When is a cutting an embankment?

[martin_wynne]

Strange to read RAIB referring to a cutting side as an embankment in this near-miss report published today:

 

 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/safety-digest-022022-near-miss-with-track-workers-and-collision-with-a-tree-on-the-line-at-uphill-junction/near-miss-with-track-workers-and-collision-with-a-tree-on-the-line-at-uphill-junction-near-weston-super-mare-somerset-14-january-2022

 

Martin.

[Michael Hodgson]

I would say a cutting became an embankment when the navvies had shifted the soil from a hill to a valley.

 

But that location looks to me like a cutting.

[Halvarras]

In my early years of railway interest (late 1960s) I used to cycle to Penwithers Junction where the Falmouth branch diverged from the Cornish main line just west of Truro, this took me across the first overbridge on the branch. At that time when looking from the bridge towards the junction a flat area of wasteland carved into the hillside to the right of the branch was very obvious. Since it was level with the trackbed the youthful me used to wonder if there had been sidings there in the past, although even then I thought it would have been a strange place to put them. I later learned that the embankment between bridge and junction had eliminated a timber viaduct there in the late 1920s..........a-ha, mystery solved!

[Wickham Green too]

I gave up half way through reading that report ........... I reckon the "site decision making tool" should be replaced by good ol' fashioned common sense - an' IF that's what the report goes on to say,  I apologies to its authors.

[Michael Hodgson]

4 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

I reckon the "site decision making tool" should be replaced by ...

 

Isn't that what they call a ganger these days?

[St. Simon]

1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said:

I gave up half way through reading that report ........... I reckon the "site decision making tool" should be replaced by good ol' fashioned common sense - an' IF that's what the report goes on to say,  I apologies to its authors.

And frankly it’s that ‘good old fashioned common sense’ attitude that causes accidents.

 

Simon

[SR71]

1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said:

... should be replaced by good ol' fashioned common sense - an' IF that's what the report goes on to say,  I apologies to its authors.

That is what the gap in the paperwork identified by the report effectively permitted. Only I suspect that 'common sense' was overridden by (to borrow an aviation term) 'get there itus'. Last job of the day and they chose to use a human rather than get all the safety gear (primarily rope it seems) out which would then have to be packed up again.

 

No judgement on those involved, very easily done as part of a group when you are tired at the end of the day. It's the planning each stage that keeps people safe. Written down in a report it's obviously the wrong thing to do but only by writing it out beforehand as a method statement would that potentially become clear. As part of a dynamic site situation full consequences can easily be overlooked when RAMS provided do not have sufficient consideration or limitation for a situation that's changed.

 

And no, it's a cutting.

[Wickham Green too]

15 hours ago, St. Simon said:

... ‘good old fashioned common sense’ attitude that causes accidents.

On my planet its a LACK OF common sense that permits accidents to happen.

[Reorte]

1 hour ago, Wickham Green too said:

On my planet its a LACK OF common sense that permits accidents to happen.

Well assuming people have it when in fact they don't. And no-one's perfect either, everyone does something really stupid from time to time, just usually luckily enough in situations where there aren't any serious consequences.  But I guess there has to be some balance between that and trying to programme everyone like robots.

[Wheatley]

2 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

On my planet its a LACK OF common sense that permits accidents to happen.

The problem being that self-evaluated common sense is often characterised by the lack of same. 

Edited May 17, 2022 by Wheatley

[The Stationmaster]

The interesting thing to me in all this is the seeming lack of safety qualification among the contractors staff (and they weren't 'trackworkers working on an embankment' they were actually contractors working in a cutting.   The firm which deals with my trees has been involved in contract work for NR for many years - all of their staff who get involved on railway property, and much of their work is done in cuttings, have full track safety training and qualification, including some with COSS qualification, and in fact - as it should be - they are not allowed by their employer to work on railway property if their qualification has not been re-examined up to date.  

 

That imposes a considerable cost on the company and they no doubt reflect that in their bids to NR.  And knowing their attention to safe working methods and assessment of potential risks when they do work in my garden - which has a cutting like steep bank at the bottom end - I'm almost left wondering if the old maxim about 'paying peanuts and getting what you paid for' could have some relevance in this case?

