Is this what you call a SPAD?

[43066]

And of course passing a signal at danger in that instance is permitted within an agreed framework, as laid out in Rule Book Module S5.

Yes indeed.

I can think of several locations where if a wrong route were offered, the Driver approaching it would have insufficient time/distance to bring their train to a stand at the signal upon first being made aware of the routing beyond it

Likewise. I would *hope* the driver would be fully exonerated in that situation. Not something I’d want to put to the test, though!

 

[najaB]

I can think of several locations where if a wrong route were offered, the Driver approaching it would have insufficient time/distance to bring their train to a stand at the signal upon first being made aware of the routing beyond it

In those cases is there not (sometimes?) an instruction in the SA for the driver to accept the route if they sign it? I'm pretty sure I've seen it at least once in the Scottish SA.

 

[Meerkat]

The MOM works for NR and represents NR in the recovery, liaising with the signaller and so on. Getting a third party involved would introduce a further element of risk and as I explained, the procedure doesn't allow for it, simple as that. Once an incident such as this has happened, it's in the hands of the infrastructure owner as it has happened on their network. You can't just drag in some random driver of another train to assist.

I accept that current procedures might not allow it, but not seen an explanation of why it would be riskier than a non-driver wandering about on the trackside. Don't signallers get other drivers to go slow and inspect the track when a problem has been reported and in a tragic fatality that was reported here an oncoming driver was asked to stop and investigate why a crew wasn't communicating.

Reducing delay after an incident is not top priority - a safe method of working and following procedure is rather more important.

Sure, but if the procedure was allowed why wouldn't it be safe?

What 'radio to communicate' does a driver have? A passenger train driver will only have the GSM-R which is fixed in the cab. Not much use if the rear of the train you want them to supervise setting back is some way ahead and a clear view is not available without leaving the train.

If the supervising driver is going the other way on the other track they will be level with the back of the freight train and looking right at the track ahead of them and behind the reversing train.

 

[12LDA28C]

If the supervising driver is going the other way on the other track they will be level with the back of the freight train and looking right at the track ahead of them and behind the reversing train.

And how exactly would they communicate with the driver of the freight train?

 

[43066]

I accept that current procedures might not allow it, but not seen an explanation of why it would be riskier than a non-driver wandering about on the trackside.

For one thing, in a lot of stock the driver sits to the left of the cab, and has a poor enough view of the off side of their own cab, yet alone the rear of a train on an adjacent line.

It’s a non starter from that point of view alone, and there are virtually zero situations where this would lead to any quicker outcomes - it’s not as if situations like this thread is discussing happen particularly often.

And how exactly would they communicate with the driver of the freight train?

I assume they’re thinking of the (supposed) functionality of the GSMR to allow direct train to train communication. I have no idea whether it has ever been set up, let alone had any training on it!

 

[Meerkat]

For one thing, in a lot of stock the driver sits to the left of the cab, and has a poor enough view of the off side of their own cab, yet alone the rear of a train on an adjacent line.

It’s a non starter from that point of view alone, and there are virtually zero situations where this would lead to any quicker outcomes - it’s not as if situations like this thread is discussing happen particularly often.

Both fair points, though I would ask what the danger the observer is looking for is likely to be. Pull alongside and you can check the line behind the train and then presumably you are more there to ensure the reversing train doesn't reverse too far, which doesn't require that great an angle (or the observer could pull up at the stop point and watch (how long a lead is there on the GSMR handset?)).

I assume they’re thinking of the (supposed) functionality of the GSMR to allow direct train to train communication. I have no idea whether it has ever been set up, let alone had any training on it!

I was assuming that drivers could communicate with each other via GSMR - but maybe they can't trust you not to use it for gossip

 

[zwk500]

Both fair points, though I would ask what the danger the observer is looking for is likely to be. Pull alongside and you can check the line behind the train and then presumably you are more there to ensure the reversing train doesn't reverse too far, which doesn't require that great an angle (or the observer could pull up at the stop point and watch (how long a lead is there on the GSMR handset?)).

Checking that points don't swing in the path of the train, checking nobody wanders behind the train, checking the load is secure, checking the train hasn't stopped in foul. All need to be outside the cab, a GSMR handset has a normal length telephone lead so you can stand on the platform by the cab door but not much further.

I was assuming that drivers could communicate with each other via GSMR - but maybe they can't trust you not to use it for gossip

You wouldn't want an emergency call to interrupt the setback move just at the point when the driver needs to be told to stop. There's a reason Back-to-back walkie talkies are used in Yards.

 

[43066]

but maybe they can't trust you not to use it for gossip

Ha - probably a fair point!

 

[Annetts key]

Ha - probably a fair point!

