Families of Croydon tram crash victims say justice not been done


Tram 2551 was en route from New Addington to Wimbledon via East Croydon when it crashed

Ten years on from the fatal Croydon tram crash, the families of those who died say they believe they were failed by the justice system.

Tram 2551 came off the tracks on a sharp bend at 06:07 GMT on 9 November 2016. It was travelling at over 43mph (70km/h) - more than three times the recommended limit.

Sixty-nine passengers were on board at the time. Seven people died and 61 were injured.

The driver Alfred Dorris was cleared of health and safety offences following a trial, while Transport for London (TfL) and Tram Operations Limited (TOL) were fined a total of £14m for failing in their health and safety duties.

"It's a milestone at 10 years, but to us we live with it everyday. Justice was not served," says Jean Smith, whose son Mark died in the derailment.

Danielle Richardson, who lost her grandfather Phillip Logan, says: "I'm always going to feel bitter. I'm always going to feel that anger towards Transport for London."


Dorota Rynkiewicz, Dane Chinnery, Donald Collett, Mark Smith, Phil Seary, Philip Logan and Robert Huxley were killed in the derailment - Image © Met Police

The seven people who died were Dane Chinnery, 19, Philip Seary, 57, Dorota Rynkiewicz, 35, Robert Huxley, 63, and Philip Logan, 52, all from New Addington, and Donald Collett, 62, and Mark Smith, 35, both from Croydon.

Of the 61 injured, 19 were seriously hurt. Many sustained life-changing injuries, from chronic pain to amputations.

All of them were on their way to work.

(BBC article continues, in some detail)

We shall see who my 'Learned Friends' advise the victims to sue, but I suspect, if they do at all, it will be higher in the food chain than the driver.

We shall see who my 'Learned Friends' advise the victims to sue, but I suspect, if they do at all, it will be higher in the food chain than the driver.

Is this correct? I ask because the test of culpability is less in a civil case, isn't it? And the driver was negligent, he admitted same.

What's the point in suing the driver, he is unlikely to have any wealth or assets to speak of so it would be vindictive also he has been proven innocent in a Criminal Court so in a civil court the prosecution would have to show the Criminal Court was wrong.

What's the point in suing the driver, he is unlikely to have any wealth or assets to speak of so it would be vindictive also he has been proven innocent in a Criminal Court so in a civil court the prosecution would have to show the Criminal Court was wrong.

The wealth is with TfL (aka the Tax Payer) if there is, which is likely, compensation will more than probably be settled out of Court, once the Criminal case has finished, there is nothing further to prove, the only things are the amount of money and an apology from TfL.  To take the compensation to Court will incur costs and there is no guarantee the plaintives (victims) would get all of their cost covered above the amount of compensation.

The tram driver is now by virtue of the verdict a victim and is entitled to compensation from TfL for putting his health and safety at risk whilst at work.

I would be interested if the bereaved sued for compensation & brought in both Driver & TfL/Tram company on that statement.

I would be interested if the bereaved sued for compensation & brought in both Driver & TfL/Tram company on that statement.

Reading the reports in the press, I am glad with the verdict such as was delivered. Too many systemic problems to heap guilt on to one man. I offer this opinion as an amateur (but professionally delivering) railwayman myself. I understand the frustrations and heartache of the bereaved and injured but they should be looking higher up the management structure (and safety culture as it was then) for the underlying reasons IMHO.

He told them: "I'm a human being and sometimes as a human being things happen to you that you are not in control of."

From the BBC - court report


The trial is set to last for up to 5 weeks.

Passengers were "flung around" as if in a washing machine during a tram crash in Croydon that killed seven people, a court has heard.

Sixty-one passengers were also injured, 19 seriously, when the tram derailed in south London on 9 November 2016.

The Old Bailey heard passengers were flung about when the driver attempted a curve at more than three times the speed limit.

Proportionally the Tram Driver could end up with a more severe sentence than TfL as any fine impacts directly any public services, TOL part of the defence is the fact they have or are since the accident implementing fatigue management and monitoring.  The Tram Drive and I'm not saying his actions are not reprehensible, but he is going to live with the consequences of that morning on his mind for the rest of his life,   TfL and TOL will have corporate amnesia 

ORR have initiated prosecutions of the driver, Transport for London (TfL) and Tram Operations Limited (TOL) for breaches of health and safety law. From the BBC:

There's a lot that this statement. It is easy for those of us who spent a working life sat at a desk when the worse thing that a moment's inattention could cause is knocking your coffee over your keyboard to make a statement like this. This person did not set off to work intending to cause injury, and quite likely did not realise what danger had arisen immediately before the accident - although if he was (for example) playing with a mobile device instead of concentrating on his job, or under he influence of drink or drugs, that would be different.

Personally, I get more upset when a psychopath beats the living daylights out of some unfortunate who gets in their way when their blood is up gets away without a jail sentence. We sadly have a tabloid culture which whips up a revenge culture against those involved in accidents, when what we really need to do is to make sure as far as possible the risk of a recurrence is reduced or eliminated.  We would be a better society if grieving relatives were made to feel some consolation if this happens, rather than encourage a culture baying for revenge against someone whose "crime" might be just a few moments inattention when they were tired.

