Last week our engineers were obsessing over the technical details of this crash in Tasmania involving a light pole and roadside barrier.
(Thankfully, we understand no one was seriously injured.)
From the footage, it appears the white ute has pocketed into the light post. The rail then flattens the cab. It is a bit hard to see at full speed, so look closely (we slowed it down for you)
We quickly obtained post-crash site photos and that is when the discussion really opened up.
The reinstatement appears to have:
- Not fixed the kerbing
- Not filled the void created by post movement during the crash
- Used two different barrier posts within the same system
- Reinstalled the light pole and barrier in the same location, ready for the next pocketing event
This is probably symptomatic of the pressures on maintenance crews to simply reinstate. Get it back up, get traffic moving, and move to the next job.
They are unlikely to be trained or licensed to assess barrier system performance in a Safe System sense (BTW – where are we at with ASHTAS barrier licensing in Tasmania?).
They are just doing what the process tells them to do.
And that is the point. While we don’t think this is the highest risk issue in the network, it is a very clear example of how our processes and governance structures are often not set up to: learn from crashes, fix systemic design issues, or improve the environment before the next impact.
Are our asset management, design, maintenance and safety governance systems are genuinely aligned with a Safe System mindset?
———-
Follow Safe System Solutions Pty Ltd on LinkedIn for more updates and road safety industry news.