Car on Track near Motspur Park — Major Disruption to SWR Suburban Services

[61653 HTAFC]

One thing I notice missing from this thread, a call for all new drivers to be taken off the road, now if the driver had been 65+ ..........

All we know of the driver is that they've recently passed their test. They could, for all we know, also be aged over 65.

 

[Purple Train]

I thought that was intentional, and a desperate attempt by a drug dealer to get away from the chasing police?

So probably not at all similar…

Indeed it was, and they went a considerable distance down the track.

 

[30907]

This seems more likely what happened. Look at the photo in post #10. Look where the car has come from if you assume it hasn't turned sharply. I know this crossing and I would suspect they were in the filter lane to go left coming from the Raynes Park direction. The problem wasn't that they turned left too early, but too late.
Filter lanes tend to lead the unwary into believing they don't need to slow down.

I'm not convinced. It would mean they ignored the Give Way and crossed the opposite lane. And this is a left turn lane, not a filter lane - where you would normally slow right down.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I've just done this screenshot to help those who don't know this area to visualise it.

The big black X is where the driver ended up; the two thinner arrows are the two possible ways in which he or she could have got there. The straightness of the car on the tracks suggests the premature left turn is more likely; a driver coming through the filter lane would have had to steer right again in order to aim straight along the tracks.


Image is a marked screenshot of the Google Maps view of the level crossing in question.

 

[Deepgreen]

Very poor design of the level crossing area and road junction. The signage at the location does say TURN LEFT with a huge arrow immediately before the crossing. I can see how this one has happened, especially with a naive new driver.

Nevertheless it takes an astoundingly stupid person to do what has been done here.

Why on earth has it taken them hours to move a car from track immediately adjacent to a level crossing?

Quite - I imagine it could have been reversed carefully - it didn't even damage the anti-trespass wooden boards. No doubt a 'crime-scene' investigation or equivalent required that it be left there despite the chaos. I also wonder why the driver didn't just reverse back and drive away - I would have thought there would be adequate traction on the ballast, but perhaps it was grounded on the rail. What DID the occupant(s) do, I wonder.

The driver was very lucky they didn't get as far as the conductor rail or they really would have been toast.

I agree... it might need an isolation, but then just rope/winch/drag the car back onto the road and reopen the railway.

Although the juice rail is on the car's passenger side here.

 

[Meglos]

Very poor design of the level crossing area and road junction.

The crossing pre-dates the point when it was an issue. There is virtually no way to redesign without a major expense.
The picture is taken from the 'T' road

 

[Joshua_Harman]

Perhaps something like this would be useful, the design might have to be adapted slightly to fit a train but it seems effective enough to stop a car turning

 

[1955LR]

Perhaps place some "No Entry" road signs either side of the track facing the road .

 

[norbitonflyer]

Perhaps place some "No Entry" road signs either side of the track facing the road .

I refer you to post No 44. I can count nine.

 

[alxndr]

Quite - I imagine it could have been reversed carefully - it didn't even damage the anti-trespass wooden boards. No doubt a 'crime-scene' investigation or equivalent required that it be left there despite the chaos. I also wonder why the driver didn't just reverse back and drive away - I would have thought there would be adequate traction on the ballast, but perhaps it was grounded on the rail. What DID the occupant(s) do, I wonder.

Deep ballast can be surprisingly difficult to drive on. I suspect the side in the 4ft would have been alright, but not the driver’s side where it is on the ballast shoulder. Try too hard and you’ll just dig yourself a hole.

 

[D365]

I dunno. Rubber car tyres aren't great conductors to begin with, and generally cars are deliberately designed as a faraday cage so any electricity is conducted around the outside of the shell.

But if the car had 'landed' on the track in a position to short out the third rail...

 

[Lockwood]

I refer you to post No 44. I can count nine.

9 and a bit. Top left corner.

Perhaps something like this would be useful, the design might have to be adapted slightly to fit a train but it seems effective enough to stop a car turning

Someone would find a way. I don't know how or why, but someone will.


