Car on line at Stirling Station - 14th October 2020

[Non Multi]

There was a 6 foot high security fence in place...

Which fell apart when hit and allowed the car through. That's why a traffic barrier should have been in front of it.

 

[Bald Rick]

At a lever frame box you'd chuck everything back into the frame and start banging the tapper in either direction!
Only ever received it once and boy does that get the adrenalin pumping!

Many years ago I took my kids to St Albans South signalbox to have a look round. There was an ex signaller in there giving visitors a demonstration at the far end of the frame. My youngest was interested in the block bell (shiny, makes a noise) at the steps end, so when the signaller has his back turned I suggested that she ring it six times. He didn’t half jump!

(@John Webb - apologies if it was you!)

 

[ComUtoR]

I know that, but it informs the signaller of the need to do so.

If a REC goes out then the job of stopping all trains is done (or should be). There isn't then a need to revert all the signals to red. everyone should have come to a stand and hit the ST button.

I can't speak for the Siggy's and I'm happy @FGW_DID highlighted the Signallers method to replace all signals to danger. I would be interested to know in what circumstances they would put the signal back to specifically stop a train. I've had signals go back on me for many reasons. If a Driver rang up using the yellow button and made an Urgent call and requested "lines blocked and/or Emergency switchoff" I could understand reverting the singals to danger asap, even then the big red button may have been the better option. A recent incident at my place would not have been prevented by reverting the signals to red. However, the big red button prevented a collision.

In an emergency wouldn't the Signaller use the EMERGENCY STOP message to all Drivers in their panel/area/cell etc instead ? I've had both a REC and an EMERGENCY STOP and both are pretty scary for a second or two.

 

[hexagon789]

If a REC goes out then the job of stopping all trains is done (or should be). There isn't then a need to revert all the signals to red. everyone should have come to a stand and hit the ST button.

I can't speak for the Siggy's and I'm happy @FGW_DID highlighted the Signallers method to replace all signals to danger. I would be interested to know in what circumstances they would put the signal back to specifically stop a train. I've had signals go back on me for many reasons. If a Driver rang up using the yellow button and made an Urgent call and requested "lines blocked and/or Emergency switchoff" I could understand reverting the singals to danger asap, even then the big red button may have been the better option. A recent incident at my place would not have been prevented by reverting the signals to red. However, the big red button prevented a collision.

In an emergency wouldn't the Signaller use the EMERGENCY STOP message to all Drivers in their panel/area/cell etc instead ? I've had both a REC and an EMERGENCY STOP and both are pretty scary for a second or two.

I see what you mean. I suppose so then, yes

 

[Camden]

Smacks of an OAP "parking mishap"

 

[Stathern Jc]

In Post 42 "Matchmaker" indicated that there were two young ladies in the car. No doubt more will emerge in due course.
It will have been traumatic for them even if it wasn't a case of a new driver at the wheel.
If that is correct, I think that any of us who have helped one of our own to learn to drive will say let's spare them a thought and hope they are ok.

 

[hexagon789]

Smacks of an OAP "parking mishap"

Stereotyping much?

Besides, it was stated the occupants were two young women, so your comment is rather unfounded as well as rather ageist

 

[LucyP]

Would the car's insurer / MIB actually be liable for delay minutes? On the one hand you could argue some railway-related business (I have no idea who but assume Network Rail) would presumably be liable and ought to be able to recover their costs. On the other hand, you could equally argue that delay minutes are an accounting exercise and not really the car driver's problem - instead they should be liable for the cost of the inconvenience and damage they have caused rather than some approximation of same based upon a formula which I suspect doesn't really apply in the current national situation.

I have absolutely no idea by the way so would appreciate some informed input. Do remember this was in Stirling so Scots law applies!

Yes they would be liable, providing that there is actually insurance cover. There might not be, if the car was not actually insured, or if the insurers deny cover because it was a deliberate act. Most policies have a such a clause. I don't agree with others that the skid marks are from acceleration in such a small car with likely a tiny engine. They are most likely from the wheels locking under heavy braking, which likely points to it being an accident.

If the MIB is involved, because they are uninsured, then they will not pay the first £300 of the claim and the maximum that they will pay is £250,000 for financial loss.

As to "delay minutes" -compensation for them can be recovered (providing they are insured as set out above/MIB (up to £250K)). The cases of Network Rail -v- Conarken Group and Network Rail -v- Farrell Transport established that.

 

[John Webb]

Many years ago I took my kids to St Albans South signalbox to have a look round. There was an ex signaller in there giving visitors a demonstration at the far end of the frame. My youngest was interested in the block bell (shiny, makes a noise) at the steps end, so when the signaller has his back turned I suggested that she ring it six times. He didn’t half jump!

(@John Webb - apologies if it was you!)

I don't remember that; it was almost certainly someone else as I'm not an ex-signaller. Closed, alas, at the moment - no way can we maintain 'social distancing' in our narrow box!

 

[alxndr]

As well as the fence there is a curb. If you were at a sensible parking speed you'd probably not make it over without having to put your foot down a bit.

 

[ExRes]

Smacks of an OAP "parking mishap"

Equally as much as a twenty something "drinking coffee while texting mishap"

 

[Deepgreen]

As well as the fence there is a curb. If you were at a sensible parking speed you'd probably not make it over without having to put your foot down a bit.

That's the point, though - an accident is when something inadvertent happens - e.g. slipping onto the accelerator, etc. By definition, sensible speeds/actions don't apply in those circumstances.

