On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 11:27:18 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote:


"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
.. .
On Mon, 14 Apr 2008 14:40:04 -0700 (PDT), Mr Thant
wrote:

On 14 Apr, 22:23, "Railsigns.co.uk" wrote:
There's an elevated Limit of Shunt signal at the Richmond end of the
Up platform (no. GB507). As you say, there are no routes reading up to
it. It's fitted with a trainstop and it's there to prevent trains
setting back wrong road to Richmond without authority.

And you can see a photo of it on page 15 of this 5 MB PDF:
http://www.irse.org.hk/chinese/newsl...ary%202007.pdf

And also a comprehensive explanation.

Including that the offending move (as done on at least two previous
occasions) being prevented is a train returning to Richmond "wrong
line" in error rather than proceeding past the crossover at the London
end of the station and using that crossover to return to Richmond on
the Down Line.

So is it exactly the sort of set up the RAIB revealed is not 'cost
effective' following the incident at Camden Town?

The circumstances were slightly different. IIRC Camden Town involved a
one-off incident of a driver setting off "wrong line" after forgetting
which way he and the train were facing while at Gunnersbury there was
a (repeated?) misunderstanding of an instruction from a remote
signaller concerning a train being sent back by the same route (but
not wrong line). I haven't got the details of the Camden Town incident
to hand but one thing possibly missed by the driver was that before he
set off he failed to check the platform starter; had he done so then
its absence should have indicated something was wrong. For practical
purposes he seems to have compounded the event by doing a one-man
"ding-ding and away".