Have I made daft mistakes after passing my address test? Yes.
Have I made daft mistakes recently? Probably.
Have I got a car pinned and needed recovery because I made a wrong turn, misjudged a reverse and got pinned on earthworks, and had to make about 20 calls to the AA because it was the middle of nowhere and the phone kept cutting off during the "use our app" recorded message at the start? Maybe. Depends on there were many witnesses.
I've made some poor decisions with my driving - I did a really daft mistakes at the end of 2016 that had the potential to become A Big Problem...
Have I ever gone for a drive down a level crossing? No.

That is a level of poor decision making that is beyond "scared new driver" and firmly in the "not driving to the standard expected of the average motorist" camp.


I would be interested in what happens next - will they get a "there there", plead exceptional hardship, or get a ban and extended retest

 

[PyrahnaRanger]

Anyone know enough about law to know how much of that is recoverable from the insurers? It is at least partly an internal railway accounting trick after all, but some of it is genuine compensation too.

You can never quite tell with insurers when they’ll roll over and cough up, and when they’ll argue the toss indefinitely. I wouldn’t like to put money on it going either way!

 

[London Trains]

In my opinion, that level crossing should be closed, but that would probably cause more issues than it solves.

Closing it would increase traffic over the other level crossing on West Barnes Lane, the one next to Motspur Park station. The K5 bus route would need to be diverted, and the width restriction on Crossway would probably need to be removed to provide a through route for large vehicles through the Motspur Park area.

 

[Undiscovered]

Depends on what value is put against each service group by TOC. You won't ever find out the actual number.

They range from £80 to £225 per minute, per train.
TOCs are very good at tracing root causes too.
Delays will hound you for reasons for losing just 30s, that's how expensive it is.

 

[43096]

I also wonder why the driver didn't just reverse back and drive away

Because the driver was an utter clart, clearly wasn't thinking straight to get into that position, so certainly wouldn't be capable of engaging brain to reverse out of it.

 

[AlterEgo]

The crossing pre-dates the point when it was an issue. There is virtually no way to redesign without a major expense.
The picture is taken from the 'T' road
View attachment 148756

The crossing itself isn’t the issue, it’s the design of the road junction and the signage. This is entirely, or almost entirely outside the railway’s remit here, so I hope my remarks didn’t come across as a criticism of NR on this occasion.

 

[GusB]

If a driver (new or experienced) can't tell the difference between a road and a railway then they shouldn't be driving. Poor signage don't even come into it.
I think the offence here would be driving without due care or attention.
Luckily it wasn't causing death by dangerous driving.

Do you drive? If so, can you put your hand on your heart and honestly say that you've never ever made a mistake in your entire driving career?

I had very little experience "under instruction". This was because:

a) Driving lessons are expensive and I couldn't afford to take any more once my instructor had deemed that I was ready to take my test.

b) The only other driver in the household (my dad) hadn't held a full licence for long enough for him to be able to legally accompany me outwith driving lessons.

My driving instructor, after I'd been handed my pass certificate, said "now you'll learn how to drive". 30-odd years on, I'm still learning. I like to think that I'm a reasonably competent driver, but every now and then a situation arises that makes me question my decisions.

There's a lot of information to take in when learning to drive. There is the physical operation of the vehicle for a start. Then you have to get used to the rules of the road, while learning how to adapt to changing conditions as you go along.

Let's not be so quick to judge.

 

[30907]

The crossing itself isn’t the issue, it’s the design of the road junction and the signage.

The junction is a simple sharp left turn, and the signage is straightforward:
"Turn Left Ahead" (Arrow with 90deg bend in blue circle) above the crossing signage plus road markings before the junction (left turn ahead arrow and TURN LEFT, x2), then "Turn Left Ahead" again immediately beyond the crossing.
I would bet that it conforms exactly to standards - and I can't see how it could be done differently without compromising safety. Over to you

 

[AlterEgo]

The junction is a simple sharp left turn, and the signage is straightforward:
"Turn Left Ahead" (Arrow with 90deg bend in blue circle) above the crossing signage plus road markings before the junction (left turn ahead arrow and TURN LEFT, x2), then "Turn Left Ahead" again immediately beyond the crossing.
I would bet that it conforms exactly to standards - and I can't see how it could be done differently without compromising safety. Over to you

Why is it even necessary to have those massive arrows? It says TURN LEFT on the road immediately before the stop line for the level crossing. It seems unwise, if you want to protect the railway line, to have a massive TURN LEFT arrow directly in front of the crossing.

