GLOUCESTERSHIRE
WARWICKSHIRE RAILWAY
REVIEW OF
BRIDGE HEADROOM CLEARANCES & STRIKE HISTORIES
The GWS Railway has intersections with roads and farm tracks at 46
places along the roughly 15 miles of trackbed that it owns.
Of these, 17 are Overline bridges, where the road goes over the
railway and consequently these bridges cannot be subjected to impact from any
road vehicle, whatever their height. This leaves 29 bridges which could be the
subject of a vehicle strike.
We next have a group of 12 Underline Farm Accommodation bridges, which
allow small farm vehicles, tractors and trailers and similar, to pass beneath
the railway from one part of a farm to another. These bridges have widths and
headrooms of the order of 3 to 3.5m.
They are never used by standard road vehicles so do not present any risk
of being struck. This then leaves us with 17 bridges to assess.
There are only 2 structures on the railway that meet current minimum motorway
standards of 5.03m (16’-6”) namely – 12 (Stanway Viaduct) and 21 – Pottery
Bridge. This latter is a brick arch bridge which only provides the full
headroom clearance across the centre 3m width. See pictures below.
Bridge 12 (Stanway Viaduct) - roadside pier under repair. The height
to the arch springing point bed stone (hidden behind thick Ivy- since
removed!!) is app. 6m (19’- 9”). The
semi-circular arch rises a further 5m (16’-0”) app .
As noted Bridge 21 (Pottery Bridge) provides the full standard minimum clearance, only between the two vertical white lines, visible in this picture. |
The remaining 15 bridges, their headrooms, road crossing details and our
knowledge of their strike histories, are detailed in the chart below. As you can see
there are 6 bridges that have never been hit. You will also see that several of
those hit-free ones are lower (up to 530mm lower) than Bridge 1 at Broadway. Clearly
it is not just a question of height but also of the traffic likely to be using
the road. As you can see virtually all of our bridges cross unclassified roads,
but naturally some are busier than others and perhaps then attract more, and larger
vehicles than others.
Thus our strike “problems” really
only relate to 9 bridges, of which 5 have only been hit only once. 6 of the 9
that have been hit were done without our knowledge, but were spotted during the
regular visual inspections that we carry out. Thus they could have occurred
prior to our ownership, i.e. over 34 years ago, or at any time before that.
Thus and finally, it becomes clear that the serious bridge strike problems
only lie with bridges 1 & 39, plus the recent addition of bridge 6. We
think that this one is slowly becoming known to the local users, who had about
25 years without a deck to worry about!
Bridge No.
|
Bridge
Name
|
Chainage
|
Headroom
Metric ;
(Ft. & Ins)
|
Road
beneath
|
Strike
history
|
Type
|
1
|
Station
Road, Broadway
|
4 - 76
|
4.4 M :
14 ’– 3”
|
B 4632
|
At least
10 known
|
Steel
deck
|
2
|
Childswickham
Road, Broadway
|
5 – 16
|
4.8 M :
15’ – 9”
|
Unclassified
|
2 minor
|
Steel
deck
|
3
|
Pry Lane
|
5 – 34
|
3.4 M :
11’ – 3”
|
U/C &
Cul-de-sac
|
1 extremely
minor
|
Brick
arch
|
5
|
Little
Buckland
|
6 – 26
|
4.1 M :
13’ - 6”
|
Unclassified
|
None
|
Steel
deck
|
6
|
Laverton
Halt (Opened 12. 2009)
|
6 – 79
|
4.0 M :
13’ – 3”
|
Unclassified
|
At least
4 since 2009
|
Concrete
deck
|
15
|
Didbrook
1
|
10 – 03
|
4.5 M :
14’ – 6”
|
Unclassified
|
None
|
Brick
arch
|
16
|
Didbrook
2
|
10 – 14
|
4.2 M :
13’ – 9”
|
Unclassified
|
None
|
Concrete
deck
|
26
|
Gretton
Village
|
13 – 33
|
4.5 M :
14’ – 9”
|
Unclassified
|
1 medium
|
Steel
deck
|
28
|
Stanley
Pontlarge
|
13 – 67
|
3.7 M :
12’ - 6”
|
U/C &
Cul-de-sac
|
None
|
Steel
deck
|
31
|
J. J.
Farms, Far Stanley
|
14 – 28
|
3.6 M :
12’ – 0”
|
U/C &
Cul-de-sac
|
1 minor
|
Steel
deck
|
32
|
Prescott
Road
|
14 – 40
|
4.3 M :
14’ – 0”
|
Unclassified
|
1 minor /
medium
|
Steel
deck
|
34
|
Gotherington
Skew
|
15 – 17
|
4.3 M :
14’ – 0”
|
Unclassified
|
1 minor
|
Steel
deck
|
35
|
Granna
Lane
|
15 – 25
|
3.7 M :
12’ – 6”
|
U/C &
Cul-de-sac
|
None
|
Conc.
