Train hits tractor and trailer on level crossing, Leominster, 22 May 2025

[whole diary]

[stuving]

.....which was not recorded.....

Should it have been and the process was not completed for some reason? I would have thought the recording of such a potentially safety critical interaction should be mandatory.

I don't think user phones at UWCs^▸ (User Worked Crossing - a level crossing where the barriers or gates are operated by the user) are, in general - but maybe that has changed. In any case, analysing any recordings would still take more time and precaution than would allow a quick initial conclusion. 

[TaplowGreen]

.....which was not recorded.....

Should it have been and the process was not completed for some reason? I would have thought the recording of such a potentially safety critical interaction should be mandatory.

I don't think user phones at UWCs^▸ (User Worked Crossing - a level crossing where the barriers or gates are operated by the user) are, in general - but maybe that has changed. In any case, analysing any recordings would still take more time and precaution than would allow a quick initial conclusion. 

Given the wide availability of call recording technology and safety critical nature of the locations and the calls for which they are used, if those phones aren't suitably equipped for call recording I would find it absolutely breathtaking.

[a-driver]

All safety critical photo calls made into or out of a signal box are recorded. 

[TaplowGreen]

Interesting perspective on the issues and risks involved with these types of crossings in general.....

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/12K9u3WiHKT/

[a-driver]

Interesting perspective on the issues and risks involved with these types of crossings in general.....

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/12K9u3WiHKT/

And you can't disagree with what that farmer is saying

When I worked in a box, we had a panel with a button for each crossing, anytime someone called from a crossing the button illuminated so we knew exactly what crossing they were be calling from.  I don't know if that's still the case though. 

Workload is a big issue.  One signaller can only manage a certain amount of these crossings.  If you've got 20 crossings in your area and a queue of calls waiting to be answered mistakes are going to be made.  Signallers are only human, we are all prone to making mistakes, there needs to be a fail safe method of working. 

[TaplowGreen]

Interesting perspective on the issues and risks involved with these types of crossings in general.....

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/12K9u3WiHKT/

And you can't disagree with what that farmer is saying

When I worked in a box, we had a panel with a button for each crossing, anytime someone called from a crossing the button illuminated so we knew exactly what crossing they were be calling from.  I don't know if that's still the case though. 

Workload is a big issue.  One signaller can only manage a certain amount of these crossings.  If you've got 20 crossings in your area and a queue of calls waiting to be answered mistakes are going to be made.  Signallers are only human, we are all prone to making mistakes, there needs to be a fail safe method of working. 

Can't they just install automatic gates on all crossings, as seems to be the suggestion?

[LiskeardRich]

Interesting perspective on the issues and risks involved with these types of crossings in general.....

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/12K9u3WiHKT/

And you can't disagree with what that farmer is saying

When I worked in a box, we had a panel with a button for each crossing, anytime someone called from a crossing the button illuminated so we knew exactly what crossing they were be calling from.  I don't know if that's still the case though. 

Workload is a big issue.  One signaller can only manage a certain amount of these crossings.  If you've got 20 crossings in your area and a queue of calls waiting to be answered mistakes are going to be made.  Signallers are only human, we are all prone to making mistakes, there needs to be a fail safe method of working. 

Can't they just install automatic gates on all crossings, as seems to be the suggestion?

Or at least lights

[a-driver]

Interesting perspective on the issues and risks involved with these types of crossings in general.....

https://www.facebook.com/share/v/12K9u3WiHKT/

And you can't disagree with what that farmer is saying

When I worked in a box, we had a panel with a button for each crossing, anytime someone called from a crossing the button illuminated so we knew exactly what crossing they were be calling from.  I don't know if that's still the case though. 

Workload is a big issue.  One signaller can only manage a certain amount of these crossings.  If you've got 20 crossings in your area and a queue of calls waiting to be answered mistakes are going to be made.  Signallers are only human, we are all prone to making mistakes, there needs to be a fail safe method of working. 

Can't they just install automatic gates on all crossings, as seems to be the suggestion?

Or at least lights

Cost being the obvious answer, there's around 3,000 user worked crossings in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom).... and then you could potentially argue it's another failure point adding more delay minutes.  It would be interesting to see a breakdown of all those crossings based on linespeeds

[Chris from Nailsea]

It's not a User Worked Crossing, but there is a pedestrian footpath crossing the Bristol to Exeter main line, just west of Nailsea & Backwell station.  There are no barriers, gates or lights (nor telephones to the nearest signal box (?)).

