Lumo overspeed incident at Peterborough (17/04/2022)

[brad465]

Can those with injuries and/or damaged equipment claim back subsequent costs for these if serious enough, or is this too early to ask?

 

[D6130]

I would think that the track and pointwork involved would have had to be examined for possibly damage as well.

 

[gazr]

Would the driver have had to be relieved at Peterborough for drink/drug test? If this doesn't fall under the category for such a thing, why not?! I'm guessing he/she was quite shook up by the incident as well to continue? Where would Lumo find a replacement driver? Although the passengers on board have every right to be upset, they should also be thanking their lucky stars it wasn't much more serious.

 

[Watershed]

Can those with injuries and/or damaged equipment claim back subsequent costs for these if serious enough, or is this too early to ask?

Yes, they will be able to. Although I suspect they may be disappointed at how little they're entitled to.

 

[TheEdge]

Flashing yellows into both platforms 1 and 2 from the Up Fast, and thus no TPWS protection if the train's received the flashing yellow sequence.

So either the driver has really really messed up and ignored two restrictive aspects OR there has been a significant wrong side signal failure.

Those seem to me to be the obvious causes.

 

[HST43257]

So either the driver has really really messed up and ignored two restrictive aspects OR there has been a significant wrong side signal failure.

Those seem to me to be the obvious causes.

Trains have run through since so there surely there can’t have been a signal failure.

 

[43096]

Would the driver have had to be relieved at Peterborough for drink/drug test? If this doesn't fall under the category for such a thing, why not?! I'm guessing he/she was quite shook up by the incident as well to continue? Where would Lumo find a replacement driver? Although the passengers on board have every right to be upset, they should also be thanking their lucky stars it wasn't much more serious.

It looks like the train went through to London, looking at RTT. The back working was cancelled due to train crew issues, likely to be due to the driver being taken off duty for post incident investigation and drug/alcohol screening. Presumably the train would also be met by "engineer with the laptop" to carry out OTMR and CCTV downloads on the train.

 

[Watershed]

So either the driver has really really messed up and ignored two restrictive aspects OR there has been a significant wrong side signal failure.

Those seem to me to be the obvious causes.

The fact that the line is still open (rather than being closed for forensic investigation) gives a strong indication, I'd have said...

 

[D6130]

Would the driver have had to be relieved at Peterborough for drink/drug test? If this doesn't fall under the category for such a thing, why not?! I'm guessing he/she was quite shook up by the incident as well to continue? Where would Lumo find a replacement driver?

I would have thought so. Maybe LUMO diverted the booked driver for 1S95 to Peterborough to bring the train to London.

 

[cambsy]

Looking at Real Time Trains, at arrivals, into Kings Cross, everything seems to be running normally, from the North and Peterborough, so the incident doesnt seem to have damaged the track in the vicinity, or been signalling failure, as services running normally through the area, so maybe not as serious as we first thought.

 

[brad465]

I would think that the track and pointwork involved would have had to be examined for possibly damage as well.

All services through Peterborough are running fine at the moment, so it must not be an urgent issue, unless they inspected it already and found it was fine.

 

[HST43257]

I can’t see how this can be anything but driver error. However, I also can’t see why it was routed into Platform 1 because Platform 3 was clear. Maybe they were letting the 0754 off Newcastle re-overtake it after its delay earlier on

 

[D6130]

I also can’t see why it was routed into Platform 1 because Platform 3 was clear. Maybe they were letting the 0754 off Newcastle re-overtake it after its delay earlier on

The same speed restrictions would have applied had the train been routed into Platform 3.

 

[Right Away]

Flashing yellows into both platforms 1 and 2 from the Up Fast, and thus no TPWS protection if the train's received the flashing yellow sequence.

So either the driver has really really messed up and ignored two restrictive aspects OR there has been a significant wrong side signal failure.

Those seem to me to be the obvious causes.

It is also possible that even with flashing aspects provided, the train was checked down before the route was set through platform one. If it hadn't been noticed by the driver that the route had cleared towards platform one instead of platform 3 they could accelerate to a speed as if routed through platform three.

 

[Darandio]

The same speed restrictions would have applied had the train been routed into Platform 3.

Why? Platform 3 is on the up fast is it not?

 

[cambsy]

Im thinking, that there might have been some excessive speed through the points, but not 80mph, as im sure if this been the speed, trains would not be running normally, through Peterborough, so im airing on the side of caution, and while there been an incident, its not of the seriousness, thats its been blown up to by twitter etc, the ride through the points, might have been rough etc, but i think its more like 40 etc through the points, rather than 80mph.

