Report of Partial Bridge Collapse WCML 11/6

The Planner · 12 Jun 2026

zwk500 said:
Risk is Consequence * Likelihood.

Generally the table will look something like this:

{image showing risk matrix]

We know the impact is 'Very High', so the questions are:
How often has this bridge been struck before?
How often will this bridge be struck again?

Very High impact/consequence * very low probability/likelihood = Medium Risk.

If this was the Bridge's 1 time in 500 years when it's number came up, well it's a little late to fit the barriers...

Based on the reaction to this incident, and the fact trains are running past it, its probably only a 4.

RailUK Forums

Torfaen · 12 Jun 2026

66701GBRF said:
Network Rail have a legal obligation to install and maintain fencing on all sections of operational lines, regardless or remoteness or traffic levels.

When I travelled across Rannoch Moor earlier in the year, I noticed most of the lineside fencing had degraded to the point there was no sign there had ever been any in a few places. A standard height fence is no obstacle to deer anyway, so I guess that pragmatism overtook rules when deciding that renewing it was not a good use of money.

Nicholas Lewis · 12 Jun 2026

Benjwri said:
That’s all well and good but you are talking crazy amount of money. No one can just magic likely at least near a billion pounds out of nowhere. What are you going to cut to pay for these beams. What is the cost associated with those cuts?

On the WCML its a no brainer at a high risk bridge though not across the whole network i would agree

Starmill · 12 Jun 2026

Tetragon213 said:
Alternatively, long and painful jail sentences for wilful negligence and/or vandalism might get people to take this sort of thing more seriously. I wonder if there's any chances of charges for "Endangering Passengers on a Railway"...

From what I've heard, the lorry driver did a runner when he realised he'd royally screwed up. Perhaps an additional charge of fleeing the scene of an accident?

The wider context is that putting people in prison for non-violent, non-organised crimes isn't really flavour of the month. We only have a very limited number of prison places and they're really needed for people who are doing things like sexual violence or selling dangerous drugs in large quantities.

ac6000cw · 12 Jun 2026

Honestly, you can put in all the warning signs and increase the legal penalties on drivers, but you won't stop vehicles hitting bridges - because the drivers are human and we all get distracted and do silly/stupid/illogical things sometimes.

As an example, the very low (9ft/2.7m) clearance bridge at the north end of Ely (Cambs) station was, until the A142 Ely southern bypass was built a while ago, one of the most bashed railway bridges in the country. After the bypass opened, the adjacent level crossing was closed and the road underneath the bridge was narrowed to single carriageway, controlled by traffic lights at each side.

It's got a whole series of height warning signs on the approaches to it (some in extra large type), height detectors which trigger flashing warning lights/signs (I assume, as I've not seen them operate), large yellow/black warning panels across it and down both sides plus a large diameter height restriction roundel in the middle.

It's hard to see what you could add to it in terms of warnings, yet it still gets regularly bashed. For example, I happened to visit the station two days in row recently and it got bashed on both days while I was there (one was an agricultural tractor, the other a tall 'Luton' bodied transit-style van).

Hophead · 12 Jun 2026

A lorry driver alleged to have hit the bridge reportedly left the scene. A 64-year-old Coventry man was arrested less than two hours later.

Police statement:
"At 3.30pm on June 11, we responded to reports of a railway bridge collapse on Marston Lane, Bedworth. Train routes over the bridge were stopped by National Rail while the incident was handled. Following an alleged collision between the driver of a lorry and the bridge, the driver left the scene without reporting the collision. At 5.10pm, a 64-year-old man from Coventry was arrested on suspicion of endangering a railway passenger and failure to stop following a collision."

zwk500 · 12 Jun 2026

Nicholas Lewis said:
On the WCML its a no brainer at a high risk bridge though not across the whole network i would agree

See post #210:

zwk500 said:
Risk is Consequence * Likelihood.

To be high risk, this bridge would have to be being bashed on a regular basis.

Straus · 12 Jun 2026

Hophead said:
A lorry driver alleged to have hit the bridge reportedly left the scene. A 64-year-old Coventry man was arrested less than two hours later.