Filled trough
|
36
|
Manor
Lane
|
15 – 71
|
3.8 M :
12’ – 9”
|
U/C &
Cul-de-sac
|
None
|
Brick
Arch
|
39
|
Station
Road, Bishops Cleeve
|
16 – 71
|
4.0 M :
13’ – 3”
|
Unclassified
|
At least
4 known
|
Steel
deck
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
It is a fact of life
that any vehicle which does strike a bridge, unless it is jammed tightly, will
try to get away before anybody sees it, as the consequences of prosecution and
recovery of damage repair costs, insurance excess, etc. could be very
substantial.
Mostly, the only way that we know that a
strike has occurred is because of the debris left behind, in the road, see
photo - left.
Bridge 1, is over a long straight
section of the very busy, former A46 road from Broadway to Evesham, and
consequently is a very attractive road to lorries. Despite being a fairly high
one, this bridge has been subject to many strikes over most of its life. It is likely
that there has been a decrease in frequency since the Broadway by-pass was opened,
in 1998, but several strikes have occurred since.
After the trains stopped running in
1976, because none of the strikes was serious enough to warrant an immediate
repair, no attempt has been made to do so, either by Network Rail (British
Rail), before 1981, or GWSR, since. Consequently, since the 3 really bad strikes
had happened, it has become almost impossible to identify subsequent minor
grazes, as vehicles tend to strike roughly the same part of the bridge each
time. The total number of strikes, on this bridge, could therefore be far more
that stated.
Following the recent repairs and
upgrading and painting works, of this bridge, completed in September 2014,
there have been at least 4 strikes within a period of 3 weeks. Almost certainly this was partly down to the
introduction of a road diversion scheme which, we believe, directed some
over-height traffic under this bridge. Complaints to Worcs C.C. Highways dept.
led to the diversion being changed and the repeated strike situation seems to
have stopped.
Bridge 6 stood, until 2009, without any
deck at all for over 25 years and this may have led to a spate of strikes in
the first 3 or 4 years, after the new deck was constructed.
Laverton and its new deck being built |
We are fairly
certain that the damage is being caused by a locally owned hydraulic tele-handler. Again repeated strikes, in
roughly the same position, make it difficult to tell if further strikes have
occurred or not. We suspect that there hasn’t been a strike for a year or more
and so we may be able to get a concrete repair done and will then know for
certain. Maybe the driver has finally realised that it is causing his 8 T. machine
far more damage than our 125 tonne bridge deck!!
Since I became the Bridges Engineer in
2005 there have been just 2 cases where, either the vehicle has become wedged,
or the damage to the vehicle meant that it stayed at site long enough for there
to be witnesses to get details of the vehicle, to support a claim. In a 3rd case we were also able to
make a claim. The bridges were :-
1. No.
1 (Station Road, Broadway) – payment received from our insurers, but recovery
of our excess is not clear. Repairs done in 2014.
2. No.
26 (Gretton Village) – payment from our insurers and recovery of our excess.
Repairs done in 2009.
3. No.
39 (Station Road, Bishops Cleeve) – payment received from our insurers in 2008.
Excess not recovered. Repairs still outstanding.
This last Bridge No.39
– Station Road, Bishops Cleeve - was struck in March 2007. It is in a large and
expanding residential area with several businesses close to the bridge and a
large school, not far away, with most children being drawn from the area around
the bridge. Thus the need for a complete closure will inevitably cause huge
disruption to many people and businesses, although provision for pedestrians, through
the works, will be provided. The bridge
only has an alternately worked one way priority traffic system (see photo left) so traffic light controlled, one way working is not possible.
SUMMARY
OF BRIDGE STRIKE PROBLEMS
Hopefully, from the data above, it is
clear that our main problem only lies with bridge 1. Our Civil Engineering Director is looking
into the various options available to introduce extra warning signs, or
barriers (costs are huge!). Hopefully our relationship with Worcestershire
County Council, during the B2B contract may lead to more of a shared
responsibility in mitigating future strikes.
17th
January 2015
Good report. Needs highlighting in general blog so readers are aware of new info.
ReplyDeleteYes, an excellent piece of writing.
ReplyDeleteI've been thinking about this bridge strike issue some, and I've had an idea. I have no idea if it's feasible or useful, but it's the best I've been able to come up with, so I offer it up for whatever (little :-) it's worth.
It's not about _preventing_ strikes (which would be optimal), but about catching the offenders when it does happen. It is, I hope, relatively feasible, and not too expensive. It is to have an (electronic) camera (or perhaps two - one for an overall view, and one which is hopefully focused on the license plate area) which are triggered by a detector beam when a vehicle passes under the bridge. It won't tell you. of course, if a strike occurred (there probably are ways to do that, with something like a seismograph, though), but if you know roughly when the strike occurred, you all can look through the record of all the vehicles, and you may be able to spot the offender.
