edcayton Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 This was horrendous and my heart goes out to the families. The news said that the coach hit the wall head on and I wondered how that was possible. Looking at the photo's it seems that this wall is at the end of a "Stop lane", and is at 90 degrees to the traffic flow. I really don't want to start speculation, but it does seem like trouble waiting to happen. Ed Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 The news said that the coach hit the wall head on and I wondered how that was possible Not sure of the configuration in this case, but several tunnels i've been through have what amount to 'lay bys' within them where broken down vehicles can move clear of traffic lanes (and they are often emergency access or contact points as well) - i'm not sure i've ever seen one of them in a tunnel that had anything other than a solid wall at the end of it, and i'd have thought that was probably a consequence of how you make a tunnel? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Indeed, very sad news and deepest sympathies to all those involved. On BBC TV news it looks like edcayton is correct, a "solid" wall at the end of the lay-by, facing oncoming traffic. Perhaps tapered barriers would have helped. Look at how most (all) motorway bridges over railways in the UK have been made safer with upgraded barriers etc after the Great Heck incident. Easy to criticise after the event, but there is a case for safety officers to be "out on the road" looking for / evaluating this sort of thing continuously, earning their wages, instead of driving a desk and producing reams of pointless reports. And in every industry too. Brit15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 But if you put barriers across the gap then it ceases to be available as an emergency refuge, I know you said tapered barriers, but for motorway speeds modern ones are very long to guide something round the obstacle, again I don't know the location, but I can't recall seeing a refuge long enough to take 100' of angled barrier *and* still be usable as a refuge... Easy to criticise after the event, but there is a case for safety officers to be "out on the road" looking for / evaluating this sort of thing continuously, earning their wages, instead of driving a desk and producing reams of pointless reports. And in every industry too. Sheesh, you're a class act! Already you're accusing all Swiss road engineers of not doing their jobs. Do you really have first hand experience of what Swiss road engineers do on a daily basis? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
APOLLO Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Not accusing anyone actually, but this seemed to be an accident waiting to happen, in a tunnel also makes it worse. Have a look at our (UK) motorways, not perfect, but all bridges walls etc have tapered safety barriers that are designed to guide errant vehicles from hitting head on bridges, etc. OUR (UK) highway saftey engineers are on the ball. Have a look at the photos here, explains better than words, last photo especially. http://www.dailymail...ozens-hurt.html Lessons to be learned from every incident, I hope they are and the appropriate actions are taken. Apologies if I have hit a nerve, but I was taught (and worked all my life) in a very safety concious industry, the Gas industry. I was involved daily in gas distribution network gas escapes & associated highway matters etc, and hold the necessary NRSWA street works training & engineering certificate for supervision of highway works, so yes I do know quite a bit about highway safety matters. 45 years worth. Sometimes (as in this case), the potental for accidents is large and obvious. My tack was meant to say that people responsible for design (safety officers / engineers) must never take their eyes off the ball. A precedent was the Dianna accident in the Paris subway - again high speed, no barriers, head on into a pier. Both these accidents could have been "engineered out" quite easily, and at no huge cost. This site explains - and you will note the Swiss have longer barrier min lengths than the UK (Swiss 50m v UK 30m, YET there seems to be none at this accident location) http://www.brake.org.uk/facts/motorway-crash-barriers.htm Again, I deeply feel for those affected. Brit15 Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mod3 Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Gentlemen - can we stick to established facts please, conjecture about anything does not help at such a sad time. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Have a look at our (UK) motorways, not perfect, but all bridges walls etc have tapered safety barriers that are designed to guide errant vehicles from hitting head on bridges, etc. OUR (UK) highway saftey engineers are on the ball. I'm pretty confident that we have similar refuges in use in the UK - in fact my understanding is that they are being added to older UK road tunnels where possible, for example the 1960s Blackwall tunnel bore - in fact I believe it's inscribed in European law that certain configurations of tunnels must have such refuges. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fat Controller Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Sadly, accidents involving coaches returning from the Alps leaving the carriageway are not uncommon- each winter sees a few. There was one earlier this year near Chalon-en-Champagne, involving a British school party, where a teacher was killed. Whilst the tour company stated categorically that the driver had taken his prescribed rest during the day, prior to leaving in the late evening, such rest (particularily when taken on an intermittent basis, and not as part of a regular shift pattern) does not allow the body and brain to relax properly. The result is what is known as 'microsleeps'; a recent study by some French ergonomists and sleep specialists using cameras to monitor eyelid movement on drivers travelling to the Cote d'Azur from Paris during mid-summer showed typical 'microsleeps' totalling between five and nine minutes were common, even during daylight. During the hours of darkness, they become even more frequent and prolonged, as SNCF research on driver behaviour has shown. As a family, we are all too aware of the results of such 'lapses of concentration'; my wife's father was killed on the M2 some 33 years ago, as a result of a road-tanker driver veering on to the hard shoulder. As to whether a 'tapered exit' might have reduced the resultant casualties- is it not likely that a vehicle entering such a location at speed might be redirected into the traffic flow, and either roll over, or be hit by following vehicles? In any event, the design of the refuge was not the initial cause of the accident; any more than the 'arbres dangereux' of southern France are- they didn't leap out in front of the vehicles. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
JeremyC Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 A horredous accident and as a parent my heart goes out to the families concerned. The pictures of the damage to the bus surely raises the question whether the crash resistance of modern buses is all it could be. Can you imagine the press reaction if a railway vehicle was damaged to that extent in an accident leaving that many casulties. Jeremy Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glorious NSE Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 you will note the Swiss have longer barrier min lengths than the UK (Swiss 50m v UK 30m, YET there seems to be none at this accident location) And again - if you put 50m of barriers there then it can't be used as a refuge. 'Safe' is not, never has been and never will be a black and white, absolute concept. Most people (including me) would generally regard the UK motorway network is 'safe' yet 7 people died in one crash at Taunton last year for example. Let me give you a 'what if' - lets say they had decided to put a concrete barrier across all the refuges in this tunnel, and shortly after a vehicle loses power in the tunnel and rather than coasting to a refuge has to stop blocking a traffic lane, it then gets hit by a following vehicle and a pile up and fire follows with a high death toll - cue next morning lots of folk saying 'why is this tunnel so unsafe'? 'How can this be allowed to happen'? 'Why was such a bad design allowed'? Please note i'm not saying one or the other is safe, or is not safe - but without knowing what the design criteria were and what that space was supposed to do - and especially before any official answers have come out then I don't see how you can make sweeping judgements on it being a bad design or not. I'm also not at all suggesting that nothing can ever be made safer, just again, sweeping judgements from outside may not help. With regards to the vehicle, it was moving at a decent speed and hit a totally immovable object, even railway vehicles (which are generally built *much* stronger than almost any road vehicle) will disintegrate in such a situation - look at the DVT at Great Heck or the 165 car at Ladbroke Grove for examples. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I know there's a whole load of variables but I have a significant personal worry that there are too many coach crashes causing young casualties and fatalities in Europe, it's not 4 weeks since a teacher from Alvechurch was killed on a half-term school trip. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lady_Ava_Hay Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 I hold a PSV licence and have driven express coaches. The speed limit on this road is 100Kmph which is the maximum speed of this vehicle. It actually cannot go faster than this so speeding is not the issue. it has to be said though that at this sort of speed this coach weighing more than 17000Kg would become unstable if a large solid object like a curbstone is run over or if the vehicle side swipes a crash barrier. Unfortunately, modern crash barriers are designed to actually rebound the vehicle back onto the carriageway. If a tyre is burst, the driver is rendered immobile in some way or the power steering fails, it is very likely that the vehicle will career out of control. I take to task anybody who suggests that this coach would look any better, indeed it looks remarkable given the weight and sheer momentum absorbed in the impact. What is more worrying is that the passenger compartment seems intact as the coach is sitting on its back wheels and yet all of the occupants were either hurt or killed. We are advised ( by a child ) that the seats detached themselves and flew forward this would have