Great Western Coffee Shop

From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-41414517):


So sad.  :(

Somewhat confused statement attributed to the police. Accident? Unexplained? Still investigating?

My thoughts are with the family and friends of the girl.  :'(

Looks like it's on the electrified curve from Bescot to Walsall, close to the M6.

There seem to be other routes, so the foot crossing should have been closed.The motorway may have blocked a convenientpedestrian way.

An adult would need a PTS certificate to enter the site; what is a little 14 year old lass to make of the sign, "beware of trains"?

Tragic and unnecessary,

OTC

Why would you need a PTS cert to cross a public footpath unless you were there for the purposes of "working on or near the line"? The public footpath signs are clearly visible in the photo.

I would expect anyone with a modicum of sense would approach a level crossing in the same way as crossing a road. Plenty people screw up crossing a road and end up dead or seriously injured and no one seems too concerned about that, so why so much interest in level crossings when someone screws up crossing one of those?

The person involved in this tragic incident was a teenager - apparently on her own, crossing the railway on foot by using an official route.

However: crossing a road, where everyone tends to look right and left because traffic is passing from both directions, is rather different from crossing a railway line.  On most railway crossings, only one train will pass in front of you, for quite a while, from either direction.

The assumption, therefore - particularly for a teenager, on her own - could be that, when a train has passed, it is safe to walk across the track.

However, I am verging on speculating here as to the particular circumstances of this tragic incident.

It is likely that the Rail Accident Investigation Branch will be involved in this case, so it's perhaps best to wait for their findings before commenting further.

Meanwhile, I too offer my heartfelt condolences to the family and friends of the girl who died.

CfN.  :(

I am. So that's not no-one.

Let's not pre-judge, yeah?

I'm reminded of the incident at Elsenham in 2005. Two teenage girls tragically killed. Initially ruled as accidental deaths. Network Rail witheld evidence from the coroner. They were later found guilty of Health and Safety Law failings that led directly to the girls deaths.

So let's not assume the girl in Walsall 'screwed up'.

Rhetorical question...could be clearer by the use of 'if' rather than 'when', but I shall leave the post as it has now been quoted. No assumptions being made on this particular incident.

There of course could be a number of reasons behind what happened (hence ongoing investigations - the coroner will be involved), but I would certainly hesitate to adopt of oft default position of pointing the finger directly and immediately at 'the railways' whenever any incident happens at a level crossing. I would also hesitate to mention any previously investigated incident until such a time as BTP or RAIB have completed their enquiries.

So let's not assume Network Rail are at fault? That seems to be what is being inferred by some on this thread, if I am not mistaken?

It's a counterpoint to the inference that crossing users 'screw up'.

Un train peut en-cacher un autre. Do we not have a similar sign on British level crossings?

An update. From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-birmingham-41431429):


Stable door...

Seems Walsall Council believe Network Rail hadn't submitted a formal closure request. And Network Rail believe they had. The paper trail will be interesting.

Once again, my heartfelt sympathy to all affected by this tragic incident. Family, friends, the train driver, witnesses and the emergency services.

A couple of observations:
Perhaps it should be standard practice that when this happens, one train should sound its hooter again? How to decide which one is left as an exercise for the railway authorities. This wouldn't cost anything and could possibly save lives.

I went to a school that was right next to railway tracks. There were two side streets crossing the line (it was a fairly spread out site, actually two separate schools on neighbouring sites) and when I was there (1980s) the crossings had been closed to vehicles but there were wicket gates used to cross the tracks. I can't remember if there were lights and siren – I think there were – but certainly no barrier. Now, both crossings have been totally closed and replaced with one rather complicated looking footbridge. I think this was done about five years ago, but whether as part of a general review or in response to an incident I do not know. There were no accidents on those crossings in the seven years I was there (unlike on the road at the other side of the school) but I think the drivers did have to brake for stray kids (and probably slowed down as a matter of course).

There was also a simple concrete post and plain wire fence between the tracks and the school playing field. For a time there was a fad for climbing over this fence and putting small coins on the rails to be flattened by trains. I never did that but I did do something even more stupid and potentially dangerous. With two friends (it was Clive's idea, he said everyone did it in Portugal where he'd been on holiday... ) we decided to take a shortcut home by walking along the tracks instead of the rather looping road. We checked the timetable (planning!) and there were no trains at that time (I guess we didn't think about freight trains) so off we went. Fortunately (because it stopped us doing it again), though a bit scarily at the time, some people working in gardens overlooking the line saw us and shouted "Trespassers on the railway line!" obviously intending to scare us off, which they did. I don't know if that fence has been replaced with something more secure.

I guess the point of all that is that kids (and probably adults too) will do stupid things on railways in part because they seem like a safe environment. You've only got one danger, the trains (assuming the line's not electrified), and they run in a predictable way, in straight lines and all at similar speeds. They don't swerve or accelerate in unpredictable ways, unlike cars and their drivers don't display the downright vindictiveness that some car drivers can in the vicinity of schools. And of course it's all run to a timetable and most of the time there's nothing there. So it gives the impression of being safe because it's highly regulated. Which statistically it is.

Laziness, sorry. If it can take you where you want to go quicker than using the proper/correct route, some pax will always chance themselves. It's a sad state of affairs that we have to be protected from ourselves.

Pax?  ::)

it's in the dictionary :-)

I know what it means. This girl who died was not a passenger.

Latin for peace.  :P

Sorry, to be completely clear, my comment was referring to this - and nothing else.

That was in my mind too.

Okay, but that perception is a general one, not limited to passengers. In fact, I wonder what % of level crossing deaths and injuries involve passengers?

pax can be 'people', not just passengers

I've only encountered it before in the specific meaning of passengers.

And just to clarify my question about what % of level crossing deaths and injuries involve passengers, obviously people crossing the tracks are not passengers because they're not on a train. What I meant by passengers in this case was people crossing the railway in order to get on a train or reach a particular platform, booking office etc, or having just got off a train. Not including track workers.