Children killed as bus cut in two on Level Crossing

[phil-b259]

Not Good

 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-42358075

[meil]

I find the quoted text in that article

 

"But the grandmother of an injured 11-year-old girl who had been on the bus told a very different story. The girl said the barrier had not come down but remained raised. "The red lights that normally flash did not come on," she said. "The (bus) driver went through and stopped half way, and that's where the train crashed into it.""

 

Quite odd. Why would the bus stop half way?

[PatB]

I find the quoted text in that article

 

"But the grandmother of an injured 11-year-old girl who had been on the bus told a very different story. The girl said the barrier had not come down but remained raised. "The red lights that normally flash did not come on," she said. "The (bus) driver went through and stopped half way, and that's where the train crashed into it.""

 

Quite odd. Why would the bus stop half way?

 

Maybe best to wait for more factual information rather than taking statements by shocked children, filtered through third parties, translated and probably mangled by at least one newsgathering organisation, at face value.

[Joseph_Pestell]

Very sad for all concerned.

 

Millas is close to my second home in France and I know that line quite well. All seems very strange and I agree that we should wait until investigation reveals the real cause.

[Focalplane]

There is very little hard news coming out of the region at the moment.  Midi Libre newspaper today has an article "what we know. . ." which says very little other than the deaths and injuries, along with terrifying photos of the bus.  The railway line is one of the few remaining branch lines in the region, serving towns along the Tet valley as far as Villefranche where it connects with Le Train Jaune.  Trains include EMUs of both traditional and modern design.  At this time of year SNCF put on Santa (Père Noel) Specials.

 

Level crossing accidents are not uncommon in the region, particularly in the area between Montpellier and Nimes.  I have been on trains there which have been held up by similar events, though they are rarely so tragic.  Train travel, according to Midi Libre reports, remains much safer than travel on the main autoroute, A9, which seems to have almost daily road accidents.

 

Our thoughts are with the families.

[Focalplane]

The latest official reports from the investigation say that the lady bus driver has since stated to official investigators that the barriers were raised when she drove onto the crossing.  Previously it had been stated that the barriers were down but now the question to be answered is whether or not the barriers came down and were damaged as a result of the accident.

 

It is still unclear as to why the bus stopped on the crossing.

[Neil]

There is a short report on the crash in the latest Europe issue of Today's Railways. It says that during the investigation marks were found on the bus at the level of the barriers; the bus driver has been charged with manslaughter, put under house arrest and forbidden from driving.

[Joseph_Pestell]

When I was down there in early January, all local reports were pointing to the fault being with the coach driver.

 

A lawyer in the case was trying to make much out of the fact that the train was running 9 minutes late. Seems that even lawyers have a minimal understanding of the workings of the railway.

[Oldddudders]

Seems that even lawyers have a minimal understanding of the workings of the railway.

I had the same difficulty with a High Court judge, when called as a very unimportant witness.

[olivegreen]

When I was down there in early January, all local reports were pointing to the fault being with the coach driver.

 

A lawyer in the case was trying to make much out of the fact that the train was running 9 minutes late. Seems that even lawyers have a minimal understanding of the workings of the railway.

 

Agree.

From the information available to the general public (and I do emphasise that point) it has been pretty clear from the beginning that the bus driver was at fault…unless you believe the stuff put out by her defence lawyer(s).

The real question is why did an apparently experienced PSV (equivalent) driver do it?  I have a distinct feeling that a portable telephone will enter the debate very soon...

Edited January 30, 2018 by olivegreen

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

...The real question is why did an apparently experienced PSV (equivalent) driver do it? ...

 I would suggest there are many potential explanations. I'll bet I am not alone in once having jumped into the car during a 'busy period' of my life, and found myself sitting in an empty employer's car park; rather than the intended car park near the maternity ward to 'collect'. The troubling aspect was that I had no recollection of driving the all too familiar route to the office, with its several traffic lights, roundabouts and high speed dual carriageway driving. Autopilot on...

[D9020 Nimbus]

A double-decker bus was hit by a Metro train on a crossing on the Tyne and Wear Metro back in the 1980s. The crossings have lights, but not barriers. Fortunately the bus was returning from a school run; there were no passengers and no injuries. So this sort of thing can happen—and before the days of mobile phones. Metros have electromagnetic track brakes which are extremely powerful. The front of the Metro ended up buried in the side of the bus.

 

No doubt there was an enquiry at the time, but it didn't get any publicity.

 

I notice that nowadays Metros sound the horn before crossing, which is done at walking pace. Not of course practical out in the country on normal railway lines.

 

Level crossing accidents have been a problem in Austria too, and have influenced several branch line closures.

[olivegreen]

Your point is taken, Nimbus, but in the incident referred to in this thread there were barriers (lowered) and lights, which the coach driver appears to have driven through, but the facts are, of course, for the enquiry to determine.