 

Incidentally judging by what the report says about the way in which the tree was felled I seriously wonder if the subbies with the chainsaw were actually experienced in properly dealing with trees but instead simply cut it down without first shortening or trimming  it.

[Penlan]

Martin, back to your original opening line, an 'embankment' is a single slope artificially created.
A cutting will have two embankments, one either side of the cutting base.
Thus an embankment is just one slope, though the term 'embankment' is taken/assumed to mean a raised area with a downward slope (embankment) either side.
Hope this helps, and all's well with you 🙂

[EddieB]

19 minutes ago, Penlan said:

Martin, back to your original opening line, an 'embankment' is a single slope artificially created.
A cutting will have two embankments, one either side of the cutting base.
Thus an embankment is just one slope, though the term 'embankment' is taken/assumed to mean a raised area with a downward slope (embankment) either side.
Hope this helps, and all's well with you 🙂

Sorry to be pedantic, but an embankment is a raised earthwork.

[martin_wynne]

25 minutes ago, Penlan said:

Martin, back to your original opening line, an 'embankment' is a single slope artificially created.
A cutting will have two embankments, one either side of the cutting base.
Thus an embankment is just one slope, though the term 'embankment' is taken/assumed to mean a raised area with a downward slope (embankment) either side.
Hope this helps, and all's well with you 🙂

 

Hi Sandy,

 

I'm fine thanks.🙂

 

Some confusion here? The material removed from a cutting through a hill is used to create an embankment across a valley. The sides of a cutting are normally called cutting slopes, not embankments. The RAIB report reads all wrong to me, which is surprising for such a respected government body. But maybe the language is changing?

 

The title of this topic is rhetorical, I wasn't actually asking. 🙂

 

cheers,

 

Martin.

[Grovenor]

42 minutes ago, Penlan said:

Martin, back to your original opening line, an 'embankment' is a single slope artificially created.
A cutting will have two embankments, one either side of the cutting base.
Thus an embankment is just one slope, though the term 'embankment' is taken/assumed to mean a raised area with a downward slope (embankment) either side.
Hope this helps, and all's well with you 🙂

Well, that is but one definition, embankment has several meanings and in Railway terminology which is the relevant usage it refers to ground built up to carry the railway above natural ground level. Whilst a cutting side may be an embankment by one definition its not the normal railway usage hence that report reading a bit off.

[Oldddudders]

In railway parlance we talk about a slope as a bank - Lickey, Hemerdon, Sole St, Brentwood, you name it. The sides of a cutting also get referred to as banks. We climb the bank to find a place of safety (or did when such things were allowed and expected of us). Extending that to embankment is wrong.

[Wickham Green too]

According to Chambers Dictionary "embankment the act of embanking; a bank or mound made to keep water within certain limits; a mound constructed so as to carry a level road or railway over a low-lying place." so, by implication, something which is constructed ( above the natural ground surface ) for said purpose.

[Rivercider]

The report mentions that cutting back work has been taking place over a 25 mile stretch, since May 2021.

In this area the line runs across the North Somerset Levels, a completely flat area just about at sea level. The nearest cutting to the south passes through the west end of the Polden Hills at Pawlett/Dunball just north of the Kings Sedgemoor Drain to the north of Bridgwater. From there the line is level with drainage rhynes (ditches) either side until you reach the former Bleadon and Uphill station, where the line runs through the cutting (the west end of the Mendip Hills) to Uphill Junction. Continuing north from there the line is still on the level across the Levels until a short cutting just north of Yatton station. Thus the cutting where this incident took place is the only significant cutting for nearly 20 miles, there are no embankments either. 

I have made a few train journeys in recent months, and noticed the cutting back work taking place, seemingly proceeding northwards. 

 

 

edit - I am assuming the 'flat area' they were attempting to take the sapling to was on the left here,

Bleadon and Uphill cutting looking north, 12/3/2016

 

cheers

Edited May 18, 2022 by Rivercider