Another motorway crossover crash

BrianD3

Most people here have probably heard about the crash on the M50 today.

For those that haven't: A Toyota Camry crossed the central reservation between Blanchardstown and Finglas and collided with a Nissan Almera and Toyota Yaris. 7 people were injured and a couple of them are fighting for their lives according to RTE.

There is no central reservation barrier on the M50 at that point and had there been one it would surely have prevented or reduced the severity of the collision. The NRA are in the process of retrofitting barriers on M-ways and dual carriageways but it's a bit late for those unfortunate people on the M50 today.

BrianD3

Greenman

Ye saw that on the news!!! The NRA are fools, they were told about this years ago ie the central reservation barrier but did nothing. They are now putting down these dreadful barriers as per this post and in a few years I can see them digging them back up. I really despair of the NRA sometimes!!!

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/irelandcom/breaking/4529482?view=Eircomnet

Seven injured in Dublin motorway pile-up
From:ireland.com
Sunday, 28th November, 2004

Gardaí are investigating a serious road crash on the M50 motorway in Dublin in which seven people were injured

Five vehicles were involved in the crash, which happened on the northbound carriageway of the motorway between the Blanchardstown exit and the Finglas exit at around 11.30 a.m.

Two people are reported to have been seriously injured.

The injured were taken to the James Connolly Memorial Hospital in Blanchardstown, the Mater Hospital and Beaumont Hospital for treatment.

The northbound carriageway from Finglas to Blanchardstown has now been re-opened.

Tarabuses

Those bozos in the NRA should be hung out to dry over this. Incompetent doesn't even go near describing them. Every one of us who drives along our motorways has been put in danger by these people.

Why are they still in their jobs?

weehamster

to be honest with ye, I see anything been done to stop cars crossing the median until the 50 upgrade. :mad:

vinnyfitz

That eejit Ivor Calelly (Junior Minister for Transport) was on Morning Ireland talking about this this morning. He said the NRA should improve the barriers but. When asked whether the government would come up with extra money for the NRA to do this, he just ducked.

uberwolf

todays Irish Times says:

____________
Minister demands safety features for M50 after crash




The Minister of State for Transport, Mr Ivor Callely, will this morning demand that "median barriers or appropriate safety measures" are immediately put in place on the M50 following a major accident which left two children fighting for their lives. Tim O'Brien and Liam Reid report

The accident occurred when a car crossed the central reservation of the motorway and ploughed into oncoming traffic on the opposite lane yesterday morning.

Seven people were injured, six of them seriously, in the three-car pile-up, the second such serious accident to occur on an Irish motorway in three weeks.

The National Roads Authority (NRA) which is currently fitting safety barriers on all existing motorways - except the M50 - said it would be "extremely reluctant" to install the median barriers there.

The authority said a major scheme to provide a third lane in each direction would get under way in the second half of next year, and the barriers would have to be taken out again.

However, Mr Callely said last night he was "not prepared to wait up to 15 months for median barriers or appropriate safety measures to be put in place. I will be meeting with my officials in the morning, and will be requesting a full investigation. I will be guided by my officials, but something will have to be done immediately; it would be too long to wait 15 months."

Yesterday's accident occurred close to the Blanchardstown exit of the M50 shortly before noon, when a Toyota Camry, travelling in the south-bound carriageway, crashed through the median of the motorway and into the north-bound carriageway.

It ploughed into a Nissan Almera, carrying a woman and three children. It was then launched into the air, and glanced off the top of a Toyota Yaris before crashing on its side into the motorway embankment.

The two occupants of the Camry, a man and a woman, are in a serious condition in hospital. The occupants of the Almera were also seriously injured, with two of the children described as critical.

The roof of the mangled wreck was cut off by the Fire Brigade in order to free the children and the woman. Debris was strewn across the north-bound carriageway of the M50, which was totally closed off to traffic for five hours as specialists from the Garda Traffic Bureau took detailed measurements.

A criminal investigation was also initiated, and is being handled by Blanchardstown Garda station. Gardaí are appealing for witnesses.

Defending its decision not to put up safety barriers on the M50 immediately, the NRA said research showed motorways to be the Republic's safest roads.

Work on the building of a third lane is to get under way in phases starting next year but will not begin at the site of yesterday's crash until early 2006.

