Bletchley Derailment

[LNW-GW Joint]

The driver who brings the voyager up to Holyhead as 5D13 will either be a Liverpool based driver, or a Manchester based driver.
As for the 04:25 UP train (1v51) I believe the train stables overnight from 1D41 the day before. No idea on the driver though, possibly a hotel turn?

There are two early Voyager departures to Euston from HHD before 5D13 arrives at 0625 (which goes back as 1A13 at 0655).
They are at 0425 (1R13) and 0551 (1R24).
Both stable overnight at HHD.

 

[ukrob]

I'm sure at one point the drivers for these services were taxied from Liverpool.

 

[headshot119]

I'm sure at one point the drivers for these services were taxied from Liverpool.

I know the traincrew on 1J32 (Wrexham Down Voyager) get taxied back to Liverpool after the train arrives. Only the driver takes it back to Crewe.

 

[notadriver]

Just wanted to say : Nym - I see no need for armed TPWS overspeed loops for diverging routes. Permanent TPWS Overspeed loops are usually only installed where there is a significant reduction in line speed.

 

[91101]

I only know NXEA and EC to deffinately have them still.

Why do NXEA have lodge turns? It doesnt seem like a long enough run with crew depots at either end and in the middle!

FHT and GC both have numerous lodge shifts for various trains.

Eurostar crews lodge at both ends respectively, although this is slightly sensless as they have crew at either end and again a relatively short run.

Scotrail sleeper crews lodge in a hotel during the day at either end.

 

[Nym]

Just wanted to say : Nym - I see no need for armed TPWS overspeed loops for diverging routes. Permanent TPWS Overspeed loops are usually only installed where there is a significant reduction in line speed.

I didn't think there where any such installations, but I do know it is possible thanks to the approach layouts at Piccadilly being done like this. Thanks for clearing that up.

Although I would say that some diverging routes have a significant change in speed, 90/30 or 60/15 I'd say is reasonably significant, but I suppose that would be mitigated by approach control, and of course, route knowledge...

 

[Tomnick]

Although I would say that some diverging routes have a significant change in speed, 90/30 or 60/15 I'd say is reasonably significant, but I suppose that would be mitigated by approach control, and of course, route knowledge...

An approach controlled route, of course, often having its own overspeed TPWS protection if the signal isn't released from red until the train's close to it.

 

[merlodlliw]

I know the traincrew on 1J32 (Wrexham Down Voyager) get taxied back to Liverpool after the train arrives. Only the driver takes it back to Crewe.

Interesting, I noted on the up Wrexham Voyager(0700), another person I presume a driver/guard? climbed into the rear cab at Chester when the set called on platform 3 for a minute or so on its way to Wrexham. I was waiting for a Cardiff service on the same platform.

As for taxi back to Liverpool I presume from Chester,as the down Voyager only appears to have a guard & Driver on board when it departs Chester as a local to Wrexham.

 

[whhistle]

Read through this with interest. Nice off topic though!

Here's some thoughts:

• MKDriver seems to have made two posts and both of them suggest the driver was going too fast. We must remember this is in your opinion shared by a nominal few others.
  
• The BBC's headline said "train was going too fast". Yet below they say "may have been going too fast". That is sensationalist reporting right there. They get a good headline which may as well read "train was driven by blind driver" as I could come up with a thousand "may have been this, may have been that" reasons :roll:
  
• Remember, posting slanderous and accusation fuelled comments can get the forum and it's administrators into hot water. This has been proven on another un-named UK train simulation forum.
  
• By the time the report comes out it will be yesterdays news and the majority of people won't care anyway.

You defend Virgin, a train company who distorted the real reason for the accident, they plastered 'A Freightliner train' everwhere - but not mentioning it was hired by their own holier-than-thou company.

You obviously have no idea how media works.

Of course Virgin would like to report some facts and leave others out. That is how reporting goes these days. Virgin are correct in what they say... it is a Freightliner loco. They're not exactly going to say "by the way, it was one of our drivers who was driving it, he's obviously a rubbish driver" now are they :roll:

No, they said there was evidence that the locomotive was travelling too fast.
Nobody in the press have actually suggested it was the driver's fault...

This ^ is a very good comment.


For me:

If the train was speeding, then there could be many reasons. However if this is a usual move the for the loco and the driver has been doing it for many months, I am sure he will know the speed of the points.
Even if the driver wasn't doing it for months, he would have still had to learn the line and it's speeds. Couple this together with the above point and we are still no closer to any sort of conclusion on the matter!

 

[DXMachina]

Also bear in mind that the media may monitor sites like this for 'inside info'

The BBC comment that speed was probably a factor is only a kind of verification if they aren't quoting someone on here who said it...

 

[Eagle]

Also bear in mind that the media may monitor sites like this for 'inside info'

The BBC comment that speed was probably a factor is only a kind of verification if they aren't quoting someone on here who said it...

The media have been known to lift quotes directly from this forum (ISTR the Daily Mail website took a post from a passenger word-for-word in an article about a fatality).

 

[Windcutter]

Tonights Lowland Sleeper 1S26 via the Chilterns apparently as the WCML is closed from 22:30 till 05:00.....

Why don't they divert some of the Diesel hauled services Nuneaton to Wigston and into St Pancras

 

[Rugd1022]

Why don't they divert some of the Diesel hauled services Nuneaton to Wigston and into St Pancras

Because of lack of drivers' route knowledge for the diversion and possible pathing problems.

 

[the sniper]

[*]MKDriver seems to have made two posts and both of them suggest the driver was going too fast. We must remember this is in your opinion shared by a nominal few others.

Erm, has he really suggested that? In his first post he refers to the loco, not the driver. In his second post he says it could have be an equipment failure.