 

[Jovian98]

Regarding a possible OAP parking mishap -

This Renault Clio has a manual transmission (I looked up the reg number), whereas such parking mishaps are almost exclusively confined to automatics when only a single foot is needed to do the damage. So I'd say it was unlikely to be a mistaken pedal scenario, regardless of the age of the drivers.

 

[LucyP]

You can see that it is manual in the photos. You can see the manual gear lever. The important part is that the last V5C was issued on 29/09/20, so it is likely that the driver has not owned the car for very long. Either the driver is inexperienced, or there is a defect with the car.

 

[Busaholic]

Best joke on these pages for a long time! If there was a "like" button, you would deserve many!

Absolutely.

 

[PeterC]

As well as the fence there is a curb. If you were at a sensible parking speed you'd probably not make it over without having to put your foot down a bit.

Looking at the station car park in StreetView the car park seems to be on a slight slope and there are only one or two bays where you could even get the wheels onto the platform.Assuming that it wasn't deliberate it must have taken an incredible combination of stupidity and bad luck to achieve.

 

[matchmaker]

Looking at the station car park in StreetView the car park seems to be on a slight slope and there are only one or two bays where you could even get the wheels onto the platform.Assuming that it wasn't deliberate it must have taken an incredible combination of stupidity and bad luck to achieve.

It's actually level and there are a number of parking bays which are adjacent to the platform.

 

[30907]

This is what happens when you don't have a traffic barrier between the car park and the platform. Entirely avoidable.

Is this a common occurrence? Undoubtedly a barrier would have prevented it, but is it normal practice to use them on car parks - genuine question, can't say I've checked!

 

[PeterC]

It's actually level and there are a number of parking bays which are adjacent to the platform.

I could see three rows of bricks below the playform surface. Or is there a second car park?

 

[Non Multi]

Is this a common occurrence? Undoubtedly a barrier would have prevented it, but is it normal practice to use them on car parks - genuine question, can't say I've checked!

Some car parks do, some don't. It's not universal. Concrete or Armco type barriers, old bullhead rail barriers, palisade fencing, brick walls and bollards are what you'd normally find if it was considered a risk.

 

[jopsuk]

managing to stick it right under the bridge is pretty good going. The Streetview car went round the car park a few years ago (pre electrification!) but the fence etc are the same. This is looking towards the platform


And this is the other way:


Little more than a car length between the parking bays and the containment kerb protecting the bridge

With a platform-level car park solid containment is usually deployed where there's a clear run-up, be that fat or sloped. That's not the case here

 

[bspahh]

Scotrail have posted a video of the car being dragged back onto the platform

https://twitter.com/NetworkRailSCOT/status/1317072416753987584

 

[Durradan]

Scotrail have posted a video of the car being dragged back onto the platform

https://twitter.com/NetworkRailSCOT/status/1317072416753987584

It's funny that the car ended up taking more (visible) damage on the way back up compared to on the way down.

 

[Stathern Jc]

Certainly wasn't much finesse about the recovery.
Looked as if it would have significantly reduced the prospects of a repair. But there might have been damage underneath that we couldn't see which could have made that appear unlikely anyway.

 

[Speed43125]

Almost looks like it would have been better to move it down the line then up the station ramp to be removed.
Given the way it's undercarriage was scraping the whole way up, I am not surprised coping stones needed attention after the ordeal.

 

[Domh245]

Almost looks like it would have been better to move it down the line then up the station ramp to be removed.

I don't see how that would have worked without a lot of difficulty. First turning the car and then moving it along the platform and recovering from the platform end, certainly wouldn't have been achievable with a recovery vehicle.

The ideal would have been a grabber/lift style recovery truck but being under the bridge would have put pay to that. The other thing to bear in mind of course is that NR aren't interested in recovering the car intact - only getting it off the track!

 

[Speed43125]

I don't see how that would have worked without a lot of difficulty. First turning the car and then moving it along the platform and recovering from the platform end, certainly wouldn't have been achievable with a recovery vehicle.

The ideal would have been a grabber/lift style recovery truck but being under the bridge would have put pay to that. The other thing to bear in mind of course is that NR aren't interested in recovering the car intact - only getting it off the track!

Exactly. That comment was merely in view of the damage to the car (apologies if that was unclear). Of course moving it along the track would have caused a plethora of problems, not least risking damage to the track.

 

[philthetube]

or if the insurers deny cover because it was a deliberate act

Insurers can only deny payout to the person taking out the insurance, not to the innocent victims of actions by the insured, be they individuals or businesses.

 

[Efini92]

If a REC goes out then the job of stopping all trains is done (or should be). There isn't then a need to revert all the signals to red. everyone should have come to a stand and hit the ST button.

I can't speak for the Siggy's and I'm happy @FGW_DID highlighted the Signallers method to replace all signals to danger. I would be interested to know in what circumstances they would put the signal back to specifically stop a train. I've had signals go back on me for many reasons. If a Driver rang up using the yellow button and made an Urgent call and requested "lines blocked and/or Emergency switchoff" I could understand reverting the singals to danger asap, even then the big red button may have been the better option. A recent incident at my place would not have been prevented by reverting the signals to red. However, the big red button prevented a collision.

In an emergency wouldn't the Signaller use the EMERGENCY STOP message to all Drivers in their panel/area/cell etc instead ? I've had both a REC and an EMERGENCY STOP and both are pretty scary for a second or two.

Doesn’t the ST button only work once the signaller has started clearing the call?

 

[Grumpy Git]

Scotrail have posted a video of the car being dragged back onto the platform

https://twitter.com/NetworkRailSCOT/status/1317072416753987584

My god, never has so much hi-viz clothing been seen in one place since the Dave & Gideon show was in town.