Train hits lorry in Czech republic

mezzoprezzo

Content appreciator
The safety and road arrangement here seem appallingly lax.

No gates, right on a t-junction! Lucky drivers - lorry & train.

 
Looking at this makes me wonder why people in this country (especially in my flat bit of it) whinge & whine about unsafe level crossings !
 
Either way you cut it that trucker was in the wrong, gates or no gates. You and you alone are alone for the safety of your vehicle. In fact from the direction he was coming from he should've been able to see the train - come on, it was practically right in his face - more easily than a truck from the left with the track in the passenger-side blind spot (and even so, use the damn mirrors). Good for him the truck and himself escaped unscathed, prolly lost his job but really I've no sympathy at all for people who drive into the paths of trains.

Remarkable how fast it stopped, and it looked like the left side of the engine was briefly lifted on impact.
 
Last edited:
He definitely saw the train coming and prolly thought he could beat it. It happens way too often.

John
 
The lights for the crossing were working so 100% blame to the truck driver. Sadly when some people get behind the wheel of a road vehicle - truck drivers included - their IQ sinks to that of a potato.

That said, I'm sure other countries would have full barrier protection in those circumstances not an open crossing and generally Eastern European railways seem to be slightly more lax - no fencing, staff on the line not wearing HV or PPE. A work colleague of mine was in Hungary a few months ago and encountered a situation where someone had been struck by a train. In the UK the scene is quarantined and train movement suspended to avoid distressing passengers or train crew but out there trains were continuing to run in full sight of the responders picking up the bits with no screen, covering sheets or anything.
 
Vern, you've brought up a possibly contentious point of discussion. Should a railroad halt all operations on a line whenever a train strikes someone that has invaded its right of way?

Agreed, the corpse should be covered up but the main points are a) railroad networks are critical infrastructure and time sensitive transportation devices through which delays are easily exacerbated and b) in almost all cases the intruder is always in the wrong regardless of suicidal thoughts, carelessness or just plain stupidity.
 
That's pretty much what used to happen in the UK but at some point it changed to be much more restrictive. The typical time from a train striking someone to getting all lines re-opened is around 90 mins and that's assuming reasonably accessible and no other complications such as being declared a possible crime scene by the police. On 4 track sections of railway (such as Paddington to Reading) we can sometimes get one pair of lines back a bit quicker if the mess is contained or can be screened but by then the damage to the train service is done and it can be several hours to restore some semblance of normal working.
 
The lights for the crossing were working so 100% blame to the truck driver.

The lights that should have been facing the driver are pointing to the departing traffic lane, and downwards. They appear to have been knocked out of position. The other lights were probably not visible, given the extreme angles. You cannot assume that the lights that the driver would see were working.
 
Doesn't matter the trucker is still 100% in the wrong and at least 42.7% stupid.

Doesn't matter that the required safety signals were possibly damaged and non functional? I think rather that the condition of those signals would be the first thing to be checked.
 
Doesn't matter in the sense that blaming such accidents on signs or barriers is a piss poor excuse for incompetent driving. Even if there were ZERO warning signs, a responsible driver should slow down or stop at the junction, check for obstacles or danger (ie. a giant freaking train) before proceeding.
 
Doesn't matter in the sense that blaming such accidents on signs or barriers is a piss poor excuse for incompetent driving. Even if there were ZERO warning signs, a responsible driver should slow down or stop at the junction, check for obstacles or danger (ie. a giant freaking train) before proceeding.

I agree.

I think he was trying to beat the train to the crossing which occurs all too often in many places around the world.
 
Hi everybody.
I would not disagree with the comments already posted in this thread regarding the responsibility of the truck driver for safely negotiating the junction and crossing. However, I also feel there are a number of hazardous features at this site which substantially increase the possibility of an accident which should have been cited in any site specific risk assessment carried out.

If anyone just assesses what can be seen from the video they can witness that any vehicle approaching the junction/rail crossing from an east to west direction (as looking at the video) with the intention of turning left will have their concentration drawn primarily to the oncoming road traffic towards their vehicle. The foregoing would be especially prevalent if the driver of a vehicle making the left-hand turn was unfamiliar with the junction/rail crossing, being that the rail crossing hazard lights would be at an increasing acute angle to the drivers forward eye line as they approached.

For drivers approaching the junction/crossing from West to East (as looking at the video) with the intention of turning to the right at the junction, would find that the crossing hazard lights would be at ninety degrees to their forward eye line before they could even see the status of the signals in regard to proceeding over the crossing. The foregoing hazard could also be added to by the fact that the drivers primary attention could be drawn to traffic coming across the junction from the left and passing in front of them, further diverting concentration away from the rail crossing and its signals.

In the above, anyone involved in road traffic safety would have to wonder why the above hazards were not recognised as substantial in any site specific risk assessment carried out. Just based on what can be seen from the video, any numeric risk assessment of the junction and crossing would place just the two hazards noted above and beyond the minimum safety rating allowed for in any 6 x 6 numeric assessment.

The foregoing, certainly leaves me feeling that it is possible that no risk assessment has ever been carried out at this site, or that it has been included in a generic assessment drawn up to cover a number of rail crossing sites operating without barriers. Certainly in the United Kingdom to have a generic risk assessment covering this site (if that is the case) would be illegal under industrial duty of care regulations.

As stated, the truck driver certainly holds primary responsibility in this incident. However, having worked in industrial safety for over 25 years with a large percentage of that work involving heavy vehicle road transport, I can certainly think of any number of defence solicitors who would have a “field day” in court with the authorities responsible for safety at this junction, and I would expect the driver to emerge from that court hearing with a very light penalty.

I would not mind doing the investigation into this incident myself (LOL)
Bill
 
Last edited:
I can certainly think of any number of defence solicitors who would have a “field day” in court with the authorities responsible for safety at this junction, and I would expect the driver to emerge from that court hearing with a very light penalty.

This is the problem with modern society; stupidity is plastered over with warning stickers, OHSA bureaucracy and a litigation-happy culture. Hundreds of years ago if you did something stupid you didn't get to blame anyone - you get killed. No wonder the human species seems to be going backwards these days.

1f12f4f56d3c26bf5bddfb3907e2b86e.jpg
 
Back
Top