Level Crossing Incident - Finningley (nr Doncaster) 4th December

[YorkshireBear]

Not that it's really a fair criticism (I'm well aware that assessments have to balance foreseeable risk with value for money), but the BBC site has this item which will only give the anti-rail argument more weight:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-nottinghamshire-20624216

Noticed that earlier. BBC picking up on something that would have made no difference to the crossing, and trying to put down rail industry as usual?

Although, this crash may make ORR look at it again.

 

[matchmaker]

Sorry i meant if the vehicle had skidded through the already closed barrier or ended up on the wrong side of an AHB with barrier in front. Joe public wont know if the barriers are being monitored or if the protecting signal has been passed so better to get the hell off there IMHO
Example the recent RAIB of the straw truck in Wales that due to parked vehicles ended up crossing slowly on the wrong side as the lights came on ending up with AHB in front of his cab blocking the exit.

Do you know what an AHB crossing is like? There is NO exit barrier!

 

[Tomnick]

There would be a barrier in front of you if you were on the wrong side of the road though (as the vehicle that fsmr refers to in Wales partially was, owing to the size of his vehicle and the angle that he'd had to approach the crossing at).

 

[TheLastMinute]

The RAIB has released a notice on their website that they are investigating the incident. The notice also confirms that the crossing appeared to have operated correctly and that the car dove through the barrier. It seems the investigation will focus on why this happened and if the warning equipment and the environment at the crossing contributed to this.

Fatal accident at Beech Hill level crossing near Finningley, 4 December 2012

At 12:31 hrs on Tuesday 4 December 2012 a collision occurred between a passenger train and a car at Beech Hill automatic half barrier (AHB) level crossing near Finningley, between Gainsborough and Doncaster. One of the occupants of the car, a four year old child, was seriously injured in the collision and later died in hospital.

The train involved was the 11:54 hrs service from Lincoln to Doncaster, operated by East Midlands Trains. It consisted of a single carriage unit and was travelling at 60 mph at the time of the collision. None of the 20 passengers and two crew members on the train was injured in the accident. Equipment beneath the train was damaged in the collision leading to the spillage of diesel fuel from the train’s fuel tank, but there was no fire.

The level crossing was fitted with a data logger that showed that the crossing was operating normally at the time of the accident, with the barriers lowered as the car approached. The weather was sunny at the time of the collision but there had been rain showers earlier and the road surface was wet. The car was travelling in the north to south direction over the crossing when it drove through a barrier and into the path of the approaching train.

The RAIB’s investigation will identify the sequence of events leading up to the accident, assess the likely impact of glare from the sun on the actions of the car driver and consider the conspicuity of the crossing equipment (barriers and lights). The investigation will also consider whether the design of the road signs and equipment at automatic crossings is appropriate and whether it could be improved. The investigation will take into account the findings of previous RAIB investigations into:

the accident at Wraysholme level crossing (report 26/2009);
the accident at Halkirk level crossing (report 16/2010); and
the safety of automatic open level crossings (report 12/2011).
The RAIB’s investigation is independent of any investigations by the safety authority (the Office of Rail Regulation) and the British Transport Police.

The RAIB will publish a report, including any recommendations to improve safety, at the conclusion of its investigation. This report will be available on the RAIB website.

TLM

 

[Goatboy]

It's a shame the railway must incur huge cost 'investigating' now it's 99% clear the cause was exactly the same as almost every other car accident that occurs every year - driver error.

The car drove through an object in the middle of the road. Even in the unlikely event the lights didn't work or the siren wasn't sounding or whatever - it was a gate, blocking the road, and she drove into it. Difficult to imagine how it can be anything other than driver error?

Cars don't have flashing lights and sirens to warn them when another car is stopped in the road and they don't generally drive into those as a result..

 

[DarloRich]

It's a shame the railway must incur huge cost 'investigating' now it's 99% clear the cause was exactly the same as almost every other car accident that occurs every year - driver error.

The car drove through an object in the middle of the road. Even in the unlikely event the lights didn't work or the siren wasn't sounding or whatever - it was a gate, blocking the road, and she drove into it. Difficult to imagine how it can be anything other than driver error?

Cars don't have flashing lights and sirens to warn them when another car is stopped in the road and they don't generally drive into those as a result..

Sorry - but you cant make such a leap without an investigation.

Are you certain the car didnt malfunction? Are you certain the poor driver couldnt have been incapactiated in some way? Are you certain there wasnt some substance on the road surface that prevented the car stopping? Are you certain that there wasnt some external factor that caused the car to come into contact with the train?

