15/08/17 Waterloo derailment and disruption (latter likely to continue to 16/8)

Status
Not open for further replies.

83G/84D

Established Member
Joined
28 Oct 2011
Messages
4,948
Location
Cornwall
GWR were planning on running extra non stop services between Reading and Basingstoke and vice versa for this mornings peak. Presume tickets will be valid from Basingstoke to London via Reading and Paddington.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
14,044
Location
West of Andover
GWR were planning on running extra non stop services between Reading and Basingstoke and vice versa for this mornings peak. Presume tickets will be valid from Basingstoke to London via Reading and Paddington.
I believe for the duration of the works, ticketed from Basingstoke to London routed "Via Woking" have had that restriction lifted to be valid via Reading [with additional validity for LU between Waterloo & Paddington].

But good news on GWR, hopefully some commuters would have used the extras [if they ran]
 

AndyY

Member
Joined
10 Dec 2013
Messages
70
Location
Borehamwood
"Partial derailment" probably means that only a small percentage of the train came off the rails. Designed to reassure us that it isn't a major incident.
Not too keen on deviating from the subject, but isn't Potters Bar a partial derailment by definition (only the rear coaches derailed)?
 
Last edited:

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,143
Location
Cambridge
Not too keen on deviating from the subject, but isn't Potters Bar a partial derailment by definition (only the rear coaches derailed)?
Unlikely to be described as such — the phrase was not chosen for its technical accuracy but for its euphemistic properties.
 

infobleep

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
9,735
No one is saying don't travel, however disruption is likely so plan accordingly if you need to. The residual impact from today will likely be felt tomorrow, especially in the morning peak, due to stock and crew displacement, etc.

You then also have the complication of a reduction in capacity as stated above, with likely cancellations.
I was sure they were advising people not to travel yesterday and that it extended into today. However maybe the advice was not to travel yesterday but the problems will continue until end of service today.
 

slicedbread

Member
Joined
11 Oct 2012
Messages
11
I was sure they were advising people not to travel yesterday and that it extended into today. However maybe the advice was not to travel yesterday but the problems will continue until end of service today.
You remember correctly, SWT advice yesterday - Tuesday 15th was:

UPDATE - We now strongly advise customers not to travel on our network today or tomorrow
 
Last edited:

bramling

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
8,778
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Unlikely to be described as such — the phrase was not chosen for its technical accuracy but for its euphemistic properties.
I notice it's not just "partial derailment" but "partial train derailment".

All seems a little silly to me - "due to a derailment..." would have been quite adequate, as would "due to a minor derailment..." if they were really desperate to try to limit bad publicity.

Actually, I'd have said collision was unfortunately a more accurate descriptor of what happened, but there we go.
 

Chris M

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
910
Location
London E14
I notice it's not just "partial derailment" but "partial train derailment".

All seems a little silly to me - "due to a derailment..." would have been quite adequate, as would "due to a minor derailment..." if they were really desperate to try to limit bad publicity.

Actually, I'd have said collision was unfortunately a more accurate descriptor of what happened, but there we go.
Collision would also give the wrong impression I feel, as it clearly wasn't causal and didn't have any significant impact on the consequences (except possibly mitigating them) meaning it was overall a rather minor factor in the overall incident. Collision also sounds more dramatic than it actually was.

Now for something like the Watford Tunnel incident, both "derailment" and "collision" are appropriate for a headling summary as both elements were significant.
 

infobleep

Established Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
9,735
I decided I might not make one train I was hoping to catch tonight so I got the next one which was a fast service. Thus I was only 10 minutes late compared to when the usual timetable runs, whereby I'm over 20 minutes late, if I missed a train.

I noticed that Wimbledon to Clapham Junction has 12 trains in the morning between 7 and 8am but only 8 in the reverse direction between 17.00 and 18.00? Anyone know why that might be?

Also there are four trains between Woking and Wimbledon in the morning between 7.00 and 8.00, compared to the usual none. However still only 2 in the evening between 17.00.00 and 18.00
 

Railman

Member
Joined
17 Jul 2012
Messages
87
The arguments over "derailment or collision" are really covering up the fact that if the passenger train left under clear signals when the points were not correctly set, then a MAJOR signalling problem occurred. Had the train on the opposite line been an incomming passenger train rather than a stationary ballast train, then all the words would have been correct and not enough. A very lucky escape is what I would call it.
 

spark001uk

Established Member
Joined
20 Aug 2010
Messages
1,740
More disruption tonight, trespass between Virginia Water and Weybridge stopped everything for almost an hour.
 

bramling

Established Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
8,778
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
The arguments over "derailment or collision" are really covering up the fact that if the passenger train left under clear signals when the points were not correctly set, then a MAJOR signalling problem occurred. Had the train on the opposite line been an incomming passenger train rather than a stationary ballast train, then all the words would have been correct and not enough. A very lucky escape is what I would call it.
Agreed.

