RAIB: Collision at Stainforth Road level crossing

[waynemorrell]

RAIB report:
Collision at Stainforth Road level crossing

Investigation into a collision between a car and stationary train on Stainforth Road level crossing near Doncaster, 11 January 2018.

At about 05:45 hrs on Thursday 11 January 2018, a car collided with a freight train which was standing on the down Skellow line with its rear wagon partially blocking Stainforth Road automatic half-barrier (AHB) level crossing. The car driver suffered minor injuries in the collision and their car was severely damaged.

Despite the presence of the train at the crossing, Stainforth Road AHB level crossing was open to road traffic when the collision occurred. This meant that its road traffic signals were not illuminated and its half-barriers were in the up position. At the time the accident occurred it was dark. The crossing is not illuminated and its rural location means that there are no ambient light sources nearby.

The design of this crossing results in the requirement for down trains to cover a distance of around 28 metres to clear the road surface after the re-opening sequence has been triggered....

Can’t the crossing be so designed so that that the raise sequence doesn't start until its proved clear ?

 

[Tio Terry]

One would think that the average car driver would notice a rail wagon on the road in front of them?

 

[randyrippley]

But what mad fool designs a barrier system which lifts before the train clears the crossing?

 

[Tio Terry]

But what mad fool designs a barrier system which lifts before the train clears the crossing?

Many years ago, in the day's of British Rail, I worked with the S&T department in Norwich. We had a problem with an AHB - from memory I think it was Intwood but it might have been Keswick - on the Norwich-Ely line. Because the line closed on Sunday's in those days the track circuits for the crossings were of the high voltage impulse type which would break through any rust that had formed during the no traffic period. But close to the AHB in question was a riding school. There were a number of instances of horses getting shoes across both rails, getting a shock and unseating their riders in a rather spectacular fashion! To solve this problem the AHB clearance controls were moved to the approach side of the crossing. This could result in a very slow moving train still being foul of the crossing when the barriers were raised. Now I don't know anything about Stainforth Road so I'm not saying that it has the same sort of controls but it is a possibility.

However, I still think it's strange that any car driver would drive in to an obstruction of any sort situated in front of them on an open road.

 

[Bromley boy]

One would think that the average car driver would notice a rail wagon on the road in front of them?

You would, but I guess if it was dark, in a rural location, would the light from the car's headlights fall too low to illuminate the wagons? Some of them have quite a bit of empty space underneath and car headlights are only 2-3 feet off the ground.

 

[alxndr]

I can imagine it being quite tricky to spot a wagon in the dark, especially in time to come to a stop and if someone was using dipped headlights. There's nothing reflective to pick up light, unlike say a parked car (which would have needed to be using parking lights on a road of that speed).

I think it's interesting to note that where an automatic crossing has failed, a driver cannot pass in the hours of darkness unless his train is formed of lit coaches.

4.4 If the crossing is not working correctly
Passage of trains during darkness
If the white light at the crossing is not flashing, you must not pass over the crossing during darkness unless one of the following conditions applies.
• The train is a passenger or empty coaching stock train and the interior lights are lit.
• Arrangements have been made to prevent road traffic from passing over the crossing.
• At an ABCL the barriers are in the lowered position and the lights on the barriers are lit.

https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/rulebooks/GERT8000-TW8 Iss 8.pdf#13

It strikes me as strange that this situation where a (presumably) unlit wagon has been foul of the crossing without the wigwags/barriers being in operation has been allowed to occur. It shows that the railway is aware that there is a particular risk when it comes to unlit trains being foul of the crossing without warning.

Because the line closed on Sunday's in those days the track circuits for the crossings were of the high voltage impulse type. Now I don't know anything about Stainforth Road so I'm not saying that it has the same sort of controls but it is a possibility.

Looking at the streetview images for the crossing on Google Maps it looks as though it's controlled via treadle, with Asters for the underlying track circuits, unless any changes have occured since 2016. Based on that alone, it doesn't strike me as a particularly unusual crossing set up.

 

[notverydeep]

Looking at Google Maps this is a long straight road and so might well be driven at around the national speed limit. This might mean that a dark object would not be picked up. In my observation drivers rely heavily on the white lines and kerb line as their key visual cue on dark, unlit roads and this concentration on these can lead to limited perception of stationary objects the rest of the field of view unless well lit. The report says that just the last wagon of the train was partly blocking the crossing. It is possible that lights from oncoming vehicles would have 'washed out' much of the detail as the driver approached.

The RAIB news item doesn't specify the direction of travel (of either train or car) or weather at the time and local news reports simply use a Google Street View screen capture. The moon was above the horizon (roughly South South East) at the time of the accident and wouldn't have been directly behind a driver going North East along Stainforth Road - it would have been to the left of a driver travelling South West. It could of course have been obscured by cloud.