I doubt it.

 

[Goatboy]

Are you certain the car didnt malfunction? Are you certain the poor driver couldnt have been incapactiated in some way? Are you certain there wasnt some substance on the road surface that prevented the car stopping?

And these are the fault of the railway, how exactly? Is the ladies insurer going to pick up the tab for the costs of the RAIB investigation? I suspect not.

I will eat my hat if the results of this expensive investigation suggest anything other than it being a non-railway factor to blame. Yet it is the railway which carries the cost for the investigation.

Besides - I simply said it was 'a shame', which it is. Not that it shouldn't take place, because the law dictates that it must. It's a shame they cannot restrict the investigation to 'Was the barrier closed before the car hit it? If yes, end investigation as far as RAIB is concerned'. Any further investigation, if neccesary, should be the responsibility of the traffic police as with any other ROAD accident.

 

[dk1]

The media where very quick to believe random reports the crossing was not working. Hopefully they will be just as quick or quicker to announce that the automatc crossing was in perfect working order. Given the fatal RTA traffic accidents that occur daily why they always seem to doubt Network Rail never fails to amaze me.

 

[eastdyke]

It's a shame the railway must incur huge cost 'investigating' now it's 99% clear the cause was exactly the same as almost every other car accident that occurs every year - driver error.

The car drove through an object in the middle of the road. Even in the unlikely event the lights didn't work or the siren wasn't sounding or whatever - it was a gate, blocking the road, and she drove into it. Difficult to imagine how it can be anything other than driver error?

Cars don't have flashing lights and sirens to warn them when another car is stopped in the road and they don't generally drive into those as a result..

It is very important indeed to fully investigate this accident.

Very important to allay any fears of both rail passengers and road users as to the safety of level crossings in general and this crossing in particular.

The opportunity to identify any need for modification and improvment must always be taken.

 

[Goatboy]

It is very important indeed to fully investigate this accident.

Very important to allay any fears of both rail passengers and road users as to the safety of level crossings in general and this crossing in particular.

The opportunity to identify any need for modification and improvment must always be taken.

The initial findings are that the barriers worked correctly. The crossing is safe. But we'll spend a fortune doing a thorough investigation anyway. Don't get me wrong - I appreciate it must be done and is a legal requirement. It just seems frustrating, thats all

 

[JohnB57]

And these are the fault of the railway, how exactly?

Nobody said that, just that it may not be the direct fault of the driver in the case, for example, of some external factor that could not be foreseen.

Is the ladies insurer going to pick up the tab for the costs of the RAIB investigation? I suspect not.

Any more so than your car insurance would cover a police investigation after you'd had a road accident. An investigation is a legal requirement.

I will eat my hat if the results of this expensive investigation suggest anything other than it being a non-railway factor to blame. Yet it is the railway which carries the cost for the investigation.

No. The RAIB is a governement agency independent of the railway. Just like the railway however, it is paid for out of public funds.

 

[Goatboy]

No. The RAIB is a governement agency independent of the railway. Just like the railway however, it is paid for out of public funds.

This I did not realise - thanks for the clarification.

 

[jon0844]

The media where very quick to believe random reports the crossing was not working.

Doesn't surprise me in the least. Even when they got there and saw the lights were STILL flashing (as seen on the TV reports), and hearing - or even seeing - that the barrier had been hit.

FWIW, I don't see a problem with people speculating or passing on any information they may have heard, as long as it is is made perfectly clear what's opinion or hearsay. This is a forum and if we can't discuss things then we might has well lock the thread until the RAIB report comes out.

 

[fsmr]

Do you know what an AHB crossing is like? There is NO exit barrier!

As Tomnick has already said

Of course i know what an AHB is, i was referring to incidents such as the mid Wales LC crash if you read my post where the lorry stopped with AHB in front, because he had ended up on the wrong side to get over the LC.
Had he carried on and broke through the exit AHB, he would have cleared the LC and the subsequent serious crash would not have happened

In response to the calls on here for why there is an enquiry into this latest tragic incident
The fact is this involved a railway and as such is subject to more controls and legislation than if a lone car had failed to negotiate a bend and hit a wall. If it means that the AHB have to be sited 20 yards further back (unlikely) or more warning lights placed further back in locations subject to low winter sun or slippery roads, then that will be discussed in the report and I haven't heard anything to suggest the driver drove through the barrier on purpose so, the family will want to know why it happened and how it could be avoided in the future here and at other LCs
An innocent child has died
Period

To turn it round the other way, why bother to investigate a SPAD incident, it is only driver error after all

 

[AndrewP]

An innocent child died - the parents and those who loved her need to know what happened.

