Welshpool crossing crash (22/06/20)

[Bald Rick]

The signage on that crossing is an absolute dog's breakfast. Looking at the images of Powys Dog Training on Google Maps, the warning signs in order of prominence say:
1. STOP
2. STOP - LOOK - LISTEN Beware of trains
3. BOARDING KENNEL OPENING TIMES
4. Caution - CCTV operated by Network Rail
5. 1.Open far gate before crossing with vehicles or animals / 2.Cross quickly / 3.Close and secure gates after use
6. Always telephone before crossing with vehicles or animals to find out if there is time to cross

Yes, there is a telephone, but it is located behind the railway fence, so to a driver unfamiliar with UWCs, it looks like it is for use by railway staff.

I can easily see how a unfamiliar driver would find the instructions 1,2,3 in black and white and follow them to the letter. And this is a crossing to a boarding kennels. They must have dozens of visitors every week who have never been there before and may never have seen a User Worked Crossing.

Google Maps

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

www.google.co.uk

RAIB will no doubt take this into account during their investigation. They look clear to me, but then perhaps I understand better, being used to them.

However, assuming this is a private crossing, it will have a nominated “Authorised user”, usually the owner of the property it serves. This authorised user has a responsibility to make sure that all users of the level crossing understand the procedure for crossing the line. To be fair, the owners of the kennels has a clear procedure posted on their website.

But above all, there is common sense.

 

[Llanigraham]

The signage on that crossing is an absolute dog's breakfast. Looking at the images of Powys Dog Training on Google Maps, the warning signs in order of prominence say:
1. STOP
2. STOP - LOOK - LISTEN Beware of trains
3. BOARDING KENNEL OPENING TIMES
4. Caution - CCTV operated by Network Rail
5. 1.Open far gate before crossing with vehicles or animals / 2.Cross quickly / 3.Close and secure gates after use
6. Always telephone before crossing with vehicles or animals to find out if there is time to cross

Yes, there is a telephone, but it is located behind the railway fence, so to a driver unfamiliar with UWCs, it looks like it is for use by railway staff.

I can easily see how a unfamiliar driver would find the instructions 1,2,3 in black and white and follow them to the letter. And this is a crossing to a boarding kennels. They must have dozens of visitors every week who have never been there before and may never have seen a User Worked Crossing.

Google Maps

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

www.google.co.uk

The official signs, as shown in the picture in your link are quite obvious and their first words, in the red section, are "ALWAYS TELEPHONE BEFORE CROSSING WITH VEHICLES". That sign is right by the latch you have to undo to open the gate!
There is a yellow sign on the gate that confirms that there are CCTV cameras present.
The telephone is not behind the fence, it is actually on a post level with the top of the fence, next to the pedestrian gate, and is blatantly obvious.
The large white sign on the gate is unofficial, but I suspect is tolerated because it gives the hours of they are open.

 

[ForTheLoveOf]

RAIB will no doubt take this into account during their investigation. They look clear to me, but then perhaps I understand better, being used to them.

However, assuming this is a private crossing, it will have a nominated “Authorised user”, usually the owner of the property it serves. This authorised user has a responsibility to make sure that all users of the level crossing understand the procedure for crossing the line. To be fair, the owners of the kennels has a clear procedure posted on their website.

But above all, there is common sense.

Most "traditional" road crossings that drivers will tend to come across are automatically operated by the presence of a train, and many signals won't clear unless the barriers are verified as closed (and in the case of monitored crossings verified as clear). It doesn't seem at all unusual to me that someone unfamiliar with this kind of level crossing might think that trains will be held if they are on it.

The signage is falls quite a way short in communicating the vital instructions. The presence of the kennel opening times sign is a distraction that Network Rail should not have authorised, or if it didn't authorise it then why did it not get flagged up on a routine track inspection?

