Hi all
I have just receved word of a incident on a Level Crossing at Swainsthorpe, near norwich on the GEML.
A 170 hit a car that was stolen and dumped on the LC and set alight, the 170 hit it, sending it 700yards down the track. Reports of one fatality, unsure if its driver/guard or passenger on the train.
More will be posted when i know, or if anyone else has an info, post it!
Cheers
Rob......
Incident near Norwich
Moderator: Moderators
-
Whitemoor
- Very Active Forum Member
- Posts: 2455
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 10:11 pm
- Location: Whittlesea Crossing
- Contact:
Incident near Norwich
http://rb-transport.fpic.co.uk
90% of teens today would die if Myspace had a system failure and was completely destroyed. If you are one of the 10% that would be laughing, copy and paste this to your signature.
90% of teens today would die if Myspace had a system failure and was completely destroyed. If you are one of the 10% that would be laughing, copy and paste this to your signature.
-
Whitemoor
- Very Active Forum Member
- Posts: 2455
- Joined: Mon Aug 08, 2005 10:11 pm
- Location: Whittlesea Crossing
- Contact:
i was just browsing that, looks quite bad the damage to the 170....looks like more 153s for my line 
http://rb-transport.fpic.co.uk
90% of teens today would die if Myspace had a system failure and was completely destroyed. If you are one of the 10% that would be laughing, copy and paste this to your signature.
90% of teens today would die if Myspace had a system failure and was completely destroyed. If you are one of the 10% that would be laughing, copy and paste this to your signature.
The Eastern Daily Press online newspaper has this piece of faintly hysterical hyperbole at
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/sto ... 3A28%3A817
No mention of whether the dead person was on the train or not in this piece leading one to assume it's a train passenger and the picture of the barbecued 170 front end is sensationalist. Normally the EDP is pretty even tempered and a reasonable reporter of facts rather than supposition or the reporter's personal prejudice. I can only assume Sunday Morning was being covered by the tea boy.
Oh well, at least this gives "one" a real reason for making a mess of the Monday morning London service which they seem to have been doing far too regularly of late. Well, not just Mondays, but Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays......
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/sto ... 3A28%3A817
No mention of whether the dead person was on the train or not in this piece leading one to assume it's a train passenger and the picture of the barbecued 170 front end is sensationalist. Normally the EDP is pretty even tempered and a reasonable reporter of facts rather than supposition or the reporter's personal prejudice. I can only assume Sunday Morning was being covered by the tea boy.
Oh well, at least this gives "one" a real reason for making a mess of the Monday morning London service which they seem to have been doing far too regularly of late. Well, not just Mondays, but Tuesdays, Wednesdays, Thursdays......
-
MattBoro87
- Getting the hang of things now
- Posts: 84
- Joined: Fri Nov 11, 2005 12:09 pm
Without trying to be too judgemental, reports seem to suggest the vehicle was stationary on the crossing, or at least had disobeyed the instructions to stop clear of the crossing - BTP have confimed the crossing was working correctly. In that case, it is most likely to be one of three things:
Suicide - in a similar event to Ufton Nervet last year
Misadventure - driving round the barriers deliberately
Failure - the road vehicle broke down on the crossing
I'd suggest that this last is the least likely, even Mr Hart was able to move clear of his vehicle (Selby, 2001). Therefore, if it is one of the first two, then it would be fairly safe to assume the accident was caused by the motorist's own actions (resulting in their death).
I have little sympathy for people whose acts of selfishness or stupidity endanger the lives of others, irrespective of whether they themselves are killed. Fortunately no passengers' or traincrew's lives were lost, but that event is something which will live with them.
Suicide - in a similar event to Ufton Nervet last year
Misadventure - driving round the barriers deliberately
Failure - the road vehicle broke down on the crossing
I'd suggest that this last is the least likely, even Mr Hart was able to move clear of his vehicle (Selby, 2001). Therefore, if it is one of the first two, then it would be fairly safe to assume the accident was caused by the motorist's own actions (resulting in their death).
I have little sympathy for people whose acts of selfishness or stupidity endanger the lives of others, irrespective of whether they themselves are killed. Fortunately no passengers' or traincrew's lives were lost, but that event is something which will live with them.
-
cardiffcroupier
- Well Established Forum Member
- Posts: 533
- Joined: Sun May 01, 2005 11:13 am
-
danielw2599
- Very Active Forum Member
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 12:00 am
- Location: I'm behind you!