What we should be getting upset about is that in this modern and apparently safety pre-occupied world we ended up with a rail based mode of transport that could hurtle towards a bend this sharp at this speed.

  

It's the ORR prosecuting, not the CPS.

What we should be getting upset about is that in this modern and apparently safety pre-occupied world we ended up with a rail based mode of transport that could hurtle towards a bend this sharp at this speed.

"Up to two years imprisonment" - seems a pretty light penalty for 7 lives lost? (if found guilty)

"Up to two years imprisonment" - seems a pretty light penalty for 7 lives lost? (if found guilty)

The companies are also being prosecuted, which suggests that the CPS will argue that there were failings at corporate level, sufficient to clear the bar for  prosecution.

"Up to two years imprisonment" - seems a pretty light penalty for 7 lives lost? (if found guilty)

ORR have initiated prosecutions of the driver, Transport for London (TfL) and Tram Operations Limited (TOL) for breaches of health and safety law. From the BBC:

ORR have initiated prosecutions of the driver, Transport for London (TfL) and Tram Operations Limited (TOL) for breaches of health and safety law. From the BBC:

Mr Dorris, then aged 42, is accused of "an alleged failure as an employee to take reasonable care of passengers whilst employed at work driving the tram", the ORR said.

If found guilty, he could face a penalty of up to two years imprisonment and an unlimited fine. TfL and ToL could also face an unlimited financial penalty.

The driver of a tram that crashed in Croydon, killing seven people, could have been "disorientated" following a micro-sleep, an inquest jury has heard.

Simon French, of the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB), said there was evidence the driver thought he was travelling in the opposite direction.

Mr French earlier described the event of November 2016 as "fast and violent".

It was "absolutely clear within hours" the crash was caused by excessive speed, he added.

He told the inquest if there had been a micro-sleep, "it is quite possible that the driver was fatigued", which could be a result of "cumulative sleep deprivation and insufficient sleep the previous night".

He also showed the hearing a video reconstruction of the crash.

The film, of a tram emerging from a tunnel at 78km/h (48mph) before slowing down to 73km/h (45mph), was shown first in slow motion and then at full speed.

Judging by the news reports tonight it was an accident waiting to happen with numerous other incidences of speeding on that stretch....ultimately if you don't feel you're safe to drive any vehicle whether through fatigue,illness or whatever it's up to you to say so and stay out of the driving seat.

- improvements to safety management systems, particularly encouraging a culture in which everyone feels able to report their own mistakes

- improvements to the tram operator’s safety management arrangements so as to encourage staff to report their own mistakes and other safety issues

Summary

On the morning of 9 November 2016, tram 2551 reached the maximum permitted speed of 80 km/h as it entered the first of three closely spaced tunnels, which together extended for about 500 metres. When leaving the tunnels, the tram should have been reducing speed significantly as it was approaching the sharp curve round to Sandilands junction, where there is a 20 km/h limit. This was marked by a speed limit sign at the start of the curve. On the day of the accident, the tram was travelling at 73 kilometres per hour when it reached this sign.

The excessive speed caused the tram to overturn as it passed through the curve. Passengers were thrown around inside the tram and the tram slid along the ground on its side. Of the 69 passengers involved in this tragic accident, seven died and 61 were injured, 19 seriously.

Investigation methods included:

- obtaining data from the tram’s on board recorder and the tramway’s signalling system

- conducting tests on the tram’s safety systems using computer modelling to understand the minimum speed that would overturn a tram on the curve at Sandilands

- reviewing the design of the infrastructure reviewing the tramway’s safety and risk management systems

- interviews with people and organisations involved

- surveying tram drivers to understand how trams were being driven on that route

The RAIB’s investigation concluded that it is probable that the driver temporarily lost awareness on a section of route on which his workload was low. The investigation has found that a possible explanation for this loss of awareness was that the driver had a microsleep, and that this was linked to fatigue. Although it is possible that the driver was fatigued due to insufficient sleep there is no evidence that this was the result of the shift pattern that he was required to work.

It is also possible that, as he regained awareness, the driver became confused about his location and direction of travel through the tunnels. The infrastructure did not contain sufficiently distinctive features to alert tram drivers that they were approaching the tight curve.

The investigation found that:

- there was no mechanism to monitor driver alertness or to automatically apply the brakes when the tram was travelling too fast

- there was inadequate signage to remind drivers when to start braking or to warn that they were approaching the sharp curve

- the windows broke when people fell against them, so many passengers were thrown from the tram causing fatal or serious injuries

Recommendations

The RAIB has made 15 recommendations intended to improve safety. Recommendation areas include:

- technology, such as automatic braking and systems to monitor driver alertness

- better understanding the risks associated with tramway operations, particularly when the tramway is not on a road, and the production of guidance on how these risks should be managed

- improving the strength of doors and windows

- improvements to safety management systems, particularly encouraging a culture in which everyone feels able to report their own mistakes

- improvements to the tram operator’s safety management arrangements so as to encourage staff to report their own mistakes and other safety issues

- reviewing how tramways are regulated a dedicated safety body for UK tramways

The RAIB concluded that management of fatigue was not a factor in the incident, nor did a speeding culture contribute to it.

