• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Does this video show a close call?

Status
Not open for further replies.

malc-c

Member
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Messages
990
This video popped up from one of the channels I subscribe to.


skip to 2:43 - the forum is ignoring the embedded start point

Not sure if its an optical illusion from the viewers point of view, or if there really was an issue where gauging is out at the crossing and there could have been a derailment. Either way it caused the driver of the 47 to apply the brakes and wait. Was this a signalling issue, in that the 47 was allowed to depart too soon with not enough time for clearance from the freight train ?

Be interested to hear peoples comments
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

3141

Established Member
Joined
1 Apr 2012
Messages
1,771
Location
Whitchurch, Hampshire
It looks to me as if the points are set correctly for the class 47 + 442, and that it wouldn't have collided with the freight train. But perhaps the driver hadn't observed how the points were set, saw a possibility that he might collide with the other train, and decided it would be prudent to stop. "Almost a near miss" - actually quite safe then!
 

Master29

Established Member
Joined
19 Feb 2015
Messages
1,967
The points seem correctly set and it just looks close simply because of perspective.
 

JN114

Established Member
Joined
28 Jun 2005
Messages
3,346
No near miss.

You’d have to ask the 47 driver why they’d stopped; but there’s any number of innocent reasons which the passing freightliner would have nothing to do with.

The high zoom level of the camera is foreshortening the picture massively making it look at lot worse than it is.
 

Dr_Paul

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2013
Messages
1,355
To digress a bit, further on, at 11.00, there are two 66s pulling two carriages that look like they're from a 508 EMU set, with 'Arlington Fleet Group' on their sides. Any idea what they are? And look at the state of the track, absolutely covered in weeds!
 

Dr_Paul

Established Member
Joined
3 Sep 2013
Messages
1,355
Many thanks! I think that they used to be called match-wagons in the past. I take it that they are able to be fitted with different sorts of couplings to fit the various types of stock that are being towed by the diesel.
 

malc-c

Member
Joined
1 Dec 2017
Messages
990
I agree that perspective is foreshortened due to the zoom. Maybe the 47 driver was just being cautious - best be safe than sorry - if he had a feeling something was wrong.
 

MarkyT

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2012
Messages
6,232
Location
Torbay
Legitimate parallel move. There's no signal where the 47 stopped, so no aspect reversion or forgotten ground signal involved I think. Possibly an intermittent technical issue on board, or a hand slipped from the throttle, or a reaction to something else observed on the track that the camera couldn't see.
 

vikingdriver

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2010
Messages
307
It looks to me as if the points are set correctly for the class 47 + 442, and that it wouldn't have collided with the freight train. But perhaps the driver hadn't observed how the points were set, saw a possibility that he might collide with the other train, and decided it would be prudent to stop. "Almost a near miss" - actually quite safe then!

How are ROG when it comes to route learning? Go anywhere types? Signing the road, you should know exactly where your train is going, especially having just gone past a signal telling you...
 

Dieseldriver

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2012
Messages
971
How are ROG when it comes to route learning? Go anywhere types? Signing the road, you should know exactly where your train is going, especially having just gone past a signal telling you...
In my time driving on a few occasions I have been spooked by another movement. Never stopped as a result but sometimes in a split second it can seem as though something may be amiss. I would never judge a fellow Driver for automatically grabbing the brake handle in that split second.
If you are a Driver (which I suspect you are), you should be aware that there are numerous reasons why a train may suddenly come to a stand due to a brake application and a multitude of those reasons are not as a result of the Driver actually applying the brakes themselves.
 

vikingdriver

Member
Joined
11 Mar 2010
Messages
307
In my time driving on a few occasions I have been spooked by another movement. Never stopped as a result but sometimes in a split second it can seem as though something may be amiss. I would never judge a fellow Driver for automatically grabbing the brake handle in that split second.
If you are a Driver (which I suspect you are), you should be aware that there are numerous reasons why a train may suddenly come to a stand due to a brake application and a multitude of those reasons are not as a result of the Driver actually applying the brakes themselves.

Totally aware and yes I am indeed a driver. I brought this up having recently had two drivers from another FOC, a company that others have questioned on here previously, learning the road into a quarry except they weren't, they told me they were going to take a route map with them when they were sent there for that section of line. Signing the route seemed to be a case of tell the gaffer they know it. I presume others therefore are equally as casual in how they go about things, proven by some high profile incidents. Not saying that has happened here, indeed it is probably as you say.
 

