Train crash near Reading

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by MovedGoalPosts

Someone above has posted the driver is suicidal, and thus selfish. That is exactly waht a suicidal person is, they never have any thought other than for themselves. Those who have to deal with the consequences of their actions, family, friends, are irrelevant to anyone in that state of mind.

The exact cause of this "accident" (in quotes because these things often have an identifiable and thus potentially forseable and so preventable cause), at this time is speculation. On that basis it is unfair to band about claims of car drivers being at fault at this time.

My sympathies to all victims.

It was me who said that. I wasn't actually saying that was the cause. It's one possible cause, but at stated above, the crossing should have been monitored. They seem to have CCTV everywhere else, why not have it where it might save lives?

[BBKing]

They seem to have CCTV everywhere else, why not have it where it might save lives?

There are CCTV monitored level crossings - usually on busier roads. AHBs, like in this incident (and of course open crossings which have no barriers at all) are used on lightly used roads, which this certainly was. It's difficult to think of a use of CCTV that would make a difference - possibly a device to alert if the crossing is blocked would be better (bearing in mind that signalmen have more to do than watch a bunch of TVs).

There are lots of level crossing accidents every year, usually resulting in a dead road user, but there is a serious one about every 20 years (1968, 1986, 2004).

Casualties are now six - car driver, train driver and four others, probably on the train, considering that the normally excellent Mk.3 coaches suffered serious damage, which needs to be examined urgently, considering the train wasn't travelling at full speed.

Poor old Great Western has now had three serious HST accidents in seven years, only one of which was their fault, and all with the first class section at the front of the train bearing the brunt of it, which I suppose is lucky as it's generally less used.

[Stuart]

Originally Posted by BBKing

There are CCTV monitored level crossings - usually on busier roads. AHBs, like in this incident (and of course open crossings which have no barriers at all) are used on lightly used roads, which this certainly was. It's difficult to think of a use of CCTV that would make a difference - possibly a device to alert if the crossing is blocked would be better (bearing in mind that signalmen have more to do than watch a bunch of TVs).

There are lots of level crossing accidents every year, usually resulting in a dead road user, but there is a serious one about every 20 years (1968, 1986, 2004).

True, I was possibly oversimplifying. An automatic monitoring device would be more useful.

One thing people need to remember. Despite the well-publicised train accidents in recent years, the amount of people killed or injured on trains is a fraction of those killed or injured on roads.

[greencreeper]

I would have thought moving the car so that the front or rear was facing the train would be better than having it side on? The car would be able to move, absorbing some of the force of the impact.

[cjmillsnun]

Originally Posted by BBKing

There are CCTV monitored level crossings - usually on busier roads. AHBs, like in this incident (and of course open crossings which have no barriers at all) are used on lightly used roads, which this certainly was. It's difficult to think of a use of CCTV that would make a difference - possibly a device to alert if the crossing is blocked would be better (bearing in mind that signalmen have more to do than watch a bunch of TVs).

There are lots of level crossing accidents every year, usually resulting in a dead road user, but there is a serious one about every 20 years (1968, 1986, 2004).

Casualties are now six - car driver, train driver and four others, probably on the train, considering that the normally excellent Mk.3 coaches suffered serious damage, which needs to be examined urgently, considering the train wasn't travelling at full speed.

Poor old Great Western has now had three serious HST accidents in seven years, only one of which was their fault, and all with the first class section at the front of the train bearing the brunt of it, which I suppose is lucky as it's generally less used.

Casualty figures now at seven, also this would be the fourth HST accident as there was a FGW train involved in another level crossing incident in Worcestershire a couple of months ago (a number of deaths - but all in the minibus that was on the crossing)

My sympthies to everyone involved

EDIT Greencreeper: why would the car be anything but side on to the tracks? If they wanted to push the car or crank it out on the starter (only possible with manuals) they want it pointing the right way.

[greencreeper]

Originally Posted by cjmillsnun

EDIT Greencreeper: why would the car be anything but side on to the tracks? If they wanted to push the car or crank it out on the starter (only possible with manuals) they want it pointing the right way.

I was thinking in terms of "what if the vehicle couldn't be moved clear of the tracks", and also for those contemplating suicide it might be better for those on the train if their vehicle isn't side on.

[MovedGoalPosts]

We do not know yet why the car was stationary on the crossing. But it seems there is a reliable witness, an off duty police officer, who accordgin to ITV news at least, was trying to use the level crossing phone to warn signal staff there was a problem. However there was never going to be enough time. Rail signals are effectively automated as far as automated corssings go. Once the barrier is down the light goes green, and the train continues.

The oddity of this particular collision is that the train derailed. That appears very unusual looking at statisitics. It appears road vehicle versus train on corossigs is happens many times a year, but only the vehicle occupants die as trains usually stay on the tracks. As the ITV report I saw said, yet again this is a road accident that has involved trains.

Ultimately the only way that we are to prevent level crossing incidents is to remove them. But is the country prepared to accept and fund the cost of doing so? We would have to remove each and every crossing as to say one part of the network is a higher risk than others would be impossible, as the vehicle being stuck could happen anywhere any time. In most cases as there is no alternate viable route so building bridges or underpasses would be necesary, but especially in built up areas the space to do so may not be physically available. I don't think there is an easy answer.