Croydon tram crash: Two memorials unveiled


A stone plinth and a new communal area have been built in the centre of New Addington

Two memorials honouring the victims of the Croydon tram derailment have been unveiled on the first anniversary of the tragedy.

Seven people died when the commuter tram overturned on 9 November 2016.

A stone plinth has been erected near the crash site at Sandilands Junction, and a new communal area built in New Addington.

Families of the victims attended a memorial service, along with Mayor of London Sadiq Khan, on Thursday.

Taiye Ajbiola, who was on the tram when it derailed, said the anniversary brought back painful memories. "Two or three days before today I've been having a lot of flashbacks. This morning it was like I was on the tram again," he added.


Relatives of the victims laid flowers during the memorial service

Speaking at the service, Mr Khan said: "Our public transport system should be a place where people are always safe. We owe this to the victims, the families and to all Londoners."

Tony Newman, leader of the council, said the ceremony "gives all those affected a chance to think back. Although a year has passed since the incident we still mourn those who died on that dreadful day."

The seven people killed in the crash were Dane Chinnery, 19, Philip Logan, 52, Philip Seary, 57, Dorota Rynkiewicz, 35, and Robert Huxley, 63, all from New Addington, and Mark Smith, 35 and Donald Collett, 62, both from Croydon.


Seven people died and 50 were injured when a tram derailed in Croydon

The tram had been travelling at 44mph in a 13mph zone when it derailed near the Sandilands Junction area of Croydon, an interim report found.

An full investigation is under way into the causes of the tram derailment.

The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) said its final report is "nearing completion" and is expected to be published by the end of the year.

Key recommendation areas addressed to UK tram operators, are likely to be:

• provision of active tram protection to prevent serious accidents due to excessive speed at high risk locations
• research into active means of detecting the attention state of drivers and intervening in the event of inattention
• improved containment of passengers by tram windows and doors
• setting up of an industry body to facilitate more effective cooperation between UK tramway owners and operators on matters related to safety performance and the development of common standards

In addition, the RAIB’s investigation into how Tram Operations Ltd manage fatigue risk may result in a recommendation.

Our final report will also highlight the importance of ensuring the availability of in-tram CCTV systems and any actions already taken to address the issue. If necessary, the RAIB will also make a recommendation for further improvement in this area.

An interesting question.  However, some are questioning the accident rate on HGVs, particularly at night. The law is the minimum, that dos not mean it is adequate. Also laws are often a blunt instrument in such matters. 

How do the regulations re: shift lengths, rest periods etc differ in this case from rail services? (Or indeed lorry drivers on the tachograph etc?) I thought these minimum conditions were non negotiable & covered by legislation?

They have:

http://www.croydonadvertiser.co.uk/trade-union-voice-concerns-about-tram-drivers-shift-patterns-and-rosters/story-29929764-detail/story.html

Trouble is that as a 'new' operation hard earned conditions earned over many generations in the case of national rail services (such as shift lengths, consecutive days worked, and so on), are harder to negotiate above and beyond what is the legal minimum.

I've no doubt that without unions, your average train driver would be exposed to far more risk from such things as well.  I'm not a fan of much of what the union does, but that's one area where they are very important.

Or are the shift patterns of a nature that means that staff do not get adequate sleep, as some have alleged.

Or are the shift patterns of a nature that means that staff do not get adequate sleep, as some have alleged.

Scarcely believable and incredibly worrying  - is "ability to stay awake at work" not part of First Groups recruitment process?

Hi All,

It just dose not get any better!

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/shocking-footage-emerges-of-croydon-tram-driver-asleep-at-controls-a3542661.html

Basset

I recently saw a dashcam video from inside a Tesla which correctly predicted (you hear the warning tone before anything visible happens, quite spooky) a car spinning and overturning on a motorway directly infront. The Tesla managed to stop itself quickly enough to avoid any further collisions with debris or the crashed car. A computer can avoid unexpected collisions/obstructions given the right sensory inputs and algorithms and will likely respond quicker and more effectively than any human controller.

ChrisB - yes, that was indeed why I put driverless in quotation marks to infer a system such as what we see currently on several tube lines, but in my opinion having that human being there is frankly overkill with how technology has come along in the last few years.

1.5lb of pressure doesn't sound very much. Is it possible that a sleeping driver with their hand on the lever would prevent the deadman's handle activating, without it actually being faulty? I know someone who was involved in a near head-on crash with a car driver who had fallen asleep and whose sleeping foot was exerting enough pressure on the accelerator pedal for the car to carry on at about 40mph uphill, so such things do happen.

Croydon tram crash: Drivers 'fell asleep' on fatal line

Four drivers have admitted falling asleep while operating trams in Croydon, where seven people were killed after a tram derailed in November 2016.

Drivers said a safety device, known as "a dead man's handle", failed to activate and stop their trams.

Tram Operations Ltd, which runs the line, said driver fatigue was monitored and controls were "fully functional".

An interim report into November's crash suggested the tram was speeding and the driver may have "lost awareness".

It found there was no emergency braking and the tram had been travelling at 46mph before it crashed in a 13mph zone, near the Sandilands Junction area of Croydon.