 

[TheBigD]

The same speed restrictions would have applied had the train been routed into Platform 3.

It wouldn't. Platform 3 is on the up fast and has a 105mph linespeed.

 

[D6130]

Why? Platform 3 is on the up fast is it not?

I thought that was Platform 4. What number is the Up bay?

Edit: Sorry....I was looking at an out-of-date Quail atlas. Would I be correct in thinking, therefore, that the Up Bay (Formerly Platform 1) has now gone and that the Slow Line Platforms (formerly 2 & 3) are now numbered 1 & 2, with new new Up Fast Platform being 3?

 

[43096]

I thought that was Platform 4. What number is the Up bay?

There is no up bay. See the current layout in post #13: https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/lumo-incident.230537/post-5620190

 

[gazr]

If the LUMO was looped into P1 to allow the late running train behind it to overtake, why do it at Peterborough? LUMO not booked to stop, but LNER was. Seems unusual move from the signalling side of things.

 

[Darandio]

Im thinking, that there might have been some excessive speed through the points, but not 80mph, as im sure if this been the speed, trains would not be running normally, through Peterborough, so im airing on the side of caution, and while there been an incident, its not of the seriousness, thats its been blown up to by twitter etc, the ride through the point might have been rough and bouncy, but im sure if a train had come through points at 80mph and nearly derailed, that trains would not bee running normally through Peterborough.

We know everything is running normally now but what about in the immediate 90 minutes after the incident?

 

[Efini92]

The same speed restrictions would have applied had the train been routed into Platform 3.

It’s 105mph through platform 3, there’s an extract from the sectional appendix on the first page.

It is also possible that even with flashing aspects provided, the train was checked down before the route was set through platform one. If it hadn't been noticed by the driver that the route had cleared towards platform one instead of platform 3 they could accelerate to a speed as if routed through platform three.

Would the system allow flashing yellows into three? It goes against the principal of the route being set for a diverging junction.

 

[TheBigD]

I thought that was Platform 4. What number is the Up bay?

There is no up bay. And the former platform 1 could only be accessed from the South. That closed around 2013 when Peterborough was recontrolled and platforms 6 and 7 added. What was the former platform 1 was abolished and the current platform 1 (used to be platform 2) extended southwards over where the points for the up bay used to be. This allows platform 1 to accommodate a 12 car 700 and a 2 car 15x for the Lincoln service at the same time.

 

[bengley]

Im thinking, that there might have been some excessive speed through the points, but not 80mph, as im sure if this been the speed, trains would not be running normally, through Peterborough, so im airing on the side of caution, and while there been an incident, its not of the seriousness, thats its been blown up to by twitter etc, the ride through the points, might have been rough etc, but i think its more like 40 etc through the points, rather than 80mph.

Do you work in the industry to be able to make such a judgment?

 

[HST43257]

We know everything is running normally now but what about in the immediate 90 minutes after the incident?

Everything got through relatively normally. One GN went into 3 rather than 1 but I see nothing otherwise.

 

[bramling]

I thought that was Platform 4. What number is the Up bay?

Bear in mind platform numbers have changed at Peterborough. The original bay platform 1 is abolished. Platform 1 was formerly Platform 2. Platform 2 was formerly Platform 3. Platform 3 is the new one facing the up fast. Having been used to the old setup, I still find this hard to get my head around - especially TL services often using platform 1 now which used to be fairly rare.

 

[SouthStand]

Do you work in the industry to be able to make such a judgment?

You don't need to work in the industry to make an educated guess.

 

[D6130]

There is no up bay. And the former platform 1 could only be accessed from the South. That closed around 2013 when Peterborough was recontrolled and platforms 6 and 7 added. What was the former platform 1 was abolished and the current platform 1 (used to be platform 2) extended southwards over where the points for the up bay used to be. This allows platform 1 to accommodate a 12 car 700 and a 2 car 15x for the Lincoln service at the same time.

Thanks....see my edit for post #48.

 

[Right Away]

It’s 105mph through platform 3, there’s an extract from the sectional appendix on the first page.


Would the system allow flashing yellows into three? It goes against the principal of the route being set for a diverging junction.

I was thinking along the lines of brought down to a red while the signaller was making their regulating decision with the signal then clearing into platform one.

 

[TheBigD]

If the LUMO was looped into P1 to allow the late running train behind it to overtake, why do it at Peterborough? LUMO not booked to stop, but LNER was. Seems unusual move from the signalling side of things.

Lumo was running early. Train was to be regulated to allow the LNER service to preceed it from Fletton Junction.