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

[Dr_Paul]

A motor car has somehow ended up on the track at the West Barnes Lane level crossing between Motspur Park and Raynes Park, the picture below has been borrowed from a local gossip site. The motor has a 'P' -- newly-passed driver -- sticker on it, which might be relevant. It is also very close to the conductor rail, if not actually touching it.

SWR services via Epsom are being diverted via Surbiton or cancelled. A 455 can be seen be seen in the picture; this might be the up Chessington South service 2M62, which, according to Real Train Times, was running half an hour early and didn't get any further than Motspur Park. Kingston loop, Hampton Court and Shepperton services are also badly affected, with cancellations, late running and diversions, with 'obstruction on the line' as the reason.

 

[thedbdiboy]

Ooops...

 

[MCR247]

Seems to be this service as 2M62 is showing as cancelled throughout

Realtime Trains | 1904 Chessington South to Motspur Park | 16/12/2023

Real-time train running information for 1904 departure from Chessington South to Motspur Park on 16/12/2023. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.

www.realtimetrains.co.uk

 

[Lifelong]

I think there’s a Guildford via Epsom train not able to move for >2 hours. No facilities etc on the train…

 

[FOH]

You can almost hear the Sat Nav saying "turn left" for the upcoming junction and the driver immediately obliged

 

[Steve Harris]

Darn. When I read the title I was expecting a electric motor to have fell off a train ! A Car is a bit of a let down and by today's standard of driving, no surprise.

 

[Mojo]

Darn. When I read the title I was expecting a electric motor to have fell off a train ! A Car is a bit of a let down and by today's standard of driving, no surprise.

I agree, I have changed the title to better reflect the situation.

 

[ijmad]

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

 

[swt_passenger]

You can almost hear the Sat Nav saying "turn left" for the upcoming junction and the driver immediately obliged

Wasn’t that a suggested reason when a car turned right onto the tracks at Brockenhurst LC a few years back?

 

[EpsomGirl]

I was on the train. It was the 6.54pm from Waterloo heading to Guildford. We nearly got evacuated from the train but it was eventually decided to ‘reverse’ the train down the track back into Raynes Park station. Here is a better photo of the situation showing the car on the tracks.

 

[MontyP]

I was on the train. It was the 6.54pm from Waterloo heading to Guildford. We nearly got evacuated from the train but it was eventually decided to ‘reverse’ the train down the track back into Raynes Park station. Here is a better photo of the situation showing the car on the tracks.

So that photo must have been taken from the footbridge spanning the lines next to the level crossing. The train in the picture is an "up" service towards Waterloo I think? That level crossing is a bit of a mess, with the incorporation of a T-junction on the west side with some slightly bizarre traffic prioritisation that leads to major congestion/chaos at peak times.

 

[FOH]

Here is a better photo of the situation showing the car on the tracks.

Nice pic. Could they not just've cleared people from the car and crossing, closed the car door and allowed the train to pass at walking pace before moving in to mop up the scene?

 

[AndrewE]

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

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

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

 

[ijmad]

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

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. This is mainly a protection against lightning strikes but might have protected the passengers in this scenario too. Still, highly dangerous if they'd opened the door and stood on the ground if the electricity was still flowing.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

So that photo must have been taken from the footbridge spanning the lines next to the level crossing. The train in the picture is an "up" service towards Waterloo I think? That level crossing is a bit of a mess, with the incorporation of a T-junction on the west side with some slightly bizarre traffic prioritisation that leads to major congestion/chaos at peak times.

Yes, I think that is 455 717 + 455 902 on the 2M60 19.04 Chessington - Waterloo; zooming in the roof profile matches a /7 and a /9 in that order although it's not possible to actually read the number on it.

 

[AlterEgo]

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.

 

[RGM654]

The problem would not have existed with the old-fashioned gates that swing between the road and the railway.

 

[Somewhere]

The problem would not have existed with the old-fashioned gates that swing between the road and the railway.

You'd end up with a gate AND a car on the railway

 

[wimbledonpete]

That level crossing's always been a headache. But the current layout is much better than it's been in the past. It used to be a standard T junction, with West Barnes Lane coming up to it from the east and hitting the level crossing just before the junction. Traffic had to cross the LC one or two cars at a time and then sit waiting for a clear patch to turn either left or right. Traffic turning right to go east over the LC also had to wait for a clear patch. When you added in the gates closing constantly it could take forever.

Nowadays there's no right turn over the LC coming from the east and the priority is for traffic using the LC. So the flow from West Barnes Lane to Burlington Road is constant while the gates are open, and the flow along the top part of the T is constant while the gates are closed. Best of a bad situation, really.

As for signage, yes, it'll say "turn left" - on the assumption that people at a well-lit location won't turn on to the actual railway tracks.

 

[Desirolly]

Nice pic. Could they not just've cleared people from the car and crossing, closed the car door and allowed the train to pass at walking pace before moving in to mop up the scene?

Was thinking that myself when I first saw the image.

 

[dangerousdids2]

How some people are given a driving license these days completely amazes me.

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

Health and safety and law suits.