The scene of the accident is just two kilometres from the scene of a crash in which three men, one a priest, were killed in a similar cross-over accident in March 2001.

Three weeks ago, five people were injured, one critically, when a car crossed the median on the M1 near Dublin Airport and collided with two vehicles travelling in the opposite direction.

Fudger

I just wonder where our car tax monies really go ?????
Terrible crash, hope everyone pulls through ok. Any know what happened ? Was it a blow-out that caused the crossover or what?

Hagar

The Gardaí are apealling for anyone who saw the accident to come forward.
Everyone but the NRA saw it coming. Does that help?

thejollyrodger

I cant see anything being installed until after the M50 is upgraded either.

BrianD3

Any know what happened ? Was it a blow-out that caused the crossover or what?

I don't know, but one thing I did notice was that there were definitely two sets of tyre tracks running across the median with one set seeming to stop before it reached the other carriageway. This would suggest that maybe it was a collision that caused the crossover. Then again the second set of tracks could have been caused by an emergency service vehicle or an unrelated incident.

BrianD3

Trojan

Irrelevant perhaps: the M1 accident happened at 10.30am on a Sunday morning, this one at 11.30am on a Sunday morning, interesting coincidence for 2 such similar accidents (both had fire brigade cut roof off at least one car).

I hope the victims pull through ok.

BrianD

The tailback for the toll gates can start around Exit 6. Perhaps one of the vehicles was travelling at excessive speed and came upon the stopped traffic and either hit the brakes or swerved off the road. Once again has mistakenly picked up on the absence of crash barriers on this road as the key issue in this incident. In reality, it has nothing to do with it. Driver error or a major vehicle defect was the cause.

Hagar wrote:

Everyone but the NRA saw it coming. Does that help?

Its pretty obvious that this incident had nothing to do with the NRA and I wonder how they could have seen it coming!!!

Trojan

BrianD wrote:

Once again has mistakenly picked up on the absence of crash barriers on this road as the key issue in this incident. In reality, it has nothing to do with it.

And back here on Earth, we can clearly see that a potentially fatal cross-over accident could have been avoided by presence of a barrier, which could have turned it into a single-car side-swipe of the barrier.

sliabh

To be fair to the NRA, they don't wan't to install the barriers when they know that the M50 upgrade works are to be started in less than 18 months. It would be money wasted. Especially as when the M50 is one of the safest roads in teh country. While there have been two crossover accidents in the last month, how long has it been since there was one before that?

impr0v

There has been a criminal investigation launched, so it would seem that there is the possibility of dangerous or reckless driving causing the initial collision.

BrianD wrote:

The tailback for the toll gates can start around Exit 6

On a Sunday morning though?

Trojan wrote:

And back here on Earth, we can clearly see that a potentially fatal cross-over accident could have been avoided by presence of a barrier, which could have turned it into a single-car side-swipe of the barrier.

Indeed it could have been mitigated against with the installation of a barrier. It would still have been a potentially fatal accident when the car was bounced back into it's own lane, though the velocities would have been less. Whatever you do with the engineering aspect of roads you cannot make them idiot proof. Using roads puts you at risk of being killed by idiots who speed and drive dangerously, this will not change whatever barriers are added. In this respect the engineering side of things is coming under undeserved levels of criticism due to failures in other areas, such as enforcement and driver licencing.

If the barrier had been installed on the M50, then you'd also have the "OMG Those NRA guys are eejits, why have they jobs!!! taxpayers money, etc. etc." sensationalist and stupid posts here in a year when, after a number of months of hellish traffic distruption on the M50 and a large amount of money putting them in place, they had to be taken down again to facilitate the upgrade scheme.

As per the article in todays Irish Times, there have been three people killed due to 'crossover' accidents on the M50, and that was from the one, joyriding related, incident in 2001. Considering the amount of journeys undertaken on the road since it's opening, more than 90 million prior to the 2001 crash, it's an acceptable risk to leave it without barriers for a further 12 months, or 15 to 18 on this particular section, until it's upgraded. Statistically the chances of a similar accident happening prior to the third lane being added, and a barrier, are low and this is what dicates the economics of the situation.

Trojan

improv: I agree that it is a potentially fatal accident in any case, barriers or no.