The entire responsibility for using that footpath railway crossing remains with the user: there is good visibility in both directions, but discretion is advised - the line speed here is 100 mph, and not all trains actually stop at NLS^▸ (usually Nailsea & Backwell station, but may refer to National Library of Scotland in an historic map context), so some of them are travelling at that speed.

I have used that footpath crossing, years ago, with my family while dog-walking.  Arriving at trackside, I stopped, took a good look (and listen) up and down the line, then encouraged them to cross the tracks promptly.  On one occasion, I remember, a train appeared in the distance, while we were crossing: I raised one arm in acknowledgement, while hustling the family and dog off the track. The train driver gave a 'toot' of thanks.

CfN^▸ (Chris from Nailsea, an administrator on this forum).

Edit note: Wording expanded, for clarity. I was making a comparison, in terms of responsibility, with User Worked Crossings. My apologies for any confusion. CfN.

[Chris from Nailsea]

Meanwhile, the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) news item has been updated:

Man arrested after train hits tractor and trailer

[Image from here is not available to guests]

A man has been arrested after a train hit a tractor and trailer on a level crossing in Herefordshire, leaving two people injured and rail services at a standstill.

One passenger, a man, was airlifted to Hereford County Hospital, although his injuries were not life-threatening, West Midlands Ambulance Service (WMAS) said.

A woman was also taken to hospital by ambulance following the crash near Leominster at about 10:45 BST, although she is not thought to be seriously hurt.

British Transport Police (BTP^▸ (British Transport Police)) said a 32-year-old man from Bromyard had been arrested on suspicion of endangering safety on the railway.

A spokesperson for the Rail Accident Investigation Branch said a team of inspectors was at the site, gathering evidence.

Fifteen other people were checked over and discharged at the scene. The tractor driver was uninjured, the ambulance service added.

(article continues)

[ChrisB]

It's not a User Worked Crossing, but a pedestrian footpath crossing the Bristol to Exeter main line, just west of Nailsea & Backwell station.  There are no barriers, gates or lights (nor telephones to the nearest signal box (?)).

The entire responsibility for using that footpath railway crossing remains with the user: there is good visibility in both directions, but discretion is advised - the line speed here is 100 mph, and not all trains actually stop at NLS^▸ (usually Nailsea & Backwell station, but may refer to National Library of Scotland in an historic map context), so some of them are travelling at that speed.

I have used that footpath crossing, years ago, with my family while dog-walking.  Arriving at trackside, I stopped, took a good look (and listen) up and down the line, then encouraged them to cross the tracks promptly.  On one occasion, I remember, a train appeared in the distance, while we were crossing: I raised one arm in acknowledgement, while hustling the family and dog off the track. The train driver gave a 'toot' of thanks.

CfN^▸ (Chris from Nailsea, an administrator on this forum).

Huh? It is reported that the crossing is in the Leominster area?

[Chris from Nailsea]

I was merely making a comparison, in terms of user responsibility, for any such railway crossings.


Edit note: With my apologies for any confusion, I have expanded the original wording in that post to clarify my intent. CfN^▸ (Chris from Nailsea, an administrator on this forum).

[stuving]

RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) have published their report on this accident, with the main conclusions on the summary page. This says:

The accident happened because the signaller gave permission to the tractor’s driver to use the crossing, despite the proximity of the approaching train. The signaller had forgotten about the presence of the train when they gave permission and did not check signal box equipment which was indicating the presence of the train beforehand, as they had been trained to. The signaller’s actions may have been affected by an interruption to their established routine for giving users permission to use the crossing, an increase in their workload, distraction and the effects of fatigue.

As Nordan Farm level crossing is a passive user worked crossing, it has no engineered safeguards to warn or protect a crossing user of an approaching train and safe operation is solely reliant on the signaller’s decision as to whether it is safe to cross or not.

RAIB found that Network Rail’s level crossing risk assessment process did not effectively recognise nor control the higher risk present at some crossings during intensive seasonal use. This was an underlying factor. RAIB also found that Network Rail did not have a coherent process for deciding whether a vehicle using a user worked crossing should be considered as large, low or slow moving. This was a possible underlying factor.

The main recommendations are about Network rail's management processes, with some learning points for signallers and other staff too.