It’s in section Z that gossiping is only permitted while a cup of tea is present ☕️…

{You should have heard some of the conversations that occurred back before the days of voice recorders… }

 

[BeijingDave]

What I like about the original poster is he calls a SPAD a SPAD.

 

[najaB]

What I like about the original poster is he calls a SPAD a SPAD.

Your coat, sir.

 

[Dieseldriver]

In those cases is there not (sometimes?) an instruction in the SA for the driver to accept the route if they sign it? I'm pretty sure I've seen it at least once in the Scottish SA.

Not always, the ones I’m talking about are junction signals for diverging routes that lead to completely different routes or where a ‘wrong route’ would truly be a wrong route.
I’m sure the standards for these set ups are that as long as the difference in speed for either route is less than 10mph the driver doesn’t need any prior warning of what route the junction is set for until they arrive at the protecting signal.
As an example, Southcote Junction in the down direction, linespeed 60mph, diverging route for Basingstoke 50mph

 

[zwk500]

In those cases is there not (sometimes?) an instruction in the SA for the driver to accept the route if they sign it? I'm pretty sure I've seen it at least once in the Scottish SA.

Instructions in the SA for accepting a wrong route are usually limited to short diversions where route knowledge isn't a problem, and includes the proviso that the train shouldn't be booked to stop there. It's also usually that the driver can accept it, not that they should/must. It also depends on what the impact to the route of an unscheduled extra train would be.
I know there are instructions for the WCML to go via Roade/Northampton, or Stafford/Colwich, without needing to question the route, but I don't think drivers are allowed to accept Trent Valley/Birmingham routing without challenging. Incidentally, Rugby northbound is a 125/125 diverge at the Junction, and even with the PRI a misrouting is unlikely to be caught in time.

 

[Railsigns]

Incidentally, Rugby northbound is a 125/125 diverge at the Junction, and even with the PRI a misrouting is unlikely to be caught in time.

Luckily, PRIs are provided there. Colton Junction southbound, on the other hand...

 

[zwk500]

Luckily, PRIs are provided there. Colton Junction southbound, on the other hand...

Indeed - at least soon there'll not be the additional issue of running off the knitting at Colton if sent towards Church Fenton by mistake.

 

[Falcon1200]

In those cases is there not (sometimes?) an instruction in the SA for the driver to accept the route if they sign it? I'm pretty sure I've seen it at least once in the Scottish SA.

IIRC there is such an instruction applying to the Edinburgh/Glasgow Queen St services via Falkirk High at Polmont and Greenhill Upper Junctions, the route via Falkirk Grahamston being a regular diversionary route should the line via High be blocked. There may also be a similar instruction for the WCML at Shieldmuir and Law Junctions.

 

[Jimini]

Incidentally, Rugby northbound is a 125/125 diverge at the Junction, and even with the PRI a misrouting is unlikely to be caught in time.

That’s an interesting one (for a layman such as me anyway). Are PRI distances from the diverging junction signal based on speed / distance and therefore stopping times to prevent going the wrong way in all instances, or does it vary?

 

[zwk500]

That’s an interesting one (for a layman such as me anyway). Are PRI distances from the diverging junction signal based on speed / distance and therefore stopping times to prevent going the wrong way in all instances, or does it vary?

I'm afraid I don't know the design criteria.

 

[Surreytraveller]

In this example a LO driver on the other line would presumably be on site quicker, and it would be in the interest of their company to get the freight out the way and the LO service moving again.

Who's going to relieve the LO driver? They cannot abandon their train on a running line while they carry out a task they've received no training for.
Which is going to be the more risky activity here?

 

[Meerkat]

Who's going to relieve the LO driver? They cannot abandon their train on a running line while they carry out a task they've received no training for.
Which is going to be the more risky activity here?

I was thinking they could do it from the cab - hence less risky than having someone trackside. Pull up, check the immediate area behind then pull forward slowly watching ahead. But it depends exactly what the 'observer/supervisor' is supposed to be looking out for as per the regs, as mentioned above.

 

[zwk500]

I was thinking they could do it from the cab - hence less risky than having someone trackside. Pull up, check the immediate area behind then pull forward slowly watching ahead. But it depends exactly what the 'observer/supervisor' is supposed to be looking out for as per the regs, as mentioned above.

They wouldn't have the field of view to supervise the move from the cab, and when they're moving their own train they'd need to be focusing on that move, not somebody else's.

 

[Stampy]

Indeed - at least soon there'll not be the additional issue of running off the knitting at Colton if sent towards Church Fenton by mistake.

I can remember being on York station one Saturday in the early '90s (I think) when a Class 91 "ran off the knitting" into an unelectrified platform...

Seem to remember a pantograph head bouncing down the platform....

 

[Surreytraveller]

I was thinking they could do it from the cab - hence less risky than having someone trackside. Pull up, check the immediate area behind then pull forward slowly watching ahead. But it depends exactly what the 'observer/supervisor' is supposed to be looking out for as per the regs, as mentioned above.

It wouldn't work. The driver wouldn't have communication with the other driver, and wouldn't have communication with Network Rail Control.

It wouldn't work. The driver wouldn't have communication with the other driver, and wouldn't have communication with Network Rail Control.

There's also the likelyhood that if a train's been wrong routed, the route will also be locked, so wouldn't be able to bring another train alongside anyway

 

[zwk500]

I can remember being on York station one Saturday in the early '90s (I think) when a Class 91 "ran off the knitting" into an unelectrified platform...

Seem to remember a pantograph head bouncing down the platform....

Really? The wires at York cover Platform 1, 3, and 5-11. The only possible route a 91 could get at York that would lead off the knitting is wrong-road through 3 into 4. Also they'd have had to be travelling quite fast for the ADD not to catch the pan before it struck the train shed roof, the only over-line obstruction on that route.

Sounds very dramatic if it happened!

 

[Mcr Warrior]

So to recap, and in simple terms, what's happened at Canonbury on Saturday exactly, when was this (around 1300?), where was the freight travelling from/to and when was the freight eventually allowed on its way?

Anyone able to provide a summary of this incident?

 

[Meerkat]

They wouldn't have the field of view to supervise the move from the cab, and when they're moving their own train they'd need to be focusing on that move, not somebody else's.

What do they need to be able to see? Bearing in mind its likely a line they would normally be doing tens of MPH rather than a very slow jog.

 

[zwk500]

What do they need to be able to see? Bearing in mind its likely a line they would normally be doing tens of MPH rather than a very slow jog.

When setting back, you need to check, among other things, that any points are set correctly (trailing and facing), that no other trains are moving that might conflict, that nobody is in the way or might potentially be in the way (including trespass), that there are no obstructions likely to damage the train or track (if the train has used the emergency braking then it could have dislodged something), and that the rear of the train does not stop foul of anywhere it's not meant to.
Bear in mind that Signaller, driver and shunter all need to have a clear understanding of what each other are doing and what the train is doing and why. If somebody's job involves driving a different train they can't be fully focused on the move in hand. This isn't like waving a mate into a tight parking space. The driver of the train will not know anything is wrong for a long time, as (s)he has 600-800m of train between her/him and the problem. Some of these problems might be on tolerances of millimetres, such as the wagon scraping the platform edge - it might be fine, it might just be a scrape, but it could damage a really vital component or bump the coping stone out of gauge and that then tears a Titanic-style hole in the next LO unit.
Even at 5mph, A 3,600hp loco pushing 1600-1800 tonnes will do damage if things are in the way, and things are most likely to be in the way around the margins, where you need to be close to it to check whether or not it's safe to continue. There's a reason these things are tightly controlled - do them wrong and you'll damage, hurt or kill things.

 

[Meerkat]

When setting back, you need to check, among other things, that any points are set correctly (trailing and facing), that no other trains are moving that might conflict, that nobody is in the way or might potentially be in the way (including trespass), that there are no obstructions likely to damage the train or track (if the train has used the emergency braking then it could have dislodged something), and that the rear of the train does not stop foul of anywhere it's not meant to.
Bear in mind that Signaller, driver and shunter all need to have a clear understanding of what each other are doing and what the train is doing and why. If somebody's job involves driving a different train they can't be fully focused on the move in hand. This isn't like waving a mate into a tight parking space. The driver of the train will not know anything is wrong for a long time, as (s)he has 600-800m of train between her/him and the problem. Some of these problems might be on tolerances of millimetres, such as the wagon scraping the platform edge - it might be fine, it might just be a scrape, but it could damage a really vital component or bump the coping stone out of gauge and that then tears a Titanic-style hole in the next LO unit.
Even at 5mph, A 3,600hp loco pushing 1600-1800 tonnes will do damage if things are in the way, and things are most likely to be in the way around the margins, where you need to be close to it to check whether or not it's safe to continue. There's a reason these things are tightly controlled - do them wrong and you'll damage, hurt or kill things.

Is any of that applicable to a train that only needs to go back a little bit along a line it just came along legitimately?

 

[najaB]

Is any of that applicable to a train that only needs to go back a little bit along a line it just came along legitimately?

The problem is, how far is "a little bit"? In this case it might only have been, say 40m, of plain line but in the next it's 60m, then 150m with a crossover, then...

 

[Meerkat]

The problem is, how far is "a little bit"? In this case it might only have been, say 40m, of plain line but in the next it's 60m, then 150m with a crossover, then...

That would be a risk assesment for the signaller/controller. "Do we need to risk a MOM trackside, or can we safely use a driver who is about to pass by the other way?"