As far as I can tell, the only instruction the driver directly disobeyed was to cross "quickly". But even that is arguable; nowhere does it say you must stay in your vehicle, or cross within a stated time period. Perhaps the driver genuinely thought this was the correct way to use the crossing, even having read all the signage.

And why does the signage not say to open both gates before bringing anything onto the crossing? If I were this driver's insurer I would definitely be considering a claim (or partial defence) of contributory negligence against NR.

 

[Bald Rick]

Most "traditional" road crossings that drivers will tend to come across are automatically operated by the presence of a train, and many signals won't clear unless the barriers are verified as closed (and in the case of monitored crossings verified as clear). It doesn't seem at all unusual to me that someone unfamiliar with this kind of level crossing might think that trains will be held if they are on it.

Most “traditional” level crossings don’t require you to get out of your vehicle and operate the gates / barriers yourself. And most road vehicle drivers won’t have the foggiest idea about signalling arrangements.

Let’s put this another way. Would any reasonably competent driver, if opening a gate into an adjacent field, park their vehicle broadside on to the road in the middle of a blind bend?

As far as I can tell, the only instruction the driver directly disobeyed was to cross "quickly".

What about the instruction that says “Always telephone before crossing with vehicles...” ?

That is also a clear instruction to do that on the website of the kennels.

Finally, you would hope that the vehicle driver has passed a driving test, and thus have at some point studied the Highway Code. Rules 291 and 294-297 apply.

 

[6Gman]

Most "traditional" road crossings that drivers will tend to come across are automatically operated by the presence of a train, and many signals won't clear unless the barriers are verified as closed (and in the case of monitored crossings verified as clear). It doesn't seem at all unusual to me that someone unfamiliar with this kind of level crossing might think that trains will be held if they are on it.

The signage is falls quite a way short in communicating the vital instructions. The presence of the kennel opening times sign is a distraction that Network Rail should not have authorised, or if it didn't authorise it then why did it not get flagged up on a routine track inspection?

As far as I can tell, the only instruction the driver directly disobeyed was to cross "quickly". But even that is arguable; nowhere does it say you must stay in your vehicle, or cross within a stated time period. Perhaps the driver genuinely thought this was the correct way to use the crossing, even having read all the signage.

And why does the signage not say to open both gates before bringing anything onto the crossing? If I were this driver's insurer I would definitely be considering a claim (or partial defence) of contributory negligence against NR.

There is a red sign with STOP written on it, with instructions below. It's right next to the catch on the gate which you need to operate to cross.

Read the sign. Follow the instructions. Simple.

 

[alxndr]

While all the information required is on the signs, the layout and wording of those signs is something that has been deemed to have been a causal factor in several previous crossing incidents and leaves something to be desired. Although common sense says that a user should take the time to carefully read and understand what is required of them in order to cross safely and to err on the side of caution if they are uncertain, it cannot be ignored that the signage at crossings is not as clear as it could be.

In my opinion, one major flaw with the main instructional sign for UWCs is that there is a 3 step list for how to use the crossing, which does not mention at any point the need to telephone before crossing. The instruction to telephone is above and separate, in the portion of text on the red background. The eye is drawn to the large "stop" at the top of the sign, and then down to the black-on-white 3 step instruction. There is a temptation to skim the all-important telephone instruction as it is in a larger paragraph and there is less contrast between the red and white.

The RSSB report into Signs at private road level crossings also raises some interesting points about that particular sign as well:

• Around half were unable to correctly identify which groups of users the sign is intended for.
• Only around 70% stated that they would phone the crossing operator when crossing with a vehicle. Over 15% said they would only call if they were unsure if it was safe and over 10% said they would only call in an emergency.
• Over a quarter stated they would cross if they could see no trains approaching.
• In the section of the report considering alternative signage, the equivalent signs produced had additional steps, with the first being to call. Unfortunately, I don't believe this came to anything.

