|
Northern line near collision
What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident
correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6751809.stm Paul |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 1:34 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote: What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6751809.stm Paul The Service (Line) Controller made a Code Red to the trains in the area. It was a re-numbering of trains that didn't quite go to plan. |
Northern line near collision
"Paul Scott" wrote in message ... What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6751809.stm Paul I had the same thought, initially. Then I remembered a map I had seen of the Camden Town junction. I think you will find that the configuration simply does not permit two trains into the same tunnel in different directions. I suspect that what happened is that as one train approached the merge point another train was alredy occupying the track going in the same direction but from the "other" branch. |
Northern line near collision
"chunky munky" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 14, 1:34 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6751809.stm Paul The Service (Line) Controller made a Code Red to the trains in the area. It was a re-numbering of trains that didn't quite go to plan. Presumably a 'Code Red' is an emergency stop. Does a 'renumbering' include trains reversing short of original destination or something? Was this as scary as the BBC suggest then, or was it protected by the signalling system? Paul |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 1:56 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote: "chunky munky" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 14, 1:34 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6751809.stm Paul The Service (Line) Controller made a Code Red to the trains in the area. It was a re-numbering of trains that didn't quite go to plan. Presumably a 'Code Red' is an emergency stop. Does a 'renumbering' include trains reversing short of original destination or something? Was this as scary as the BBC suggest then, or was it protected by the signalling system? Paul Sorry I didn't explain it properly. A Code Red is for all trains to stop immediatly. The signalling system did not prevent this from happening. The re-numbering involved the train still heading in the same direction, but to a different destination, as part of a re-numbering with another train (that also had its number and destination changed) |
Northern line near collision
On 14 Jun, 13:34, "Paul Scott" wrote:
What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... Yes. But there's nothing to stop a driver getting into a train and setting off in the wrong direction. There was no SPAD in the conventional sense. BRB Class 465. |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 1:34 pm, "Paul Scott"
wrote: What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6751809.stm There's an actual description of what happenned he http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/...wn_station.cfm It implies the driver tried to go southbound when they were meant to continue north to High Barnet. U |
Northern line near collision
Mr Thant wrote:
On Jun 14, 1:34 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6751809.stm There's an actual description of what happenned he http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/...wn_station.cfm It implies the driver tried to go southbound when they were meant to continue north to High Barnet. U Evening Standard says the driver was on train a, with destination a and was signalled inadvertently into the 'wrong branch' and then asked to change trains over to train b and continue with it to his original destination a so the driver walked through the platform interchange but got in the wrong end and went the wrong way down the tunnel. I would think changing trains like this is an unusual thing to ask a driver to do but the bigger question for me is how can a train for destination a end up in wrong platform/tunnel? Isnt signalling supposed to make such things impossible? Im quite ignorant here of the technicalities of the ability of the line controller to manually over-ride things etc but in my ignorance I assumed the signalling was all automatic based on some giant computerised timetable... Please help me understand (gently though, Im just a passenger) mysteryflyer |
Northern line near collision
On 14 Jun, 15:28, Mystery Flyer wrote:
Isnt signalling supposed to make such things impossible? Im quite ignorant here of the technicalities of the ability of the line controller to manually over-ride things etc but in my ignorance I assumed the signalling was all automatic based on some giant computerised timetable... If everything works as planned, the signalling should prevent it. However, railway signalling is designed to prevent *unsafe* situations from arising. A train ending up on the wrong route isn't really unsafe, merely inconvenient (with certain exceptions, for example if the train is too large to fit into a tunnel). In this case, it's possible that a signaller pressed the wrong button, or that the train was carrying an incorrect description at the control room. The driver will receive an indication of which route is set, but it's quite easy for him not to notice that the wrong indication is displayed - especially somewhere like Camden Town. We don't know why the wrong route was set, and AFAIK we also don't know if the driver had queried it and been told to continue in order to save time. None of this is unsafe in itself, though it will cause delay and inconvenience to passengers. In essence, it shouldn't happen, but human nature means mistakes will occasionally happen and we just have to learn to deal with it. |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 3:28 pm, Mystery Flyer wrote:
I would think changing trains like this is an unusual thing to ask a driver to do but the bigger question for me is how can a train for destination a end up in wrong platform/tunnel? Because the wrong route was chosen for the train by whatever person and/or arcane piece of equipment decides such things on the Northern. Isnt signalling supposed to make such things impossible? No. The signalling is there to make sure whatever route trains are given, they don't hit each other. U |
Northern line near collision
"Mr Thant" wrote in message
ups.com... There's an actual description of what happenned he http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/...wn_station.cfm It implies the driver tried to go southbound when they were meant to continue north to High Barnet. Interesting that an incident which had no direct consequences should appear so instantly on the RAIB website. It led me to peruse the rules they publish about what they need to be notified of, and how quickly (all nicely linked from the website). I pondered long on what category this incident fell into (which apparently required immediate notification).. I couldn't find any relevant category (no derailment, no long-term blockage, no injuries, no expensive damage) .. until I noticed that Category 1(9) (the last category requiring immediate notification) reads: ======== 1(9) Accidents or incidents which could have lead to deaths or serious injuries or 2m euros worth of damage to trains, infrastructure or environment, but did not do so. If in doubt notify. ======== I find it difficult to think of any incident which wouldn't fall into such a category - pretty much rendering all the other categories irrelevant. I wonder how it's supposed to be interpreted in practice.. -- Walter Mann |
Northern line near collision
"chunky munky" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 14, 1:56 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: "chunky munky" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 14, 1:34 pm, "Paul Scott" wrote: What might have happened here then - have the BBC described the incident correctly, or were the brakes applied by the operation of the tripcock? Surely the Camden town junctions don't allow trains in opposite directions to meet, thats the whole point of all the branch tunnels... http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6751809.stm Paul The Service (Line) Controller made a Code Red to the trains in the area. It was a re-numbering of trains that didn't quite go to plan. Presumably a 'Code Red' is an emergency stop. Does a 'renumbering' include trains reversing short of original destination or something? Was this as scary as the BBC suggest then, or was it protected by the signalling system? Paul Sorry I didn't explain it properly. A Code Red is for all trains to stop immediatly. The signalling system did not prevent this from happening. The re-numbering involved the train still heading in the same direction, but to a different destination, as part of a re-numbering with another train (that also had its number and destination changed) From RAIB web site: "At approx 17:35 hrs a northbound Northern Line train was incorrectly signalled into the High Barnet platform at Camden Town when it was scheduled to go to Edgware. To minimise passenger delay the following High Barnet train was signalled into the Edgware platform, and arrangements were made to exchange passengers and crews between the two trains. When the train in the High Barnet platform was ready to depart it set off in a southerly direction for a short distance; the driver saw the lights of the next northbound train, which was standing at a signal, and stopped the train." A nice clear explanation for the layman Paul S |
Northern line near collision
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:52:50 +0100, "Walter Mann"
wrote: "Mr Thant" wrote in message oups.com... There's an actual description of what happenned he http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/...wn_station.cfm It implies the driver tried to go southbound when they were meant to continue north to High Barnet. Interesting that an incident which had no direct consequences should appear so instantly on the RAIB website. It led me to peruse the rules they publish about what they need to be notified of, and how quickly (all nicely linked from the website). I pondered long on what category this incident fell into (which apparently required immediate notification).. I couldn't find any relevant category (no derailment, no long-term blockage, no injuries, no expensive damage) .. until I noticed that Category 1(9) (the last category requiring immediate notification) reads: This was in the evening rush hour so it was potentially disastrous. One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal at that end of the platform. ======== 1(9) Accidents or incidents which could have lead to deaths or serious injuries or 2m euros worth of damage to trains, infrastructure or environment, but did not do so. If in doubt notify. ======== I find it difficult to think of any incident which wouldn't fall into such a category - pretty much rendering all the other categories irrelevant. I wonder how it's supposed to be interpreted in practice.. |
Northern line near collision
Christopher A.Lee wrote:
This was in the evening rush hour so it was potentially disastrous. On a Sunday? ;-) |
Northern line near collision
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:57:44 GMT, "Jack Taylor"
wrote: Christopher A.Lee wrote: This was in the evening rush hour so it was potentially disastrous. On a Sunday? ;-) You're right, I didn't check the day. |
Northern line near collision
Walter Mann wrote:
======== 1(9) Accidents or incidents which could have lead to deaths or serious injuries or 2m euros worth of damage to trains, infrastructure or environment, but did not do so. If in doubt notify. ======== I find it difficult to think of any incident which wouldn't fall into such a category Hints and allegations? I'll be singing that all day now... |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 4:34 pm, Christopher A.Lee wrote:
One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal at that end of the platform. You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that must mean green"? What a dick. I hope he's fired just like any bus or truck driver would be if they drove the wrong way down a main road though I'm sure Bob Crowe will crawl out from under his rock at some point and try and blame LU or Metronet for it. B2003 |
Northern line near collision
"Boltar" wrote in message oups.com... On Jun 14, 4:34 pm, Christopher A.Lee wrote: One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal at that end of the platform. You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that must mean green"? What a dick. I hope he's fired just like any bus or truck driver would be if they drove the wrong way down a main road though I'm sure Bob Crowe will crawl out from under his rock at some point and try and blame LU or Metronet for it. Probably an ASLEF member. |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 5:32 pm, Ben wrote:
Walter Mann wrote: ======== 1(9) Accidents or incidents which could have lead to deaths or serious injuries or 2m euros worth of damage to trains, infrastructure or environment, but did not do so. If in doubt notify. ======== I find it difficult to think of any incident which wouldn't fall into such a category Hints and allegations? I'll be singing that all day now... Email tip offs? see http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources...07_Crofton.pdf Hobdenius |
Northern line near collision
In article .com,
Boltar writes One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal at that end of the platform. You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that must mean green"? Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing - means red. Having said that, I can't offhand think of any LU station that doesn't have a starting signal at the end of the platform. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: |
Northern line near collision
In article ,
Ben wrote: Walter Mann wrote: ======== 1(9) Accidents or incidents which could have lead to deaths or serious injuries or 2m euros worth of damage to trains, infrastructure or environment, but did not do so. If in doubt notify. ======== I find it difficult to think of any incident which wouldn't fall into such a category Hints and allegations? I'll be singing that all day now... Watch out for that boy ... no, the one in the bubble over there ... Nick -- http://www.leverton.org/blosxom ... So express yourself |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 9:20 pm, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote: In article .com, Boltar writes One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal at that end of the platform. You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that must mean green"? Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing - means red. Having said that, I can't offhand think of any LU station that doesn't have a starting signal at the end of the platform. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: There is a rumour that there was a Fixed Red Light but this was "bagged" over. Dont know about the associated train stop but within the past few months contractors working for Tube Lines have concreted one over in error that caused delays to the train service. Stations without station starters are Croxley (Southbound) and Chesham, some others do have them a fair way out of the platform. |
Northern line near collision
You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he
do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that must mean green"? Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing - means red. Um, actually, no signal means that whatever the last signal meant is still in effect. Like, y'know, yellow. -- Mark Brader | "Red lights are not my concern. Toronto | I am a driver, not a policeman." | --statement made after collision, 1853 |
Northern line near collision
In article .com, BRB
Class 465 writes However, railway signalling is designed to prevent *unsafe* situations from arising. A train ending up on the wrong route isn't really unsafe, merely inconvenient (with certain exceptions, for example if the train is too large to fit into a tunnel). And that sort of exception *is* catered for by the signalling (e.g. with height detectors connected to the signals). -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 9:37 pm, (Mark Brader) wrote:
You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that must mean green"? Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing - means red. Um, actually, no signal means that whatever the last signal meant is still in effect. Like, y'know, yellow. -- Mark Brader | "Red lights are not my concern. Toronto | I am a driver, not a policeman." | --statement made after collision, 1853 Not if it is in the opposite direction! |
Northern line near collision
Paul Scott quotes the RAIB web site:
