(17-06-2010, 08:58 AM)cgallafant Wrote: Briefly explain the purpose of a risk assessment. Outline a suitable process for risk assessment. [5 marks]
To me JCB's was the best re
Purpose. IJPs was good but should have included likelihood and consequences; it then went on too much into the ALARP triangle- if this was supposed to be dealing with the next section on
Process then it wasn't obvious and needed to be wider. Begins to look like regurgitation of pre-learned text which does not go down well with examiners.
JF's was brief but covered
Purpose well (again should have mentioned likelihood and consequence though) but said little on
Process.
RB's did sound a bit too much jargon but actually I quite liked it, but I'd have integrated the initial definition within the first paragraph.
I thought that RB's answer was best re
Process- this is one time where the question really was asking for something such as the Yellow Book 7 stage process and rattling that off is perfectly ok because it does fit what was asked. It would have been best to have incorporated some info re Qualitiative and Quantative risk assessments from JCB's answer.
Also don't only focus on direct immediate harm to people; think about Mexico and Deepwater Horizon- it isn't just those killed in the immediate explosion that have been severely affected and widen definition of safety losses.
There are analogies in the rail sector. Similarly there was an incident a few years ago in the Morpeth area where a high speed train went across a CCTV level crossing operating in degraded mode and the barriers were raised just as trhe train arrived; I believe there were no significant injuries but the image of cars getting out of the way seconds before the train hurtles over the crossing certainly is not something that does the industry any good- a near miss if there ever was one.
2 of the 4 answers hardly had anything on process.
Quote:
A road needs to cross a railway line, they are both at the same level and a level crossing (also known as a grade crossing) is proposed. Taking into account road traffic density, frequency of train services, cost and safety, what measures would need to be considered to protect trains and road traffic (including pedestrians)? [15 marks]
General- This was the heart of the question and to my reading required a list of possible measures that could be adopted and then discussion, based on risk assessment, of which measures should be adopted at particular sites (as defined by their level or road traffic and rail traffic). I'd therefore have expected firstly some discussion of the risk that they were intended to prevent / reduce (to get an idea of the safety benefit that they may achieve). Secondly I'd expect this benefit set against their cost so need an assessment as to whether each mitigation measure were cheap, moderate or extremely expensive to implement.
I would expect something like this form of presentation
i.e. the question was designed to show that the student DID REALLY UNDERSTAND what they wrote re the purpose of risk assessment and the overview process of setting about doing it. Unfortunately this certainly wasn't evident from the answers offered; the whole idea seems to have whistled past everybody. The examiner already knows that the candidate claims to understand what was needed only the find later that when they are put to the test they completely muff it!
About as useful as having a car where the starter motor enthusiastically turns over the engine at the first turn of the key, but then there re is no spark in the cylinders to get the engine itself to fire up for the vehicle to provide functional transport. A starter motor is a vital but on its own doesn't get the car very far....
IJP: Seemed to know their stuff on level crossing provision but it was a bit rambling; hard to readily see how the individual measues were related to all the various factors requested. More of a description of various forms of crossing. The diagram really didn't add anything, but actually it
could have been a good idea had it been used more; I could envisage a diagram with lots of possible measures, drawn given # numbers and then
a table with these # numbers, brief description of the measure and then further columns headed road traffic density/ frequency of trains / cost / safety and then in the intersections a comment whether measure would be inappropriate / undesireable/ possible / recommended etc in conditions of High/Medium/Low for whatever that column heading stated.
RB: I think that it started reasonably well but it then seemed to become more like a descriptive piece answering some other question.
Also there seemed to be confusion between needing a person to confirm that a crossing is clear (most CCTVs can be automatically lowered and raised) and the actual operation of barriers / gates physically on site.
I am afraid that is seemed to drift off into the marginally relevant-
remember to keep to the question asked AND the syllabus of the module- this was a module 1 question on risk assessment using the level crossing example to illustrate in a practical application, but the answer seemed to be for a mod3 or mod5 question about the technical and operational requirements for level crossings. Not totally unrelated and various elements of what was writtten could have been useful, but not going to score many marks presented in the way it was.