 

[PG]

In my opinion, one major flaw with the main instructional sign for UWCs is that there is a 3 step list for how to use the crossing, which does not mention at any point the need to telephone before crossing. The instruction to telephone is above and separate, in the portion of text on the red background. The eye is drawn to the large "stop" at the top of the sign, and then down to the black-on-white 3 step instruction. There is a temptation to skim the all-important telephone instruction as it is in a larger paragraph and there is less contrast between the red and white.

Several others agree with your opinion, notably RAIB and DfT.
The RAIB summary of learning - UWC has this to say about signs (my bold):

At present, the signs that may be provided at user worked crossings are specified and described in the Private Crossings (Signs and Barriers) Regulations 1996. The signs which are specified do not reflect current thinking on how to convey information, are badly designed and can be confusing and hard to understand. In addition to this, the regulations do not include signs suitable for use with the various novel technologies that have been introduced in recent years, such as power-operated gates and barriers. We have recommended that the Department for Transport (DfT), working with the industry and the regulator, should revise and update the regulations so that clear, effective signs can be used at these crossings (report 13/2009 and report 12/2018). The DfT has indicated that it intends to introduce new regulations during 2020.

I'm having technical difficulties quoting from the Frognall Farm UWC report but it says (paragraphs 92-98) much the same as you've said.

The STOP word should be the only word in white on the red background at the top of the sign.​

All other wording should be black text on a white background.​

The requirement to telephone should be the first item.​

​

I suspect the DfT intention to introduce new regulations this year may be delayed.

I'm of the opinion that it will be between two and five years before new signs are installed at the majority of UWC, so sadly the likelihood exists of further incidents at UWC in the coming few years.

 

[gsnedders]

Do we know how long the signal block is now with ETCS?

From the Penrhyndeudraeth UWC crash (pre-ETCS on the line) report:

Telephones at UWCs on lines with long signalling sections and where the signaller may not know precisely where the train is, may lead to long waiting times for crossing users and encourage the user to cross without using the telephone. The car driver in this case did not use the telephone to contact the signaller to ask if it was safe to cross. It is important that this factor is taken into account when considering risk and options for improvement at user worked crossings with telephones.

 

[The Planner]

Do we know how long the signal block is now with ETCS?

From the Penrhyndeudraeth UWC crash (pre-ETCS on the line) report:

Fairly sure the there is a block marker around Westbury, and obviously the one entering Welshpool station but we plan it as an effective absolute block between Sutton Bridge and Welshpool. It would be rare to flight in the same direction along there.

 

[DerekC]

The signage on that crossing is an absolute dog's breakfast. Looking at the images of Powys Dog Training on Google Maps, the warning signs in order of prominence say:
1. STOP
2. STOP - LOOK - LISTEN Beware of trains
3. BOARDING KENNEL OPENING TIMES
4. Caution - CCTV operated by Network Rail
5. 1.Open far gate before crossing with vehicles or animals / 2.Cross quickly / 3.Close and secure gates after use
6. Always telephone before crossing with vehicles or animals to find out if there is time to cross

Yes, there is a telephone, but it is located behind the railway fence, so to a driver unfamiliar with UWCs, it looks like it is for use by railway staff.

I can easily see how a unfamiliar driver would find the instructions 1,2,3 in black and white and follow them to the letter. And this is a crossing to a boarding kennels. They must have dozens of visitors every week who have never been there before and may never have seen a User Worked Crossing.

Google Maps

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

www.google.co.uk

I think that gravely misrepresents the signage at the crossing and I recommend looking at the linked picture more carefully.

 

[Taunton]

Finally, you would hope that the vehicle driver has passed a driving test, and thus have at some point studied the Highway Code. Rules 291 and 294-297 apply.

The RAIB covered this one in a previous report, somewhere in East Anglia I think, where the railway risk assessment indeed said that drivers of heavy vehicles would have covered these points in their extended driving test, but licences from all across the EU were now fully valid in the UK, and drivers in particular of commercial vehicles with non-UK licences now represented a significant proportion of such drivers, and in some sectors a majority, including the driver of the accident vehicle.

