Bletchley Derailment

[Whistler40145]

Thanks for making that clear. I don't have a clue on the systems!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[DownSouth]

90046 may have had a defect on its TPWS equipment, would this have caused the brakes not to automatically apply themselves when passing the signal protecting the crossover?

If this is found to be the case. This loco is operated by Freightliner, but at present on hire to Virgin, which company would get a roasting for it?

That would depend on what is meant by "on hire to Virgin."

If it's an arrangement where Freightliner are contracted to provide any Class 90 loco from their fleet and haul VT services with it, it's nothing to do with Virgin. This is known in Australia as a "hook and pull" contract, mainly because it's the best way to describe what the loco operator does!

Things could be more complex if the agreement is more along the lines of a sub-lease where VT take possession of the locomotive along with the responsibilities of maintaining and driving it.

Given that VT only use one at a time and that Class 90 has an infamous reputation for poor reliability, I suspect that it would be more along the lines of a "hook and pull" contract. The fact that the loco in question was in Freightliner livery also points to it being a "hook and pull" contract rather than a sub-lease.

What the final breakdown of liability ends up looking like could depend on so many things. I can't see anything getting the driver off the hook for this one, even if there was a TPWS error which would otherwise have washed off a bit of the speed between the signal and the points. I hope that the driver's union has an officer employed to assist ex-rail workers in finding other employment.

 

[Whistler40145]

None of my comments are pointing the blame at the Driver, but the reliability of the locomotive & maintenance regime.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[A-driver]

I can't see anything getting the driver off the hook for this one, even if there was a TPWS error which would otherwise have washed off a bit of the speed between the signal and the points. I hope that the driver's union has an officer employed to assist ex-rail workers in finding other employment.

Absolute rubbish and what a purely ignorant comment to make. Even if speed is found to be the cause it still dosnt put full blame on human factors.

And even if it is pinned on the driver it isn't always as clear cut as a hanging offence. I know of drivers involved in derailments who are back on the footplate-all down to the situation surrounding the incident and weather it can be controlled for the future. Exactly the same with SPaDs. Infact I may go out on a limb and say that over 50% of drivers in some depots have had a safety of the line incident at some point. (No hard evidence but thinking through my colleagues I don't think I'm far off).

As I said earlier people should be ashamed of some of the things they are saying on here-and the post above which I have quoted is nothing short of evil. I am interested where your facts that nothing can get the driver off the hook come from and how you know this was driver error even if it was down to the speed.

Try thinking before you post 'DownSouth'. That way your posts may not read so ignorantly.

 

[Whistler40145]

A-Driver, I agree with you, those comments are unwelcome & very dangerous. It's a good job we're not in a Court of Law.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[68000]

Somethimes I think some people forget that this is a discussion forum where things get discussed. I have seen hundreds of threads which contained speculation rather than discussing the ins and outs of an RAIB report!

 

[crewmeal]

So what's happening today? When will the lines be back to normal? The press seem to think it'll be Monday at the earliest.

 

[68000]

Slow lines open, fast lines still under possession - likely open for Monday morning

 

[Eagle]

Slow lines open, fast lines still under possession - likely open for Monday morning

Assuming they've cleared the snow by then...

 

[Nym]

There's snow?

Toasty and warm here, thats maybe why I got a £340 gas bill

 

[Eagle]

There's snow?

Southern, central and eastern England forecast for three to five inches of snow this afternoon and evening. Going to be fun...

At least tomorrow morning it won't be -11 °C like it was this morning.

 

[Nym]

So they'll blow it all out of proportion and say it's a major problem where if we had four or five inches up here it would make no difference at all to anything running... (Except the stuff to down south)

Anyone panic buying bread and milk yet?

 

[calc7]

There's snow?

Toasty and warm here, thats maybe why I got a £340 gas bill

Nice! My frugality saw me receive a £7 gas bill (and icicles hanging off my nose).

 

[Nym]

I'd rather be warm than rich And it's £101 (now up to £110)/month whatever I do anyway, so I may as well be comfy

 

[Eagle]

Toasty and warm here, thats maybe why I got a £340 gas bill

Insert obvious joke about huskies being used to subzero temperatures.

 

[87015]

It wouldn't be out running with a fault on the TPWS. Not at speed anyway. As a fail safe system, any TPWS faults break wire 13 and so you won't get the brakes off. I'm sure the real reasons will come out before long...

There is no way TPWS works with diverging routes is there? Once the signal has cleared from approach controlled with the loco approaching, TPWS won't kick in as the signal is green, as the TPWS speed is related to the main route.

 

[Nym]

Insert obvious joke about huskies being used to subzero temperatures.

Return with whitty comment that has something to do with foxies visiting...

Oh, and it was only a £240 gas bill, and a £220 leccy bill, where did I use THAT much?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There is no way TPWS works with diverging routes is there? Once the signal has cleared from approach controlled with the loco approaching, TPWS won't kick in as the signal is green, as the TPWS speed is related to the main route.

