weeks or months. Glad to know some spare wooden gates are still around!

"Automatic" (not quite!) barriers are not always a like for like replacement for manual, wooden gates. It would normally need resignalling, and then the equipment it self. Would be a fairly pricey sum as Bald Rick pointed out


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[dk1]

Replacement of simply broken wooden gates with an automatic crossing is probably one of the most random things I've ever heard on this forum

 

[carriageline]

Replacement of simply broken wooden gates with an automatic crossing is probably one of the most random things I've ever heard on this forum

To be honest, I ignored the "automatic" part and put it down to lack of knowledge, and thought they meant a manual LC with barriers. A full on AHB would of been a bit mental


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DXMachina]

I presume the ones that were destroyed were quite old?

If they used cl.31 on sprayer trains instead of cl.57 the gates would have done their job

 

[alexl92]

If they used cl.31 on sprayer trains instead of cl.57 the gates would have done their job

Why is that?

 

[dk1]

If they used cl.31 on sprayer trains instead of cl.57 the gates would have done their job

It gets worse doesn't it?

 

[455driver]

Why is that?

Buggered if I know!

 

[asylumxl]

Buggered if I know!

I think they're trying to say Class 31s are slow/weak or something?

 

[Chris M]

If they used cl.31 on sprayer trains instead of cl.57 the gates would have done their job

The job of level crossing gates and barriers is to keep road traffic and pedestrians off the level crossing when it is being used by rail traffic.

Gates perpendicular to the railway line are performing a secondary job of keeping pedestrians and road traffic off the parts of the railway line that are not a level crossing.

Stopping rail traffic (of any sort) is not part of the job description. You might be getting confused with buffers.