 

[Bald Rick]

The RAIB covered this one in a previous report, somewhere in East Anglia I think, where the railway risk assessment indeed said that drivers of heavy vehicles would have covered these points in their extended driving test, but licences from all across the EU were now fully valid in the UK, and drivers in particular of commercial vehicles with non-UK licences now represented a significant proportion of such drivers, and in some sectors a majority, including the driver of the accident vehicle.

Indeed. That driver went to prison for 15 months.

 

[Nottingham59]

the Highway Code. Rules 291 and 294-297 apply

Hmm. Let's have a look at these. It's not as obvious as people may at first think:

Rule 291. "Approach and cross it with care". Yes, of course.
"Never drive onto a crossing until the road is clear on the other side" It probably was clear beyond the second gate. We don't know (yet) if that gate was open
"Never stop or park on, or near, a crossing." Well that's a nonsense in this case. You have to stop near the crossing to open the gate.

Rule 294: " You MUST obey any sign instructing you to use the railway telephone to obtain permission to cross." There is no sign instructing you to obtain permission. There is a sign that says you should phone for information. Which implies the decision to cross is yours.

Rule 295: " Crossings without traffic lights. Vehicles should stop and wait at the barrier or gate when it begins to close". Not relevant here.

Rule 296: "You MUST NOT cross when the red light is showing, only cross if the green light is on. If crossing with a vehicle, you should - open the gates .... cross quickly ... ". This barrier has no lights, so it doesn't apply

Rule 297: "If there are no lights, follow the procedure in Rule 296." i.e. open the gates and cross quickly. And then R297 follows that with:
"Stop, look both ways and listen before you cross." So you make the decision to cross.
"If there is a railway telephone, always use it to contact the signal operator to make sure it is safe to cross." i.e. for information, not for permission.

Everyone reading this forum knows what the signs mean, and more-or-less how to operate a UWC safely. And yes, the van driver probably broke the rules.

But I do think the railway industry is blind to the human factors and the risk of cofusion in naive drivers coming across a gate and a track in a field somewhere. The RAIB was scathing about the signage at Frognal Farm UWC in 2017: "There were multiple signs associated with the crossing which were placed in a way that meant they did not stand out to the van driver." " underlying cause of the accident was that the system where authorised users are responsible for briefing visitors about the safe way to use private crossings, is unreasonable in present-day circumstances." "the vital lesson from this investigation is how important it is that each user worked crossing is managed in a way that takes into account the context in which it is used, and the needs and expectations of the people who may encounter it in the course of their everyday business."

Report 12/2018: Collision at Frognal Farm User Worked Crossing

RAIB has today released its report into a collision at Frognal Farm User Worked Crossing, 23 October 2017.

www.gov.uk

 

[Taunton]

Despite longstanding both road and rail knowledge, I've never actually taken a vehicle across a user-worked crossing, so first contact with one would be novel to me too.

I did however encounter a failed AHB (it had been down for hours in a storm, next to the house we were in, and we had commented on it all morning; services appeared suspended), so when leaving I stopped, got out, checked the dead straight rail line, then instructed my passenger, a driver, on how to do same and handsignal as I drove across. Despite this explicit (and it was) briefing 10 seconds beforehand they waved me on with no looking up and down the line at all. They just said "I was seeing you didn't bump the gate". This is what you get from members of the public.

If those coming to the premises don't even know when it is open and need a supplementary notice for this, relying on the premises owner briefing any arriving driver beforehand seems misplaced. I guess it suited somebody's risk assessment though.