Did you read MKDriver's post or the subsequent complaint about him blaming the driver, which was later dropped when the poster realised MKDriver hadn't actually laid any blame on the driver?

The loco approached Bletchley from the north on the up slow and got the signal to cross to the up fast at the crossover at the south end of the platform. Unfortunately it then took the 15mph crossover at about 40-50 mph. It made it through the slow end of the cross over, but smashed the points on the fast end, derailed and ploughed through the ballast to end up on the other side of the flyover.

Not necessarily. Could be an equipment failure. RAIB will check and test everything before coming to any conclusion. That is one reason for all lines being closed all morning.

[*]The BBC's headline said "train was going too fast". Yet below they say "may have been going too fast". That is sensationalist reporting right there. They get a good headline which may as well read "train was driven by blind driver" as I could come up with a thousand "may have been this, may have been that" reasons :roll:

But what they were told by Network Rail is:

"You are meant to approach points at a relatively low speed," the spokesman said. "But it looks like that move was taken at a high speed and, as a result, the train has derailed."

There's no 'may have' there, so the title is only reflecting what they've been told by NR.

If NR had said 'But it looks like the driver was blind and, as a result, the train has derailed', then maybe as you say, they would've been in their rights to put the title "train was driven by blind driver"... :roll:

I understand people wanting to stand up for one of their 'brothers' in the grade, but some people in this thread have tried to kick up trouble where there isn't any.

Time will tell what's happened here. I don't think anyone in this thread has been silly enough to place the blame on the driver with the limited amount of info we all know.

 

[Whistler40145]

What was the routing of the Sleepers from Euston to Crewe?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[matt]

What was the routing of the Sleepers from Euston to Crewe?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Via Banbury, Coventry and Bescot rejoining the booked route at Stafford

 

[lordhinton]

Why don't they divert some of the Diesel hauled services Nuneaton to Wigston and into St Pancras

i wish wigston station is in my back garden

 

[Whistler40145]

Quite surprised it wasn't routed Coventry to Nuneaton.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[The Planner]

Cov Nuneaton is blocked Sunday night / Monday morning.

 

[Whistler40145]

Thanks


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Eagle]

Via Banbury, Coventry and Bescot rejoining the booked route at Stafford

Technically it rejoined the booked route at Coventry (1S26 always is booked via Coventry and Bescot anyway on a Sunday).

 

[DarloRich]

I noticed this morning that the damaged crossing has been plain lined

 

[swt_passenger]

I noticed this morning that the damaged crossing has been plain lined

I think if it was to be removed anyway, as part of the remodelling, there might be little point in reinstalling it. They might be able to live without the route it provides for a few months.

The diagram that was posted a few weeks back doesn't show it, presumably because the functionality will be replicated at the future Drayton Rd Jn?

 

[glenbogle]

RAIB findings have been released today.

http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/current_investigations_register/120203_Bletchley_Junction.cfm

 

[The Engineer]

The RAIB’s preliminary examination found that the derailment occurred because the locomotive was driven significantly faster than the permitted speed over the junction. This resulted in its wheel flanges climbing over the outer rail of a curve just before it would have reached the up fast line.

No evidence has been found that the condition of the track played a part in causing the derailment.

 

[westcoaster]

The RAIB’s preliminary examination found that the derailment occurred because the locomotive was driven significantly faster than the permitted speed over the junction. This resulted in its wheel flanges climbing over the outer rail of a curve just before it would have reached the up fast line.

No evidence has been found that the condition of the track played a part in causing the derailment.

What about the rest of what the RAIB wrote, there will be a reason behind the excessive speed, There is nothing that says the signalling was at fault in the incident.

RAIB quote

The investigation will identify the sequence of events that led to the locomotive exceeding the permitted speed for the route it was taking.* It will also include an examination of the factors that influenced the behaviour of the driver, the train operating company’s competence management system and the signalling arrangements at the junction.* It will also review the history of the junction signal and any risk assessments that were carried out.

 

[CosherB]

This 'accident' appears to point to a need for more automation of train operations. Automatic systems are very good at observing speed limits (or more correctly, operating the locomotive at the correct speed). Human beings are actually not very well suited to such low level but vital tasks.

Example: sit someone in front of a panel on which there's red light that ocassionally illuminates. Provide them with a button that must be pressed each time the light comes on, but not be pressed if the light does not come on. A very simple task, but it won't be long before the human either misses a time the button should be pressed, or presses it when the light is not lit.

However, for almost no money, I can provide a bit of automatic kit (some wires and a relay would do it) which would 'press the button' with absolutly no error.

Humans are very good where descisions and judgements have to be made when the evidence isn't always 100% clear. machines are not so good at that.

Humans are poor at simple black and white tasks which a machine will never fail to get right.

 

[Geezertronic]

Humans are poor at simple black and white tasks which a machine will never fail to get right.

I think you may have unintentionally misquoted yourself there

 

[GB]

This 'accident' appears to point to a need for more automation of train operations. Automatic systems are very good at observing speed limits (or more correctly, operating the locomotive at the correct speed). Human beings are actually not very well suited to such low level but vital tasks.

Automation is only as good as the technology and programming behind it. The class 66 for example has a slow speed cruise control setting, but will usually overspeed before settling down.

So if you select it for say 5mph, you will find it overspeeds up to 7 or 8mph for some distance.

How does your "automation kit" cope with the different braking characteristics of different trains, locations and rail head conditions? Braking is not a black and white task.

 

[CosherB]

Originally Posted by Captain Speaking View Post
Humans are poor at simple black and white tasks which a machine will never fail to get right.

I think you may have unintentionally misquoted yourself there

Err, no. I think you need to re-read it.