We have just received a letter from Simon d'Albertanson, HM Inspector of Railways, regarding the chalk mine gallery underneath the trackbed in the Charlton railway tunnel. The Inspector sides entirely with Network Rail, concluding that there is no significant danger to the travelling public - a breathtakingly reckless conclusion to arrive at given the concise account of 1849 and our advice on the matter (informed by 25 years investigating chalk mines). If this is considered libel, then perhaps that will lead to a healthy airing of the matter in front of a judge - who will doubtless have a more open mind than those inside the UK railway industry, who continue to display an institutionalised cavalier attitude to the safety of the travelling public.
The risk-based approach to management of railway safety has largely been imported into Network Rail by chairman Rick Haythornthwaite, who was formerly chair of the Risk & Regulatory Advisory Council. In his business model, the value of a human life is arrived at using a pocket calculator and a balance sheet. The Inspector of Railways sadly goes along with this sinister mathematical callousness, instead of displaying the refreshing scepticism so urgently needed to deal with a largely unaccountable and secret organisation such as Network Rail.
Here is a verbatim copy of the Inspector's letter:
29 March 2011
Dear Mr Clinton
Dangerous Tunnels in Charlton
Thank you for your correspondence on the Charlton Tunnels. I have inspected Network Rail’s recent examination records for this area for both the trackbed and the tunnels which might be affected by the presence of an underground chamber in this location. A review of the relevant available information recorded since 1849 does not indicate any structural issues which might indicate the presence of an underground chamber.
The report in the Kentish Mercury for 1849 therefore appears to be the only source for the presence of an underground chamber in the vicinity of the railway. The reference to the Hanging Woods indicates that the Tunnel referred to is Charlton Lane which appears to be confirmed by examination of maps of the time, however, the exact location of the ‘cave’ is uncertain. The article seems to suggest that the railway passes over the breadth of one of the chambers. Unfortunately, it does not say whether the chambers were subsequently filled in and there does not appear to be any other information relating to this. Network Rail’s tunnel management strategy for this tunnel considered the 1849 article and as you know some trial drillings have been carried out in the past to locate it without success.
In my view, Network Rail have carried out all actions that could reasonably be expected of them under Health and Safety Law to manage risk at Charlton Lane Tunnel, including the possibility of an unknown void beneath it which includes risk based periodic examination of the structure. If you have any further information which might assist them to locate the ‘cave’ referred to in the 1849 article I would ask you to let Network Rail know so that they can take this into account in their management strategy for the structure.
I am satisfied Network Rail have suitable measures in place for the examination and maintenance of the tunnel and therefore do not propose to take the matter further unless new information comes to light.
Yours sincerely
Simon d'Albertanson
Here is the reply I sent to Mr d'Albertanson:
Dear Mr d'Albertanson,
Thank you for your letter detailing your position and intent regarding the old mine gallery under the railway tunnel at Charlton.
Your decision is inevitably flawed by the narrow terms of reference within which HSE/ORR operates.
I was shocked by how closely you have aligned yourself with Network Rail's position. How many more people must die on the railways of Britain before a genuinely responsible safety culture is introduced? Your innuendo about the small-scale drillings that were conducted some years ago being somehow sufficient is very unfortunate.
There are basically two approaches to the Charlton mine gallery issue:
The Network Rail approach:
Risk-based approach. Risk defined by lack of subsidence in the tunnel/s and lack of information about the location of the mine gallery. The lack of information is used as a justification for inaction. Rejection of the notion that the 1849 mine gallery may be just a part of a much larger mine working, other galleries of which may also undermine the railway. Do nothing. Wait until a disaster happens before action is taken.
The safe and sensible approach:
Definite and concise historic reference to mine gallery underneath the railway tunnel discovered in 1849 archives. Suspicion that the mine gallery is an orphaned gallery from a much larger chalk mine. Thorough geotechnical investigation launched in both railway tunnels and section between tunnels to attempt to find the 1849 mine gallery. Once 1849 gallery is located, it is entered and the fallen sand at the end is dug away for a considerable distance (supporting the roof to protect workers) to prove whether it is an old slope-drift entrance to a single isolated adit in chalk, or connects to further mine passageway. Even if it is a single adit, the original quarry face must be traced and exposed to see if there are neighbouring individual adits also driven into the chalk. The overall aim is to locate any and all mine galleries under Hanging Wood, and carry out an accurate underground survey. Roof falls/blockages are plotted and appraised to see where more galleries may be located. Result: a thorough understanding of mining activity under Hanging Wood, and subsequent remedial action undertaken if necessary in certain sections of mine gallery. Travelling public and railway staff safeguarded to a very high degree of certainty when passing through the tunnels by train.
Even if the 1849 gallery has been safely locally filled directly beneath the trackbed in the past, its location must still be found and the mine gallery re-opened in order to explore the mine and search for additional galleries not found in 1849 which may undermine the railway at other unknown locations in or around Hanging Wood.
*Although I refer to the "1849 gallery" it may actually have been dug decades or even centuries before 1849.
==================================
I will continue to pursue other avenues in order to force Network Rail to launch a full and through geotechnical investigation monitored and evaluated by truly independent engineers who will report their findings to me and my colleague.
Regards,
Dominic Clinton
Yesterday I reviewed the official report into the Moorgate tube disaster of 28 February 1975, as well as looking through contemporary photographs of the rescue effort - much bravery was in evidence amid the harrowing crush of metal and human bodies. Forty-three people were killed at the scene, with several more dying later from their injuries. I'll be the first to admit that the circumstances are not the same as the Charlton tunnels, but it's clear that a disaster
in a tunnel is something to be avoided at all costs; the pictures below speak for themselves.
It is not something to be risk-assessed on a pocket calculator.
