Croydon Tram Accident

[stewartingram]

My understanding is that a tram does count as a "road vehicle" - otherwise it would not be permitted on the public highway.

 

It might seem trivial but modern tram systems still fall under the same regs as those around in the 1950s. The tendency to use reserved alignments or ex railways these days for large chunks of the system makes no difference to the law.

 

Light railway systems such as the Metro in Newcastle and the DLR are however considered as railways by law and from a legal perspective they are no different to the national network / Heritage railways / London Underground

 

OT for this thread, for which I apologise, but this has reminded me of a question I posed some time back, and never really got a satisfactory answer.

 

Cambridge has its infamous (Mis)Guided busway, mainly along the alignment of the former St.Ives railway. This is, for those not familiar, a twin track "road" that normal(ish) buses traverse. They have horizontal guide wheels bearing on the kerbs of the roadway, & connected to the steering of the bus. The road as such is really a railway; concrete rails laid on a form of concrete sleepers. Road crossings are traffic light controlled crossroads where normal tarmac road is laid.

The busway was built for the local authority, who licensed 2 bus operators to provide services along it. No other vehicles are permitted (nor would be able to use it for technical reasons) except for a contracted breakdown truck.

The question I asked was, is this then a roadway (subject to road regulations), or is it a form of railway (it is guided after all), and thus subject to rail regulations? In which case what happens after an accident, is there a RAIB type investigation, or is it glossed over? I am aware of 3 accidents/derailments so far, but there doesn't seem to be anything that has been investigated thoroughly as it would have been on rail.

 

Stewart

 

(apologies if this is OT, if necessary I will move it to a new topic?)

[ruggedpeak]

AT around a minute in, there's a sharp left bend - the black and white chevron boards are interesting, something I wouldn't have expected to see on a tram-only section, though an obvious and simple solution to highlighting the left bend where the original alignment went straight ahead.

Something that might, I stress might, have been useful here if the driver was for some reason distracted sufficiently to not be aware of his position and needing a reminder of the impending turn.

 

A similar situation on a public road could see bend hazard signs, chevrons on the bend, reflective markers on the roadside, hazard or solid lines on the approach, possibly rumble strips and SLOW painted on the road. I'd also expect a slippery surface sign given there is a transition from a dry tunnel to a wet/leafy/icy surface (in a depression overlooked by mature trees on several sides) in the braking zone and in the bend. Roads are used by the public and thus skill levels etc are highly variable compared to trained tram/train drivers, but I'm a little surprised the photos I've seen I can't see anything visual in the bend to remind drivers of the sharp turn because a late forgetful glance might see only the tunnel opposite and an assumption of straight on (i.e. the potential for basic human error which is the cause of most road traffic collisions).

 

I assume on heavy rail such a situation would be signal controlled and have some form of speed limit sign well before the turn? I appreciate public roads and tram only tracks are very different propositions, but that location seems to have lots of elements to catch out the unwary and might be in my view a collision hotspot if it were a public road. The difference would be that road users have the ability to go straight on if they were going too fast - either hitting other vehicles as they did so, escaping unscathed down the other lane or still trying to make the turn and hitting the verge on the other side. I guess trams/trains only have one option, enter the curve at whatever speed.

 

The Sun, Mail and Metro are reporting that the driver may have been texting http://metro.co.uk/2016/11/13/croydon-tram-driver-may-have-been-texting-in-crash-that-killed-seven-6254681/ Earlier it was alleged he had blacked out, so we are still in speculation mode.

[Edwin_m]

What is that gubbins in the four-foot that you can see at 1:44 into this video of the Manchester Metrolink at Oldham, which is also a former suburban railway-come-tramway?

It's a loop which interrogates the transponder underneath the tram, which in turn is set up with route information and can also allow the driver to select manually the changing of points ahead.  The information gets fed back to the control room and also drives the next tram displays at the stops. 

[Edwin_m]

AT around a minute in, there's a sharp left bend - the black and white chevron boards are interesting, something I wouldn't have expected to see on a tram-only section, though an obvious and simple solution to highlighting the left bend where the original alignment went straight ahead.

