Waterford Station closes after landslide!

cbl593h wrote: »

Cue the IR apologists, "shur twas an act of god"............ Minimal maintenance, Cork station canopy part 2.

So should have Irish Rail installed a drainage system or waterproofed the side of an entire hill just in case?

cbl593h wrote: »

IÉ have a duty of care to customers/staff/contractors. You take reasonable precautions to make sure rockfaces/platform canopies/viaducts/bridges don't collapse.

Reasonable being the operative word. Acts of God, extreme weather, shale cliffs and external occupiers of said land are another thing.

We'll forgive me, but that rock face is probably sandstone and therefore is not the most stable.

If no one in CIE had ever thought to have it shored up then that is negligent.

A bit like when the bridge near Malahide collapsed; that was so nearly a disaster with loss of life, and was largely because CIE hadn't bothered to check it, and had lost the plans anyway.

Well companies like CIE employ many people these days, in risk assessment, whose job is to predict things that might happen and take steps to prevent them.

To foresee hindsight, if you will.

This is a very important duty when you're dealing with the safety of the public.

So if that mechanism has failed, in this case, Malahide or others, then something is wrong.

Sligo Quay wrote: »

Now ask me anything about shipping.....

What is a ship?

Sligo Quay wrote: »

Safest form of transport,

Try telling that to Jack Dawson, Robinson Crueso or Lord Nelson :pac:

flazio wrote: »

Is this the same station that had it's platforms flooded last year?

Yes the platforms are flooded this evening but not on the same scale.

They removed the cliff face danger along the road by creating a series of tiers.

Who did, that still wouldn't stop a landslide, did they not think about doing it all correctly. The flood defence along the quay has increased flooding in the station so another half arsed job.

flyingsnail wrote: »

They could always go the long way around :P

Or go back to road and no more contract for IE.

Fred Swanson wrote: »

This post has been deleted.

Only Ballina-Waterford is cleared for liners, no other lines are allowed to take them without clearance.

Trick of the Tail wrote: »

I've been there many times. It was obvious that the rockface there hadn't been looked at or maintained in an age.

Its not a freak accident, its an occurrence that could have been avoided if IE bothered doing routine maintenance and safety surveys.

If it has never happened before why would you mess with something that is not broken. If the council felt the need to fix the road side why not fix the railway side. If safety was top they would of completed all the works.

Not exactly the same but all the damage on the west cost was "preventable" if action was taken....the only reason people have issue with this is because it happened with IE, if it was on a side of a road nobody would say a word.

Losty Dublin wrote: »

Suitable engine availability is another issue. 201 Class loco's are not allowed south of Arklow bar for an emergency. There are not passed for the South Wexford line and they are certainly not passed out for the Barrow bridge.

In any case, I would wager that either station at Rosslare hasn't a long enough passing loop for a runaround manoeuvre to take place.

South Wexford line could never handle the payload of the DFDS service, they could always find an 071 as 201's very rarely operate to Waterford. One return trip in the last 4 or 5 months.

In the same way the Malahide bridge collapse was due to negligence and lack of maintenance.

That had never happened before - doesn't mean it was ok that a train full of people nearly fell into the sea.

Some of the replies here are off the wall! The cutting never collapsed onto the roadway but was reinforced all the same. It appears the ah sure it will be grand approach was applied at the train station and the inevitable happened. I've never been knocked down crossing the road does that mean I shouldn't look both ways?

The comparison to the west would be acceptable if roads, piers, promenades etc. hadn't been closed but they were as the damage/danger was anticipated. The problem I have is that IE should of known the rock face was vulnerable we had heavy rain and poor weather conditions leading up to the collapse and I've no doubt that they were factors but IE seem to be blind to the danger given the difference in its appearance along the roadside and track bed.

If when the RAIU report is published it's found that everything in relation to risk assessment and mitigation was up to an acceptable standard and recent inspections where performed properly and found no reason for concern then fair enough but for now I'm skeptical.

corktina wrote: »

the Malahide bridge collapse was caused by the sea scouring out the foundations.Only easy to see with hindsight.....

Have you read the published report? It's here http://www.raiu.ie/download/pdf/accident_malahide.pdf Members of the public raised concerns re scouring under the bridge piers and ultimately IE inspection and knowledge where found very wanting it was plain to see for anyone who knew when and what they were looking at.

Waterford is re-opening this afternoon.