However, a BBC investigation for the Victoria Derbyshire programme, has found that at least three trams have been recorded speeding on that same line since the derailment.

One was travelling at 40mph in a 25mph zone. Another is understood to have been speeding near the crash site.

'Very fortunate'

Four current and former drivers have also admitted they have fallen asleep while driving a tram.

Konrad Turner, who retired last year after driving trams in Croydon for 16 years, said he woke up 10 metres after passing the line's George Street stop, adding: "A person was very fortunate that I didn't run them over."

Mr Turner said his tram's driver safety device - which is used on different types of tram across the UK and Europe - failed to work.

Drivers have to apply 1.5lb of pressure on a lever and push it forward for the tram to accelerate.

If pressure is not maintained, a safety device inside the lever should activate - sounding an alarm and then applying an emergency brake.

There is no suggestion a problem with this device was responsible for the derailment at Sandilands.

Cost their jobs

Guidance from the Office of Rail and Road (ORR) safety regulator says the driver safety device should activate "in the event of driver collapse".

Further guidance also states the device should be designed "so that it cannot be kept in the operating position other than by a vigilant tram driver".

But six drivers said the device was not "fit for purpose".

One said drivers were afraid to tell management about safety device failures because they feared being sacked over falling asleep.

"You're asking somebody to come forward and admit to something that could cost them their job," he said, adding that he believed most drivers had fallen asleep at some point in the career.
The BBC has uncovered three incidents in the past decade where drivers were incapacitated.

They include a near head-on collision, a collision with buffers, and a driver failing to slow down at the line's Morden Road stop.

On that occasion, the driver was only woken when he was spotted by ticket inspectors on the platform, who radioed his cab.

In November, footage released by the Sun showed a driver who appeared to be asleep for at least 30 seconds continuing to power a tram on the line.

Transport for London told the BBC the driver safety device failed to work because the driver had not completely lost consciousness.

"If he were to completely pass out and lose consciousness then he would relax his grip," director Leon Daniels said when shown the footage.
Another driver told the BBC of a dead man's handle failure in May 2016.

He said a spring in the device had broken, causing the alarm and emergency braking to be initially delayed, before failing altogether.

The driver told the BBC he reported it immediately. He said he was told it was safe to continue.

"[I said] if I have a heart attack or become unconscious this tram will go through the buffers at Beckenham junction at 50mph and kill more than likely myself, the majority of people on board and around the tram.

"Only when I said that [did they say], 'Take it out of service straightaway.'"

In a statement, Tram Operations Ltd, said there was not "a full failure" of the driver's safety device and passengers "were not at risk".

'Operating safely'

It says the tram was later "examined" and the fault was rectified the next day.

Transport for London said the "tram was still operating safely".

The Office of Rail and Road (ORR) safety regulator said it was not made aware of the incident, but a "failure should be reported".

When questioned on allegations of trams exceeding speed limits in Croydon, Tram Operations said it had increased speed checks across the tram network since the crash.

Yes, but, the DLR has no level crossings to entertain (other than just the one I believe, at Beckton Depot whereby the road only has access to the depot so not a major thoroughfare), Croydon has numerous level crossings and spaces whereby people walk across the track, East Croydon station for one. All it takes is for one broken down car or one fallen over old lady and its not worth thinking about, a computer wont notice these things, a driver on the other hand will do.

I'm surprised no one has mentioned 'driverless' trams -

The DLR seems to manage....

The DLR seems to manage....

That, or a more modern system that does exactly the same like TPWS.

Indeed, the driver had driven that route many times before, successfully. He knew where to brake.

31 A tram approaching the Sandilands Junction area from Lloyd Park at 80 km/h (50 mph) would need to brake at its full service rate of 1.3 m/s² approximately 180 metres before the speed restriction sign, in order to be travelling at 20 km/h (13 mph) when the sign was reached.
32 RAIB observations and measurements indicate that tram drivers approaching Sandilands Junction from the direction of the tunnel during the hours of darkness, in clear conditions, can sight the curve and read the speed restriction sign from around 90 metres with headlights on main beam, and from around 60 metres with dipped beam.
33 The point at which the curve can be sighted and the sign becomes readable in clear conditions is therefore about 90 - 120 metres beyond the point at which a full service brake application must start in order to reduce speed from 80 km/h to 20 km/h (full service brake deceleration is around half emergency brake deceleration).  At the time of the accident the readability of the speed restriction sign is likely to have been adversely affected by heavy rain.
34 There was no sign to indicate to drivers where they should begin to apply the brake for the Sandilands curve; they were expected to know this from their knowledge of the route.

Four tram crash survivors still recovering in hospital, 'some with amputations' according to police

There are still four survivors of the Croydon tram crash who are recovering in hospital with serious injuries, some with amputations according to the detective in charge of the criminal investigation into the tragedy which killed seven people.

Senior investigating officer Detective Superintendent Gary Richardson spoke to the Croydon Advertiser today about the investigation and explained that early indications from the pathologist who carried out the postmortems on the victims, shows that they were killed instantly.