 

[Meerkat]

Can they put red cats eyes along the side of the roadway to make it a bit more of an effort to be stupid enough to do this?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

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.

Umm it doesn't say a lot for the efficacy of the driving test process if a driver doesn't actually look for a road before making a turn.

 

[43066]

Umm it doesn't say a lot for the efficacy of the driving test process if a driver doesn't actually look for a road before making a turn.

No indeed. But I can imagine how a new driver who gets flustered and panics could make a mistake like this, given the presence of a badly placed turn left sign (an ex girlfriend of mine
who took seven attempts to pass her test comes to mind …).

There are always going to be many poor drivers out there, hence why the safest option will always be to close level crossings where possible. Where that isn’t possible NR/local councils/the Highways Agency need to ensure the signage and road furniture surrounding them are as clear as possible.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

No indeed. But I can imagine how a new driver who gets flustered and panics could make a mistake like this, given the presence of a badly placed turn left sign (an ex girlfriend of mine
who took seven attempts to pass her test comes to mind …).

There are always going to be many poor drivers out there, hence why the safest option will always be to close level crossings where possible. Where that isn’t possible NR/local councils/the Highways Agency need to ensure the signage and road furniture surrounding them are as clear as possible.

Umm that's protecting the railway against idiots but they represent a far greater risk to the wider population than that.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Umm it doesn't say a lot for the efficacy of the driving test process if a driver doesn't actually look for a road before making a turn.

When I passed my test, my dad said "well done... now, you start learning how to drive!"

I do wonder how pleased this person's insurance company will be when all the railway related claims come in... their renewal quote will be eye-watering!

 

[Lucan]

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

Indeed. At one time in my chequered career I drove a breakdown truck. I would have had that car off and away in minutes.

 

[norbitonflyer]

You'd end up with a gate AND a car on the railway

Unlikely. The gate should be sufficient clue that it is not a road. (Since gates were replaced with barriers, level crossings have been almost the only part of the railway not fenced off from the general public). Even if sewing gates are now impractical, lifting barriers across both road and railway (one goes up as the other goes down) would be a possible solution at locations were this happens often.

 

[MontyP]

That level crossing's always been a headache. But the current layout is much better than it's been in the past. It used to be a standard T junction, with West Barnes Lane coming up to it from the east and hitting the level crossing just before the junction. Traffic had to cross the LC one or two cars at a time and then sit waiting for a clear patch to turn either left or right. Traffic turning right to go east over the LC also had to wait for a clear patch. When you added in the gates closing constantly it could take forever.

Nowadays there's no right turn over the LC coming from the east and the priority is for traffic using the LC. So the flow from West Barnes Lane to Burlington Road is constant while the gates are open, and the flow along the top part of the T is constant while the gates are closed. Best of a bad situation, really.

As for signage, yes, it'll say "turn left" - on the assumption that people at a well-lit location won't turn on to the actual railway tracks.

I'd say the current layout is still a nightmare! The whole junction needs traffic lights that somehow link with the crossing lights. It can be a 5-10 min wait coming down W Barnes Lane from Raynes Park and trying to continue on Burlington Road without going over the crossing.

 

[norbitonflyer]

That level crossing's always been a headache. But the current layout is much better than it's been in the past. It used to be a standard T junction, with West Barnes Lane coming up to it from the east and hitting the level crossing just before the junction. Traffic had to cross the LC one or two cars at a time and then sit waiting for a clear patch to turn either left or right. Traffic turning right to go east over the LC also had to wait for a clear patch. When you added in the gates closing constantly it could take forever.

Nowadays there's no right turn over the LC coming from the east and the priority is for traffic using the LC. So the flow from West Barnes Lane to Burlington Road is constant while the gates are open, and the flow along the top part of the T is constant while the gates are closed. Best of a bad situation, really.

As for signage, yes, it'll say "turn left" - on the assumption that people at a well-lit location won't turn on to the actual railway tracks.

I'd say the current layout is still a nightmare! The whole junction needs traffic lights that somehow link with the crossing lights. It can be a 5-10 min wait coming down W Barnes Lane from Raynes Park and trying to continue on Burlington Road without going over the crossing.

That's how it used to be.
This is Google Street View in 2009. If I recall correctly the bagged up traffic lights used to be for a right turn arrow, and were linked to the operation of the crossing lighhts.
https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@51.4...e0!5s20080601T000000!7i13312!8i6656?entry=ttu

The same view today - note how traffic coming off the level cerossing now has priority

Google Maps

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

www.google.co.uk

The offending left turn sign - note that it is the "bent" one meaning turn left AHEAD

Google Maps

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

www.google.co.uk

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.

The sign is beyond the crossing and says Turn Left AHEAD. However, the painted road markings could be misleading

Google Maps

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

www.google.co.uk

Just to clarify, for those not familiar with the location, this is not the crossing immediately south of Motspur Park station, but the one some way to the north, about half way between Motspur Park and Raynes Park stations. The street name at both places is West Barnes Lane, as the street takes a dogleg route between the two. Also not to be confused with the two across Vine Road, near Barnes station, which are on a completely different line.