What I don't agree with is Brians assertion that the absence of crash barriers on this road has nothing to do with this incident. I don't recall his affiliations, if any, but this sounds like the typical smokescreen we hear from our politicians and administrators day in-and-out. Apologies Brian if you're not a politician

IMnshO the magnitude of the incident is severely affected by the absence of these barriers.

Tarabuses

BrianD wrote:

Its pretty obvious that this incident had nothing to do with the NRA and I wonder how they could have seen it coming!!!

What!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

The NRA are entirely responsible for vehicles crossing the central reservation into oncoming traffic in the opposite direction. They didn't need to see it coming since they have been told it would happen many times over.

BrianD3

Even though I am pro-barrier I agree that there has been a lot of hysteria about this issue lately and it has become a political issue rather than a safety one with the likes Callely jumping on the bandwagon and demanding that barriers be installed on the M50 RIGHT NOW. I'd ask these politicians, where the hell were ye 5,10,15 years ago when the roads were being built? I have been concerned about the lack of median barriers on Irish roads for a decade and can't have been the only one.

Median crossover fatalities are not a new thing. Around 10 years ago, I saw the aftermath of a crash on the Naas road where a young guy drove his parents Merc across the median in front of a truck carrying butter. Horrible crash.

BrianD3

Tarabuses

sliabh wrote:

To be fair to the NRA, they don't wan't to install the barriers when they know that the M50 upgrade works are to be started in less than 18 months. It would be money wasted. Especially as when the M50 is one of the safest roads in teh country. While there have been two crossover accidents in the last month, how long has it been since there was one before that?

Tell the relatives of the next person killed that it would have been money wasted.

sliabh

Tarabuses wrote:

Tell the relatives of the next person killed that it would have been money wasted.

That is a pretty lame (and cliched) retort.

The reality is that we do not have unlimited funds for safety and engioneering work. Prioritisation has to occur. We cannont (and quite sensibly do not) attach an infinite value to every life that is lost in an accident.

SeaSide

BrianD wrote:

Its pretty obvious that this incident had nothing to do with the NRA and I wonder how they could have seen it coming!!!

I count at least four places on my journey on the M50 where the hedge has been penetrated. Its Russion Roulette - there might be a car to get hit or there might not be...

Was there not a priest killed about four years ago when I think it was hit by one of two cars racing which lost control. There was another on the M7 where a jeep crossed the median. Once your on the grass you've no chance of braking

sliabh

SeaSide wrote:

I count at least four places on my journey on the M50 where the hedge has been penetrated. Its Russion Roulette - there might be a car to get hit or there might not be...

Was there not a priest killed about four years ago when I think it was hit by one of two cars racing which lost control. There was another on the M7 where a jeep crossed the median. Once your on the grass you've no chance of braking

Someone quoted the statistics earlier, there have been 4 crossover accidents in over 90 million trips. Calling it Russian roulette (where the odds are 1 in 6) is a little misleading.

And I have seen people drive through the median hedges when doing u-turns to avoid tailbacks. A damaged hedge cannot be taken as evidence of a crash.

SeaSide

sliabh wrote:

Someone quoted the statistics earlier, there have been 4 crossover accidents in over 90 million trips. Calling it Russian roulette (where the odds are 1 in 6) is a little misleading.

And I have seen people drive through the median hedges when doing u-turns to avoid tailbacks. A damaged hedge cannot be taken as evidence of a crash.

I was kinda saying that if a car crosses the median that its then Russian Roulette as to whether it hits something.

Never seen the U-turn through a hedge though. There are gaps.

BrianD

Tarabuses wrote:

Tell the relatives of the next person killed that it would have been money wasted.

I have no problem whatsoever! Do you really belive that the lack of barriers was the cause of their deaths??? OF COURSE NOT!

The evening papers are saying that the car that is believed to have caused the crash was allegedly travelling at 90MPH. Somebody might also like to tell that to the relatives of those injured. If such reports are true, my speculation that a driver travelling at excessive speed came upon stationary traffic Q'ing for the toll bridge and made an evasive manouever. I would say that had barriers been in place that this vehicle would have caused equally serious damage on the south bound lane.