Police statement:
"At 3.30pm on June 11, we responded to reports of a railway bridge collapse on Marston Lane, Bedworth. Train routes over the bridge were stopped by National Rail while the incident was handled. Following an alleged collision between the driver of a lorry and the bridge, the driver left the scene without reporting the collision. At 5.10pm, a 64-year-old man from Coventry was arrested on suspicion of endangering a railway passenger and failure to stop following a collision."

I wasn't aware National Rail ran trains.

Nicholas Lewis · 12 Jun 2026

zwk500 said:
See post #210:

To be high risk, this bridge would have to be being bashed on a regular basis.

Its high impact on services though and being substandard height its hardly low probability that theirs potential so 3x2 should qualify it. The A23 bridge at Coulsdon has just been fitted with beams at that has far better clearance to road level than this bridge.

Minnietheminx · 12 Jun 2026

thenorthern said:
In regards trucks most trucks now have sat navs which warn drivers if they are using a bridge that is too low for the truck to fit under. These sat navs are normally very accurate in warning drivers that they can't go down certain routes.

These are specialised sat nav systems, and are generally more expensive than the sat nav systems used by the general public. Sadly, some hauliers, in a bid to keep costs down, install the cheaper systems, which would fail to notify the driver of the hazard in front of them. Add that to a mentality of always following the orders of the sat nav instead of the evidence of the mark 1 eyeball and it's not difficult to see how these bridge strikes are becoming more frequent.

Harpo · 12 Jun 2026

Minnietheminx said:
Add that to a mentality of always following the orders of the sat nav instead of the evidence of the mark 1 eyeball and it's not difficult to see how these bridge strikes are becoming more frequent.

Bridge strikes predate SatNav. From my involvement in the past with two frequently bashed bridges, the most common factor was lack of awareness of the vehicles height.

zwk500 · 12 Jun 2026

Nicholas Lewis said:
Its high impact on services though and being substandard height its hardly low probability that theirs potential so 3x2 should qualify it.

Why is it not low probability? How many times has this bridge previously been struck?

Strategic traffic won't be routing via Marston lane due to the presence of the A5, M6, and M69, while local traffic has the option of a B-Road overbridge rather than an unclassified road underbridge.

Nicholas Lewis said:
The A23 bridge at Coulsdon has just been fitted with beams at that has far better clearance to road level than this bridge.

I wonder how the AADT figures compare for Brighton Road in South London vs a rural lane in Warwickshire. NR's Press release says:

The Brighton Road bridge near Coulsdon South station, which carries hundreds of thousands of passengers on the Brighton Main Line over the A23, has been hit many times by large vehicles too tall to fit underneath, causing major delays and disruption to train services.

(my bold), https://www.networkrailmediacentre....-bridge-set-to-have-protection-beam-installed

Which suggests the risk is not just theoretical. Although interestingly those bridges are also bypassed by the actual A23 Farthing way.

RyanOPlasty · 12 Jun 2026

Active warning signs don't seem to work; certainly, the nearby A5 bridge is struck regularly despite flashing warnings.
Sydney Harbour Tunnel has a laser/waterfall system, which seems pretty much foolproof.

https://www.laservision.com.au/softstop-barrier-system/

There are some very innovative fools out there as well, though.

Tetragon213 · 12 Jun 2026

GRALISTAIR said:
That is certainly a federal crime in the USA.

I'd be surprised if there wasn't something on our side of the pond we could charge that driver with!

GRALISTAIR said:
I should not laugh but I have been watching that channel - 11 foot 8 - for years when I was in the USA and there truly are some idiots and hilarious truck, caravan etc damage.

Don't worry, you're not alone in that boat laughing at the idiots!

fandroid said:
Ratcheting up sentences has never worked in the area of criminal law, and just dumps more expense on taxpayers in looking after offenders in jail for longer. It comforts the "something must be done" brigade, for a bit, until the next time it happens.

Starmill said:
The wider context is that putting people in prison for non-violent, non-organised crimes isn't really flavour of the month. We only have a very limited number of prison places and they're really needed for people who are doing things like sexual violence or selling dangerous drugs in large quantities.