I was chairing the safety workshop where the operator requested that sign and everyone agreed it would be a good idea.  It's slightly different from the Croydon situation in that the trams initially took the line straight ahead through Werneth tunnel before the diversion through the centre of Oldham was finished, so there is a greater risk of drivers forgetting the curve because they took the straight route previously.  However whatever else changes as a result of this accident, I would expect to see something like this in Croydon as an obvious "reasonably practicable" mitigation. 

[edcayton]

In addition to a stop and proceed board, would it not be fairly simple to arrange a signal (traffic light?) that shows red until the tram stops and then goes green?

 

Ed

[Grovenor]

In addition to a stop and proceed board, would it not be fairly simple to arrange a signal (traffic light?) that shows red until the tram stops and then goes green?

 

Ed

Simple enough, the signal could go green when the tram has slowed to the required speed, no need for a stop. That is the standard approach control used on the railways for well over 50 years. But a red signal does not stop a driver who is incapacitated etc.

regards

[meil]

A number of roads around us have signs which display your speed. I would have thought it would be a simple solution to fit one of these to the tram system (a tram is a bus). However I would couple it to a tram signal that would only show proceed if the speed monitor was showing below/at the permitted speed. That way if the tram was speeding and as such committed a SPAD that SPAD would trigger the emergency brake. It would also give reason for instant dismissal of the driver.

[Colin_McLeod]

Meil I agree with your thoughts but NOT the last sentence. The reason for the SPAD has to be determined as it could be a technical problem for example a failure of the brakes.

[D854_Tiger]

Lots of speculation in the press about what the driver may, or may not, have done at the time of the crash.

 

Some of this may have come from the passengers but, as it was dark at that time of the morning, would the passengers have been able to see the driver.

 

I don't know how it works with trams, during the dark, but on the first generation DMUs blinds were pulled down, you couldn't see the driver at all.

 

 

[Grovenor]

 

That way if the tram was speeding and as such committed a SPAD that SPAD would trigger the emergency brake.

Neither an active speed sign nor a tram signal will trigger an emergency brake application unless some system is fitted to the trams, and if you fit that, ZUB or whatever, you don't need the active sign or the signal, the passive speed limit boards are enough.

Rgds

[Mark Saunders]

Lots of speculation in the press about what the driver may, or may not, have done at the time of the crash.

 

Some of this may have come from the passengers but, as it was dark at that time of the morning, would the passengers have been able to see the driver.

 

I don't know how it works with trams, during the dark, but on the first generation DMUs blinds were pulled down, you couldn't see the driver at all.

Too much light behind you reflects off the windscreen and cuts down visibility, hence the dropped blinds!

 

The same reason you sit in the dark in a car!

 

Mark Saunders

[The Stationmaster]

OT for this thread, for which I apologise, but this has reminded me of a question I posed some time back, and never really got a satisfactory answer.

 

Cambridge has its infamous (Mis)Guided busway, mainly along the alignment of the former St.Ives railway. This is, for those not familiar, a twin track "road" that normal(ish) buses traverse. They have horizontal guide wheels bearing on the kerbs of the roadway, & connected to the steering of the bus. The road as such is really a railway; concrete rails laid on a form of concrete sleepers. Road crossings are traffic light controlled crossroads where normal tarmac road is laid.

The busway was built for the local authority, who licensed 2 bus operators to provide services along it. No other vehicles are permitted (nor would be able to use it for technical reasons) except for a contracted breakdown truck.

The question I asked was, is this then a roadway (subject to road regulations), or is it a form of railway (it is guided after all), and thus subject to rail regulations? In which case what happens after an accident, is there a RAIB type investigation, or is it glossed over? I am aware of 3 accidents/derailments so far, but there doesn't seem to be anything that has been investigated thoroughly as it would have been on rail.

 

Stewart

 

(apologies if this is OT, if necessary I will move it to a new topic?)