Now we have The Minister of State for Transport calling for "median barriers or appropriate safety measures" to be installed immediately. What sort of IDIOTIC request is this - talk about not being able to see the wood from the trees! Next the Minister for Justice will be calling for everyone to wear flak jackets instead of fighting gun crime ...

ando

SeaSide wrote:

Once your on the grass you've no chance of braking

thats another thing, they should replace the grass with tarmac. They did that in Formula one a few years ago on some corners, they found tarmac to be a lot safer than gravel or grass for a car that went off. The grass when its raining is like ice

Tommy Vercetti

What use is a barrier, in the bigger scheme of things, when people who are neither qualified nor capable of operating a motor vehicle, are permitted to drive on the roads. I don't mean any disrespect to those injured in this collision, but it's just media hype because it happened on a motorway in Dublin. I see at least one collision every week on the M1 southbound because people are tailgating in the overtaking lane, and the fools probably don't know any better either. The major accident there a few weeks back was caused by someone leaning over to pick up his phone ffs. Putting up a very expensive and disruptive barrier isn't going to change peoples' ridiculously poor driving standards.

Hagar

Accidents will happen, either through drink, drugs, speed, incompetence, human error or mechanical failure. There is no comparison between a crash between two vehicles travelling in the same direction and a head-on collision.
These barriers offer protection to the innocent.
These barriers are life safers.

Westmeath Co Co are installing concrete crash barriers along the Athlone by-pass and making a good job of it. This standard of barriers be on all dual carriageways / motorways. These are great as they also block the lights of cars on the other side.

The idea of saving money based on statistical possibilities of crashing through the median is sheer lunacy to say the least. No money was saved. I would swear that Joe Public paid for these barriers but the non installation of the barriers simply made money for someone somewhere.

The price we pay in this country for civil engineering projects is criminal.
When they are finished robbing us blind we at least should be safe to use the roads.

sliabh

Hagar wrote:

The idea of saving money based on statistical possibilities of crashing through the median is sheer lunacy to say the least.

No it isn't. it's standard practice the world over.

If you have limited funds to spend then it makes total sense to spend your funding on the more likely accident.

Take an example. There is a very high probability of accidents involving cars trying to turn right being shunted into the opposite lane on N routes (this has happend regularly in the past and the consequences are pretty much the same as for a motorway crossover accident - multiple fatalities and serious injuries). The cost of road re-painting to provide dedicated right turn lanes on most of the risk junctions across the country is probably on the same order as putting crash barriers down the centre of the M50.

So if you worked for the NRA and you had the funding and resources for only one project, would you spend the money on repainting all the risk junctions across the country where the chance of an accident is high (probably several per year) or would you spend the money on the M50 where the chance is about one accident in every 2-3 years?

Hagar

sliabh wrote:

No it isn't. it's standard practice the world over.

Not in the places I've been.
What's that statement based on?
Your location mentions Germany, would it be standard practice in Germany for instance?
It didn't look that way when I was there.

sliabh

Hagar wrote:

Not in the places I've been.
What's that statement based on?

It's based on over 8 years experience as a project manager where the first thing that is done in any project is a cost benefit analysis.

Hagar

Is this experience in similar civil engineering projects or in a different field ?
Did peoples lives depend on the money saved?

impr0v

Hagar wrote:

The idea of saving money based on statistical possibilities of crashing through the median is sheer lunacy to say the least.

More hysteria.

The statistical chance of a plane dropping on the M50 while on approach to the airport is extremely low, but should the money still be spent to put the M50 underground so that all the vehicles using it are protected from this chance? It's the same principal.

The barriers are going to be installed, this has already been stated. They are not going to be installed now because they would have to be removed in 18 months and this would obviously be a serious waste of money.

Just to clear up the statistical element. There was one fatal crossover incident and that was when the priest and two others were killed in 2001, as a result of two joyriders racing. Before this date there were 90 million journeys undertaken on the M50, since then it would safe to state that there have been half as many as that again. That's one fatal incident for approximately 130 million journeys.

Private Joker

Firstly The NRA was not in existence when the M50 was built, therefore a lack of foresight can't be blamed on them.

Secondly the potential benefits of a central crash barrier are out weighed by the cost implications.

