Incident at Great Coates level crossing - 09/04/13

[Tomnick]

If they did that then either the trains would derail or the cars would have a bumpy ride across the track.

Surely he wants them replaced not removed.

Removed, with alternative routes provided by new bridges - that's how I interpreted it. I'd have a little more sympathy with his cause if he was just on about AHBs (and their replacement with MCB-OD crossings, rather than just using that technology to reduce supervision costs at existing MCB and CCTV crossings), but he seems to be on about all level crossings - completely missing the real issues, as always.

 

[tom1649]

Bob has a habit of overreacting to things. People might actually stop and listen to what he said if he was a little more reasonable.

 

[Zoidberg]

Removed, with alternative routes provided by new bridges - ...

Ah, I'd call that "replaced by bridge ..."

"Removed" would just leave space where they used to be

But I think we all know what's meant. It was just a bit of fun with word-play.

 

[IanD]

Removed, with alternative routes provided by new bridges - that's how I interpreted it.

i.e. replaced by bridges.

 

[neonison]

The following is the link to the Grimsby Town forum where user cmackenize4 works at the Pasture Street level crossing:

http://thefishy.co.uk/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1365544556/

...which goes on to say:

Thats not what happen though is it Chris ?

I heard that the driver did a zig zag round the barrier.

and subsequently C MacKenzie posts:

Still unsure what happened, it's my day off today back tomorrow, so may know a little more then, Lets hope the car driver did not try and get around the barriers whilst down.

 

[Geezertronic]

Or removed could indicate what they did at Canley and removed the ability to cross the tracks (i.e. no level crossing or bridge)

 

[Goatboy]

So thats 5 level crossing fatalities in as many months.

In the meantime how many other things have car drivers crashed into resulting in fatalities?

A truck plunged off a bridge this week onto the Motorway below. So clearly we should remove all of those as well.

Personally I feel the risk an LC represents is very low and removing them would be completely ridiculous. Car drivers would still fatally crash into other things instead - as they do thousands of times every single year.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

They'd have to be bloody sturdy - Britain's two worst (by far) level crossing accidents both involved vehicles crashing through traditional wooden gates.

Mind me asking what these two were?

This accident was mentioned on 1pm BBC News, and a spokesman from the RMT said he wants all level crossings removed as soon as possible.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks, Sam

So presumably then a lot of RMT (or other union) employed crossing keepers would be out of work, causing union uproar. OK...
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I do think he meant removed, he clearly is very anti-level crossing.

There are for example no LC's on the WCML and that works ok, as there are other ways to get across a railway line i.e. bridges.

Expensive though!

Not the south end but I believe there are the further north you go

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=22992

Using the traditional definition of the WCML as Euston-Weedon-Trent Valley-Crewe-Shap-Carlisle-Glasgow, then the closest to London (save Norton footpath near Warrington which is being removed in the coming months) is Hest Bank, 3 miles north of Lancaster. After that, there's Bolton-le-Sands a mile and a quarter later, before footpaths (or similar) at Tebay, Heybank, Long Ashes all before Carlisle, however those could well have gone with the modernisation.

The next level crossing in the traditional sense (i.e. for vehicles) after Bolton-le-Sands is near the Border at Floriston, 6 miles north of Carlisle, you then have Cove, Bodsbury and Cleghorn, before one final one at Logans Rd north of Motherwell.

There weren't actually too many more before the modernisation on that route either. Banbury Lane near Weedon is one that went (the closest to London), then apart from Hademore Crossing near Tamworth not much more than path and farm tracks went. Of course, on the Brum branch there was a lot of work on removal, such as Berkswell, Tipton etc.

 

[ModChod]

So thats 5 level crossing fatalities in as many months.

In the meantime how many other things have car drivers crashed into resulting in fatalities?

A truck plunged off a bridge this week onto the Motorway below. So clearly we should remove all of those as well.

Personally I feel the risk an LC represents is very low and removing them would be completely ridiculous. Car drivers would still fatally crash into other things instead - as they do thousands of times every single year.

Agree completely. Level crossings seem very safe to me if used correctly. I realise that on this occasion it could be due to a rear shunt, but it seems that with half barriers, a lot of deaths are down to people trying to dart between them.

In my opinion, If you choose to ignore flashing red lights and ignore the fact that the barriers are down, then it is only a matter of time before you are caught out or overtake on a blind bend or smash into a tree.

Assuming that someone weaved a half barrier crossing, was hit by a train which derailed and killed passengers but the car driver survived, would the car driver face charges e.g manslaughter?

 

[neonison]

I realise that on this occasion it could be due to a rear shunt, but it seems that with half barriers,

I'm dismayed to see this unfounded hypothesis is still being promulgated.

Assuming that someone weaved a half barrier crossing, was hit by a train which derailed and killed passengers but the car driver survived, would the car driver face charges e.g manslaughter?