Dieseldriver

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2012
Messages
971
Totally aware and yes I am indeed a driver. I brought this up having recently had two drivers from another FOC, a company that others have questioned on here previously, learning the road into a quarry except they weren't, they told me they were going to take a route map with them when they were sent there for that section of line. Signing the route seemed to be a case of tell the gaffer they know it. I presume others therefore are equally as casual in how they go about things, proven by some high profile incidents. Not saying that has happened here, indeed it is probably as you say.
That's down to the irresponsibility of those individuals in the case you've mentioned. Any Driver willing to take a risk like that is a fool.
 

class 9

Member
Joined
18 Nov 2010
Messages
948
Vikingdriver, when I mentioned ROGs Drivers route knowledge recently and its authenticity, I was told by presumably one of their staff, that having 12 Drivers covering the whole country was ok.
Regarding the video, the Driver may have thought a collision was imminent, but locations like this should be pointed out in route learning packs.
Although no one apart from the drivers in 47 know what actually happened, it could have been a spurious tpws brake demand, dropped dsd, etc etc.
 
Last edited:

mike57

Established Member
Joined
13 Mar 2015
Messages
1,633
Location
East coast of Yorkshire
As a passenger I would much rather a driver apply the brake if he feels something isnt right and 'unapply' it when he realises it's not a problem than the opposite.
 

Edders23

Member
Joined
22 Sep 2018
Messages
549
Being an enthusiast as opposed to a railwayman it strikes me as odd that smaller operators would have their own dedicated drivers. I would have thought they would have hired in drivers from which ever area they are operating on an "agency" basis much like lorry and bus firms do
 

6Gman

Established Member
Joined
1 May 2012
Messages
8,383
Being an enthusiast as opposed to a railwayman it strikes me as odd that smaller operators would have their own dedicated drivers. I would have thought they would have hired in drivers from which ever area they are operating on an "agency" basis much like lorry and bus firms do

Bit out of touch these days but in the early days of privatisation there was a lot of "hiring in". Trouble is that the supplier tended to overcharge. Examples from personal experience: charging an 8 hour shift to route conduct Ferryhill Jn to Clayhills Sidings (Aberdeen); charging £100 per occasion to arrange a taxi Edinburgh Waverley to Craigentinny.
 

tsr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
7,400
Location
Between the parallel lines
Bit out of touch these days but in the early days of privatisation there was a lot of "hiring in". Trouble is that the supplier tended to overcharge. Examples from personal experience: charging an 8 hour shift to route conduct Ferryhill Jn to Clayhills Sidings (Aberdeen); charging £100 per occasion to arrange a taxi Edinburgh Waverley to Craigentinny.

Such wasted money is sadly by no means unheard of within individual TOCs and FOCs. I remember one driver who was “famously” paid 12 hours’ money to work a train from Redhill to Reigate. A four minute journey...
 

Bigfoot

Member
Joined
2 Dec 2013
Messages
1,103
Such wasted money is sadly by no means unheard of within individual TOCs and FOCs. I remember one driver who was “famously” paid 12 hours’ money to work a train from Redhill to Reigate. A four minute journey...
Crews have the company by the balls when it comes to working trains that the company can't cover through advance rostering of work.

Completely down to the individual as to what they set their price, many deals are done to keep the train moving. A couple of hundred quid or cancellation of potentially a few services as the stock will be in the wrong place/late etc, overtime for the crew is cheaper.
 

Karl

On Moderation
Joined
16 Aug 2011
Messages
710
Location
Bamber Bridge
Totally off topic but I just loved the 08 footage in this video. They're my favourite loco. Hardy little giants. I miss them :)
 
Joined
31 Aug 2019
Messages
341
Location
IW
Interlocking prevents conflicting movements.
If there was a SPAD there is a chance, otherwise there isnt.
 

Dieseldriver

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2012
Messages
971
Interlocking prevents conflicting movements.
If there was a SPAD there is a chance, otherwise there isnt.
Interlocking does prevent conflicting movements, if its functioning correctly.
The Driver involved in the Waterloo collision a couple of years back made an emergency brake application when they saw the 'impossible' (set of points throwing them into another train when the signal protecting them was clear). The vigilance of that Driver could have had a positive influence on the outcome of the situation.
Further back in history we have the Clapham crash as further proof that fail safe systems are not always necessarily fail safe.
 