Also if there is something that can stop similar incidents happening in future there is further value to the investigation.

Railways are safe compared to roads - fact.

 

[Oswyntail]

....The opportunity to identify any need for modification and improvment must always be taken.

I agree fully with this. However:-
a) If there are such improvements to be made, then it must be made 110% clear that this is not because their absence in any way caused the accident. Too often the attempt to lay blame away from drivers makes implementation of safety measures out to be a surrogate admission of guilt.
b) There are, as has been said, many factors that, while unforeseen, may have contributed to the accident from the driver's side. Perhaps, in that case, the motor industry should be legally bound to fund, research and implement its own "modification and improvement" (eg fail-safe systems to cope with sudden driver illness or unexpected road surface). For many, totally understandable, reasons, safety on the railways is focussed on primary areas, prevention of accidents, while on the roads the emphasis is on secondary safety, reduction of damage to drivers and passengers. Perhaps the road industry should be made to consider primary safety (in the same way that the railways are often urged to consider secondary safety devices such as seatbelts).

 

[Ediswan]

Deleted, too much speed reading.

 

[transmanche]

The media where very quick to believe random reports the crossing was not working. Hopefully they will be just as quick or quicker to announce that the automatc crossing was in perfect working order.

The BBC have: Level crossing death crash car 'driven through barrier'.

 

[jon0844]

Some new cars with front facing cameras/radar can stop a car if you're about to hit another car or pedestrian. Of course it can't work miracles, but I wonder if it would have stopped a car hitting a barrier?

I am talking about cars like those from Volvo and Ford that have the technology.

 

[swj99]

It's a shame the railway must incur huge cost 'investigating' now it's 99% clear the cause was exactly the same as almost every other car accident that occurs every year - driver error.

As far as I’m aware, the RAIB report hasn’t been completed or published yet, so no-one can properly say who, if anyone, is liable for the accident.

It's a shame they cannot restrict the investigation to 'Was the barrier closed before the car hit it? If yes, end investigation as far as RAIB is concerned'. Any further investigation, if neccesary, should be the responsibility of the traffic police as with any other ROAD accident.

Sadly I don’t think things are as black and white as that. As has been previously stated, there are many possibilities regarding the cause of the accident. Until the RAIB report on the findings of their investigation, it’s hardly worth speculating.

You raise an interesting point about the traffic police investigating the accident, however, once the investigation is complete, would it not be easier for the RAIB to pass on their findings to the police and the CPS, rather than two investigations being undertaken into the same incident ?

Is the ladies insurer going to pick up the tab for the costs of the RAIB investigation?

The insurer of a motor vehicle is not liable per se, ie just because the car was involved. Normal practice is that motor insurers only compensate people who have a legal cause of action, ie if they have been injured or have suffered financially as a result of the negligence of their insured. So if the driver of the car is held liable for negligence, then yes, her insurers may theoretically have to indemnify those who have suffered loss. If the driver’s actions were not negligent, then no her insurers probably won’t have to pay.

The BBC news article linked in the post above is somewhat misleading due to the odd way it is worded. It appears to suggest that the RAIB investigation has already been completed, when at the time of writing, my understanding is that it hasn’t been completed.

A crash between a car and a train which killed a four-year-old girl happened after the car she was in was driven through a barrier and into the path of the train, an investigation has found.

Later in the same article, it says that the report was released ahead of the investigation. But the text relating to the incident on the RAIB website looks more like information about an ongoing investigation rather than a report.

 

[Silv1983]

If the driver has driven around a barrier with flashing red lights at a level crossing with a child on board - and im not saying she has: but IF she has "run the risk" I hope she spends time in prison for death by dangerous. I don't want to believe someone has that mentality - but I can't believe the railways infrastructure has failed at the same time.

 

[jon0844]

Wasn't the report that the barrier had been hit, suggesting the driver failed to see it - for whatever reason?

 

[Zoidberg]

Wasn't the report that the barrier had been hit, suggesting the driver failed to see it - for whatever reason?

That is my understanding - how one can get to someone having "driven round the barrier" from the reports and pictures is beyond me.

 

[455driver]

The media where very quick to believe random reports the crossing was not working. Hopefully they will be just as quick or quicker to announce that the automatic crossing was in perfect working order.

Dont hold your breath, it may get a mention in the bottom left hand corner of page 34 or somewhere else, it certainly wont get the prominence of the initial "dangerous level crossing" headline did thats for sure.