 

The French press is full of train-crashing-into-road-vehicle incidents on level crossings, and I suppose it is little different elsewhere, since it makes sensational news. That said, in the vast majority of cases it is unquestionably the road vehicle driver that is at fault. For me, that hardly justifies the closure of a line, branch or otherwise, but we live in excessively (IMHO) risk-averse times….

 

French traffic law is the same as in UK in that a red light means stop. Whether the crossing is protected by barriers or not, a red light means stop. I may be very heartless here but if a driver does not respect the red light at a level crossing, he/she has only him/herself to blame for the injuries and deaths that may as a result be caused and, as is too often forgotten, for the trauma caused to the train driver, regardless of other consequences.

[Fat Controller]

A double-decker bus was hit by a Metro train on a crossing on the Tyne and Wear Metro back in the 1980s. The crossings have lights, but not barriers. Fortunately the bus was returning from a school run; there were no passengers and no injuries. So this sort of thing can happen—and before the days of mobile phones. Metros have electromagnetic track brakes which are extremely powerful. The front of the Metro ended up buried in the side of the bus.

 

No doubt there was an enquiry at the time, but it didn't get any publicity.

 

I notice that nowadays Metros sound the horn before crossing, which is done at walking pace. Not of course practical out in the country on normal railway lines.

 

Level crossing accidents have been a problem in Austria too, and have influenced several branch line closures.

The level crossings on T&W Metro were all at platform ends, so speeds would fortunately be low, as trains were either starting from the station, or slowing to a halt. The French incident, unfortunately, was on a line with higher speeds and heavier stock, hence the damage wreaked on the bus. It is not the first such incident involving school buses, there having been one in eastern France where a bus stopped with its rear portion still on the crossing. Having seen what children's' behaviour can be like on school buses in this country, I wonder if that may have had some influence on the driver's behavior?

France has, unfortunately, a relatively high number of crossing accidents. These are usually attributable to motorist impatience, though one or two are probably down to the proximity of the crossing to the local Cave Co-Operative. Casualties amongst rail users have been thankfully low, though there was an incident in the Dordogne where the road vehicle was a fuel tanker which caught light- thirteen died.

SNCF, like Network Rail, has a long-standing policy of closing crossings whenever the opportunity arises; this is at best disruptive to locals, and also usually very expensive if a bridge is involved.

This article presents a reasonable summary of the scale of the problem:- https://www.thelocal.fr/20171215/why-are-level-crossings-in-france-so-deadly

[Focalplane]

There has been a lot of confusion over who was responsible for the Millas crossing fatalities. Recently the press (Midi Libre) reported that a student on the bus made a statement that the barriers were down. I understand the students were teenagers so the statement was taken into account with other evidence and the conductrice (lady bus driver) has been charged.

 

There was a story circulating that the crossing had had a fault for several days before the accident causing the train drivers to sound their horns more than usual. This was probably local hearsay.

 

Paul

[olivegreen]

There has been a lot of confusion over who was responsible for the Millas crossing fatalities. Recently the press (Midi Libre) reported that a student on the bus made a statement that the barriers were down. I understand the students were teenagers so the statement was taken into account with other evidence and the conductrice (lady bus driver) has been charged.

 

There was a story circulating that the crossing had had a fault for several days before the accident causing the train drivers to sound their horns more than usual. This was probably local hearsay.

 

Paul

 

I think you are a bit behind the curve on this, Paul: it has been clear for some time that the bus has traces of the barrier's paint on its front end - and vice versa. SNCF have confirmed that the crossing was working correctly. There is no confusion whatsoever, except in the minds of journalists… Again, I emphasise that what I say is simply repeating what information is in the public domain - it is for the legal enquiry to determine the facts.

 

As for the story about the crossing having a fault, as you say it is probably local hearsay and to be taken with an extremely large pinch of salt unless and until proven otherwise.

 

Again, I apologise to all for being more forthright on this affair than is my usual temperament, but from the evidence so far available I really do feel that the bus driver, a PSV (equivalent) qualified person conveying children and who had the express or tacit approval and confidence of everyone from the transport ministry downwards through the children's parents to the children themselves, is wholly to blame for this accident, and that those protecting her are fooling themselves regarding her responsibility in the matter. But again, I repeat that  that is a personal view and it is for the official enquiry to decide on the matter.

 

Mike

[JeffP]

One of the scariest bus jourenys I ever made was on a bustitution SNCF coach from Millau to Montpellier.

 

The lady coach driver had a friend sitting to her right and kept talking to her, but INSISTED on taking her eyes off the road to look at her friend as she spoke.

 

Anyone who knows the route south from Millau will know why I was a bit scared....we tended to weave about a bit....

