Level crossing accident at Pickering (21/05)

[Chris M]

The same legal risk exists for other media. Where the cause is not known it is best (legally and morally) not to assume and/or mislead people into thinking that one party is at fault, even if they are statistically more likely to be.

 

[dakta]

I thought the same, dust barely settled and there's already critique on how vague the reports taken from the immediate aftermath is. I suppose it takes all sorts but it did get a sigh out of me.

 

[mpthomson]

The chances of somebody noticing that the car is rolling away soon enough to jump in but for the car to still get up to speed where it can do significant damage to itself or a person are suspiciously small.

Either the driver forgot to secure their vehicle, they failed to ensure their vehicle was in full working order, they failed to ensure that their health was proper for being in charge of a vehicle, or they panicked and failed to stop the vehicle by applying the brakes soon enough, or deliberate drove onto the crossing.

Cars do not move of their own volition. They are either driven, improperly maintained, or improperly secured. Drivers need to be held to their responsibilities to the road (and yes, I am a driver myself and I do not pretend to be a perfect driver).

All the health checks in the world prior to setting off can't prevent a stroke or cardiac event or similar. As the circumstances at the time weren't understood that was why the wording was as it was. In the fullness of time the cause of the incident will become clear, however your 'analysis' misses other possibilities. It may be one of the causes you listed, it may not be.

I appreciate the legal risk to the railway. My point is a wider frustration at the general media coverage of road traffic incidents.

Why? In this instance the media has accurately reported the statements provided by the railway and emergency services. The media can't speculate in a manner that leaves it or the railway open to legal scrutiny so has to simply present the facts. At the time it was reported all that was known was that a vehicle with the driver at the wheel had somehow hit the generator car. That's it. What else did you expect the media to say?

I thought the same, dust barely settled and there's already critique on how vague the reports taken from the immediate aftermath is. I suppose it takes all sorts but it did get a sigh out of me.

And me

 

[PetrosEbor]

Picture is Google Maps Street View of the LC over Yatt's Road.
N-Yorks’ Police report states:
www.northyorkshire.police.uk/news/north-yorkshire/news/news/2023/05-may/collision-near-pickering/
a collision on a level crossing on Yatt's Road.
75m South of the LC over Yatt's Road, there is an occupation LC, from Street View it appears to be a POGO crossing; the gates open away from the railway.

Emergency Services reports confused as there are 3 LCs in close proximity. News media then presumed that it was the LC over Yatt's Road.
NYMR notified RAIB, who remotely collected information, which they reviewed. RAIB to take no further action, as further investigation is unlikely to reveal significant new safety learning leading to formal recommendations for the improvement of railway safety.
BTP CID are investigating.
Let's hope that the female car-driver, who sustained serious multiple-injuries, make a quick and full recovery.

 

[Pigeon]

I thought the same, dust barely settled and there's already critique on how vague the reports taken from the immediate aftermath is.

It's not about them being naturally vague because they're immediate. It's about them being made vague deliberately.

 

[mike57]

Without getting into silly speculation it does appear that the train 'was in the wrong place at the wrong time'.

Emergency Services reports confused as there are 3 LCs in close proximity.

This is a case where What3Words would probably have resolved the location very quickly. A large proportion of the population have a smart phone with GPS capability, and for non tech people What3Words is simple to use, and gives an unambiguous location, which can easily be texted if phone reception is marginal. Yes you can also use grid references or Lat-Long but I suspect a lot of people wouldn't know where to start with giving a location in that form.

 

[Phil56]

It’s possible that the car was shunted from behind by another vehicle.

Even so, that means it was improperly secured. The driver should have applied the handbrake when stationery for any significant length of time, such as waiting at a level crossing.

 

[30907]

It's not about them being naturally vague because they're immediate. It's about them being made vague deliberately.

Possibly because a precise report, eg identifying the specific POGO crossing, might have identified the person concerned?
I imagine the NYMR signaller could have pointed the emergency services in the correct direction as soon as they were contacted.

 

[richw]

Picture is Google Maps Street View of the LC over Yatt's Road.
N-Yorks’ Police report states:
www.northyorkshire.police.uk/news/north-yorkshire/news/news/2023/05-may/collision-near-pickering/
a collision on a level crossing on Yatt's Road.
75m South of the LC over Yatt's Road, there is an occupation LC, from Street View it is a POGO crossing; the gates open away from the railway.
BBC Look North (Yorkshire) Evening News 17:50 Sunday 21/05/2023, showed the occupation LC 75m South of New Bridge signal-box and LC.
BBC News website photo updated to show car being removed from the LC.
www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-york-north-yorkshire-65665628

The pictured car being a Tesla, how much autonomous equipment do they have that could have developed fault

 

[mike57]

The pictured car being a Tesla, how much autonomous equipment do they have that could have developed fault

Even a correctly maintained car can develop an unexpected fault. Most of the time it doesn't have serious consequences, but every so often everything lines up and it results in an incident with more serious consequences.

I work in a high hazard industry (not railways) and have been in engineering 50 years, and over that time I have heard "That cant happen" too many times, and on occassions it has happened. To be fair the majority of incidents do have a human factors component, but every so often something happens that no one could have foreseen or avoided.