"At approx 17:35 hrs a northbound Northern Line train was incorrectly signalled into the High Barnet platform at Camden Town when it was scheduled to go to Edgware. To minimise passenger delay the following High Barnet train was signalled into the Edgware platform, and arrangements were made to exchange passengers and crews between the two trains. When the train in the High Barnet platform was ready to depart it set off in a southerly direction for a short distance; the driver saw the lights of the next northbound train, which was standing at a signal, and stopped the train." On the Toronto subway system, it happens fairly regularly that the crew on one train will swap places with the crew on a train going the other way. I assume this is done in order that a crew without enough time remaining on-shift to work a full return trip can do a partial one and still finish at the right place. The TTC uses two-person crews, the guard riding two cars from the rear of each train and becoming the driver when the train reverses. So the swap-over is fairly fast if the trains reach the station at the same time *and* it's one where the layout allows the crew members to easily reach the opposite platform; otherwise it can take several minutes. Is it also a common practice in London for drivers to swap between trains for this reason? If so, it is easy to see how a mental lapse could cause this near-accident: a driver who changes en route to the train on the "opposite" platform is usually going to proceed the other way, but in this specific case it was the same way, not the other way. I remember another case in London of a near-accident due to an incorrect reversal. As I recall, this was on the Piccadilly Line at King's Cross St. Pancras, maybe around 1990. A driver was told to unload his passengers and reverse on the crossover, but he thought that he'd already passed the crossover before entering the station. So instead of pulling forward with the empty train to clear the points and then reversing, he reversed in the station. The signalling system did not prevent this unusual error, but the driver of the following train saw him coming and pinched the Drico wires to cut off the power and prevent a crash. -- Mark Brader, Toronto | "To err is human, but to error requires a computer." | -- Harry Lethall My text in this article is in the public domain. |
Northern line near collision
On 14 Jun, 21:20, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote: Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing - means red. Does it? No signal when there should be one, as you pointed out = unlit signal = red. |
Northern line near collision
On 14 Jun, 21:58, (Mark Brader) wrote:
On the Toronto subway system, it happens fairly regularly that the crew on one train will swap places with the crew on a train going the other way. It's fairly common on a number of systems; I've seen 'stock and crew' changes (as the practice is known in London) happen in Stockholm on a number of occasions. It tends to be used as a way of getting defective trains back to depots early, as well as sorting crews out after service interruptions. |
Northern line near collision
On 14 Jun, 13:34, "Paul Scott" wrote:
What might have happened here then 'London Underground insisted that such incidents, while worrying to the public, were "incredibly rare." ' Nice to know that LU apparantly sees no reason to feel worried itself. I'm not convinced that the driver of the stationery northbound train would be entirely indifferent to the unexpected approach of a train proceeding towards him from the north. Filling his pants would perhaps be a more likely scenario. Have there not also been "incredibly rare" cases of trains "running away" in the "wrong" direction unchecked because trainstop devices are set up on the premise that if trains are going to do something naughty they'll always have the courtesy to do it whilst proceeding forwards in the correct direction of travel? -- gordon |
Northern line near collision
Nick Leverton wrote:
1(9) Accidents or incidents Hints and allegations? Watch out for that boy ... no, the one in the bubble over there ... But have you noticed the way the camera follows you in slo-mo? |
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 11:17 pm, " wrote:
Have there not also been "incredibly rare" cases of trains "running away" in the "wrong" direction unchecked because trainstop devices are set up on the premise that if trains are going to do something naughty they'll always have the courtesy to do it whilst proceeding forwards in the correct direction of travel? Which is why all trains are being installed (or possibly have been by now, not sure) with rollback protection devices that will apply the emergency brakes if they roll backwards too far. Doesn't help if it's being driven from the wrong end, mind. U |
Northern line near collision
Paul Scott wrote:
From RAIB web site: "At approx 17:35 hrs a northbound Northern Line train was incorrectly signalled into the High Barnet platform at Camden Town when it was scheduled to go to Edgware. To minimise passenger delay the following High Barnet train was signalled into the Edgware platform, and arrangements were made to exchange passengers and crews between the two trains. When the train in the High Barnet platform was ready to depart it set off in a southerly direction for a short distance; the driver saw the lights of the next northbound train, which was standing at a signal, and stopped the train." I'm interested in the arrangements for exchanging passengers and crews between the two trains. Were the doors left open on both trains during this time? If so, are drivers allowed to leave their trains unsupervised while they carry out the swap? I didn't think so, in which case wouldn't it need a member of the station staff to "look after" the train, and hand over to the new driver when he arrived? Also, wouldn't the train have been left in northbound mode, with red lights to the rear and white lights at the front? Would it need a conscious change of that directional set-up to be able to drive southbound from the rear cab? -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) |
Northern line near collision
In article ,
Ben wrote: Nick Leverton wrote: 1(9) Accidents or incidents Hints and allegations? Watch out for that boy ... no, the one in the bubble over there ... But have you noticed the way the camera follows you in slo-mo? I'll be with you in a minute - this is a long distance call. Nick -- http://www.leverton.org/blosxom ... So express yourself |
Northern line near collision
What did he do, see there was no signal at all and just thought