 

As for French schoolchildren on school buses, they are FAR better behaved than their English equivalents, since their acceptance on the service would be quickly withdrawn if they weren't. And it would then be up to their parents to get them to and from school, with stiff penalties for failure so to do.

 

Only in the UK do we make it their RIGHT to travel, no matter how badly they behave. And provide taxis etc if they do get removed from the bus.

Edited February 3, 2018 by JeffP

[Mike Storey]

Level crossing accidents in France are not as rare as in the UK, unfortunately. Of course, we do not know why this driver stopped on the level crossing, nor whether it is true that she did go through a lowered barrier with the lights flashing, although the evidence for that is starting to point in one direction. 

 

What I would say, as someone who traverses many level crossings here in France on a regular basis, is that there is a significant difference between what French authorities call "modernised" and "very visible", to that in Britain.

 

Take these two photos as a comparison:

 

https://www.google.fr/maps/@42.6857008,2.7039482,3a,75y,195.06h,80.09t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1slphAXUdHWrlfAA-xjvbIEg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

https://www.google.fr/maps/@54.1660852,-0.7080931,3a,75y,311.16h,73.85t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1soUCY7ADjThrFs3-SjHuWVg!2e0!7i13312!8i6656

 

The first is the crossing at the accident scene and the second a similar crossing in North Yorkshire. I leave you to decide which has greater visibility.

 

It would appear from a google map route search, that the most likely route the school bus took, would have meant that the bus had just turned left, at a crossroads, on to the road containing the crossing, just a few yards beyond. There is a further cross roads just the other side of the crossing. It is entirely possible that her attention was diverted by activity at one or both of these. We do not know how long this driver had been driving this journey, but the attempted defence of the train being 9 mins late (however laughable to us, perhaps) could be part of the reason that she did not expect the barriers to be down and was otherwise distracted. I don't attempt to predict the outcome of the investigation, but I do know (having been involved in one or two in the UK) that such factors would be part of the accident investigation.

 

It is a fact that French law presume greater responsibility for one's own actions, as against the H&S obligations of authorities or companies, than in the UK. Some say (in the UK) that this is a good thing. The stats say something else. 

[Oldddudders]

I have not studied much of this, but when I read that there were barrier marks on the bus, I assumed she had entered the crossing with them up, then been unable to continue due to traffic ahead. And if the train had been on time, this would indeed not have mattered. Perhaps she regularly drove onto the crossing "knowing" that the traffic ahead would clear, and no train was due. Of course a car might get away with it, but a long vehicle is vulnerable. 

 

Many years ago a skoolfriend was driving over a single-track humped river bridge, and having passed over the hump was a bit crestfallen when an oncoming car drove straight into him. The other driver - not young - said "But I always cross the bridge at this time - and I've never hit anyone before!"

[Mad McCann]

It truly amazes me the thought processes -or lack thereof- that come into play when far too many people get behind a wheel. Ever since I passed my test 26 years ago, I've always operated under this assumption on the road;  if you're approaching a situation where something dangerous could occur as a result of another approaching driver doing something stupid, assume that they will do it and modify your driving/position/speed accordingly in anticipation. Your mate's hump backed bridge is a classic example of this kind of situation. The number of fatal accidents on blind bends on rural roads in these parts is a dreadful testament to the lack of anticipation of such hazards. Given this situation with backed up traffic in advance of the crossing, there's no way I would have risked entering it - least of all with the knowledge of Hixon currently being discussed elsewhere. I guess it's just box junction etiquette but with a very serious additional hazard added to the mix.

 

D4

[olivegreen]

Accepting that I generalise a bit, have you ever seen the way French drivers act on the (admittedly rare) box junctions in France? It's a complete waste of paint, whatever the Code de la route might say!

 

Going back to Mike Storey's post 18 above, French level crossings like the one in question, though from those photos that one is evidently less visible at the crossing itself than the British one, will usually have warning signs, and often countdown markers on all the roads leading to it. A driver who does not heed them … well, I will not repeat the case I made earlier.

 

Mike.

 

(edited forr speelingues)

Edited February 4, 2018 by olivegreen

[Mike Storey]

Accepting that I generalise a bit, have you ever seen the way French drivers act on the (admittedly rare) box junctions in France? It's a complete waste of paint, whatever the Code de la route might say!

 

Going back to Mike Storey's post 18 above, French level crossings like the one in question, though from those photos that one is evidently less visible at the crossing itself than the British one, will usually have warning signs, and often countdown markers on all the roads leading to it. A driver who does not heed them … well, I will not repeat the case I made earlier.

 

Mike.

 

(edited forr speelingues)

 

We both live in this land that the highway code forgot (I recently bought an updated version, and most of it seems to appeal to common sense, as a form of guidance, and how to pass the test, rather than strict rules), but I am not sure of the point you are making?