 

[30907]

The signage on that crossing is an absolute dog's breakfast. Looking at the images of Powys Dog Training on Google Maps, the warning signs in order of prominence say:
1. STOP
2. STOP - LOOK - LISTEN Beware of trains
3. BOARDING KENNEL OPENING TIMES
4. Caution - CCTV operated by Network Rail
5. 1.Open far gate before crossing with vehicles or animals / 2.Cross quickly / 3.Close and secure gates after use
6. Always telephone before crossing with vehicles or animals to find out if there is time to cross

Yes, there is a telephone, but it is located behind the railway fence, so to a driver unfamiliar with UWCs, it looks like it is for use by railway staff.

I can easily see how a unfamiliar driver would find the instructions 1,2,3 in black and white and follow them to the letter.

Signs 1, 6 and 5 are one sign - a standard one
The telephone is very close to the relevant sign.

Sign 2, also a standard one, appears to be adjacent to a pedestrian gate, and we'll out of the driver's view.

3 shouldn't be attached to NR property but I don't see it as a major issue.

A driver who followed instructions 1,2,3 as suggested would have crossed safely- this one didn't.

Incidentally (now I've read more posts) the recommendation to move the instruction to telephone from the mandatory part of the sign (white text on red) to the supplementary part (black text on white) is in Highway Code terms giving it lesser significance. That said, it seems desirable!

 

[cakefiend]

Despite longstanding both road and rail knowledge, I've never actually taken a vehicle across a user-worked crossing, so first contact with one would be novel to me too.

I did however encounter a failed AHB (it had been down for hours in a storm, next to the house we were in, and we had commented on it all morning; services appeared suspended), so when leaving I stopped, got out, checked the dead straight rail line, then instructed my passenger, a driver, on how to do same and handsignal as I drove across. Despite this explicit (and it was) briefing 10 seconds beforehand they waved me on with no looking up and down the line at all. They just said "I was seeing you didn't bump the gate". This is what you get from members of the public.

If those coming to the premises don't even know when it is open and need a supplementary notice for this, relying on the premises owner briefing any arriving driver beforehand seems misplaced. I guess it suited somebody's risk assessment though.

AHBs always have a phone to contact the signaller. Why didn't you use that?

 

[MarkWiles]

Given one of the villagers where I live managed to put their car into a train when it was virtually on the level crossing, frankly I would never underestimate the ability for the public to be utterly stupid. The fact the RAIB seem to think the signs need rewording and redesigning to make them clearer suggests that they too think that the majority of drivers, who never use a level crossing they have to open the gates to, really do need to have the process spelt out in words of one syllable.

Sadly there are many drivers who have never used a level crossing, let alone one not controlled by a signalperson or fitted with automatic devices. I think that those of us who are, or were involved with the railway industry forget that for many people, the railway doesn't exist on a day to day basis and so never get familiar with the risks involved, especially in rural areas.

 

[Tom Quinne]

If that is the case, then the driver can expect a stay at one of Her Majesty’s hotels.

I doubt it very much unfortunately.
How long did the bloke at Great Heck for the manslaughter of a number of people?

It’s about time crossing misuse was treated with the seriousness it needs; too long has the railway simply accepted the blame when it should have stood up and said actually it’s the people who misuse the crossing who are at fault.

 

[Tom Quinne]

I find that simply extraordinary! I occasionally use a user-worked crossing (with warning lights). I would never, ever, ever, ever even think about stopping in the four-foot.

Open both gates (checking at each stage). Check again. Drive across. Check again. Close both gates (checking at each stage).

Job done.

They “know then the trains run”.....

The process at any crossing UWC or FP (with a phone for permission) is phone the signaller, and comply with their instructions.

Which will be cross or wait.
If it’s cross, then open both gates first cross with your vehicle, close both gates and finally confirm the crossing is clear with the signaller.

This simply procedure is to complex for some people however.

 

[Tom Quinne]

I think the point here s that all of us on the forum are railway minded and recognise the dangers of body and / or vehicle on railway track. I'd venture to suggest that most road users don't, which is why situations like this happen. Obviously Edwin is spot on with the "4+1" buit there isn't a way around it.