DS Richardson's boss Assistant Chief Constable Robin Smith also admitted that at one point on the day of the crash he feared that the death toll could have been as high as ten.

ACC Smith revealed that 70 police officers who responded to the derailment are being offered specialist treatment by the British Transport Police due to the risk of them suffering post-traumatic stress disorder.

The two senior police officers gave an insight today as to what it was like for the emergency services who responded to the tram crash.

ACC Smith was made aware of the derailment about an hour after the tram came off the tracks. After he knew the scale of the incident, he immediately went to the scene.

He said: "If there is a train crash that is one of the main reasons we are here, it is our bread and butter. I walked into the office at 7.15am, one of the guys said to me 'have you heard?' And I thought he was going to say Donald Trump is going to be the new president, and he said 'no there's been a tram crash'. And this is a guy who when I first joined the force two months ago said 'we never have train crashes'."

When he arrived at the scene a police cordon had already been put in place along Addiscombe Road and the emergency service operation was well under way.

Survivors who were freed from the overturned tram were being escorted onto another stationary tram at Sandilands tram stop where they were assessed for their injuries, before being put on one of two buses which would go to hospitals in Croydon or Tooting.

When asked if the work of the emergency services had prevented any of the injured from dying, DS Richardson, who also attended the scene, said: "It is hard to say that anybody saved a life. I think from the pathologist that conducted the post-mortems, Rob Chapman, the view was that those people who died from the fatalities in affect died almost immediately, so that has been some comfort for the families that [their loved ones] didn't have survivable injuries. There is nobody now in hospital that has injuries that they will die from. There are still four people in hospital, a couple of those will be in there for a few weeks because they are amputees."

As the scale of the incident began to become clear ACC Smith addressed the media, initially confirming that five people had died.

He said: "We knew that seven people had died by late afternoon. At lunchtime we said it was five [and feared it was] up to potentially ten. Later on we were talking seven, potentially eight. And it came down to seven when we confirmed [the number of victims]. It is quite tricky because everyone [immediately] wants us to be definitive. Sometimes it is not as easy as you expect. So it is easier to say certainly five [have died] maybe seven, in fact I briefed the mayor to say that it was certainly five but it could be seven or it could be eight, but I think we knew by late afternoon."

The nature of the injuries made formal identification difficult for the officers who could not easily establish how many bodies there were.

ACC Smith explained that while his officers go through regular training for incidents like this, nothing compares to the real thing - but he felt the BTP, along with the other emergency services, did a good job.

He added: "One thing you can never train for is just the human aspect, we all see difficult and challenging scenes. I've done incident training where you have actors and it is very realistic but, of course, you know they are actors. Our staff had to deal with quite difficult scenes and we are all human. I guess [this was] one thing you can never train for.

"BTP deals with a lot of tragedy so our staff are pretty experienced but I don't think it makes it any easier. We need to consider their welfare, because it was a very, very challenging scene as you can imagine. It used to be you go home, have a thoughtful moment to yourself and acted super strong, now we recognise post-traumatic stress disorder."

ACC Smith said that 70 officers who attended the scene were being offered support. He said: "As organisations have become more sophisticated and realised [tragedies such as this] can have lasting effects, well lets provide that care to our staff. Fourteen family liaison officers have been deployed to [the] seven families [of the victims]. Those families are incredibly distressed and that distress can transfer over to the officers, so they are also part of that process to make sure it isn't having an adverse effect on them."

A number of residents who lived within the police cordon and near the crash site wanted to help the emergency services in any way they could on the day of the incident.

"It was bitterly cold," ACC Smith said. "It was that 'in your body bones cold'. But that comes with the job, and what also comes with that is the members of the community who come out with ham sandwiches and cups of tea. The local nursery gave us access to their facilities. Communities come together which is quite important."

Tram driver suspended over Sun footage

A tram driver has been suspended after footage in The Sun appeared to show him falling asleep, transport company FirstGroup has said.

The footage suggested he may have nodded off at the controls on the same line in which a crash killed seven people in Croydon on 9 November.

The Sun said it was recorded in April, about three miles from the south London derailment which also injured 51.

FirstGroup said the driver was removed from duty pending an investigation.

A spokesman for the company said: "We have not seen this video before (we saw the footage for the first time when the Sun sent it last night) and it will now be subject to a full investigation.  If the situation is as it appears, then this is completely unacceptable and appropriate action will be taken."

In a 30-second clip the driver - who is not the same one involved in last week's fatal crash - appears to drift in and out of sleep as the tram moves forward.

He is seen apparently struggling to remain upright as passengers are heard expressing shock as the tram approaches the next stop.

Mayor of London Sadiq Khan said he was "extremely concerned" by the footage.

The BBC has not been able to verify the footage, but Transport for London said it was also carrying out urgent inquiries.

A spokesman said it had asked operators FirstGroup to take all necessary action and report back as soon as possible.

The tram that derailed in Croydon killing seven people was travelling at three and a half times the speed limit, investigators have said.

The Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) said the tram, which was carrying about 60 people, was travelling at 43.5mph in a 12mph zone.

In its interim report, it said there was no evidence of any track defects, or obstructions on the track.

The investigation also found no malfunction of the braking system.

The tram derailed last Wednesday morning shortly after coming out of a tunnel which has a faster speed limit.

'Rigorous assurance process'

Initial analysis shows the driver did apply the brake after coming out of the tunnel but only enough to reduce his speed from 50mph out of the tunnel to 43.5mph.

The tram travelled 25m before stopping.

The RAIB said the factors that led to the speeding were still under investigation and so it advises London Trams and Tram Operations Ltd to put speed restrictions in place before the bend out of the tunnel.

Mike Brown, London's transport commissioner, said: "We will follow the RAIB's advice and, before service is resumed, will implement additional temporary speed restrictions and associated signage near Sandilands to supplement existing safety arrangements.

"We are continuing to carry out a thorough safety assessment and are taking the advice of an independent panel of tram experts.

"We will only resume services for the local community once that rigorous assurance process has been completed."

Transport for London (TfL) has offered to pay for the funerals of the seven victims of the Croydon tram crash.

TfL has pledged to do "everything we can to support the families and all those affected".

An interim report into the crash is due to be published on Wednesday, but it could take "many months" to produce a final report, investigators warned.

Announcing the offer of assistance to victims' families, London's Transport Commissioner Mike Brown said: "The TfL Sarah Hope line is available 24 hours a day to provide advice on a whole range of matters and immediate financial and other support.

"This includes covering funeral costs and travel expenses for relatives."

Summary
1 At about 06:07 hrs on Wednesday 9 November 2016, a tram running between New Addington and Wimbledon derailed and overturned on a curve as it approached Sandilands Junction, in Croydon (figure 1). The tram travelled for a short distance on its side before stopping in the vicinity of the junction.

2 Seven people suffered fatal injuries in the accident. A further 51 people were taken to hospital, with eight of them suffering injuries described by the London Ambulance Service as “serious or life-threatening”.

3 The Rail Accident Investigation Branch’s (RAIB) initial review of the on-tram data recorder (OTDR) shows that the tram was travelling at a speed of approximately 70 km/h (43.5 mph) as it entered the curve, which had a maximum permitted speed of 20 km/h (12.5 mph).

The RAIB’s role and the context of this interim report

4 The RAIB is responsible for conducting independent investigations into railway
and tramway accidents in the UK. The purpose of its investigations is to improve
safety by establishing the causes of accidents and making recommendations
to reduce the likelihood of similar occurrences in the future or to mitigate their
consequences.

5 The RAIB is not a prosecuting body; its investigations are focused solely on safety
improvement and do not apportion blame or liability. The police and the Office of
Rail and Road deal with contraventions of the law. None of their statutory duties
are changed by the RAIB investigation.

6 The RAIB’s investigation is running independently of those of the British Transport
Police, the Office of Rail and Road, and the industry. However, all investigating
agencies, and the industry, are co-operating fully with each other.

7 This interim report provides some key information including the RAIB’s findings
from its initial investigation. It builds upon the information already provided
on the RAIB’s website1. A final report will be published on completion of the
investigation. All RAIB investigation reports are available on the RAIB website.

8 At any stage in its investigations the RAIB may also issue urgent safety advice
(see paragraph 32) and make recommendations to such persons as appropriate
in the circumstances

information
People

9 The driver was the only member of staff on the tram. The exact number of passengers is still being established, but is believed to be around 60.

Parties involved

10 The tramway infrastructure is owned and managed by Transport for London through its London Trams subsidiary.

11 Tram Operations Ltd, a subsidiary of First Group, operates the trams.
Key features of the route and accident location

12 The accident occurred at Sandilands Junction on the London Tramlink network in Croydon; the point at which the two easterly legs of the network from Beckenham Junction/Elmers End and New Addington converge (see figure 2).

13 The tram involved in the accident was running between Lloyd Park and Sandilands tram stops on the route from New Addington. After the Lloyd Park tram stop, the route runs in the open for about 900 metres, and then passes through Sandilands tunnels (comprised of three closely spaced tunnels with a total length of 512 metres), before emerging into a cutting approximately 100 metres before the left-hand curve on which the accident occurred. The curve has a radius of approximately 30 metres.

14 The tramway runs in its own dedicated corridor in this location (it does not change to street running until after Sandilands tram stop). The alignment through the tunnels on the approach to the curve is straight, and the track is on a gently falling gradient from the tunnel portal to the curve, before rising again through the junction.

15 The maximum permitted speed for trams approaching the area from Lloyd Park is 80 km/h (50 mph) until the curve near to Sandilands Junction, at which point it drops to 20 km/h (12.5 mph). A reflective board denotes the commencement of the 20 km/h speed restriction; it is located approximately 30 metres before the point where the derailment occurred.

16 Trams, including those in Croydon, generally operate on ‘line-of-sight’ principles, with drivers being required to check that the route ahead is clear. Indicators are provided at locations where conflict can occur, such as junctions and road crossings. There is no requirement for advance warning of speed restrictions (neither is there a requirement for speed control systems to be fitted to trams).
External circumstances

17 At the time of the accident it was dark and raining heavily.

The tram

18 The vehicle involved was tram 2551, one of 24 units (comprising three bogies and two cars joined by an articulation unit) that made up the initial Croydon fleet. It was built by Bombardier Transportation in Austria in 1998.

19 The tram was equipped with forward facing and internal closed circuit television (CCTV) cameras and an OTDR. The OTDR records key parameters such as the vehicle speed and the driver’s operation of power and brake controls.

20 The OTDR was functioning at the time of the accident, and the evidence obtained is being used in the RAIB’s investigation. However, an initial examination of the tram’s CCTV equipment suggests that it was not working at the time of the accident.

The accident

21 Tram 2551 departed from New Addington at 05:55 hrs, calling at six stops including Lloyd Park. After leaving Lloyd Park it travelled at up to 80 km/h (50 mph)(in accordance with prevailing speed restrictions), as it ran towards its next stop at Sandilands.

22 The tram entered the curve on the approach to Sandilands Junction at a speed of approximately 70 km/h (43.5 mph). As it encountered the curve, it derailed and turned over onto its right side, travelling for approximately 25 metres before it stopped.

Consequences

23 Seven people lost their lives in the accident and 51 were taken to hospital, eight of them suffering from serious injuries.

24 The right side of the tram, which made contact with the ground, was severely damaged.

25 There was some damage to the track and lineside equipment in the vicinity of the accident.

The investigation

26 The RAIB was notified via its telephone incident line at 06:42 hrs, and deployed five inspectors and two support staff to the site of the accident. The first three inspectors arrived on site at 10:02 hrs. The RAIB completed work on site at 09:20 hrs on 12 November 2016.

27 The RAIB has:
l secured relevant physical evidence including the tram;
l moved the tram to a secure location;
l obtained details from the tram’s OTDR;
l carried out a detailed survey of the track and other infrastructure in the area of the accident;
l started gathering evidence from the tram operator;
l started gathering evidence from witnesses; and
l launched an appeal for other witnesses to come forward (www.gov.uk/government/news/raib-witness-appeal).

Initial findings
Track

28 The RAIB has undertaken a survey of the track in the vicinity of the derailment and will be reviewing the findings from the survey in due course. At this stage, no evidence has been found of any track defects, or obstructions on the track, that could have contributed to the derailment.
The tram and its operation

29 Detailed examination of the tram has not yet been possible. However, the RAIB’s initial investigation has not indicated any malfunction of the tram’s braking system.

30 A tram approaching the Sandilands Junction area from Lloyd Park at 80 km/h (50 mph) would need to brake at its full service rate of 1.3 m/s2 approximately 180 metres before the speed restriction board in order to be travelling at 20 km/h (12.5 mph) when the board was reached.

31 Initial analysis of the tram’s OTDR indicates that some braking was applied in the 180 metres before the 20 km/h (12.5 mph) speed restriction board, but this was only sufficient to reduce the tram’s speed from 80 km/h (50 mph) to approximately 70 km/h (43.5 mph) by the time the tram passed the board and entered the curve on which the accident occurred.

Urgent Safety Advice

32 In the light of this accident, the RAIB has issued the following urgent safety advice to Tram Operations Ltd and London Trams:
‘The factors that led to the over-speeding are still under investigation. Until these factors are better understood, and before the junction re-opens to passenger operation, the RAIB advises London Trams and Tram Operations Ltd to jointly take measures to reduce the risk of trams approaching Sandilands Junction from the direction of New Addington at an excessive speed. Options for consideration should include the imposition of a further speed restriction before the start of the existing 20 km/h speed restriction around the curve and/or additional operational signs.’

RAIB’s future action in the investigation

33 During its investigation the RAIB will work in conjunction with other agencies to contact the families of those who lost their lives and those who were injured in the accident. The RAIB will also be contacting any passengers who were on-board the tram when the accident occurred, but who were not injured.

34 The RAIB’s ongoing investigation will include consideration of:
l the sequence of events before and during the accident;
l events following the accident, including the emergency response and how passengers evacuated from the tram;
l the way in which the tram was being driven and any influencing factors;
l the design, configuration and condition of the infrastructure on this section of the route, including signage;
l the tram’s behaviour during the derailment and how people sustained their injuries;
l any previous over-speeding incidents at Sandilands Junction; and
l any relevant underlying management factors.

35 The RAIB’s investigation report will include recommendations to reduce the likelihood and/or consequence of similar events occurring in the future.

Former Croydon tram driver claims 'crazy' working conditions mean staff are 'never fully awake'

By CBallinger  |  Posted: November 11, 2016

A former tram driver has criticised the working conditions staff are subjected to and believes "crazy" shift patterns could have contributed to the fatal Croydon crash which has claimed seven lives.

The driver of the tram which overturned on Wednesday morning is alleged to have told a passenger immediately after the derailment that he thought he had blacked out at the controls.

The 42-year-old from Beckenham was arrested on suspicion of manslaughter and released on bail until May. It is understood that establishing if the driver blacked out, or fell asleep, will be a crucial part of the police investigation.

The former driver with six years' experience has told the Croydon Advertiser he understands drivers have fallen asleep while in control of trams in the past and that he "always felt in a bit of a daze" himself.

The man, who asked not to be named, said colleagues would complain to each other about being unable to get into a regular sleeping pattern because of the different shifts they would constantly be working.

He added that the tight left-hand turn where the tram derailed on Wednesday just before Sandilands station is considered a "nasty bend" by drivers.

Speaking to the Advertiser he said: "If you ask me people need to understand the context of what pressures are put on tram drivers before they give this driver a raw deal. [If he did fall asleep] I don't think he is entirely to blame, the working conditions are responsible.

"If he did [fall asleep] he wouldn't be the first and he won't be the last.

"Nobody is ever fully awake, I was always feeling in a bit of a daze, and that is because the way the shifts work doesn't allow the drivers to get a regular sleep pattern.

"When I was a driver we worked seven days on the trot and then got four days off. We'd then work seven days again before getting two days off and then work two days for one day off. It was crazy.

"During all this you could have a week of early starts, at say 3.45am, and then a week of late shifts finishing at 2am. When I was a driver the longest shift was nine hours and the shortest six hours.

"You could never get into a routine of proper sleep.

"At the Therapia Lane tram depot there were three vending machines and the only drink available in one of them was Red Bull - that tells you everything you need to know.

"We would all moan to each other about the shift system and the lack of sleep we were getting."
Former Croydon tram driver claims 'crazy' working conditions mean staff are 'never fully awake'
...

Metrolink started in 1992, although for many years the vast majority of its route (Bury - Altrincham) was former BR lines with just a small section of on street running.

4 Application of this guidance should provide a sufficient level of safety for approval to be
given by the Inspectorate, provided that it has been demonstrated that the use of the
guidance is wholly applicable to the works, plant or equipment.
5 If this is not the case, then the Inspectorate will wish to be satisfied that due
consideration has been given to ensuring that all intolerable risks have been eliminated
and that all remaining risks have been reduced to be as low as reasonably practicable
(known as ALARP).

Effects on existing works
6 This document does not apply retrospectively to existing works, plant and equipment.
However, new or altered works, plant and equipment might introduce incompatibilities or
inconsistencies with the existing works, plant or equipment. In this case, approval may
only be given if appropriate arrangements have been made to address these safety
implications, which may include modifications to the existing works, plant or equipment.

Croydon falls silent to remember tram crash victims

The people of Croydon fell silent in remembrance of the seven victims of Wednesday's tram crash.

It comes a day after those killed in the accident where named by the British Transport Police (BTP).

They were Donald Collett, 62, from Croydon, Philip Logan, 52, and Robert Huxley, 63, both from New Addington.

Those already named were Mark Smith, Dane Chinnery, Phil Seary and Dorota Rynkiewicz.

Bishop Jonathan Clarke of Croydon Minster read out the names during the cathedral's annual service of remembrance for the fallen in two world wars and in other conflicts.

The tram driver, Alfred Dorris, 42, from Beckenham, south-east London, is currently on bail.  He was arrested after the derailment on suspicion of manslaughter.  Investigations into the crash are continuing.

A spokesman for FirstGroup, which operates the south London tram network for TfL said: "We can confirm that Alfred Dorris has worked for us since March 2008. Given the ongoing investigation we don't have anything further to add at this point."


Tributes have been paid to Philip Logan (left), Donald Collett (centre) and Robert Huxley, (right)

.............and that (as is becoming increasingly clear) it was an accident waiting to happen through excessive speeding which appears to have been widely known and acknowledged, and yet nothing was done to prevent it.

.............and that (as is becoming increasingly clear) it was an accident waiting to happen through excessive speeding which appears to have been widely known and acknowledged, and yet nothing was done to prevent it.

Indeed ...

Yes, standard procedure (on the heavy rail network at least) is for a drugs and alcohol screen to be conducted on any individuals involved in an incident of any serious nature.  This would be a urine test rather than breath test though, but if the police are involved and arrest anyone they would no doubt undertake a breath test themselves.

I remember many years ago as a driver I reported a 'near miss' to the signaller involving some trackside workers, a couple of whom were not in a position of safety when I approached.  I later found out that they were all immediately relieved of their duties and the whole team were tested for drugs and alcohol - this sort of zero tolerance approach is part of the reason the railways are so safe.

The tragedy of this event seems to be the age profile of those killed, so young 

A further update, from the BBC:

Croydon tram crash: More victims named after derailment


The named victims are Mark Smith, Dane Chinnery, Phil Seary and Dorota Rynkiewicz (L-R)

Four people who died when a tram derailed in south London, killing six men and one woman, have been named.

Phil Seary, Mark Smith, Dorota Rynkiewicz and Dane Chinnery were all travelling on the tram when it crashed just after 06:00 GMT on Wednesday.

The vehicle left the track as it negotiated a sharp bend. More than 50 people were also injured.

An extra minute's silence was added to the Armistice Day ceremony at Croydon Cenotaph to remember the victims.

British Transport Police (BTP) is investigating claims made in a Facebook post last week that a tram "lifted onto one side at 40mph" at the same spot.

I was told that all staff employed on the railways were also subject to random testing, regardless of whether they had safety critical duties.

And I suspect, a breath test.

Driver has been released on Police bail after being arrested for manslaughter, looks like they're checking his mobile phone records as well as investigating whether he fell asleep.