Before each project is undertaken a cost benefit analysis is done, which takes into account many factors including the reduction of accidents and if the numbers dont add up then the project doesn't go ahead. It's a harsh reality and a kick in the teeth for families of victims, but at the end of the day the cost to the exchequer has to be justified

edit: already stated by sliabh

BrianD

It has already been proven through statistical anlysis that it is more cost effective to invest the cost of barriers into Accident and Emergency rooms in hospitals along any route.

Many people refer to the presence of barriers on UK motorways. However, they are built differently to Irish projects. UK m-ways generally have 3 lanes in each direction and the central median is very narrow and the crash barriers are necessary in this incidence as it is the only thing that separates both carriageways.

Highways in the US have wide medians with no barriers similar to ireland.

Zaph0d

This is very simple. You just want to maximise the number of lifes saved (or injuries avoided) with your safety budget. Safety budgets cannot be infinite and the public accepts the idea that people are going to die as a result of car use.

The notion of cost justifying safety measures applies to any project that incurs a risk of people dying- not just civil engineering.

You don't want to carry out a safety measure that results in 2 lives being saved when there is another measure that could save 10 lives for the same money. A cynical or stupid person sometimes demands that a less efficient safety measure be implemented because it will be popular with the public.

It has been suggested, for example, that the UK government has spent public money on making railways safer when it could have saved more lives by spending the same money on road safety measures. There is a political temptation to spend money on accidents that make the headlines, the paradox being that these accidents are newsworthy precisely because they are rare.

Tarabuses

sliabh wrote:

The cost of road re-painting to provide dedicated right turn lanes on most of the risk junctions across the country is probably on the same order as putting crash barriers down the centre of the M50.

Since when did paint stop accidents? Practically every road in the country has road markings to keep vehicles apart and yet we still have more road deaths than we should, statistically.

Tarabuses

BrianD wrote:

I have no problem whatsoever! Do you really belive that the lack of barriers was the cause of their deaths??? OF COURSE NOT!

YES....if the barriers were there those particular vehicles would not have been involved in a head on collision at a combined speed of up to 160mph (if your speculation about one car doing 90mph is correct). An accident on the same carriageway would not have been head on.

sliabh

Tarabuses wrote:

Since when did paint stop accidents? Practically every road in the country has road markings to keep vehicles apart and yet we still have more road deaths than we should, statistically.

What the NRA have done is paint a filter lane for turning right in the centre of the road with hatching around it. All the usual traffic is slightly deflected to the right for 50 to 100m away from the new lane.

So a vehicle turning right is not sitting in the middle of the road while they wait for a break in the oncoming traffic. This has been the cause of numerous accidents where someone approaching from behind doesn't realise the car is stationary and shunts it. In the worst cases the turning car is then propelled into the oncoming traffic causing a head on collision.

Victor

http://home.eircom.net/content/unison/national/4550625?view=Eircomnet

M50 smash dad pleads for safer driving
From:The Irish Independent
Wednesday, 1st December, 2004

A DISTRAUGHT father last night made a heart-felt plea to motorists to drive safely as members of his family fought for their lives following the weekend M50 pile-up.

Seven people, including boys aged 15 and 13, were injured after a car ploughed into two vehicles travelling in the opposite direction.

Dubliner Larry Cawley spoke of the devastation caused to his family by the accident. His daughter Errin (22) and ex-wife Betty are in critical condition, while his son Evan (15) is now out of danger.

The family, with a young friend of Evan's, had just joined the motorway when the crash happened.

Pleading to drivers to take greater care, Mr Cawley said he was praying that his family would recover and be home for Christmas.

"I can't expect motorists to slow down to 40mph but they should drive safely and not take risks," he told the Irish Independent. He said that the horrific injuries to his family might have been prevented if barriers been in place at the scene of the crash on the busiest road in the country.

"I just want people to know how devastated this family is as a result of what happened," he said.

Fergus Black

Victor

http://www.rte.ie/news/2004/1205/rta.html

Woman dies in hospital after M50 accident
05 December 2004 18:36

A 22-year-old woman involved in last weekend's three-car pile-up on the M50 died in hospital last night

Six other people were injured in the crash which happened on the motorway between Blanchardstown and Finglas last Sunday.

She was the driver of a car which was driving northbound when a southbound car crossed the central reservation and crashed into her car and another car.

The dead woman was from Dublin

....