Why do you assume the standards - assuming they’re adhered to - aren’t the issue in this specific scenario? I’m sure the standards change.

I wouldn’t be willing to put any money on

a) the driver being charged with dangerous driving, or
b) none of the signage being changed or clarified.

Neither of those things seem certain at all.

 

[Bald Rick]

The delay minutes alone will be comfortably into six figures, and quite possibly higher, given that SWR advertised major disruption as a result of this incident. I have no idea whether NR/TOCs would attempt a claim for those from a car insurance policy.

Delay minutes never run into 6 figures - the biggest *ever* incident (excluding longstanding TSRs) is less than 20,000 minutes.

The compensation for the minutes can run into millions though, if thats what you mean.

I’m aware of an example on my patch where being twenty minutes late out of a depot cost over £5,000

It’s a very complicated subject, because TOCs will pay NR, and also the DfT, and also passengers through delay repay.

They range from £80 to £225 per minute, per train.

The lower end is much, much lower. Lots of service groups have single figure £/min rates.

 

[43066]

Delay minutes never run into 6 figures - the biggest *ever* incident (excluding longstanding TSRs) is less than 20,000 minutes.

The compensation for the minutes can run into millions though, if thats what you mean.

Yes, that’s what I meant, apologies for the poor phrasing. Are you aware of whether the cost of delay minutes is charged to car insurance companies by NR for incidents involving cars at level crossings?

And what was the biggest ever incident, out of interest?

The lower end is much, much lower. Lots of service groups have single figure £/min rates.

The fallout from me being 20 late off the depot (a long story which was only partly my fault), and the circa. £5k cost in the example I alluded to above, suggests my patch isn’t one of the cheaper ones .

 

[Bald Rick]

Are you aware of whether the costs of minutes is charged to car insurance companies by NR for incidents involving cars at level crossings?

It can be, yes. I know of cases where it has been done, more usually for bridge bashes.

And what was the biggest ever incident, out of interest?

For minutes, I’ll have to look it up!

The fallout from me being late out of the depot (a long story which was only partly my fault), and circa £5k cost, suggests my patch isn’t one of the cheaper ones .

Long distance high speed has high rates (valuable passengers, and lots of them). Regional services, less so!

Thameslink Bedford peak services used to be the highest. When you have 1800 people on a train each paying around 50p+/mile it’s very high value.

 

[43066]

It can be, yes. I know of cases where it has been done, more usually for bridge bashes.

Thanks.

For minutes, I’ll have to look it up!

If you’re able to divulge, it would be interesting to know which incidents resulted in a. Greatest number of delay minutes, b. Greatest financial value, which of course won’t necessarily be one and the same.

Long distance high speed has high rates (valuable passengers, and lots of them). Regional services, less so!

Makes sense.

 

[duffield]

Nottingham, I believe: https://maps.app.goo.gl/sLrmaiRhrrBzoBDA6. Where the trams leave Lenton Lane to flyover the Mainline rail tracks.

I watched them build that bridge (and much of the rest of the line). Passed the bridge at least twice a week on my walk home from work while the new tram lines were under construction. At the time I thought "The road layout is wrong; the road leads naturally onto the tram bridge, so people will drive onto it regardless of any signs".

And they did, and they still do. You could put something like a rising retractable barrier right across and they would still just crash into that and the resulting accident would block the tram track for even longer.

I believe the only real solution is to separate the road from the tramway further from the bridge in a way that naturally leads the motorist away from the bridge.

Google street view shows what I mean; the road needs moving to the right, just taking a bit of carpark, removing the "kink" so the road leads straight onto the rest of the road rather than curving gently and invitingly left onto the the tram bridge. You'd probably have to move a few of the OHLE masts as well.

I don't suppose it will ever happen now, but I don't understand why it wasn't done when the line was built since it was entirely obvious from the start that the current setup would not work well.

 

[dangerousdids2]

Do you drive? If so, can you put your hand on your heart and honestly say that you've never ever made a mistake in your entire driving career?