At least from the NYMR perspective there doesn't seem to be any shortfall, as evidenced by the post #36, the RAIB will not be investigating further.

It also worth remembering that people make mistakes, there does seem to be a tendancy to try and 'pin the blame' these days, probably to do with insurance claims, but unless someone is negligent I am not sure if it serves a purpose, better to look at how you can avoid a repetition, as human error is usually one of several factors in any incident. It also worth noting that when we are reviewing human factors even with the best guidance and clear indications we have to assume that 1 in 100 times the human will not carry out the operation correctly, maybe conservative, but humans are falliable. Our gold standard is to have a system which is passively safe, i.e. cannot physically get into a hazardous condition barring major external events that are unforeseeable. Obviously with cars, railways etc this is not acheivable.

 

[Lucan]

The pictured car being a Tesla, how much autonomous equipment do they have that could have developed fault

Even a correctly maintained car can develop an unexpected fault.

There is the point that [some but not all?] Teslas are fitted with "Autopilot" which is assumed by some of its owners to be self-driving AI, although Tesla themselves do a double act of hyping its capability while at the same time doing the legal footwork to evade any responsibility for it going wrong - as it often does. I could post numerous links to examples here but they are easily found, and the best summary of Autopilot's performance on typical UK secondary roads was given by someone who said it was like being chauffeured by a drunk.

A question to which we might never know the answer (as in many "self-driving" crashes) is whether the Autopilot was engaged in this case at this time. Muddying the waters is the fact that with many Tesla crashes the car may have been on Autopilot leading up to the crash but the driver took over in the last few seconds when they realised the danger, but was too late to avoid it. This of course enables Tesla to claim that the crash did not occur under Autopilot.

 

[zwk500]

A question to which we might never know the answer (as in many "self-driving" crashes) is whether the Autopilot was engaged in this case at this time.

Legally in the UK is the driver not still responsible for monitoring the Autopilot and intervening if it fails to detect an obstacle?

 

[Lucan]

Legally in the UK is the driver not still responsible for monitoring the Autopilot and intervening if it fails to detect an obstacle?

Yes the driver is still responsible, and Tesla tell you to remain alert with your hands on the wheel (which largely defeats the point of it). But that does not stop drivers from ignoring the requirement; and even if you do stay alert it takes a new type of skill to decide at what point to intervene with the Autopilot.

 

[zwk500]

Yes they are, and Tesla tell you to remain alert with your hands on the wheel (which largely defeats the point of it). But that does not stop drivers from ignoring the requirement; and even if you do stay alert it takes a new type of skill to decide at what point to intervene with the Autopilot.

At which point, it is an active choice of the driver that the crash happened as sure as if they drove drunk.

 

[mike57]

it takes a new type of skill to decide at what point to intervene with the Autopilot.

I think this this sentence is very important, and I suspect something that is not currently covered or developed, you could almost see the need for simulators to hone that sort of skill, and that massively complicates the learning required (and costs).

 

[swt_passenger]

I suspect if there’d been even a whisper that this incident was caused specifically by a Tesla feature the media would be all over it by now.

(I remember that Park Royal spectacular last year, discussed in a recent thread, seemed to be reported as a “Tesla problem” for the first few hours, until it became clear they were just innocent bystanders…)

 

[Mcr Warrior]

When was the last time on the GB network that a collision between a railway train and a car (or similar other road vehicle) wasn't caused, directly or indirectly, by the action (or inaction) of the car driver, or some vehicle-related fault?

 

[edwin_m]

When was the last time on the GB network that a collision between a railway train and a car (or similar other road vehicle) wasn't caused, directly or indirectly, by the action (or inaction) of the car driver, or some vehicle-related fault?

Not sure if Moreton-on-Lugg was the most recent one, but it did cause one fatality and several injuries. Signaller error made dangerous by inadequate interlocking.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Not sure if Moreton-on-Lugg was the most recent one, but it did cause one fatality and several injuries. Signaller error made dangerous by inadequate interlocking.

Thanks for clarifying. Think that incident was maybe just over thirteen years ago, now.

 

[paul1609]

When was the last time on the GB network that a collision between a railway train and a car (or similar other road vehicle) wasn't caused, directly or indirectly, by the action (or inaction) of the car driver, or some vehicle-related fault?

I believe there have been several incidents with collisions or near misses with agricultural vehicles on user worked crossings where the railway was at least partially to blame. One caused hysteria on the other popular enthusiasts forum with several people (including rail staff I suggest) calling for immediate jail sentences for the Polish Tractor Driver involved, only for it to be revealed shortly after that he'd been given permission to cross in front of the train by the signaller.

 

[Cowley]

I believe there have been several incidents with collisions or near misses with agricultural vehicles on user worked crossings where the railway was at least partially to blame. One caused hysteria on the other popular enthusiasts forum with several people (including rail staff I suggest) calling for immediate jail sentences for the Polish Tractor Driver involved, only for it to be revealed shortly after that he'd been given permission to cross in front of the train by the signaller.

Yes indeed and I think that highlights the fact that we’re guessing here in a vacuum of certain information.

Well call it a day for now and revisit it as and when more is known.

Thanks everyone