Victor

Maybe, just maybe, accidents like this get attention because suddenly the MPV driving, M50 driving, 97-octane, mobile phone using drivers suddenly can't accpet it might happen to them and go into denial?

Conspiracy

Penalty Points have failed miserably.

The government claims they are working, but they are not.
In the first year of penalty points, the government used figures to display how effective the new scheme was. The drop was accountable to a seasonal drop, and not any real drop. The road deaths rise, and then they say that people are getting careless.

Infact, nothing has changed at all. People are just more scared of getting caught by a garda who might use one of the 65 potential "offences" to threaten their driving licence and thereby their insurance. Fear fear fear.
More and more garda are recruited, and less and less appear on the streets - especially concerning traffic (freeflow & other PR stunts aside).

Cops work to a quota. They are no different to the salesman who waits till the end of the month to get the last few in. Because of the lack of garda prescence on the streets for the rest of the month, business will indeed be good at month end, and only a few hours are needed to get the targets.

People don't think they will get caught, and people are probably right !

I also find it a disgrace that a 40km road that takes 25 years to build, has no concrete borders between the northbound/southbound lanes (as it appears the EU paid for it). The same was done with the Drogheda bypass. Now they have to put one up there aswell, but only when the EU pointed it out and demanded it be sorted. So now, the government debates giving the contract out twice ! Yes twice !! In light of this terrible accident we speak of, they are considering on getting a border in asap - irregardless of the cost. Then, when the work on the third lane on each side starts, remove it, and then build it again !! More contracts for the boys again huh......?

Who benifits from the road building? The rich.
Who benifits from the penalty points? Apparently no-body.
Who benifits from the road contracts? The boys
Who will it cost to foot the bill since it wasn't done before? The taxpayer.

Will there be a change of attitude from people driving irresponsibly to one of people driving carefully? Probably not. Everyone still uses the mobile while driving. Some woman have admitted to spending 30 minutes on a hand held phone while driving around dublin. I've certainly seen many situations (not just women) over the past number of weeks - and it's bloody dangerous out there on the road.

Our attitude needs changing,
Our licencing & testing system needs changing.
Our Garda need to get their arse onto the road (Mandatory 1st years garda service on traffic duty) .
Our government need to stop playing with the traffic issues and deal with it once and for all.

I am really so sick of hearing about this daily for years now.

BrianD

Sad to hear that woman died from her injuries sustained from the collision on the M50.

I see Ivor Callely is calling for safety barriers on the M50 to be fitted within "weeks" even if they are only temporary!! Is this guy for real?? Talk about not being able to see the wood from the trees! Perhaps Mr Callerly might make a call for a reduction in the blood alcohol limit with rigorous random breath testing. Now that would make a difference to the carnage on our roads. Don't insult the travelling public with your lazy calls for safety barriers - do something that actually makes a difference!

Looking at the barriers that have retrofitted onto other m-ways, I wonder what difference they would have made in this case. The only difference would probably have been that the injuries and fatalities would have taken place in the south bound lane.

I wonder the NRA have data on the number of cross over incidents that take place each year on Irish motorways?

GreeBo

What is the point of a median if there is no barrier?

BrianD

It separates the two carriageways and prevents head on collisions from overtaking which would occur if the both carriageways were adjacent to each other.

GreeBo

BrianD wrote:

It separates the two carriageways

to what end?

BrianD wrote:

prevents head on collisions from overtaking which would occur if the both carriageways were adjacent to each other.

surely just the hedge does this?

sliabh

[QUOTE=BrianD]It separates the two carriageways[/QUOTE]

GreeBo wrote:

to what end?

So that when you are overtaking you don't cross the median into the oncoming traffic lane. This is the major safety benefit of dual carraigeways and motorways.

GreeBo

sliabh wrote:

So that when you are overtaking you don't cross the median into the oncoming traffic lane.

so you only cross it when you are out of control and crashing?

sliabh

GreeBo wrote:

so you only cross it when you are out of control and crashing?

Or as I have seen, doing a u-turn to avoid a tail back

Conspiracy

I heard something about the driver that crossed over onto the wrong side of the road.

Allegedly, he was weaving through the traffic on his own side of the road at high speed - one weave went wrong - and he weaved right across through the centre?

Any one hear anything about that?