If I remember rightly something like that happened recently at Cardiff Central - I think attracting RAIB attention but fortunately no derailment or collision.

Not good.
 

eman_resu

Member
Joined
14 Aug 2013
Messages
28
The arguments over "derailment or collision" are really covering up the fact that if the passenger train left under clear signals when the points were not correctly set, then a MAJOR signalling problem occurred. Had the train on the opposite line been an incomming passenger train rather than a stationary ballast train, then all the words would have been correct and not enough. A very lucky escape is what I would call it.
Or someone or something has affected the Signalling System mores the point........

Unless the signalling design has been changed for the possession, which is doubtful IMHO, then an action has been carried out to defeat the protection designed within the signalling system to stop this very problem.......
 
Last edited:

3141

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2012
Messages
1,509
Location
Overton, Hampshire
The arguments over "derailment or collision" are really covering up the fact that if the passenger train left under clear signals when the points were not correctly set, then a MAJOR signalling problem occurred. Had the train on the opposite line been an incomming passenger train rather than a stationary ballast train, then all the words would have been correct and not enough. A very lucky escape is what I would call it.
I think it's possible to get a bit carried away by the "what ifs...?" There wasn't another moving train and nobody was injured.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,143
Location
Cambridge
The arguments over "derailment or collision" are really covering up the fact that if the passenger train left under clear signals when the points were not correctly set, then a MAJOR signalling problem occurred. Had the train on the opposite line been an incomming passenger train rather than a stationary ballast train, then all the words would have been correct and not enough. A very lucky escape is what I would call it.
Or someone or something has affected the Signalling System mores the point........

Unless the signalling design has been changed for the possession, which is doubtful IMHO, then an action has been carried out to defeat the protection designed within the signalling system to stop this very problem.......
I think it's possible to get a bit carried away by the "what ifs...?" There wasn't another moving train and nobody was injured.
Definitely a case of over-speculation here. It could just as easily have been a poorly-maintained bogie pranging the points mechanism as it went past.
 

Matt Taylor

Established Member
Joined
31 Aug 2008
Messages
2,299
Location
Portsmouth
I sign this route and was briefed on it (visually) only a week ago, the images I've seen (not in the public domain) suggest the likely cause but for obvious reasons I cannot divulge that. However it seems reasonably safe to say that the unit was not at fault, not least because I saw 456015 running through the carriage washer at Clapham Yard last night so the unit is clearly safe to move although there appeared to be some taping up in the shoe gear area of the leading cab. The unit has since been hidden from public view as there is some ugly looking damage to the cabside, I imagine it'll be left for First to sort out the repair!
 

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
3,109
Definitely a case of over-speculation here. It could just as easily have been a poorly-maintained bogie pranging the points mechanism as it went past.
Let's put it this way, it looks to me 100% like It wasn't a bogie issue.
 
Last edited:

Chris M

Member
Joined
4 Feb 2012
Messages
910
Location
London E14
Definitely a case of over-speculation here. It could just as easily have been a poorly-maintained bogie pranging the points mechanism as it went past.
Or maybe not?
The point is that, at least based on the officially released information that I am aware of, it is not yet known whether:
  • Whether the train was driven correctly*
  • The points were correctly set when the train departed
  • The interlocking between the points and signal worked as designed
  • The points moved between the train departing and the train reaching them
  • The points moved under the train (e.g. they could have been set correctly but not locked)
  • The possession had (intentionally or otherwise) altered the operation of the points
  • The points were damaged before the train reached them, and if so whether anything related to the possession was responsible.
  • The points were damaged by the train, causing it to derail (there was almost certainly damage to the points as a consequence)

*Actually I'm not certain whether we do know this or not.

In other words it's too early to know whether this is a small or large problem.

There is going to be more information known internally, but as many (most?) here do not have access to any internal sources it's very difficult to know what is sourced from fact and what is sourced from rumour, e.g. I've seen it stated with equal certainty that the points were correctly set but moved under the train and that the left and right blades were set to different routes before the train arrived - they can't both be true and I have no way of assessing the reliability of either source.
 

Sunset route

Member
Joined
27 Oct 2015
Messages
1,004
I think this thread might need to be locked for the time being, as a lot of people in the know, know what took place but not why and it will save them accidentally breaking their respective companies social media policies, until such time as RAIB release a bulletin or full report.
 

bb21

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Global Moderator
Joined
4 Feb 2010
Messages
23,785
I think this thread might need to be locked for the time being, as a lot of people in the know, know what took place but not why and it will save them accidentally breaking their respective companies social media policies, until such time as RAIB release a bulletin or full report.
I think that is wise, as the RAIB is involved who will publish their findings in due course.
 

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
3,109
Just to add to this, a sorry looking 456 with plastic sheeting over the front driver side was being loaded onto the back of low loader at Wimbledon depot earlier visible from the mainline. No idea where it's heading though.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top