-
danielw2599
- Very Active Forum Member
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 12:00 am
- Location: I'm behind you!
-
skipperdipper
- Well Established Forum Member
- Posts: 644
- Joined: Tue Jun 29, 2004 7:57 pm
- Location: Wirral
- Contact:
-
danielw2599
- Very Active Forum Member
- Posts: 1601
- Joined: Mon Feb 25, 2002 12:00 am
- Location: I'm behind you!
Well the investigation is still on going. But even if he was stopped on the crossing, doesnt mean it was suicide. He probably saw the train coming and slamed on his breaks to avoid it. Of course this is only speculation, and I too have no sympathy for the car driver, I do however for the victims family and emergency/rail staff.
Daniel
Daniel
Norwich's own "Framley Examiner" goes from bad to worse:
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/sto ... 3A25%3A027
Fresh fears about unmanned level crossings? Well, what about all those pesky unmanned crossroads including the one on the A47 between Norwich and Yarmouth where all the sugar lorries going to cantley turn off, or the one just outside Wymondham which is unlit and where several people have been killed this year?
"The three-carriage 'one' train was not derailed in the collision, possibly because it was travelling at lower speeds than normal because of engineering works." Erm, not exactly. The engineering works were between Diss and Ipswich, which is why there was a 3 car 170 working the service, not a full Intercity rake. Mind you if it had been a 90 chances are the accident wouldn't have happened as the things are . and keep breaking down, but that's another story...
"Yesterday's accident will reawaken concerns over rail safety, coming less than a month after a farmworker was killed at an unmanned crossing between Littleport and Downham Market." Really? Yesterday's accident was at a normal half-barrier road crossing. The Littleport accident was an uncontrolled farm crossing. Two completely different things.
"High-speed trains to and from London normally operate between Norwich and Diss at speeds of about 120mph. This weekend such services were not running because buses replaced trains between Diss and Ipswich as a result of the engineering works." You what? 120 mph? Behave. You are lucky to get 100mph (the line max otherwise it wouldn't have been a half barrier crossing) for most of the journey.
"Another person living near the crash scene, who asked not be named, said he had feared for some time that somebody was going to be hurt on the level crossing as many motorists did not see signs warning them about the crossing ahead until it was too late." Yes, especially as many car drivers are terminally stupid, too busy on the phone, fannying around with the cd changer, or in Norfolk over 70 and relying on their guide dog to navigate for them. Typical Joe Public, blame the signs, not their own stupidity. Accidents are caused by people, not signage.
Not one of the EDP's better reports. In fact it's pretty appalling for them.
http://new.edp24.co.uk/content/news/sto ... 3A25%3A027
Fresh fears about unmanned level crossings? Well, what about all those pesky unmanned crossroads including the one on the A47 between Norwich and Yarmouth where all the sugar lorries going to cantley turn off, or the one just outside Wymondham which is unlit and where several people have been killed this year?
"The three-carriage 'one' train was not derailed in the collision, possibly because it was travelling at lower speeds than normal because of engineering works." Erm, not exactly. The engineering works were between Diss and Ipswich, which is why there was a 3 car 170 working the service, not a full Intercity rake. Mind you if it had been a 90 chances are the accident wouldn't have happened as the things are . and keep breaking down, but that's another story...
"Yesterday's accident will reawaken concerns over rail safety, coming less than a month after a farmworker was killed at an unmanned crossing between Littleport and Downham Market." Really? Yesterday's accident was at a normal half-barrier road crossing. The Littleport accident was an uncontrolled farm crossing. Two completely different things.
"High-speed trains to and from London normally operate between Norwich and Diss at speeds of about 120mph. This weekend such services were not running because buses replaced trains between Diss and Ipswich as a result of the engineering works." You what? 120 mph? Behave. You are lucky to get 100mph (the line max otherwise it wouldn't have been a half barrier crossing) for most of the journey.
"Another person living near the crash scene, who asked not be named, said he had feared for some time that somebody was going to be hurt on the level crossing as many motorists did not see signs warning them about the crossing ahead until it was too late." Yes, especially as many car drivers are terminally stupid, too busy on the phone, fannying around with the cd changer, or in Norfolk over 70 and relying on their guide dog to navigate for them. Typical Joe Public, blame the signs, not their own stupidity. Accidents are caused by people, not signage.
