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

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.

"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.

"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

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)

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.

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

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

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.

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