There is a thick hedge on the left hand side approaching the crossing travelling NE and that would further have obscured a westbound train, the other side and the driver's approach driving South West is more open...

Sorry - I see from subsequent comments that the direction of the car and by inference the train is in the image caption - I had read the text in detail, but missed that!

 

[LCC106]

The train was traveling from right to left according to the comment under the photo, which was taken from the car's approach position if I read rightly.

 

[alxndr]

The RAIB state that the photograph was taken in the direction of the car's travel, so they would have been heading North East. The train was travelling from the East, so would have been standing to the West of the crossing as the car struck it.

The moon was a waning crescent that morning, with just over a quarter visable, so wouldn't have provided a great deal of light, and the weather was apparently "passing clouds".

 

[Taunton]

One would think that the average car driver would notice a rail wagon on the road in front of them?

You have to bear in mind that 50% of drivers are, by definition, below average ability.

If a parked road vehicle had been left unlit in the dark at such a position, it would most likely have been hit by the following morning.

 

[MichaelAMW]

Could this be explained by the tail of the train rolling back after the brakes were released? Even 6 inches of slack in a coupling is fifteen feet over the length of many tanker trains.

 

[swaldman]

Looking at that picture... approaching that crossing at 50-60mph in the dark, one would see the reflective strips around the lights, and the reflectors on the (raised) barriers, and the reflective roadsigns, and perhaps not a dark-coloured wagon, maybe only slightly across the road, against a black road and the night sky.

It's a scary thought.

 

[Ash Bridge]

Looking at that picture... approaching that crossing at 50-60mph in the dark, one would see the reflective strips around the lights, and the reflectors on the (raised) barriers, and the reflective roadsigns, and perhaps not a dark-coloured wagon, maybe only slightly across the road, against a black road and the night sky.

It's a scary thought.

Should a driver be approaching a crossing at such an excessive speed though, not only at night but under any conditions?

 

[Mojo]

Should a driver be approaching a crossing at such an excessive speed though, not only at night but under any conditions?

What's the definition of excessive speed? I occasionally drive over the level crossing on the A1133 near Collingham during the hours of darkness at ~100km/h and cannot see any reason to not do so.

 

[Ash Bridge]

More a common sense thing really, approaching an LC at 60 mph to my mind does not leave a lot of reaction time should the unexpected occur, the thought of doing this in a rural location during total darkness frightens the life out of me.

 

[Taunton]

What's the definition of excessive speed? I occasionally drive over the level crossing on the A1133 near Collingham during the hours of darkness at ~100km/h and cannot see any reason to not do so.

I suppose it comes from my time in the USA, but approaching every level crossing (not too many) I turn off the radio and open the car window a bit, to listen for any train horn. And am prepared to stop.

 

[Raul_Duke]

I suppose it comes from my time in the USA, but approaching every level crossing (not too many) I turn off the radio and open the car window a bit, to listen for any train horn. And am prepared to stop.

That’s a ridiculous amount of common sense. Motorists should not be expected to have to think for themselves or anticipate potential risks!!

(I am genuinely glad that the car driver was relatively unscathed on this occasion though.)

 

[FordFocus]

I'm happy the car driver is okay.

The railway does have to take some form of responsibility here as it works both ways with level crossings. If the lights are flashing red then the motorist has the responsibility of stopping and not obstructing the crossing. Equally the motorist (in particular during darkness) should trust the crossing to be clear if the flashing traffic signals aren't illuminated. Freight wagons don't have reflectors and hitting a wagon last minute is like seeing a tree fallen in the road on a blind bend, you have no prior warning.

 

[bramling]

What's the definition of excessive speed? I occasionally drive over the level crossing on the A1133 near Collingham during the hours of darkness at ~100km/h and cannot see any reason to not do so.

I wouldn't go over a crossing at that speed. Too much chance of the surface of the crossing being in poor state, e.g. panels unsecure. Hit one of those awkwardly at speed and the car is guaranteed to be off the road.

In fact I think this may have been a factor in a crossing mishap in recent years - somewhere on the Ely-Norwich line IIRC.

I won't go over a crossing at more than about 40 mph at the very most.

 

[GB]

Just some further info. The rear of the train was over the crossing by a few feet due to the train coming to a stand because of a temporary loco issue. One motorist avoided the train and reported it to the police. While the police were reporting it to NR the accident happened. The train moved off a short time later and was stopped and examined further down the line.

Note, it was the extreme rear, ie the buffer beam and hopper control panel that was hit which is probably why the car driver didn't see it. Its not as if the whole side of the wagon was on the crossing.