Now that I think about it, though, if the whole thing is computerized, you should be able to get actual strike evidence. Suppose a seismograph type device is added to the bridge; it wouldn't be useful/feasible to record continuous output (or would it - hard drives are awfully large these days :-), but when a picture (time-stamped, of course), is taken, 3 seconds of seismograph data before and after the picture trigger time could also be recorded. A simple program should be able to find records which show large amplitude signals, and it could pop up the photo(s) of the offending vehicle.
Like I said, it won't _stop_ strikes, but I believe the combo would be very useful in finding the culprits (and if the police want to prosecute them for leaving the scene, evidence), and it shouldn't cost too much.
Anyway, hope it's useful!
Noel
My understanding is that the actual clearance is 3'' above the height indicated by the (circular, previously triangular) prohibition sign.
DeleteSo if you have a light beam set at or just above the level of the prohibition, any triggers will be for offenders, even if they haven't hit the bridge.
I think a microphone clamped to the bridge metalwork would be the way to go, rather than a "seismograph". Set the gain low so that ordinary traffic noise doesn't trigger the photo, but vibrations from a direct hit would be conducted through the metalwork. Could be tested with a hammer!
ReplyDeleteBridge 39 (Station Road, Bishops Cleeve). It is not clear from the report as to whether the offending vehicle was identified.
ReplyDeleteI know it is a bit late but, I may have some knowledge regarding that.
Send me an email, Ken.
DeleteJo.
DeleteJust noticed your request. Will try and do it tomorrow.
After 7+ years another day wont matter.
http://www.swindonadvertiser.co.uk/news/11782478.UPDATE__Wootton_Bassett_Road_reopens_after_lorry_strikes_rail_bridge/
ReplyDeleteGetting a strong sense of deja vu here.....
The Motor Insurers' Bureau is a fund of last resort and as such will consider claims for property damage and injury where compensation cannot be claimed from another source. The Bureau's obligation is to handle claims in accordance with the agreements between MIB and the Government. MIB is restricted to paying compensation in respect of liability for property damage or injury arising from an accident that has occurred either on a road or a public place in accordance with the Road Traffic Act 1988 and subsequent regulations. MIB is also the UK Green Card Bureau and can be contacted when the driver of foreign registered vehice is being held responsible for an accident which has occurred in the UK.
ReplyDeleteHi Tim,
DeleteThe MIB fund for untraced drivers only pays out for injury, not property damage. If the driver is traced but uninsured then there is a possible claim for injury and property damage.
Terry
Thanks Tim, that sounds like a hopeful possibility, if the claim being made against the company that we know caused the first strike, fails, for any reason.
ReplyDeleteI really want to get the damaged paintwork repaired before rust starts to take hold!
Is there a system in place for reporting Bridge Strikes to the railway, so that an inspection can be undertaken to ensure the safety of the line.
ReplyDeleteOn Network Rail there is a Bridge Strike Information plate, attached to the abutment, giving a number to call and the location of the bridge, road name, bridge number etc.
Also is there a procedure for operation of trains in the event of a strike.
Hi John,
ReplyDeleteWe started installing these a couple of years ago, as and when funds were available, and the five recently "renovated" bridges now all have them. We chose the 15 most high priority bridges to start with and will add some more this year. The plates are virtually identical to those on the Network Bridges, and have a dedicated telephone line to our offices. When a strike is reported I, as Structures Engineer, if available, or otherwise someone else from GWSR, will go and looks at what has happened, and decide whether it is safe to run trains over the bridge. Depending on the extent of the damage and the effect on the safety of the bridge it may then be necessary to bring in a professional engineer to undertake a close up inspection to determine whether any repairs are needed, and if so what. So far we have never had a bridge damaged so badly that running trains over has had to be halted, nor that running road traffic beneath was considered to be dangerous. I hope that that will always be the case !!!
John,
DeleteGood to see everything in place.
I retired last year as an Examing Engineer looking at NR bridges and dealt with a lot of Bridge Strike reports.
Sounds as though you would make a very useful addition to our Civil Engineering Dept, if you ever fancied it. Professional Bridge Inspections cost a lot of money, although we do the visual inspections ourselves, but with over 110 bridges and culverts to examine (and odd extra ones still coming to light), annually, it takes a lot of time.
ReplyDeleteContact me on john.balderstone@sky.com if this might appeal to you.
What about digging the road up downwards? This would give more headroom.
ReplyDeleteAaron
This has some possible advantages and was done on the Golden Valley road between Cheltenham & Gloucester a few years ago. I doubt that it would be cheap, and there might be problems with levels with entrances into our, the garage and the caravan site. Thanks for the suggestion.
ReplyDelete