Whittlesey - collision between freight train and tractor. (19/08/21)

[Tio Terry]

Of course, use it or lose it is not applicable because most of these crossings are legally protected in some shape or form. To resolve the legal issues either requires a sack of cash, whichever way you go about it.

If the crossing couldn't be abolished, could NR secure the gates and appoint a crossing keeper? And if so, can they charge the cost of doing so to the farmers who've caused the incidents that have led to that being the solution?
I'm guessing the answers are 'in theory yes', and 'no', respectively, so it wouldn't be a viable option.

In the case of the Chivers Crossing collision back in BR days, BR were forced to automate the crossing at their own cost.

 

[G Broughton]

BR spent that money to prevent further loss of life, remember both DMU drivers were killed in the 1970 and 1976 accidents due to total disregard of the rules by drivers of vehicles at that crossing.

 

[Tio Terry]

BR spent that money to prevent further loss of life, remember both DMU drivers were killed in the 1970 and 1976 accidents due to total disregard of the rules by drivers of vehicles at that crossing.

BR wanted to close the crossing and force the farmer to apply for Change of Use because of the carrot washing plant. That would have pushed the cost of automation on to the farmer. But the DOT forced BR to foot the bill. I can assure you that BR didn't do it out of the goodness of their heart!

 

[LAX54]

Three Gates Xing on the Clacton and Walton Lines was recently closed, NR did a deal with the Farmer, think there is alternate access for him, still cost NR a LOT of money to secure the closure tho

 

[Llanigraham]

Three Gates Xing on the Clacton and Walton Lines was recently closed, NR did a deal with the Farmer, think there is alternate access for him, still cost NR a LOT of money to secure the closure tho

On the Cambrian, east of Talerddig Cutting, NR removed numerous UWC's which were all just field access and replaced them by upgrading a previous bridge and improving road access, all with the agreement from the local farmers. They did similar to between Newtown Station and Abermule, and you can still see the old crossings as you drive along the A483 that runs parallel. Agrede though, it wasn't cheap.

 

[JBuchananGB]

The Parsonage Lane User Worked Crossing crossing in Margaretting was festooned with closure notices a few years ago, when I saw a Tesco delivery van working its way across it. Maybe it has now been closed, but Google Streetview still shows it as it was.

 

[apinnard]

The Parsonage Lane User Worked Crossing crossing in Margaretting was festooned with closure notices a few years ago, when I saw a Tesco delivery van working its way across it. Maybe it has now been closed, but Google Streetview still shows it as it was.

Motts Lane foot crossing at Witham was closed around 7-8 years ago and replaced with a bridge. Albeit not in a rural setting, it must have been an expensive closure.

 

[Sean Emmett]

On the Cambrian, east of Talerddig Cutting, NR removed numerous UWC's which were all just field access and replaced them by upgrading a previous bridge and improving road access, all with the agreement from the local farmers. They did similar to between Newtown Station and Abermule, and you can still see the old crossings as you drive along the A483 that runs parallel. Agrede though, it wasn't cheap.

There was also an entirely new bridge constructed too.

 

[snowball]

The Talerddig scheme is described in more detail in the press release quoted in post 225 in this thread:

When will we see the end of level crossings?

What about the huge number of farm and foot crossings. There's been a few incidents with these recently probably more of a risk than barriered crossings. K

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[Class 170101]

Motts Lane foot crossing at Witham was closed around 7-8 years ago and replaced with a bridge. Albeit not in a rural setting, it must have been an expensive closure.

Time mostly due to land acquisitions needed and then possession access to install the bridge. Signalling was also adjusted but that came later.

 

[ainsworth74]

There has been a short update from the RAIB confirming that they will be carrying out an investigation into this accident. There is a brief summary of events and information concerning the scope of their investigation:

At 09:01 hrs on 19 August 2021, a freight train consisting of a class 66 locomotive and 36 container wagons struck a loaded farm trailer at Kisby user worked level crossing, situated near to March, in Cambridgeshire. The train driver applied the train’s emergency brake around 6 seconds before the collision occurred, but the train was still travelling at around 58 mph (93 km/h) when it struck the trailer.