"ooh, that must mean green"? Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing - means red. Um, actually, no signal means that whatever the last signal meant is still in effect. Like, y'know, yellow. Not if it is in the opposite direction! Ah, good point! -- Mark Brader, Toronto Premature generalization is the square root of all evil. |
Northern line near collision
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 16:27:32 +0100, "Paul Scott"
wrote: From RAIB web site: "At approx 17:35 hrs a northbound Northern Line train was incorrectly signalled into the High Barnet platform at Camden Town when it was scheduled to go to Edgware. To minimise passenger delay the following High Barnet train was signalled into the Edgware platform, and arrangements were made to exchange passengers and crews between the two trains. When the train in the High Barnet platform was ready to depart it set off in a southerly direction for a short distance; the driver saw the lights of the next northbound train, which was standing at a signal, and stopped the train." A nice clear explanation for the layman Does that mean the driver got in the cab at the wrong end of the train? |
Northern line near collision
Clive D. W. Feather wrote:
In article .com, BRB Class 465 writes However, railway signalling is designed to prevent *unsafe* situations from arising. A train ending up on the wrong route isn't really unsafe, merely inconvenient (with certain exceptions, for example if the train is too large to fit into a tunnel). And that sort of exception *is* catered for by the signalling (e.g. with height detectors connected to the signals). Has a height detector ever stopped a train? |
Northern line near collision
In article , Mark Brader
writes Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing - means red. Um, actually, no signal means that whatever the last signal meant is still in effect. Like, y'know, yellow. Okay. I was thinking in terms of LU two aspect signalling, where yellow simply means "the signal you can't see yet is red" and doesn't give an instruction of its own. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: |
Northern line near collision
|
Northern line near collision
On Jun 14, 11:49 pm, "Richard J." wrote:
Paul Scott wrote: From RAIB web site: "At approx 17:35 hrs a northbound Northern Line train was incorrectly signalled into the High Barnet platform at Camden Town when it was scheduled to go to Edgware. To minimise passenger delay the following High Barnet train was signalled into the Edgware platform, and arrangements were made to exchange passengers and crews between the two trains. When the train in the High Barnet platform was ready to depart it set off in a southerly direction for a short distance; the driver saw the lights of the next northbound train, which was standing at a signal, and stopped the train." I'm interested in the arrangements for exchanging passengers and crews between the two trains. Were the doors left open on both trains during this time? If so, are drivers allowed to leave their trains unsupervised while they carry out the swap? I didn't think so, in which case wouldn't it need a member of the station staff to "look after" the train, and hand over to the new driver when he arrived? Also, wouldn't the train have been left in northbound mode, with red lights to the rear and white lights at the front? Would it need a conscious change of that directional set-up to be able to drive southbound from the rear cab? -- Richard J. (to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address) So long as the train is secured and the keys removed this is okay and both Train Operators can swap over, after all the customers would want to be following the driver. Station staff probably were requested to attend, to assit the passengers. In the past during a stock and crew, especially at an unusual location send station staff to make sure that the Train Operator doesn't go wandering off the long way round, causing a much bigger delay! |
Northern line near collision
On 14 Jun, 21:37, chunky munky wrote:
On Jun 14, 9:20 pm, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the- train.demon.co.uk wrote: In article .com, Boltar writes One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal at that end of the platform. You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that must mean green"? Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing - means red. Having said that, I can't offhand think of any LU station that doesn't have a starting signal at the end of the platform. -- Clive D.W. Feather | Home: Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work: Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is: There is a rumour that there was a Fixed Red Light but this was "bagged" over. Dont know about the associated train stop but within the past few months contractors working for Tube Lines have concreted one over in error that caused delays to the train service. Stations without station starters are Croxley (Southbound) and Chesham, some others do have them a fair way out of the platform.- Hide quoted text - - Show quoted text - Sounds like a good old fashioned misunderstanding - motorman thought he had been told to take the train back south and assumed therefore it was a valid movement and that he had been given permission to depart. A similar incident happened a few years ago at somewhere like Euston, told to reverse his train (via shunt move) he simply walked to the opposite end cab and was already to head off wrong line - can't remember what stopped him. As a result fixed reds were hurriedly installed at all platform 'wrong' ends presumably with trainstops, but before starting in other direction they must check the tripcock is correctly primed, in this case it evidently wasn't. There would seem to be a gap in driver training. Rob |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 08:09 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk