Woman dies after cars struck by train at Moreton-on-Lugg in Herefordshire (16 January 2010)

[whole diary]

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Signalman suspended in Herefordshire crash inquiry

A signalman has been suspended by Network Rail as part of its inquiry into a fatal crash on a level crossing in Herefordshire.
Jane Harding, 52, a hairdresser from Marden, was a passenger in one of two cars on the crossing when a train crashed into it on Saturday.
Safety barriers were up at the crossing at Moreton-on-Lugg, British Transport Police have said.
Network Rail said the suspension was a matter of routine in such cases.

[JayMac]

Network Rail said the suspension was a matter of routine in such cases.

But publicising the fact isn't......

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) website:

Investigation into a fatal accident on a level crossing at Moreton-on-Lugg, Herefordshire, 16 January 2010

The RAIB is carrying out an investigation into a fatal accident that occurred at Moreton-on-Lugg level crossing, Herefordshire, on the railway between Shrewsbury and Hereford, on 16 January 2010.

The accident occurred at about 10:30 hrs, when the 08:30 hrs Manchester Piccadilly to Milford Haven train collided with two cars on Moreton-on-Lugg level crossing. This crossing has full-width lifting barriers controlled from the adjacent signal box. One of the two people in one of the cars was killed and the other was seriously injured, and the two people in the other car suffered minor injuries. There were no casualties on the train, which suffered some damage.

The RAIB^s preliminary examination indicates that the level crossing barriers were raised as the train was approaching the crossing. There is no evidence that the actions of the motorists or the driving of the train contributed to the accident.

The RAIB^s investigation is independent of any investigations by the British Transport Police, or by the safety authority.

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.

[Tim]

Oh dear.

Just a technical question, is there not some kind of interlocking to prevent the signaller making a mistake (signals will only clear for trains if road barriers detected down)?

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Network Rail apology over Moreton level crossing death

The family of a woman killed on a level crossing have received a "full and complete apology" from Network Rail.

Jane Harding, 52, died at the Herefordshire crossing when a train crashed into her vehicle on Saturday.

Safety barriers were up at the crossing at Moreton-on-Lugg, British Transport Police said.

"We consider that the accident is most likely to have been due in some way to Network Rail," a Network Rail spokeswoman said. "Network Rail has extended a full and complete apology to the family. We would also like to extend this apology to everyone who has been so deeply affected by the accident and to the community of Moreton-on-Lugg."

A signalman has been suspended by Network Rail as part of its inquiry into the crash, although the company said this was routine.

[eightf48544]

Anyone know answer to Tim's question re interlocking.

My intial answer would be yes otherwise it's an acident waiting to happen.

Is the crossing controlled from the same box as the trains? It would appear so from various reference books I have.

If so I would expect the signals, barriers to be interlocked.   

[welshman]

Yes there is interlocking but I was nosing around for background material.  It seems that for signaller controlled and observed crossings there is an override.  I'll see if I can find it.  I think it was on the ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) site but that's down this evening. 

This is technically a Category 3 SPAD^▸ (Signal Passed At Danger) is it not?  Allegedly the train passed the distant at green and was only halted by a late red home signal.  The photos show that the train stopped only a short distance after the crossing which confirms that it cannot have been travelling very quickly.  This is a 80-90 mph stretch is it not?

Looking at the timetables there is no other train scheduled to pass shortly before or after this one so it's not a second train case. 

[super tm]

From the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) website:

The RAIB^s preliminary examination indicates that the level crossing barriers were raised as the train was approaching the crossing. There is no evidence that the actions of the motorists or the driving of the train contributed to the accident.

The wording says that the barriers were raised as the train approached the crossing.  Which would suggest that they were lowered and then raised up too soon.  The barriers can only be raised after the signals have been replaced to danger.  It would seem that the signals were returned to danger after the train had passed the distant showing clear.  So the train was going full speed and came to the stop signal at danger and was unable to stop in time.  Bad luck seems to have played a part - a few seconds earlier the distant signal would have been at caution - a few seconds later the train would have cleared the crossing.  RAIB are focussing on why the barriers were raised before the train had gone past the crossing.

[moonrakerz]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1245212/It-fault-Network-Rail-apologises-family-woman-killed-level-crossing-barriers-raised.html

[eightf48544]

If as Super TM^‡(resolve) says the signal was replaced in front of the train then I would expect that there would be some form of time delay before the barriers could be raised.

If as welshaman suggests there's an overrride or the emergency barrier raise then I would expect it to be behind a break glass or other obstacle to prevent accidental activation.

As super tm says bad timing, reminds me of the Hull accident of 1927.

[grandsire]

My recollection of the circumstances of the 1927 Hull accident is that the interlocking failed because  signalman 1 put the signal back to danger before the whole train had passed the signal -  whilst signalman 2 (in the samebox) was setting up a path for a separate train at that moment.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Details of the Hull crash in 1927 are available on the Railways Archive site:

"This disastrous head-on collision was caused by the Scarborough train, after acceptance had been given and the proper signals lowered for it to proceed on C outgoing road past West Parade Junction signal-box, being diverted on to B facing ingoing road, upon which the Withernsea train was approaching the terminal station. I can recollect no case of an accident having occurred in similar circumstances."

[Chris from Nailsea]

From the Ledbury Reporter:

Residents fear more tragedies on crossing

Residents fear that another accident is imminent on a level crossing where a 52-year-old woman died last weekend.

Jane Harding was killed when the black Volkswagen Touareg she was travelling in was in collision with a train at Moreton-on-Lugg, near Hereford, on Saturday morning.

Many drivers are now too scared to pass over the railway tracks, believing the level crossing is unsafe.

Mrs Harding^s husband Mark, who was driving the Volkswagen, has told friends the barriers were down for five minutes, blocking the road across the line. But when they lifted, without a train passing, he crossed the railway into the path of the Manchester to Milford Haven train.

Mr Harding sustained serious shoulder and pelvic injuries and was taken to Hereford County Hospital. He has since been released and is recovering at home.

A gold Vauxhall Astra was also hit, injuring a woman and her 12-year-old daughter.

Those working near the level crossing have backed up Mr Harding^s claim, saying he would only have gone on to the tracks when the barrier was raised.

Mike Greene, managing director of ABC Print in Moreton-on-Lugg, said: ^It is very shocking and no one can see how it happened. When the barriers go up, you automatically think that it is OK to go. Two cars crossed the line from different sides of the track at the same time, so obviously something went wrong. Until I have answers I am not going to use the crossing.^

Employee Phil Watts said: ^I have no intention of using it for the time being, as the accident is something that you will never forget.^

The manned crossing, which underwent maintenance work in the autumn, was re-opened at 3.30am on Monday after safety checks took place.

But Moreton-on-Lugg resident Roger Newton claims that one of the barriers was not working properly at 9am on Monday. ^I was walking towards the crossing when I noticed that the barriers were malfunctioning,^
he said. ^A Network Rail employee even had to walk across the track and physically push it up and down. Even a member of the public had to help out.^

Mr Newton added that traffic had to stop while the problem was sorted and was only allowed to go across the line when the barriers were working again.

^The signalman went back into his box and started pressing the buttons and everything went back to normal,^ said Mr Newton. ^I am staggered that the barriers were not working again just five-and-a-half hours after it was reopened and just two days after a fatal accident.^

Rachel Blackman, spokesman for Network Rail, said the crossing would only have been re-opened after an independent regulator had checked it and deemed it safe.

She added that she was unaware of any problems with the barriers after they had re-opened.

Brian Price, spokesman for British Transport Police (BTP^▸ (British Transport Police)), said that it was unclear how long their investigation would last. He said: ^The investigation has the full co-operation of Network Rail, train company Arriva Trains Wales and other industry partners, and BTP officers are following a number of lines of enquiry to establish the sequence of events which led to the crash.^

[Tim]

The wording says that the barriers were raised as the train approached the crossing.  Which would suggest that they were lowered and then raised up too soon.  The barriers can only be raised after the signals have been replaced to danger. 

One could imagine that a system could be quite easily designed so that a delay is introduced between the signal returning to danger and the barriers going up. 

However, it is possible that the design of the system and the actions of the signaller were influenced by a desire to get the barriers raises as soon as possible after the passage of the train so that the road reopened.   in my experience as a motorist, LC^▸ (Level Crossing) barriers are lowered several minutes before the train but are always raised after  the train very quickly (in fact so quickly that I would fine it hard to believe that there would have been time for a train to be stopped by a red signal or for the train to have been detected in teh next section). 

[welshman]

However, it is possible that the design of the system and the actions of the signaller were influenced by a desire to get the barriers raises as soon as possible after the passage of the train so that the road reopened.

The train had not reached the crossing.  The timetable shows that there was no other train in the vicinity.

I've seen an account which says that the distant signal was clear.  The track curves to left as the train was approaching the crossing.  The home signal was red but by the time the driver saw it he was too close to stop before the crossing and the collision took place.

If indeed the signaller raised the barriers prematurely, it's difficult to understand why that might have occurred since he was overlooking the crossing and presumably knew where the train was. 

We'll just have to wait for the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch).