Driver suffering from fatigue drove through red signal in Doncaster train crash, report finds

The collision between two freight trains at Loversall Carr Junction on July 5 last year shut the track for 26 days – but both drivers escaped serious injury in the incident.

The Rail Accident Investigation Branch report has made a number of recommendations following the incident, which took place just after 6am.

The report said 4E11, a freight train operated by GB Railfreight (GBRf) had ploughed into the back of a stationary freight train after passing through a red light.

It said: “Train 4E11 was travelling from Felixstowe to Masborough near Rotherham and comprised a diesel-electric locomotive and 35 wagons.

"It left the East Coast Main Line at Loversall Carr Junction and was travelling at 48 mph when it passed a signal at red (danger) to protect a second freight train, 4E82, which was standing in the section ahead.

"Train 4E11 struck 4E82 while travelling at approximately 28 mph.”

The driver of 4E11 was taken to hospital as a precaution and was discharged later that same day. The driver of 4E82 did not sustain any injuries.

The collision caused significant damage to the infrastructure, the leading locomotive and wagons of 4E11 and the rear wagons of 4E82. The route remained closed for 26 days for recovery and track repair work.

The report stated: “The accident occurred because the driver did not control the speed of train 4E11 to enable it to stop at the signal.

"This was because the driver had experienced a loss of awareness of the driving task, probably due to the effects of fatigue.

"It is also possible that the driver’s awareness was affected by their low workload before the train approached Loversall Carr Junction, and by their expectation, based on previous experience, of the aspect which the signal would be showing.”

RAIB found that the driver’s working pattern was likely to cause fatigue, and they had experienced a low quality of rest, primarily caused by an undiagnosed sleep condition.

The management systems GB Railfreight had not detected that the driver was at risk of fatigue.

RAIB also found that the engineered systems in place on the railway infrastructure and on the train did not mitigate the driver’s loss of awareness.

The RAIB said underlying factors to the accident were the management of fatigue by GBRf which did not follow current industry good practice. GBRf’s risk assessment processes also did not identify the hazards created by a driver driving while being fatigued.

The report made two recommendations, the first calling on GBRf to reduce the risk of train driver fatigue, including improving risk assessments, processes and following industry good practice.

The second, addressed to the Rail Safety and Standards Board, working in conjunction with freight and other train operators, calls to include the identification of sleep disorder indicators in current standards for safety-critical medical assessments.

RAIB has also identified a learning point to remind train drivers of the importance and meaning of flashing yellow signals.