 

Sorry Stewart - I missed this earlier.  technically as a 'guided transport system' it would be covered by ROGS but I can't find it on the exclusion list although all the tramway systems are excluded.  I suspect it was omitted from the exclusion list by either an oversight or simply wasn't regarded by the ORR as not being covered by the legislation because it doesn't have rails so therefore didn't need to be excluded.  Sorry that doesn't answer your question in full but at least it gives part of a  likely answer.

Edited November 13, 2016 by The Stationmaster

[Derekstuart]

Stewart

 

any accident involving a 'guided bus' falls under the remit of DVSA (Driver & Vehicle Services Agency, incorporating what was VOSA and previously VI). They are buses whether on road or guided way.

 

I have been involved with that blasted monstrosity in one form or another already. Although not involved with the operator concerned, there was an accident on it and it was VOSA (now DVSA) that became involved. Nothing to do with rail or trams etc.

OT for this thread, for which I apologise, but this has reminded me of a question I posed some time back, and never really got a satisfactory answer.

 

Cambridge has its infamous (Mis)Guided busway, mainly along the alignment of the former St.Ives railway. This is, for those not familiar, a twin track "road" that normal(ish) buses traverse. They have horizontal guide wheels bearing on the kerbs of the roadway, & connected to the steering of the bus. The road as such is really a railway; concrete rails laid on a form of concrete sleepers. Road crossings are traffic light controlled crossroads where normal tarmac road is laid.

The busway was built for the local authority, who licensed 2 bus operators to provide services along it. No other vehicles are permitted (nor would be able to use it for technical reasons) except for a contracted breakdown truck.

The question I asked was, is this then a roadway (subject to road regulations), or is it a form of railway (it is guided after all), and thus subject to rail regulations? In which case what happens after an accident, is there a RAIB type investigation, or is it glossed over? I am aware of 3 accidents/derailments so far, but there doesn't seem to be anything that has been investigated thoroughly as it would have been on rail.

 

Stewart

 

(apologies if this is OT, if necessary I will move it to a new topic?)

[coachmann]

Thanks for sharing the tram Video in Oldham. I grew up there and worked the buses for 4½ years, but I didn't know where the heck I was until the tram reached my old art school at the 'Central' stop. Then I was intrigued to see how the tram went straight through the 'Royal Oak' pub where I once played piano. Great stuff climbing from Mumps to railway level at Derker.

[The Stationmaster]

Interesting piece on the  BBC 'local' London tv news this evening.  A woman emailed the tram operators the week before the derailment to complain about excessive speed - just one of the stories coming out of the woodwork it seems at first.  But she had a reply stating they were investigating so, it would seem, they were taking her report seriously.  All of which is going to be potentially embarrassing as it seems the ORR are going round looking for exactly that sort of thing according to what was also reported in the programme.

 

Track is now reinstated and was being tested today by a tram today.

[edcayton]

Are trams fitted with tachographs?

 

Ed

[royaloak]

Are trams fitted with tachographs?

 

Ed

No, and neither are buses.

[Gwiwer]

No, and neither are buses.

 

https://www.gov.uk/tachographs/overview

 

It's complicated by the fact that there are Domestic and European Driving Hours Regulations.  Many local service buses are not fitted with tachographs because there is no legal requirement for them if they remain on routes less than 50kms.  Some buses are so fitted in order to operate longer routes and to be available for private hire duties which do require tachos.  The main reason many longer bus routes now appear to be run in sections is to avoid the need for tachos and to keep drivers on Domestic hours.  If a route is 60kms long it might show as its destination a mid-point and change there to its final destination.  Some electronic displays will show "A for B" or similar formats and the timetable will indicate that the vehicle works through, passengers are not required to change and that this arrangement is to comply with Government "guidance".  The driver will however normally be changed at the intermediate "destination."

 

Stagecoach South East route 100 / 101 (Hastings Silverhill - Dover) is nominally split in half at Lydd but the buses work end to end, the passengers get through tickets and stay on the vehicle though the drivers change over there.