Yes we wish for safe railways, but the "surprise" and newsworthy nature of the rail accident is a bit odd to me. The railways, per head of person carried per mile, per casualty beats death and injury statistics on the roads. Yet we have an outcry on rail travel accidents, because of the "novelty" of it (and perhaps that serious accidents cause mass causualty), but largely take for granted road incidents.

[greencreeper]

Originally Posted by MGP

But it seems there is a reliable witness, an off duty police officer, who accordgin to ITV news at least, was trying to use the level crossing phone to warn signal staff there was a problem.

That's what I was meaning. The car is trapped between the barriers - what do you do? Waste precious time trying to stop the train by using the emergency telephone, or move the car so it's end on and not side on? Like a previous poster said, a high speed train takes several miles to come to a stop, so there's a point at which a crash becomes inevitable and the only option left open is to try to maximise the changes of the train staying on the track.

[BBKing]

the fourth HST accident

Sorry, should have said 'with passenger fatalities'. Normally of course, the victims of level crossing accidents are in the vehicles.

Yes we wish for safe railways

We've got safe railways - no passenger deaths last year, for instance. Since Ladbroke Grove we've got TPWS, which would have prevented it, we've got Network Rail taking maintenance away from cowboys like Jarvis which would have prevented Hatfield and probably Potters Bar, and with any luck we've got a realisation that mucking about with the structure of the railways to put profit first does nothing for the safety of passengers.

Replacing all level crossings isn't going to happen, too expensive for the accidents prevented (as I said, about one serious one every twenty years). Much better to invest in better junctions, better signalling, better train driver training and target the most dangerous level crossings (where the amount of road traffic has increased for instance) and *get the people who pay for the roads* to pay for them. Why should the already cash-strapped railway pay to prevent road users killing themselves?

Also it's worth remembering that trains have been derailed and people killed at bridges over railway lines, too, after cars and lorries have been driven off the bridge.

Once the barrier is down the light goes green, and the train continues.

Actually, I don't think AHBs are interlocked with the signalling, the bigger crossings generally are. It's not usually convenient with modern signalling distances to have a signal at each LC - particularly in flat areas like the Kennet Valley where there are lots of LCs. Also, the amount of time the barriers are down is about 30 seconds (this is for the benefit of road users, who complained about the time taken to close the old swing gated crossings). This isn't enough time to avoid delaying the train, which will be about a mile away at 125mph, a bit closer at 100mph, which is well beyond the point at which it would be seeing yellows and having to slow down.

[SOSAGES]

the whole country is run by pressure groups kinda p!isses me off people die its a sad fact of life all the people that come out the woodwork and say blah blah shoudl remove the crossings etc yes its a sad event but train deaths are low and there isnt a lot you can do to stop someone in a car driving onto the track even if it was maned with a huge barrier u can still drive through it ...

sad event yes but put it into perspective. flying chips probably cause the same amount of deaths each year ... all day on local radio its all i have heard wouldnt even raise a mention if it wasnt local i bet

[Jon M]

**Update**

It turns out one guy from my office was on the train, he suffered severed tendons in his hand. His brother-in-law, who was with him, dislocated his hip. They both had to wait 4 hours to get to hospital as the more seriously injured were most likely taken first. I've heard unconfirmed reports that an 8yr old girl, daughter of a family connected with one of my colleagues, was one of those killed

[orangebird]

Originally Posted by s1lv3r

<snip>. I've heard unconfirmed reports that an 8yr old girl, daughter of a family connected with one of my colleagues, was one of those killed

Yes, it's true, this was reported on GMTV this am.

Yeah

http://www.guardian.co.uk/ufton/stor...346227,00.html

Sorry mate

A nine-year-old girl was today named as one of the seven people killed in Saturday's rail crash at Ufton Nervet, Berkshire.

Louella Main and her mother, 38-year-old Anjanette Rossi, from Speen, near Newbury, also in Berkshire, died when the 17.35 express train from Paddington to Plymouth, travelling at 100mph, hit a stationary car at a level crossing.

Originally Posted by SOSAGES

the whole country is run by pressure groups kinda p!isses me off people die its a sad fact of life all the people that come out the woodwork and say blah blah shoudl remove the crossings etc yes its a sad event but train deaths are low and there isnt a lot you can do to stop someone in a car driving onto the track even if it was maned with a huge barrier u can still drive through it ...

sad event yes but put it into perspective. flying chips probably cause the same amount of deaths each year ... all day on local radio its all i have heard wouldnt even raise a mention if it wasnt local i bet

Half barriers are fine, they stop people getting onto the track by accident and if a car wants to get on there on purpose they can do it no matter what

[Shaun]

Originally Posted by orangebird

Yes, it's true, this was reported on GMTV this am.

Sorry to hear that S1lver

I must admit I cringe when I see people letting their kids roam all over the trains while its in motion, I can't help imagining them getting seriously hurt