Mojo

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
7 Aug 2005
Messages
20,382
Location
0035
The fact that the train came to a stand on the set of points and then proceeds from a stop from the same point to me indicates that the points were always set correctly, as it is not possible to throw a set of points when there is a wheel of the train sat on said points.
 

Monty

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2012
Messages
2,349
Disregard, only just noticed that the image shown is either after or before the event. Mods, feel free to delete this if appropriate.
 
Last edited:
Joined
31 Aug 2019
Messages
341
Location
IW
Interlocking does prevent conflicting movements, if its functioning correctly.
The Driver involved in the Waterloo collision a couple of years back made an emergency brake application when they saw the 'impossible' (set of points throwing them into another train when the signal protecting them was clear). The vigilance of that Driver could have had a positive influence on the outcome of the situation.
Further back in history we have the Clapham crash as further proof that fail safe systems are not always necessarily fail safe.

Going by that your interpretation of interlocking is that its worthless as it has in certain situations failed to provide the protection required.
From what I understood of Waterloo collision the actual result was a human error which in essence removed the interlocking failsafe.
And the same can be said of the Clapham disaster... There was no interlocking due to human error in the wiring that allowed effectively removed the interlocking.

I mean both your examples are rather unfortunate ones regarding interlocking systems really as there was none present at the time and that is what caused each accident.
 

Dieseldriver

Member
Joined
9 Apr 2012
Messages
971
Going by that your interpretation of interlocking is that its worthless as it has in certain situations failed to provide the protection required.
From what I understood of Waterloo collision the actual result was a human error which in essence removed the interlocking failsafe.
And the same can be said of the Clapham disaster... There was no interlocking due to human error in the wiring that allowed effectively removed the interlocking.

I mean both your examples are rather unfortunate ones regarding interlocking systems really as there was none present at the time and that is what caused each accident.
The point I'm making is that interlocking is only fail safe if it's functioning correctly. In both of those instances it wasn't. From a Train Drivers perspective that means that the 'impossible' is indeed 'possible'.
If I am driving my train and I see a situation unfolding that makes me doubt the integrity of the signalling system the correct course of action wouldn't be to ignore it, history has proved that these rare incidents can and do happen, irrespective of the cause.
Wrongside failures are always a possibility and if they've occurred due to human error or not, it's irrelevant as the protection provided by interlocking is not there in that scenario.
 
Joined
31 Aug 2019
Messages
341
Location
IW
The point I'm making is that interlocking is only fail safe if it's functioning correctly. In both of those instances it wasn't. From a Train Drivers perspective that means that the 'impossible' is indeed 'possible'.
If I am driving my train and I see a situation unfolding that makes me doubt the integrity of the signalling system the correct course of action wouldn't be to ignore it, history has proved that these rare incidents can and do happen, irrespective of the cause.
Wrongside failures are always a possibility and if they've occurred due to human error or not, it's irrelevant as the protection provided by interlocking is not there in that scenario.

Yeah erm...

I think you are making something out of nothing with this one.
I was talking about this particular instance.
Of course while we're driving its always your duty to watch out for what is going on, you never go blindly.

But in this instance, the one in the video the interlocking is working, it is shown to have been working before during and after the fact and given that one case I made my comment.

If asked to comment Clapham I wouldnt have made the same comment.
 

DerekC

Established Member
Joined
26 Oct 2015
Messages
2,107
Location
Hampshire (nearly a Hog)
The point I'm making is that interlocking is only fail safe if it's functioning correctly. In both of those instances it wasn't. From a Train Drivers perspective that means that the 'impossible' is indeed 'possible'.
If I am driving my train and I see a situation unfolding that makes me doubt the integrity of the signalling system the correct course of action wouldn't be to ignore it, history has proved that these rare incidents can and do happen, irrespective of the cause.
Wrongside failures are always a possibility and if they've occurred due to human error or not, it's irrelevant as the protection provided by interlocking is not there in that scenario.

That's absolutely right. The signalling system is not only the technology but the people who maintain it. And even if the kit is originally designed to fail safe under every possible circumstance it can be compromised by human error - as both Waterloo and Clapham showed.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top