Not one of the EDP's better reports. In fact it's pretty appalling for them.
More from the EDP's sister paper, not quite as bad as the EDP report but not good:
http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/ ... 3A34%3A887
Fail to see how a lorry getting stuck under a descending barrier in Thetford is the railway's fault.
Interestingly this report is quoting those oh so reliable "eye witnesses" as saying the car had been seen waiting at the crossing and dodged round the barriers to park on the crossing. If this is correct - which hasn't been officially confirmed, if it ever will be - , it is possible the incident was a copycat of the Berkshire suicide. Traditionally when a suicide is reported the method is not given out in the press to avoid copycat incidents, but the railway and British Transport Police authorities were quick to release the suicide theory in the Berkshire incident. Perhaps, given there has been at least one other copycat incident in the US with train passenger fatalities and now this possible case, it was not the wisest of moves to publicise so openly that the Ufton crash was a suicide. The method (driving onto a railway track) is now publicised on a well known (and popular) suicide methodology website, and it wasn't previously, so it is now more widely known and I can't help thinking the risk of such incidents, if the eye witnesses are correct and this one is confirmed as suicide, has become greater thanks to the publicity that Ufton gained. After all, they could just have said the crossing was working fine and the car driver was at fault without saying he intended to take his own life.
The train driver was the only train casualty and was treated for shock and smoke inhalation at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital. The unit involved was 170 207, and was mainly fire damaged to the front, some damage to the coupler and the cowling, but was not seriously damaged. It's probable the unit will need a new front end, and will ahve to go to Crewe for repairs. Given all the 3 car units are needed in service on weekdays, there may be some temporary reformation or hire of sets to cover it whilst away, especially as the other two cars of 207 seem to be unscathed.
http://www.eveningnews24.co.uk/content/ ... 3A34%3A887
Fail to see how a lorry getting stuck under a descending barrier in Thetford is the railway's fault.
Interestingly this report is quoting those oh so reliable "eye witnesses" as saying the car had been seen waiting at the crossing and dodged round the barriers to park on the crossing. If this is correct - which hasn't been officially confirmed, if it ever will be - , it is possible the incident was a copycat of the Berkshire suicide. Traditionally when a suicide is reported the method is not given out in the press to avoid copycat incidents, but the railway and British Transport Police authorities were quick to release the suicide theory in the Berkshire incident. Perhaps, given there has been at least one other copycat incident in the US with train passenger fatalities and now this possible case, it was not the wisest of moves to publicise so openly that the Ufton crash was a suicide. The method (driving onto a railway track) is now publicised on a well known (and popular) suicide methodology website, and it wasn't previously, so it is now more widely known and I can't help thinking the risk of such incidents, if the eye witnesses are correct and this one is confirmed as suicide, has become greater thanks to the publicity that Ufton gained. After all, they could just have said the crossing was working fine and the car driver was at fault without saying he intended to take his own life.
The train driver was the only train casualty and was treated for shock and smoke inhalation at the Norfolk and Norwich University Hospital. The unit involved was 170 207, and was mainly fire damaged to the front, some damage to the coupler and the cowling, but was not seriously damaged. It's probable the unit will need a new front end, and will ahve to go to Crewe for repairs. Given all the 3 car units are needed in service on weekdays, there may be some temporary reformation or hire of sets to cover it whilst away, especially as the other two cars of 207 seem to be unscathed.
-
vidal
- Been on the forums for a while
- Posts: 134
- Joined: Mon Jul 05, 2004 9:59 am
- Location: Tottington, Lancashire
- Contact:
Yet again we have a fatality on a level crossing, and yet again we have members of this site (and others, to be fair) - openly stating they have no sympathy for the deceased. I have remarked in previous posts that we are not in possession of the full facts in this case, and until we are we should not be jumping to conclusions.
The only facts pertinent to this are that a car was stopped on the level ccrossing, it was hit by a train, the driver of the car was killed (RIP) and the driver of the train was lightly injured (physically).
Could I request that a mod either locks this topic or that a very close eye is kept on it?
James.
The only facts pertinent to this are that a car was stopped on the level ccrossing, it was hit by a train, the driver of the car was killed (RIP) and the driver of the train was lightly injured (physically).
Could I request that a mod either locks this topic or that a very close eye is kept on it?
James.