I do hope it has CCTV coverage and the happenings are explained by RAIB

Class 158s are fitted with forward facing cameras, voice comms are recorded between the crossing the signaller as well.

 

[Tom Quinne]

The signage on that crossing is an absolute dog's breakfast. Looking at the images of Powys Dog Training on Google Maps, the warning signs in order of prominence say:
1. STOP
2. STOP - LOOK - LISTEN Beware of trains
3. BOARDING KENNEL OPENING TIMES
4. Caution - CCTV operated by Network Rail
5. 1.Open far gate before crossing with vehicles or animals / 2.Cross quickly / 3.Close and secure gates after use
6. Always telephone before crossing with vehicles or animals to find out if there is time to cross

Yes, there is a telephone, but it is located behind the railway fence, so to a driver unfamiliar with UWCs, it looks like it is for use by railway staff.

I can easily see how a unfamiliar driver would find the instructions 1,2,3 in black and white and follow them to the letter. And this is a crossing to a boarding kennels. They must have dozens of visitors every week who have never been there before and may never have seen a User Worked Crossing.

Google Maps

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

www.google.co.uk

There is a record of all requests to cross at all UWC crossings, it’ll be interesting to see how many of the physical uses are recorded aka permission sought...

 

[InOban]

There is a general principle which most people adopt when faced with some unfamiliar equipment:

If all else fails, read the instructions.

That's why the best product designers try to make correct use intuitive.

 

[Bald Rick]

I doubt it very much unfortunately.
How long did the bloke at Great Heck for the manslaughter of a number of people?

5 years.

More recently (but still a decade ago) the sewage tanker driver who drove in front of a 156 on the Sudbury line got 15 months.

 

[Tom Quinne]

Says it all doesn’t it.

 

[Llanigraham]

There is a record of all requests to cross at all UWC crossings, it’ll be interesting to see how many of the physical uses are recorded aka permission sought...

I think every signaller can answer that; a lot of people don't do what they should.
We know but there is nothing we (signallers) can do about it, at the time.

An example:
We had a Bridleway crossing with phone. Person rings and gets refused permission and told to ring back after a certain direction train has passed them. We know that the train should take 8 minutes from the crossing to be visible from the Box. They don't ring back!

 

[philthetube]

Sorry wrong comment.

 

[Taunton]

AHBs always have a phone to contact the signaller. Why didn't you use that?

It was dead. I had actually walked out from the premises earlier to report the failure on the phone. Burns Day Storm, 25 Jan 91, on the Coastway near Chichester.

 

[Grumpy Git]

They “know then the trains run”.....

The process at any crossing UWC or FP (with a phone for permission) is phone the signaller, and comply with their instructions.

Which will be cross or wait.
If it’s cross, then open both gates first cross with your vehicle, close both gates and finally confirm the crossing is clear with the signaller.

This simply procedure is to complex for some people however.

You only have to see how a lot of drivers attempt to put their car through the front window of a supermarket to save them walking an extra 20 yards. Laziness plays a big part.

 

[Essexman]

I was staying in Newquay a few years ago when a train hit a car on a crossing. The car driver was interviewed on local TV and said -

‘I've been rushed off my feet all day and was not aware that there was a warning at the crossing. I don't often come down that road. I was travelling fairly slowly and out of the blue saw the train. I slammed on the brakes, but it was coming too fast and hit me. It was quite overwhelming how close I was. I am very thankful to be alive.’

In my view she should have been at the police station being interviewed not on TV.

 

[philthetube]

I have to admit, and I am not making excuses for anyone, that in 40 years of driving I have never been over a user worked crossing and I imagine that the same is true of many visitors to the kennels.

You do have to wonder how they got planning permission for a kennels on that site though.

I think they should be required to escort all first time visitors.

As I understand it they have a responsibility to ensure that people using the crossing obey the rules.