As a result of the collision, the trailer parted from the tractor that was pulling it and was then dragged along by the train. The leading axle of the locomotive and an unladen wagon in the middle of the train also derailed. The train ran derailed for around 780 metres before it came to a stop.

Both the train and tractor drivers suffered shock following the accident and the train driver was also treated for minor injuries. The locomotive suffered significant structural damage during the accident and level crossing and track equipment were also extensively damaged. Train services were disrupted on both lines for four days while the train was recovered and repairs were made to the track and signalling infrastructure.

Kisby user worked crossing is fitted with a telephone and with user-operated powered (POGO) gates. These gates are not interlocked with the railway’s signalling system. Users are directed by signs at the crossing to use the telephones to obtain permission from the signaller before opening the crossing gates and crossing the railway. RAIB has been unable to find any evidence that a request to use the crossing was made by the driver of the tractor involved.

Our investigation will seek to identify the sequence of events which led to the accident, including the actions of the tractor driver and other users of the crossing. It will examine how the crossing was being managed and how the risks associated with its use were being assessed and mitigated by Network Rail.

[Withdrawn] Collision and derailment of a freight train at Kisby user worked level crossing

Investigation into a collision and derailment of a freight train at Kisby user worked level crossing, Cambridgeshire, 19 August 2021.

www.gov.uk

Personally I thought this is probably quite telling:

RAIB has been unable to find any evidence that a request to use the crossing was made by the driver of the tractor involved.

 

[2HAP]

As I said earlier, a repeat of Dymchurch.

 

[trebor79]

I hope they also consider how the risks associated with the use of the level crossing were being assessed and mitigated by the tractor driver, his employer and the farmer responsible for the crossing.
They won't of course, all of the blame and cost of mitigation to avoid future events will be heaped on NR.

 

[Bald Rick]

I hope they also consider how the risks associated with the use of the level crossing were being assessed and mitigated by the tractor driver, his employer and the farmer responsible for the crossing.
They won't of course, all of the blame and cost of mitigation to avoid future events will be heaped on NR.

They will, but then the tractor driver, his employer and farmer may not necessarily give evidence. It also depends on whether there is a criminal investigation ongoing.

 

[ainsworth74]

The RAIB have now published their report. You can find the full report here and a summary is provided below:

Summary​

At around 09:00 hrs on Thursday 19 August 2021, the 04:10 hrs freight train service from Hams Hall (Birmingham) to Felixstowe collided with agricultural machinery being towed over the railway by a tractor at Kisby user worked crossing, between Whittlesey and March in Cambridgeshire. The train was travelling at about 66 mph (106 km/h) when it struck the machinery. The train driver suffered minor injuries in the accident and the tractor driver was uninjured. The locomotive and one wagon derailed, with both suffering some damage. There was also extensive damage to the infrastructure of the railway.

The accident happened because the tractor driver did not telephone the signaller before crossing the railway to seek permission to cross. This was a consequence of the tractor driver not being briefed about the requirement to call the signaller and his belief that he could cross safely by looking for approaching trains. This probably arose because the authorised user, the person owning land on both sides of the level crossing, was not briefing crossing users in a way which resulted in correct use of the crossing, and railway staff were unaware that this was the case until shortly before the accident. RAIB found that Network Rail was not effectively managing the safe use of Kisby, and some other user worked crossings with telephones, and that this was an underlying factor for the accident.

Recommendations​

RAIB has made two recommendations, one addressed to Network Rail and one addressed to the Health and Safety Executive, as a result of its investigation. These seek improvements in the management and assurance processes applied to user worked crossings and an additional means of communicating crossing safety information to agricultural workers. RAIB has also written to several organisations representing farmers asking that they remind their members of the importance of following correct procedures at user worked crossings.