Report of Partial Bridge Collapse WCML 11/6

[rmHawk765]

Hit and run means someone has run from an accident. not a planned hit.

Apologies, I misinterpreted this...

 

[LowLevel]

It seems it was a skip lorry of some sort and the culprit was caught on dash cam before fleeing the scene in the vehicle. Hope a decent prison sentence awaits them.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Surprises me that Marston Lane doesn't have this. Considering that the A5 at Hinckley has girders either side for a line which isn't as busy (I think the line speed is 80mph over it).

Its how busy the road is, not the railway

 

[The Planner]

False economy, a simple metal girder will cost far less than just the repair to this bridge alone, before you start to take into consideration the cost of disruption.

It may well be, but it still isn't going to get them added to all bridges as someone will assess the risk vs the chances of it happening.

 

[dk1]

It seems it was a skip lorry of some sort and the culprit was caught on dash cam before fleeing the scene in the vehicle. Hope a decent prison sentence awaits them.

Excellent.

 

[Russel]

It seems it was a skip lorry of some sort and the culprit was caught on dash cam before fleeing the scene in the vehicle. Hope a decent prison sentence awaits them.

Can only assume it was blind panic.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jun 2026 ==

It may well be, but it still isn't going to get them added to all bridges as someone will assess the risk vs the chances of it happening.

Seems odd to me given how risk averse the railway has become over the last few years.

 

[Peter0124]

Do Lumo even have diversionary route knowledge for this?

 

[The Planner]

Seems odd to me given how risk averse the railway has become over the last few years.

Its money.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 11 Jun 2026 ==

Do Lumo even have diversionary route knowledge for this?

No

 

[Bald Rick]

False economy, a simple metal girder will cost far less than just the repair to this bridge alone, before you start to take into consideration the cost of disruption.

A simple metal girder would not have stopped this. It needs to be substantial.

The reason the railway can‘t put up bridge protection beams everywhere is complex, and mostly due to highways authority issues.

 

[P Binnersley]

There is a hump back canal bridge with a 3 ton (mfr) weight limit the other side of Marston Jabbett making the village off limits to vehicles that are both tall and heavy.

 

[SuspectUsual]

A simple metal girder would not have stopped this. It needs to be substantial.

That's not necessarily true is it?

Or do you mean that whilst a girder would not have stopped this, it could have prevented it? (ie not forcibly stopped the vehicle but instead made the driver realise what was about to happen and stop)

 

[Russel]

That's not necessarily true is it?

Or do you mean that whilst a girder would not have stopped this, it could have prevented it? (ie not forcibly stopped the vehicle but instead made the driver realise what was about to happen and stop)

It would have absorbed some of the force.

 

[zwk500]

That's not necessarily true is it?

Or do you mean that whilst a girder would not have stopped this, it could have prevented it? (ie not forcibly stopped the vehicle but instead made the driver realise what was about to happen and stop)

Just bolting a girder up would not prevent the lorry from smashing through it and damaging the bridge. It may have mitigated the force somewhat.

What you need to do is put a BIG girder up, and brace it substantially.

 

[Swedenorer]

Previous threads have suggested there’s a marked reluctance to fit them because of some strange reasoning that they are some sort of a hazard to road users.

False economy, a simple metal girder will cost far less than just the repair to this bridge alone, before you start to take into consideration the cost of disruption.

Until Network Rail replaced the thing with the current bracketed tube girder at Emsworth there was am I beam just resting on the bridge abutments that was dislodged at one end by a curtain-sider and happily fell on to the road side and not the pavement.

In actual fact these things are of limited use as in the case of Emsworth most over-height vehicles manage to get some way under before coming to a halt. Mind you it is Steel panel sided too.

 

[The exile]

Just bolting a girder up would not prevent the lorry from smashing through it and damaging the bridge. It may have mitigated the force somewhat.

What you need to do is put a BIG girder up, and brace it substantially.

There are quite possibly all kinds of legal liability implications to deliberately putting an obstruction across the road, the sole purpose of which is to be hit by passing vehicles. Cameras and legal changes that mean that offending drivers and owners/operators of commercial vehicles face unlimited, uninsurable liability would probably be more chat effective.

 

[Merle Haggard]

Previous threads have suggested there’s a marked reluctance to fit them because of some strange reasoning that they are some sort of a hazard to road users.

That seems to be the thinking, probably in National Highways - the theoretical danger to a pedestrian of falling debris when the sacrifice beam is been hit. Has been reported for some time but I can't remember where I read about it - possibly Private Eye.
Making things perfectly safe in one area often introduces dangers elsewhere, but safety calculations don't seem to include consequential effects.

 

[james60059]

Think about the traffic using the A5, versus a country lane. There is logic in it!

I agree 100%, but with the WCML being a fast route, maybe it wouldn't be a bad idea to have them on bridges like this too. Just my opinion of course

 

[james60059]

There is a hump back canal bridge with a 3 ton (mfr) weight limit the other side of Marston Jabbett making the village off limits to vehicles that are both tall and heavy.

I go that way to see my Mum in Bedworth, and I have seen those 8x4 tipper trucks go over it. There is a small industrial estate too along Marston Lane.

 

[Signal Head]

That's Marston Lane. It's a low bridge (3.6m / 12ft) although the signage seems to have gone missing, maybe dropped out of view. Must have been a big hit to carve that substantial fresh gouge out of the concrete over the centre of the road. Maybe a crane knuckle?

Looks like part of the "Low Bridge" text signage is in amongst the debris between the beam with the chevrons on and the road surface. Presumably the offending vehicle has come from the other side anyway and ripped this beam out coming towards the camera.

 

[SuspectUsual]

Just bolting a girder up would not prevent the lorry from smashing through it and damaging the bridge. It may have mitigated the force somewhat.

What you need to do is put a BIG girder up, and brace it substantially.

You’re missing my point. I’m talking about something that alerts the driver to what he’s about to do, so that he can stop, not something that by itself will stop him

 

[Signal Head]

There are quite possibly all kinds of legal liability implications to deliberately putting an obstruction across the road, the sole purpose of which is to be hit by passing vehicles. Cameras and legal changes that mean that offending drivers and owners/operators of commercial vehicles face unlimited, uninsurable liability would probably be more chat effective.

Surely the (a) 'deliberate' obstruction already exists in the form of a dirty great bridge, which will, by itself do some degree of damage to an overheight vehicle? How is adding a protective beam any worse from a roads point of view?

 

[FrodshamJnct]

A couple more photos:



Images show a collapsed bridge and the vehicle involved

 

[Benjwri]

Also, big shout out to who ever controls the customer information system at unstaffed stations such as Atherstone, the 1600 to Crewe was showing on time until 1600, then just delayed until about 1610 when it then vanished and the screen and just showed the 1700 to c Crewe on time...

This is a huge incident where they will have an unbelievable amount of work shoved into their plate. They won’t have all the information as it is and they will a huge amount of work on their plate. That one specific train wasn’t cancelled in Darwin is understandable.

Making a point about how Darwin handles these situations, or staffing making handling major disruption very difficult would be understandable, but you absolutely shouldn’t be singling out a single person who you have no knowledge of or their workload, and who is likely facing an incredibly demanding situation with a lot more important things on their plate.

 

[StoneRoad]

A couple more photos:

View attachment 205788View attachment 205789

Images show a collapsed bridge and the vehicle involved

Waggon's reg plate is legible in that !

 

[NSEWonderer]

Won't the WCML need this route for the Sunday diversions? Wonder how substantial the damage to the bridge is!

 

[sturmey_archer]

CD366 sets out the requirements for collision protection beams, for anyone who enjoys technical reading.

A protection beam on free-standing supports in advance of a bridge can be considered as an obstruction to the highway contrary to Section 178 of the Highways Act 1980... [If a lorry hit the protection beam, I suppose the drivers insurers could then claim that Network Rail are then liable for the damage to the lorry!]

A protection beam fitted to the existing structure is acceptable, but it's difficult to do that in a way that provides meaningful protection to the bridge.

Most bridge strikes don't require repairs, but if you report that a bridge has been struck, then trains will be stopped or cautioned (depending on the bridge) until someone examines it. It's probably this disruption that drives most of the cost. Even if you go ahead and provide a protection beam, it's still likely that trains would be disrupted until safety checks were completed, so the costs do not go away... although you might be able to change the bridge from 'stop all trains until inspected by an engineer' to 'first train driver inspects track at caution and then further trains are speed limited until an engineer can visit'

 

[OuterDistant]

Waggon's reg plate is legible in that !

It sure was thoughtful of them to have a private reg that spells the company name!

 

[james73]

I saw another picture online of that bridge collapsed with a lorry in it but the lorry seems to have disappeared , that will be a long repair job

Maybe an opportunity to improve the entire structure and lower the approach road? I have no idea of the lay of the land there, just thinking out loud.

A couple more photos:

View attachment 205788View attachment 205789

Images show a collapsed bridge and the vehicle involved

Clearly not enough warning signs about the bridge being low....

 

[ac6000cw]

Waggon's reg plate is legible in that !

...and the skip company's name.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Just bolting a girder up would not prevent the lorry from smashing through it and damaging the bridge. It may have mitigated the force somewhat.

What you need to do is put a BIG girder up, and brace it substantially.

Which adds substantial cost.