On the other hand, you cannot let wilful idiocy like this go completely unpunished, and the fact that the driver fled without telling anyone anything is a severe dereliction of a driver's obligations and duties on the road; arguably, it shows a complete absence of moral fibre. Now they'll likely be facing a charge of failing to stop and report.

RyanOPlasty said:
Active warning signs don't seem to work; certainly, the nearby A5 bridge is struck regularly despite flashing warnings.
Sydney Harbour Tunnel has a laser/waterfall system, which seems pretty much foolproof.

https://www.laservision.com.au/softstop-barrier-system/

There are some very innovative fools out there as well, though.

Looks like an interesting system; something that is that in-your-face is probably going to be a lot harder to ignore.

Minnietheminx · 12 Jun 2026

Harpo said:
Bridge strikes predate SatNav. From my involvement in the past with two frequently bashed bridges, the most common factor was lack of awareness of the vehicles height.

I indicated an increased frequency.

In a broader context, increased reliance on sat navs has led to incidents which may not have happened, such as getting stuck in fords or attempting to access unsuitable tracks, had drivers paid more attention to their surroundings than the sat nav. Much like the people going fell-walking using mobile phones for navigation and the subsequent increase in demand for the volunteers in mountain rescue teams.

zwk500 · 12 Jun 2026

Tetragon213 said:
Looks like an interesting system; something that is that in-your-face is probably going to be a lot harder to ignore.

Given people have ignored these:

before at the Blackwall tunnel, never underestimate what can be overlooked.

Link: https://www.sabre-roads.org.uk/w/in...ackwall_Tunnel_-_A102_-_Coppermine_-_1936.jpg

swt_passenger · 12 Jun 2026

Now that the dust’s settled a bit, was there actually any damage to the up slow track at all? Someone noticed yesterday that there were no sleeper ends visible in the photos, and I thought myself there wasn’t a huge amount of ballast on the road surface either...

Gloster · 12 Jun 2026

There is a photo on the Coventry Telegraph site ( .coventrytelegraph.net ) from the other side of the beam that shows a lot of ballast on the road. It is ‘ Coventry man arrested after Bedworth bridge lorry smash ‘.

Starmill · 12 Jun 2026

Tetragon213 said:
On the other hand, you cannot let wilful idiocy like this go completely unpunished, and the fact that the driver fled without telling anyone anything is a severe dereliction of a driver's obligations and duties on the road; arguably, it shows a complete absence of moral fibre. Now they'll likely be facing a charge of failing to stop and report.

The penalties both financially and in licence are quite severe yes. They do need to be enforced.

Gloster · 12 Jun 2026

Starmill said:
The penalties both financially and in licence are quite severe yes. They do need to be enforced.

Of course they need to be and they are as they really hit motorists cruelly. Why, the driver who put his concrete mixer on top of a 455 at Oxshott in 2010 was given five points, fined £100, had a £15 victim surcharge and £43 costs. That is a real deterrent, I tell you.

edwin_m · 12 Jun 2026

zwk500 said:
Risk is Consequence * Likelihood.

Generally the table will look something like this:

{image showing risk matrix]

We know the impact is 'Very High', so the questions are:
How often has this bridge been struck before?
How often will this bridge be struck again?

Very High impact/consequence * very low probability/likelihood = Medium Risk.

If this was the Bridge's 1 time in 500 years when it's number came up, well it's a little late to fit the barriers...

Considering safety risk only, the probability needs to consider each step in the sequence of events that results in injuries. On that basis this incident is zero consequence because there were no injuries. A safety consequence would have required another road vehicle or pedestrian to have been beneath the falling beam (potentially 1+ fatalities), or a train to have approached at high speed before it could be stopped, and been derailed (potentially 10+ fatalities).