JF: Extremely brief- only considered one type of crossing. Again fell into the trap of not really answering the question asked at all. Given that there were 15 marks for this section, I am afraid that the question as a whole would have been a complete disaster for the candidate; however good the other question in the question paper, I think that this would be a certain fail of the exam.
JCB; This answer wasn't great but at least it was the best presented list of possible measures, and some of them even mentioned the relevant factors, but again no hint of any risk assessment. Similarly get the impression that we have another candidate who doesn't actually know much about level crossings- whether the comment on CCTV was meant to apply to stop lamp camera CCTV on any form of protected crossing or being confused with CCTV crossings I am unsure but give the benefit of the doubt. However the idea that whether a crossing is protected by controlled signals or be within an auto section is dependant on whether or not the road is busy is horribly oversimplistic at best / plain wrong at worst.
Quote:
For cases where protection is required, what determines whether grade separation (with a bridge or a tunnel) is justified? [5 marks]
IJP: Concentrated too much on a history at the site; the idea of risk assessment is to provide on the basis of the highest risk, not as a knee jerk reaction to where an incident has happened, although I do accept that there is politial pressure and this does need to be factored in. Much to its credit, a minor railway in the UK which has suffered a couple of fatalities on its crossings due to road user error / negligence has launched an upgrade programme and they didn't actually start with either of those sites; they assessed the risk and are doing them in priority order.
Overall thought this wasn't too bad, but perhaps should have at least mentioned that there are also other benefits of closing the crossing: less trespass risk, better horizontal / vertical alignment of track giving perhaps faster running and less maintenance, avoids causes of posible delays to trains, reduces ongoing maintenance and renewal costs for the level crossing- but of course needs to be offset against that for the bridge etc), no interruptions to road traffic (commercial benefit to economy as less lost time etc). To balance that there could be disbenefits- is it even practicable to divert through traffic into tunnel or over bridge without demolishing people's homes in areas where there is little space such as level crossings in towns?
RB: This seems to start by quoting the rules / laid down policy. Certainly you could mention any legislative constraints, but the rules don't come from nowhere (let's hope); they themselves have been justified and it is that which the question is really asking.
JF: Again brief- did at least mention both safety and reduction in mutual interference of traffic flows. Cost was mentioned but almost inversely- seems to suggest keeping level crossings unless the cost of doing so is very much greater than eliminating the risk!
JCB: Very superficial treatment, but very good final sentence.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am really surprised having looked at these answers; to me the question was far easier than the other ones by the same people at the same time. I'd have thought that most would have dealt far more with level crossings than degraded mode signalling facilities during the course of their work and certainly there is far more souce material available about level crossings to study.
A fair part of this question is pure Yellow Book- the biggest surprise is the almost total disconnect between the first part of the question and the rest. I am certain that the examiners when setting an exam peper don't write lots of bits of questions and then package them together into asssemblies that just happen to sum to 25 marks in a form of pick-and-mix or "buy a newspaper and get a chocolate bar free".
The first part of a question is a lead-in to the remainder, not something totally separate than just happens to be there to make up the numbers .
I haven't allocated marks per section, but there isn't one of these answers that I feel would warrant a pass and I don't think that most would get to Near Miss territory. IJP was the best of the bunch and perhaps if I extracted the 7 stage process from RB and a few choice moresels from the other two then I might get an answer that would have achieved a Pass.
This is disappointing when the
other question was done pretty reasonably by everyone. It has actually made me doubt myself and reevaluate, but having mulled over for a while I am still convinced. However I'd certainly be interested to hear if anyone thinks differently to me re how these answers would score or for someone to come up with another answer to this question.
The good thing is that I am not an examiner marking these candidates answers as I fear that, due to this question, I would not have many overall passes. My high credit/bordering distinction candidate on the other question would probably just about achieve an overall pass and perhaps there would be one other pass. A pass mark of 25% is worse than usual, but a pass rate of 50% rather better, so within the range of statistical accuracy (large on a small sample!) then this group of answers can be regarded as typical exam submissions I feel.
However it is still a good few months to the exam and hopefully by seeing how I react may give you an early insight to how an examiner may view your efforts, whilst there is still time to address the issue.