caused severe, possibly fatal crush injuries and some may well have gone through the non existent windscreen as the bus spun. We are advised that luggage was spewed from the luggage compartments and these would have been either side and under the seating area. Also be aware that this coach would not have come to a dead stop when it hit the wall and may well have spun around as the engine, gearbox and axles attempted to carry on regardless. Although all accidents require that we learn what caused them and try to prevent them and there is the immutable law that 'if it can happen, then surely it will happen', in this case and many others, I doubt that much will be learned that we don't already know. As to the other crash in which a teacher died, I think it important to note that the driver fell asleep and it was 3 am in the morning. I have driven at that time and i have to tell you that it is nearly impossible to keep awake unless you have had several days preparation and most coach drivers will tell you that. We will also tell you that we are never given that luxury. This crash was at 9pm and was relatively early into the trip and there was a second driver aboard ( also killed ). As to the worrying increase in coach accidents, I place the blame fairly and squarely on the undue pressure that all PSV drivers suffer in terms of being squeezed to drive longer and faster in heavier, more powerful vehicles ( some of which are built to a price ) and the huge extra responsibilities placed on them by both legislative backed culling of experience and the rising tide of unjustified and un-investigated complaints in which it is far simpler to sack or blame the driver for everything than it is to solve the problem. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andy Y Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 As to the worrying increase in coach accidents, I place the blame fairly and squarely on the undue pressure that all PSV drivers suffer in terms of being squeezed to drive longer and faster in heavier, more powerful vehicles ( some of which are built to a price ) and the huge extra responsibilities placed on them by both legislative backed culling of experience and the rising tide of unjustified and un-investigated complaints in which it is far simpler to sack or blame the driver for everything than it is to solve the problem. Thanks for that David which lies under my concerns and it's relevant to hear it from someone who has a greater understanding. It's all part of doing everything down to the lowest cost these days but at what price? Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talltim Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 The RAIB report on the freight train that rolled back on the WCML last year is a good starting point for reading about the effects of shift patterns on sleep and awareness at night, although as stated this crash was not at a 'dangerous' time of day. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kenton Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Driving at night, even handling any equipment that requires concentration is an aptitude that many do not have. It is a more intense form of shift work and many of us know the effect of changing shifts and working "nights" can be very difficult to acclimatise to. Not wishing to imply any assumptions in this terribly tragic accident but from personal experience of working continuous nights I fail to see how any bus driver could maintain the attention required to do the job unless they had had enough time to settle their body clock and rhythms into the pattern required. I can see that there could well be other distractions in driving a coach load of potentially exuberant and naturally high spirited children. A tunnel at any speed requires even more concentration as the potential outcome for any small error is even greater as the walls are very unforgiving. A sad and unforgettable day for all those involved. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Derekl Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Horrendous accident, and one can only feel for those affected. Not worth speculating, although I agree with Andy Y, there are too many of these. Outside speculation, what we do know is that the coach was about an hour off start, so not impossible, but unlikely that driver fatigue was an issue. The safety/refuge lane is protected by a small kerb and the coach had mounted that - it would do, quite easily, although a car would probably bounce off, depending on angle of attack. I also thought the layout with an unprotected 90 degree wall looked pretty hazardous, but I am equally sure I have seen such arrangements elsewhere. The damage to the vehicle is quite awful - we don't know what speed it was doing - news report suggest the speed limit through the tunnel is 100 km/h (62.5 mph), although one of the pictures on Sky news shows a 60 km/h limit (may be a temporary sign, though). The vehicle would be limited to 110 km/h. The crashworthiness issue referred to above must be a problem - it is readily apparent that these vehicles are not great, judging by this accident and previous reports. I suspect that impact speed was not that high, and it is just the general flimsiness of the construction that resulted in the damage (and deaths and injuries). Quite remarkable that on the railway that would no longer be tolerated - BR Mk3 and derivatives have retained structural integrity under worse pressures. On a railway, where the primary objective is not to get into a collision situation - on the road, it is a constant issue. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Dutch_Master Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17370278 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17368242 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17363474 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17371237 http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-17370516 There's quite a few families who won't sleep tonight. Or many nights to come... As to the frequency of these accidents: yes, there may be more then there were in the past, but: traffic is busier media are more vocal about it more trips are being made So, in all I think the average isn't that much higher (if at all, mind that road safety measures 30 yrs ago is not remotely where it is today!) but the exposure is.... Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
laurenceb Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 One thing that continues to puzzle me is that on the railway staff must have 12 clear hours off duty, but bus drivers do not. Often drivers with our local Arriva co tell me that they are on at 06:00 after working a late shift the day before with an 8 hour gap.Drivers cannot be properly rested in that time Laurence Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
yorkie_pudd Posted March 14, 2012 Share Posted March 14, 2012 Firstly I'm saddened by the loss of life, but not surprised really and sorry for all the families involved. I know how dwhite4dcc feels as having been a HGV driver for 22 years, with 14 of them being International covering all of west & Eastern Europe, Russia, North Africa & middle East. This just ain't about the Swish tunnels but European tunnels in general. Many are 50 - 100 year old not designed for todays vehicle sizes, yes safety improvements have been made but at cost of making the tunnels smaller. Roof air fans, lane safety lights, speed signs, distance markers and many other safety stuff put on the side walls. So todays trucks, buses and coaches can have as little 2 inch either side. No matter how many times you go through you clench your cheeks is this the one I'm hit in. Many tunnels have speed limits as low as 25mph ( KPH) but folk still speed even with speed cameras. The biggest problem is air vortex turbulence. Even a coach like in the crash or a 40 ton truck will doing 20mph and a transit type van comes speeding the other way will be blown rocked about. Everytime you saw a coach/ truck coming towards you, you waited for the smash of wing mirrors and at many tunnels i tramped regular i use to stop before and fold my mirrors in. Even though in the pics the tunnels looks whats called a normal wider tunnel, its still narrow and if something like a 16 seater bus with trailer, or 3.5 ton truck passing at 40mph ( not speculating ) at that point could have blown with turbulence the coach into the wall. There are tunnels nearly 8 miles long and very nerve racking to have your wits with you every second. As been said its down to cost as in just after the Mont Blanc tunnel fire in 1999 traffic was diverted south to the Fréjus tunnel. A EU tunnel committee found most euro tunnels were to small causing this air turbulence problem and reported that tunnels should be widened etc to counteract this. That or close tunnels to cars only which would have caused major issue for local/euro passenger/freight movements. There are small incidents every week but nowt bad like broken wing mirrors or windows etc, Thankfully major crashes like this coach are rare, but the danger is there every second of every day. Fortunately Spain has adopted the tunnel widening and all new tunnels are designed wider to help reduce nearly stop this turbulence, but as said at beginning it comes down too cash and who is going to pay for it. Then theres the local who dont mind a 30 or 40 ft wide tunnel entrance, but if needs to be widened to say 60 feet, they dont want to see extra big concrete tunnel entrances spoiling the mountain view etc. Sadly it will happen again till someone has guts to say enough and do whats rights for safety not for cash. Now thats it media splattered the best the media can do now is leave alone and let the families involved recover from this with respect. Peace and Tranquillity to the families Ken. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RANGERS Posted March 15, 2012 Share Posted March 15, 2012 Horrendous accident, and one can only feel for those affected. Not worth speculating, although I agree with Andy Y, there are too many of these. Outside speculation, what we do know is that the coach was about an hour off start, so not impossible, but unlikely that driver fatigue was an issue. The safety/refuge lane is protected by a small kerb and the coach had mounted that - it would do, quite easily, although a car would probably bounce off, depending on angle of attack. I also thought the layout with an unprotected 90 degree wall looked pretty hazardous, but I am equally sure I have seen such arrangements elsewhere. The damage to the vehicle is quite awful - we don't know what speed it was doing - news report suggest