I had very little experience "under instruction". This was because:

a) Driving lessons are expensive and I couldn't afford to take any more once my instructor had deemed that I was ready to take my test.

b) The only other driver in the household (my dad) hadn't held a full licence for long enough for him to be able to legally accompany me outwith driving lessons.

My driving instructor, after I'd been handed my pass certificate, said "now you'll learn how to drive". 30-odd years on, I'm still learning. I like to think that I'm a reasonably competent driver, but every now and then a situation arises that makes me question my decisions.

There's a lot of information to take in when learning to drive. There is the physical operation of the vehicle for a start. Then you have to get used to the rules of the road, while learning how to adapt to changing conditions as you go along.

Let's not be so quick to judge.

Not a mistake as bad as that no, I can't say I have.

I've been on the road 24 years and been involved in 2 accidents both of which was someone crashing into me.

Most accidents are caused by people not paying attention and to be quite frank if people can't pay attention when they're on the road then they shouldn't be on it.

I know we all have to learn and they say we learn from our mistakes but the road is no place for mistakes.

I'm always cautious around learner and new drivers and I'm always patient. I know what it's like, I've been there. But some drivers shouldn't be allowed behind the wheel and driving onto railway lines qualifies for a shouldn't.

 

[Benjwri]

Why do you assume the standards - assuming they’re adhered to - aren’t the issue in this specific scenario? I’m sure the standards change.

Whether surprising or not the signage conforms entirely to standards, although I wouldn’t say it is the standards at fault regardless, they are designed as a guide, and cannot cater for every specific situation.

As for the discussion about the left turn signage, speaking specifically about the arrow in the blue circle, the specific purpose of the arrow is to warn of an upcoming turn, as the arrow goes straight ahead, and then turns left. An arrow that is entirely horizontal means the turn is before the sign. The differentiation between these is something mentioned in the Highway Code, and could be examined in a theory test.

As others have mentioned it’s fairly hard to see what could be done differently here. Perhaps a left turn sign on the central reserve, or opposite, and maybe more direct lighting onto the crossing. It is a very hard crossing to sign without as many have mentioned a redesign.

 

[AndyPJG]

I wouldn’t be willing to put any money on

a) the driver being charged with dangerous driving, or
b) none of the signage being changed or clarified.

Neither of those things seem certain at all.

c) travelling on the railway without having a valid ticket?

 

[Egg Centric]

Do you drive? If so, can you put your hand on your heart and honestly say that you've never ever made a mistake in your entire driving career?

A few posts like this which basically boil down to:

1. Everyone makes mistakes when driving, especially when a novice
2. This is a mistake
3. Therefore it could happen to anyone

Nah. That's fallacious. Driving isn't for this person or at the least they need more instruction. It's not a moral failing or character defect or anything. They're just spectacularly bad at driving.

The P plates are a hint here too. P plate users tend to fall into two categories: the very conscientious new driver who will eventually and quite quickly turn out fine, or the one that friends/relatives are scared of that "force" them to put the plates on - and little in between. The first type don't attempt to drive on railways.

 

[GusB]

A few posts like this which basically boil down to:

1. Everyone makes mistakes when driving, especially when a novice

This is true. Tell me you've never made a mistake as a novice driver and I'll recommend a polygraph test.

2. This is a mistake

Yes, it was. Mistakes can be made by anyone at any time, regardless of experience.

3. Therefore it could happen to anyone

It could happen to someone who is nervous, unfamiliar with the landscape. We don't know the full facts of the case.

Nah. That's fallacious. Driving isn't for this person or at the least they need more instruction. It's not a moral failing or character defect or anything. They're just spectacularly bad at driving.

I assume that you've been sitting in the passenger seat with this driver and are qualified enough to make a full assessment of their driving skills? No, I didn't think so.

The P plates are a hint here too. P plate users tend to fall into two categories: the very conscientious new driver who will eventually and quite quickly turn out fine, or the one that friends/relatives are scared of that "force" them to put the plates on - and little in between. The first type don't attempt to drive on railways.

Would you mind providing us with a link to the results of the survey of P-plate users that you conducted in order to reach this conclusion?