Gary Hart (Great Heck) was prosecuted and imprisoned for causing death by dangerous driving.

Following on from this - if Great Coates were caused by a shunt we would have very likely heard from Humberside or BTP that a driver had been arrested for causing death by careless/dangerous driving by now.

 

[ModChod]

I'm dismayed to see this unfounded hypothesis is still being promulgated.

Gary Hart (Great Heck) was prosecuted and imprisoned for causing death by dangerous driving.

Following on from this - if Great Coates were caused by a shunt we would have very likely heard from Humberside or BTP that a driver had been arrested for causing death by careless/dangerous driving by now.

Sorry, I hadn't read the thread on the other forum - it does seem likely then that the driver weaved the barriers.

Interesting read on Gary Hart - I can remember Selby, but was in my mid teens so never really knew much about it.

 

[Crossover]

Thoughts with all those involved in the incident

Rising bollards perhaps?

No way out then though for genuinely stuck motorists

 

[jon0844]

No way out then though for genuinely stuck motorists

They'd only be in front of the barriers on the correct side of the road, thus you'd still be able to proceed if you're in front of it.

Still, I imagine a car would have to be going at some considerable speed to hit and push a vehicle through a barrier and then on to the track, which is probably why it seems rather unlikely that it happened in this case.

I suppose it might depends on whether the handbrake has been applied or someone is just sitting on the brake, but even then I am not convinced.

 

[Chris M]

It could also depend on the relative masses of the vehicles involved (a 4x4 could shove a small, lightweight car some considerable distance for example), any gradients (I don't know that part of the country at all) and the state of the road surface (this is the most significant physical variable in determining the stopping distance of road vehicle).

Several years ago I was the front seat passenger in a tank-like Volvo (might have been an 850, but I'm no good at car id) that was involved in a head-on collision with a Landrover Discovery. At impact the car I was in was travelling forwards but very close to stopping, the Landrover was travelling at about 10-15 mph (decelerating from closer to 30).
The hopefully attached photo shows the approximate distance travelled after impact on the greasy Exmoor road.

Other photos of the aftermath are at https://sucs.org/~cmckenna/photos/roadaccident/

Given this, I find it very easy to believe that an RTC could push a car through a level crossing barrier. Whether that happened in this instance I obviously don't know.

 

[swj99]

Several years ago I was the front seat passenger in a tank-like Volvo (might have been an 850, but I'm no good at car id) that was involved in a head-on collision with a Landrover Discovery.

Volvo 960 like one I used to have. Like you say, built like tanks, but a Landy seems even more so.

 

[boing_uk]

To be honest it wouldn't take more than a nudge to push a car thru the barrier, if indeed this is what happened (by the way, it was reported as such on thisisgrimsby yesterday morning, but then removed later in the day) because the crossing is on a slight incline in that direction and a lot of people tend to hold their cars on the clutch - or at least they used to when I used that crossing four times a day.

I used to commute that way to work as my mum lives round the corner and I used to work at Tioxide.

The crossing also isn't known for long delays either; or at least it wasn't (unless the strike in points have been moved) so i find it very odd for two locals to attempt a zig zag manoeuvre for the simple reason that most regular users would know there isn't a lot of time between barriers down and train crossing.

 

[Boothby97]

If anyone wants to know, the road doesn't have much of a gradient


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thanks, Sam

 

[neonison]

I suppose it might depends on whether the handbrake has been applied or someone is just sitting on the brake, but even then I am not convinced.

"Sitting on the brake" now seems routine rather than "handbrake on, both feet flat on the floor, tyres and tarmac" which is what I was taught and what is still taught. If you are rear-ended holding the car using only the foot-brake there is a good chance you will release the pressure at least momentarily.

The plywood which makes up the barrier in a AHB isn't going to stop anything more than a pushbike.

However, there seems no credible evidence for anyone being pushed in this case.
(The "source" on this seems to be back-pedalling; it has not been reported beyond a football fan forum and no-one has been arrested.)

 

[GB]

As far as I am aware, there was no other road vehicle involved.

 

[kieron]

"Sitting on the brake" now seems routine rather than "handbrake on, both feet flat on the floor, tyres and tarmac" which is what I was taught and what is still taught.

There's nothing in the Highway Code about this, and I didn't go near a railway during any of my driving lessons, much less over a level crossing. It does sound like the sort of thing which would be taught when a level crossing is encountered, though. It also sounds like the sort of thing drivers ignore thereafter because it's more complicated than using the clutch or footbrake.

You are right to say that we don't know what caused this accident.

 

[chris89]

"Sitting on the brake" now seems routine rather than "handbrake on, both feet flat on the floor, tyres and tarmac" which is what I was taught and what is still taught. If you are rear-ended holding the car using only the foot-brake there is a good chance you will release the pressure at least momentarily.