 

A few routes are not split, either theoretically or in any form of practice, and drivers must abide by European hours for their entire working period and the vehicle in question must have its tacho in use.  On example was the (now-withdrawn) Exeter - Dartmoor - Plymouth service 82 which had no handy mid-point as it traversed large areas of open moorland.  The driver worked a Totnes (base) - Plymouth - Exeter duty throughout and continued to the depot at Totnes for a day's work with a meal break at Plymouth.

 

Trams are not required to have tachographs because their route length is pre-determined and (in the UK at least) is often fairly short.  Even in Melbourne, on the largest tram network in the world, our longest tram route is 25kms.  They should however have some form of data-logger at least on more modern vehicles such as are used in Croydon.  That records the operation of the driver's controls, speed and direction changes and might or might not also record voice communication with the controller.

But instead they're equipped with 'black boxes', who also record speed, amongst various other parameters.

 

Anyone aware of the vehicle number involved and/or seen the damage on the side that was covered over during recovery?

2551

Edited November 15, 2016 by Gwiwer

[Edwin_m]

There was a picture on the BBC, which I can't now find, of part of the side of 2551 which had been downwards, or at least I infer from the fact it was more damaged than the side shown upwards on previous photos.  There was a big gouge out of the top corner and nearly all windows were missing but the structure looked otherwise intact. 

[Gwiwer]

There was a picture on the BBC, which I can't now find, of part of the side of 2551 which had been downwards, or at least I infer from the fact it was more damaged than the side shown upwards on previous photos.  There was a big gouge out of the top corner and nearly all windows were missing but the structure looked otherwise intact. 

 

It might well be the case that any images of this side are being suppressed owing to the severity of the incident and the number of fatalities.  While there is natural curiosity we don't really need to see the spot where seven unfortunate passengers met their end.  Whether or not any remaining human matter has been cleaned from it.

[The Stationmaster]

One thing which I am wondering about is whether the investigations and consequent recommendations might lead to ROGS being applied to tramways in future.  The most important, and possibly critical, aspect of this would be to apply certain standards in respect of  staff training and monitoring (which might already exist of course but are not necessarily legally enforceable or enforced) together with particular standards of safety management and incident investigation and follow-up.  In reality I would hope that a system such as Croydon - which has stretches of reserved track running at quite high speeds - would already apply such standards although no doubt the various investigations will establish that one way or another.

 

Clearly if ROGS were to be imposed there would be an initial set-up cost but the extent to which it would, or would not, impose additional ongoing managerial and administrative costs would depend entirely on the extent to which standards are developed, applied, and managed.  But, whichever, it would strengthen the arm of a regulatory body in an organised and well understood manner.  It will be interesting to see what happens in this respect.

[jamie92208]

One thing which I am wondering about is whether the investigations and consequent recommendations might lead to ROGS being applied to tramways in future.  The most important, and possibly critical, aspect of this would be to apply certain standards in respect of  staff training and monitoring (which might already exist of course but are not necessarily legally enforceable or enforced) together with particular standards of safety management and incident investigation and follow-up.  In reality I would hope that a system such as Croydon - which has stretches of reserved track running at quite high speeds - would already apply such standards although no doubt the various investigations will establish that one way or another.

 

Clearly if ROGS were to be imposed there would be an initial set-up cost but the extent to which it would, or would not, impose additional ongoing managerial and administrative costs would depend entirely on the extent to which standards are developed, applied, and managed.  But, whichever, it would strengthen the arm of a regulatory body in an organised and well understood manner.  It will be interesting to see what happens in this respect.

As far as I know, ROGS are already in use, they certainly are on heritage tramways as I got involved with them when restoring the horse tram. As we started off using grandfather rights then had to consider ROGS. IIRC the OGS is Other guided systems to includes tramways.

 

Jamie

[meil]

 

 

Anyone aware of the vehicle number involved and/or seen the damage on the side that was covered over during recovery?

No 2551

[Edwin_m]

ROGS is applied to tramways but not to guided buses. 

[The Stationmaster]

ROGS is applied to tramways but not to guided buses. 

 

But they have a partial exclusion from some parts of it (although this might only apply to rolling stock?) but it does appear their risk assessment process has to be acceptable to the ORR  (which of course might raise a further question in any investigation)