the speed limit through the tunnel is 100 km/h (62.5 mph), although one of the pictures on Sky news shows a 60 km/h limit (may be a temporary sign, though). The vehicle would be limited to 110 km/h. The crashworthiness issue referred to above must be a problem - it is readily apparent that these vehicles are not great, judging by this accident and previous reports. I suspect that impact speed was not that high, and it is just the general flimsiness of the construction that resulted in the damage (and deaths and injuries). Quite remarkable that on the railway that would no longer be tolerated - BR Mk3 and derivatives have retained structural integrity under worse pressures. On a railway, where the primary objective is not to get into a collision situation - on the road, it is a constant issue. The comparison with rail carriages and road coaches is neither accurate or fair. All coaches since 1993 are constructed in line with EU R66 structural integrity requirements, whilst it basically governs rollover strength, by it's nature it encompasses the entire passenger cell so head on collision is catered for as well. The strength of a coach is proportionately greater than that of a car, or for that matter, a railway carriage, the equivalent collision would be something like a 153 unit hitting a concrete wall at significantly more than the 62mph this one hit, no buffers to absorb the collision, just a solid object. Thankfully we've never had to witness such a collision but potentially the loss of life could be similar. The vehicle in this case was VanHool T917 overdeck design where the passenger cabin extends the full length of the vehicle, the drivers being on the lower deck so the number of people seated in the vicinity of the impact would be significantly greater than a conventional design where there is areound 2m of vehicle ahead of the passenger cell. This is almost certainly a factor in the loss of life. The deformation of the structure in this instance was significant but closer examination of the photos reveals that the majority of the basic passenger cell structure is still intact, certainly the damage is extreme but there is little to suggest crush damage was a factor in the number of lives lost. Coaches are compulsorily fitted with seatbelts but whilst the vast majority of UK coaches are fitted with three point lap and diagonal belts, this arrangement is rare on the continent, most are lap-belts which as has been proved in numerous air accidents, contribute significantly to the injuries, often by their nature fatal, in the event of a high speed collision and instant decelleration..Given the number of young lives lost, this may well prove to be significant as smaller bodies are at greater risk of injury by the belts or of failing to be restrained by the belts. I'd have to agree with the point about driver's hours regulations but the current system has grown and been chopped and changed around resulting in a structure which is something of a piecemeal one, long overdue a complete clean sheet review. It currently neither meets the needs of the modern industry, nor has safety as it's core. The one thing which is a fact is that coach travel is still the safest form of road passenger transport, accidents are thankfully extremely rare (I believe the total number of passengers who died as a result of accidents involving UK registered coaches in 2011 was only two) and this is undoubtedly the worst which anyone in the industry can ever recall. Our thoughts are with those who have lost loved ones in this tragedy and there is no doubt that if lessons can be learned, they will be. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold Russ (mines a pint) Posted March 16, 2012 RMweb Gold Share Posted March 16, 2012 One thing that continues to puzzle me is that on the railway staff must have 12 clear hours off duty, but bus drivers do not. Often drivers with our local Arriva co tell me that they are on at 06:00 after working a late shift the day before with an 8 hour gap.Drivers cannot be properly rested in that time Laurence The general idea is that you are supposed to get a min of 11 hrs between duties, this can be reduced to 9hours on EEC rules (long distance and private hire) and 8 and a half hours on domestic rules (ie local service buses) but only twice (?) in one week. 8 hours is probably illegal but some duties (ie checking and cleaning vehicles) does not neccessarily count as driving. And you are correct, if a driver does not live in the immediate vacinity of work then by the time you have got home, unwind, eaten etc etc it does not leave time for proper rest. Most companies I have worked for have been reputable & stick to the eleven hrs only 'taking advantage' of the shorter periods when something unexpected goes wrong, but you never know with other operators who cut margins to the bone, bus and coach travel is statistically as safe as rail travel, which given the less controlled environment of dealing with other traffic is something operators and drivers should be justifiably proud, unfortunately these tragic and high profile accidents (as also happens with the rail industry) draw attention to a mode of transport which is far safer than a private car. Very sad for the people involved and their family & friends. Link to post Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.