I was taught the same for coming to a stop/ waiting etc and only passed test in Jan (put off for a long time) my dad has always said the same thing as well.

But for me didn't go anywhere near level crossings on lessons, as closest ones are in Shrewsbury.

As always with these things, have to wait till the police reports come out to see what has happened.

Chris

 

[jon0844]

You should always use the handbrake but I am not going to lie and pretend I always do, because I don't.

Worse, I often don't use the footbrake either and just use clutch control to hold steady.

That said, I use the handbrake at a pedestrian crossing specifically because of the desire not to be pushed forward and hit them. I'd also use it at a railway crossing and also kill the engine too, although that's to save fuel when I know I'll be stopped a while.

 

[PaxVobiscum]

Worse, I often don't use the footbrake either and just use clutch control to hold steady.

How many years (months?) do you get out of a clutch may I ask?

 

[Marvin]

The only thing making me wonder about whether the car was pushed from behind is the reports of a "long horn" from the train.

Surely if the car was weaving between the barriers then it would have crossed the tracks with the train virtually on top of it, leaving no time for a long blast on the horn (alternatively, if it was far enough away for the train to give a long blast then surely it would have had enough time to get to the other side?). But if it had been rammed onto the tracks by an accident and the occupants were shaken up to the extent that the driver couldn't move it away, the train would have seen it coming for a much longer time.

It's horrible either way, of course. My sympathies are with the driver.

 

[jon0844]

How many years (months?) do you get out of a clutch may I ask?

Only had to change a clutch once in my whole life, and that was on an Escort Cosworth that had 70,000 miles on it!

The only thing making me wonder about whether the car was pushed from behind is the reports of a "long horn" from the train.

Surely if the car was weaving between the barriers then it would have crossed the tracks with the train virtually on top of it, leaving no time for a long blast on the horn (alternatively, if it was far enough away for the train to give a long blast then surely it would have had enough time to get to the other side?). But if it had been rammed onto the tracks by an accident and the occupants were shaken up to the extent that the driver couldn't move it away, the train would have seen it coming for a much longer time.

It's horrible either way, of course. My sympathies are with the driver.

I am sure it will be quite easy to establish what happened with or without CCTV, like the damage to the barrier, marks on the back of the car pushed on and - presumably - a vehicle that hit the car and pushed it on (assuming it didn't drive off).

Just as the pushing-on-track theory is now in doubt, perhaps the person reporting a long use of the horn could now believe it was longer than it was. Incidentally, would a train black box record the use of the horn, and how long it was used for?

 

[Zoidberg]

There's nothing in the Highway Code about this ...

From the Highway Code's "General rules, techniques and advice for all drivers and riders (103 to 158)" at:

https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-riders-103-to-158/lighting-requirements-113-to-116

In stationary queues of traffic, drivers should apply the parking brake and, once the following traffic has stopped, take their foot off the footbrake to deactivate the vehicle brake lights. This will minimise glare to road users behind until the traffic moves again.

 

[michael769]

I think the best thing is top reserve judgement until the RAIB announce their investigation. Too much uninformed speculation and rumor.

From the Highway Code's "General rules, techniques and advice for all drivers and riders (103 to 158)" at:

https://www.gov.uk/general-rules-all-drivers-riders-103-to-158/lighting-requirements-113-to-116

Sitting on the brakes is marked down in the driving test, so pretty much everyone will have been taught not to do it by their instructor (unless they had a really poor one!).

 

[neonison]

The "source" of this 'pushed from behind' hypothesis seems to rest with cmaczkenzie4 posting on http://thefishy.co.uk/cgi-bin/forum/Blah.pl?m-1365544556/. He has since both back-pedalled and not reconfirmed this today as he'd earlier indicated. So far as I can find there are no other primary sources of this notion.

Many modern units are fitted with forward facing CCTV, such as 21st Century, Zume-X, ICS and eyeTrain; many of these also offer systems monitoring. As the interior of 185 bristle with cameras I would expect all this stuff to be on a Siemens 185. It would still have been light at 19.40 so evidence should be forthcoming.

If an RTC had caused the breach one would have expected some statement from Humberside Police and/or BTP about it and very probably an arrest. It is quite common to arrest and subsequently bail someone who has appeared to cause a serious or fatal RTC.

 

[Widnes Planner]

185s do have forward facing CCTV in the cab, so that will already be in the hands of the investigators, along with any downloads from the black box software.

I've seen internal railway incident reports from this crash and spoken to people who were on-call when it happened, and there is no mention anywhere of another vehicle being involved, or any arrests. I think that notion can probably be dropped.

 

[Chris M]

Incidentally, would a train black box record the use of the horn, and how long it was used for?

From what I remember from reading RAIB reports, some do and some don't. I would imagine that a modern unit like a 185 to do so but that's just a guess.