Looking at the picture of the car (which I am sure will be included in the report), had there been a front or left back seat passenger it could quite possibly have been a fatal collision.

 

[Taunton]

There's a "Keep Crossing Clear" sign in the photo of the scene.

Doesn't that apply to everyone?

 

[Tio Terry]

Hmmmm ..... I've managed to drive around in all conditions for over 50 years, much of it in rural East Anglia but also around London and Spain, without hitting anything. Trees, animals, people, parked cars, railway wagons, you name it and I've missed it. Perhaps it's me and me driving within my limits and those of my vehicle - including it's headlights! All to their own but in my view if you drive in to something on an open road it's got to be your fault for driving dangerously - or at least without due care and attention.

No doubt the inquiry will get to the cause.

 

[twpsaesneg]

Im sure a signalling fratenity bod will know, but I'm sure some if not all AHBs have a timeout relay so that they automatically raise after a certain amount of time if a train hasn't struck out. ISTR that it will then show as failed in the box.
So if this is a long freight that's been checked at a signal for a while whilst overhanging the crossing that may be the cause.

 

[David Burrows]

What's the definition of excessive speed? I occasionally drive over the level crossing on the A1133 near Collingham during the hours of darkness at ~100km/h and cannot see any reason to not do so.

Some level crossings are very bumpy to drive over even at low speed. Some are maintained well and are level and one hardly notices when driving over them at, say 60mph. The crossing in question may be one of these and if the driver knew this there is no reason for not expecting to be able to drive across at a good speed. One surely does not have to expect that part of a wagon will be in the road.

 

[Raul_Duke]

Some level crossings are very bumpy to drive over even at low speed. Some are maintained well and are level and one hardly notices when driving over them at, say 60mph. The crossing in question may be one of these and if the driver knew this there is no reason for not expecting to be able to drive across at a good speed. One surely does not have to expect that part of a wagon will be in the road.

I get your point. However, maybe it’s just the job I do, but I’d never assume the crossing was clear, even if there were no lights, I’d always slow down and check myself.

 

[David Burrows]

I get your point. However, maybe it’s just the job I do, but I’d never assume the crossing was clear, even if there were no lights, I’d always slow down and check myself.

I completely appreciate that you might slow down and check, but the general public probably don't if the way ahead is, as far as they can reasonably see, clear. Should we all slow down to, say, 20 mph at every green traffic light on a dual-carriageway in case someone else passes a red light and thus obstructs our path? No, despite the fact that this is far more likely to occur than a part of a wagon is to be found obstructing a road, we assume that the road will remain clear and keep going.
Slowing down at a level crossing might have avoided the current incident, but slowing down would not prevent an accident where, due to a human or equipment fault a train passed over a crossing at some speed with the barriers still raised and no warning lights for road traffic, as has happened on occasion.

 

[Chris M]

How practical would it be to fit reflectors to the sides of freight wagons?
Obviously it would be a big job, given the number of wagons out there, but are we talking £5 or £500 per vehicle?

 

[Steptoe]

I don't suppose there are many AOCL's left on the national network but the Mid Norfolk Railway inherited one from BR. This was designed (and is therefore so maintained) so that the flashing red lights switch off once the front of the train depresses the treadle just off the crossing. Motorists quite reasonably are then expected not to proceed until the train has actually cleared the crossing; this applies equally to unlit engineering trains as to lit passenger stock.

Having watched numerous occasions where car (and van!) drivers have gone through these red lights despite the obvious presence of an approaching train I expect nothing sensible from them (and I retain a special space in my heart for the gentleman who crashed into a shut lit white gate on a straight section of road causing it to swing into the train)

 

[Taunton]

How practical would it be to fit reflectors to the sides of freight wagons?

Compulsory in the USA

https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...eflectorization-of-rail-freight-rolling-stock

Note the USA experience described in there, of the combination present in this incident.

As noted in the NPRM, approximately 4,000 times each year, a train and a highway vehicle collide at a highway-rail grade crossing in the United States. Approximately 23% of all highway-rail grade crossing accidents involve motor vehicles running into trains occupying grade crossings (“RIT” accidents). Many of these RIT accidents occur during nighttime conditions (dawn, dusk, and darkness) and involve a highway vehicle striking a train behind the first two units of the consist. This suggests that a contributing factor to many RIT accidents is the difficulty motorists have in seeing a train consist at a crossing in time to stop their vehicles before reaching the crossing, particularly during periods of limited visibility, such as dawn, dusk, darkness

And that's without the cues at the incident site that the crossing was clear, such as lights not flashing, reflectorised barriers in the raised position, etc.

 

[LAX54]

But what mad fool designs a barrier system which lifts before the train clears the crossing?

Simply that they don't