 

My point, for wot it is wurf, is that the stereotyped (but unfortunately fairly accurate) standard of driving suggests that much bigger and better signage is needed. UK practice on the approach to such crossings involves an advance sign about five times larger, (triangle warning and rectangular info sign underneath), and then an intermediate, pretty large, rectangular, blue/white sign warning drivers of slow or long vehicles and telling them what to do, in addition to the signs at the crossing, and the use of flashing double reds with an amber warning surrounded by red-white reflective flash edging, plus the warbling warning for blind drivers...... The French consider a small triangle at 300m, then two almost invisible side markers at 200 and 100 m, and then a single flashing red, with a warble only on selected crossings, as sufficient for drivers who generally believe they have the right of way in almost any situation. There are some H/B and Open crossings in the Limousin that I have used on many occasions, which seem to consider even this as a luxury.

 

I would guess you might be trying to say that it would all be a waste of money, because they would not obey the instruction signs, or take heed of the information signs anyway. That is a fair point of view! But I would always be in the camp that says the more warning and information you give to drivers, the less excuse they have for acting like a complete @*#t. Napoleon clearly did not anticipate this problem, which I consider to be one of his major failings.......

 

For those anticipating a leisurely drive across France at some point, fret not. If you have a UK plate, they will overtake you so quickly that you will not suffer the indignity of following them to the scene of the accident. I have French plates now so have to follow the "rules". But, unless it is a middle aged woman who has just had her hair done (and I say this not from any kind of prejudice or assumption, but from empirical observation over five years), they will stop at their version of zebra crossings (contrary to urban myth) if you appear to be deserving enough, but they will not stop for another car, in any situation, whatever the signs say they should do, unless there is a stupidly thick, solid white line which would destroy their no-claims bonus, or you are driving an Audi.

[olivegreen]

We both live in this land that the highway code forgot (I recently bought an updated version, and most of it seems to appeal to common sense, as a form of guidance, and how to pass the test, rather than strict rules), but I am not sure of the point you are making?

 

I would guess you might be trying to say that it would all be a waste of money, because they would not obey the instruction signs, or take heed of the information signs anyway.

 

 

I agree with everything you say there, Mike.  

 

I know we are getting off-topic here but the point I was making is simply that the signs and rules exist - however inadequate they might be as seen through British eyes (as an aside, an American friend once described the quality of French signage as "marginally below 'sucks'"!) - and that the law requires drivers to obey them. If the latter do not, they are at fault - it is as simple as that. Look, for example, how much emphasis is placed on the 'give way to the right' rule: woe betide you if a car piles into your right-hand side and you try to claim it was the other driver's fault. It cannot be argued that one set of rules should be applied rigorously and another not.

 

But then, this is France and life is not like that, as we well know! I'm certainly not saying that more, clear signs would be a waste of money but as you suggest (in red), would that actually change anything?

 

I hope the press does not let this story drop, as it has enormous human and road safety interest.

 

Mike S.

[Mike Storey]

I agree with everything you say there, Mike.  

 

I know we are getting off-topic here but the point I was making is simply that the signs and rules exist - however inadequate they might be as seen through British eyes (as an aside, an American friend once described the quality of French signage as "marginally below 'sucks'"!) - and that the law requires drivers to obey them. If the latter do not, they are at fault - it is as simple as that. Look, for example, how much emphasis is placed on the 'give way to the right' rule: woe betide you if a car piles into your right-hand side and you try to claim it was the other driver's fault. It cannot be argued that one set of rules should be applied rigorously and another not.

 

But then, this is France and life is not like that, as we well know! I'm certainly not saying that more, clear signs would be a waste of money but as you suggest (in red), would that actually change anything?

 

I hope the press does not let this story drop, as it has enormous human and road safety interest.

 

Mike S.

 

I don't think it is off-topic Mike, as it must surely be part of the enquiry. 

 

I know you did not make absolute pronouncements, and neither did I, but it is right to raise the issues. French attitudes to highway safety are, frankly, Victorian, and this will not be the last case,unfortunately. I despair at the number of 30 kph restrictions through villages that are observed only to the extent that your suspension or exhaust pipe could be damaged. They just do not "get it".

Edited February 5, 2018 by Mike Storey

[Focalplane]

I have for some time considered it a blessing that in-town/village streets are poorly maintained.  We have a two way street outside our house which is one lane wide between kerbs.  Although a 30kph zone, most drivers rush through at greater speed.  I need to dig a few more potholes!

 

Each French city seems to have its own type of driver and the designation of the department code on the plates can be great help in avoiding those likely to cause problems.  Montpellier (34) is fast getting a bad reputation for reckless driving.  By comparison Perpignan (66) is a relatively calm place to drive.  Interesting that my grand niece, who works in a school west of Perpignan (not far from Millas) and was educated in central France, thinks other drivers don't drive fast enough - "Why don't they drive at 90 kph when that's the speed limit?"

 

Paul