It CAN be implemented to work for diverging routes, it's just a question of weather it IS implemented or not, remember that TWPS is only two different frequencies being transmitted certain distances appart to simulate forward speed with a timer...

 

[Tomnick]

It CAN be implemented to work for diverging routes, it's just a question of weather it IS implemented or not, remember that TWPS is only two different frequencies being transmitted certain distances appart to simulate forward speed with a timer...

So the TPWS on the approach to the signal, with the grids positioned accordingly, couldn't be used for a different 'trigger' speed relating to a speed restriction in advance of the signal. Agree that, if the will was there, some form of TPWS implementation - active only when the diverging route was set - would be possible. In this case though, given the low speed of the crossover, I'd be surprised if the signal cleared before the train had passed over the TPWS loops (happy to be corrected though).

Referring to the thread generally - certainly not impressed by uninformed speculation pointing the finger directly at the Driver. All that has been suggested by official sources so far is that the train ran over the crossover too fast, but there's a variety of other possible explanations for that - some sort of mechanical failure, failure of the route indicator (shouldn't be possible, of course - but you never know), route indicator obscured... it can be discussed until the cows come home, but the RAIB will no doubt come up with the definitive answer in due course!

 

[MidnightFlyer]

UF had a good few yards of track totally removed when I passed this morning, abour 0830. Went onto Slows at Hanslope and back over at Ledburn.

 

[VTPreston_Tez]

With a overhead wire problem as well, I'm amazed at how well the guys are taking this. Credit to all of them.

 

[ALEMASTER]

BBC coverage

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-16883749

 

[Nym]

So the TPWS on the approach to the signal, with the grids positioned accordingly, couldn't be used for a different 'trigger' speed relating to a speed restriction in advance of the signal. Agree that, if the will was there, some form of TPWS implementation - active only when the diverging route was set - would be possible. In this case though, given the low speed of the crossover, I'd be surprised if the signal cleared before the train had passed over the TPWS loops (happy to be corrected though).

You can implement as many overspeed protections as you like, provided there is enough space for the induction loops / antennae.

The trigger is the time between the on-board antenna receiving the different frequencies. Relating to speed, if you see the arm frequency and trigger frequency within the set time then you're overspeed. You can have an implementation with multiple trigger loops as the 'trigger' resets the timer every time one is passed, or it times out.

 

[Tomnick]

That's what I meant - but obviously any overspeed protection for the diverging route would need to be disabled if that route wasn't set from the signal. Depending when the signal clears in this case, it's probably irrelevant anyway!

 

[Nym]

Such a system already exists, where you have multiple arm loops, one for overspeed (linespeed) and one for SPAD. So it wouldn't be too hard to implement with three stages based on route selection, would just need to integrate it into the interlocking and S&T.

 

[Tomnick]

Wasn't aware of such an implementation anywhere (if you mean an installation with one 'arming' loop and two or more 'trigger' loops that are each only activated in certain circumstances), but I can see how it would work.

 

[185]

Looking beyond the usual Virgin Rail rhetoric.....

Virgin Trains
"We are sorry but due to a Freightliner locomotive........"

Meanwhile.... the actual Truth
......A HIRED FREIGHTLINER LOCOMOTIVE BEING DRIVEN BY A VIRGIN DRIVER........

Will Virgin apologise? Seriously doubt it.

 

[VP185]

Lets face it, there are a million causes that could contribute to this incident. The truth will eventually be uncovered and even if the finger of blame does point at the driver we should be aware, especially us drivers, that there could be other factors at play here.

Whilst factors such as infrastucture and rolling stock faults have all been mentioned at that time of the morning, you've got to consider the drivers diagram. I don't know when he booked on but you've got to be looking at fatigue issues, still not being fully awake.
Is this the normal routing for this working as well? It might be booked to continue on the main, or on previous occasions the driver has worked this job, maybe even the night before, the loco continued on the main. Again this brings into question the safety of some early morning/night turns. You get into a mindset, a form of routine. This happened last night etc etc and some things just don't register. It happens to us all.

 

[ukrob]

185, so you are blaming a Virgin driver without knowing if it was driver error or not? There are any number of reasons why the speed was exceeded.

Just got an axe to grind perhaps.

 

[ushawk]

Why would there be an apology ? Its an accident and accidents happen, was nice to see the people who would usually moan at London Midland yesterday on Twitter actually being nice about it and saying things like "i hope the driver gets better soon" - shows commuters arent just robots

Also, no point speculating until the RAIB report comes out.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

185, so you are blaming a Virgin driver without knowing if it was driver error or not? There are any number of reasons why the speed was exceeded.

Just got an axe to grind perhaps.

Yet he's defending a guard currently being prosecuted for Gross Negligence Manslaughter to the hilt.