On its own that doesn't help much because clearly this could have been an injury accident if things had been a bit different. Various studies, such as those underlying the RSSB Safety Risk Model, have sought to remove the statistical fluctuation arising from actual injuries being very rare, to ascribe an "average" safety consequence to particular events reflecting the probability and severity of any accident that might follow. I believe these still identify level crossings as the greatest source of safety risk to the railway.

hexagon789 · 12 Jun 2026

Tetragon213 said:
Now they'll likely be facing a charge of failing to stop and report.

I understand the police arrested the driver yesterday evening and they have been charged on suspicion of both the offence you outline and the rather more serious offence of 'endangering the lives of persons travelling on the railway'.

StoneRoad · 12 Jun 2026

The Police / CPS need to wheel the second one out far more often.
It should be an automatic choice of offence when either a bridge strike occurs or a road vehicle ends up on the track [other than when it is using - moving over - an official level crossing].
One of the few places I'm in favour of having more high quality CCTV ...
Also, longer driving bans & having to do a retest could be more of a deterrent than they appear to be at present.

ac6000cw · 12 Jun 2026

swt_passenger said:
Now that the dust’s settled a bit, was there actually any damage to the up slow track at all? Someone noticed yesterday that there were no sleeper ends visible in the photos, and I thought myself there wasn’t a huge amount of ballast on the road surface either...

It looks like some of the ballast 'shoulder' has dropped onto the road, so there'll be some loss of track stability (the shoulders help to stop the track moving sideways, as well as spreading the dynamic forces from passing trains across a wider area of the bridge - which of course now has a concrete beam missing, so the other beams nearby would have to share more of the forces if trains were running on the up slow).

Merle Haggard · 12 Jun 2026

Although it's described as the 'Up Slow' does anyone know the speed on it?
I've certainly been on an Up Pendolino on it, and pretty certain on a Down one, too, when there were problems. Don't recollect particularly 'hanging about'.

marshlinker · 12 Jun 2026

Minnietheminx said:
These are specialised sat nav systems, and are generally more expensive than the sat nav systems used by the general public. Sadly, some hauliers, in a bid to keep costs down, install the cheaper systems, which would fail to notify the driver of the hazard in front of them. Add that to a mentality of always following the orders of the sat nav instead of the evidence of the mark 1 eyeball and it's not difficult to see how these bridge strikes are becoming more frequent.

Wasn't it a skip lorry on a local delivery? Very unlikely to be using a GPS.

pokemonsuper9 · 12 Jun 2026

Merle Haggard said:
Although it's described as the 'Up Slow' does anyone know the speed on it?
I've certainly been on an Up Pendolino on it, and pretty certain on a Down one, too, when there were problems. Don't recollect particularly 'hanging about'.

While I am not sure exactly where the bridge is, the speed limit on the up slow between Nuneaton and Rugby is mostly 75mph, with a half mile of 50mph about 6 miles from Nuneaton.

JamesT · 12 Jun 2026

hexagon789 said:
I understand the police arrested the driver yesterday evening and they have been charged on suspicion of both offence you outline and the rather more serious offence of 'endaring the lives of persons travelling on the railway'.

Reported on the BBC today: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c39y0pj1j92o

A man has been arrested for endangering a railway passenger after a railway bridge partially collapsed in Warwickshire when it was hit by a lorry.

The 64-year-old man was also arrested on suspicion of failure to stop following a collision.

jfowkes · 12 Jun 2026

Merle Haggard said:
Although it's described as the 'Up Slow' does anyone know the speed on it?
I've certainly been on an Up Pendolino on it, and pretty certain on a Down one, too, when there were problems. Don't recollect particularly 'hanging about'.

pokemonsuper9 said:
While I am not sure exactly where the bridge is, the speed limit on the up slow between Nuneaton and Rugby is mostly 75mph, with a half mile of 50mph about 6 miles from Nuneaton.

Sectional Appendix has 75mph all the way from Bulkington to Nuneaton South Junction, the section that includes the bridge.

Spaceship323 · 12 Jun 2026

matchmaker said:
Causewayhead Road bridge in Stirling has lasers which light up "Overheight vehicle - divert" signs.

So does the bridge at Long Eaton, but trucks still hit it!

Report of Partial Bridge Collapse WCML 11/6

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member