Overspeeding near Manor Park, 24 September 2024 (RAIB report)

[Jimini]

Can't see this one on the forum already, so sharing here:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/6793908ce863a0e7724f4b1e/D012025_250127_Manor_Park.pdf

Summary of the incident At around 08:11, train reporting number 9W38, the 06:50 passenger service from Heathrow Terminal 5 to Shenfield, operated by MTR Elizabeth line, passed over a set of points east of Manor Park station, East London, while travelling at a speed of 45 mph (72 km/h). This was above the permissible maximum speed for this set of points, which is 25 mph (40 km/h). The train had been diverted to pass over this junction from its originally booked route because of a track circuit failure. Passing over the points at this speed caused the train to jolt sideways. Although there were no reported injuries, CCTV footage from inside the train shows that the sudden movement resulted in some passengers losing their footing and that at least one passenger fell to the floor. The train did not derail during the incident and no damage was caused to the infrastructure or to the vehicles involved. After the incident occurred the train continued on its journey.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

How is the driver expected to see that PSR sign!?

 

[43066]

How is the driver expected to see that PSR sign!?

Strictly speaking you’re supposed to know the speed even if the sign isn’t visible. That said it’s a useful reminder when you’re being put onto a loop you hardly ever use, and this is a fairly easy mistake to make.

I wonder whether the member of staff who reported the jolt to control also told the driver so that they could tell the signaller.

 

[SuspectUsual]

That said it’s a useful reminder when you’re being put onto a loop you hardly ever use

How useful is it if it's right on top of the junction and there's no time to slow down? If the driver has forgotten surely its too late by then?

 

[Nippy]

That’s a start of restriction board, there should have been a warning board in place approaching there.

 

[43066]

How useful is it if it's right on top of the junction and there's no time to slow down? If the driver has forgotten surely its too late by then?

Still useful - you’d be surprised how quickly you can scrub 10-20mph off, which could make the difference between being double the PSR, and people falling over/being injured, and being within one or two mph of it.

That’s a start of restriction board, there should have been a warning board in place approaching there.

Generally not for loops which are approach controlled. The issue is that, if the driver doesn’t recognise which way they’re being sent, modern traction can quickly accelerate to well above the entry speed between the signal clearing and reaching the points, as seems to have happened here.

 

[30907]

Still useful - you’d be surprised how quickly you can scrub 10-20mph off, which could make the difference between being double the PSR, and people falling over/being injured, and being within one or two mph of it.



Generally not for loops which are approach controlled. The issue is that, if the driver doesn’t recognise which way he’s being sent, modern traction can quickly accelerate to well above the entry speed, as seems to have happened here.

Unsurprisingly, the report cross references the Spital Jn and Fletton incidents at Peterborough, which were more serious.

 

[chuff chuff]

How useful is it if it's right on top of the junction and there's no time to slow down? If the driver has forgotten surely its too late by then?

Not sure where else you'd have it.

That’s a start of restriction board, there should have been a warning board in place approaching there.

How many warning boards would we have in that case.

 

[saismee]

That’s a start of restriction board, there should have been a warning board in place approaching there.

Considering the fact that the sign was missing a direction arrow, i'd imagine it is generally ignored by drivers, especially if this track is under-used. I do (partially) agree, though... surely a warning board with a left-hand arrow under the signal and route indicator would work (or possibly just move the PSR sign to there?)

 

[43066]

i'd imagine it is generally ignored by drivers, especially if this track is under-used. I do (partially) agree, though... surely a warning board with a left-hand arrow under the signal and route indicator would work (or possibly just move the PSR sign to there?)

If (as in this incident) the driver mistakenly believes they’re on a different line to the one they are on, or that they’re being sent onto a different route to the one that’s been set (as happened at Peterborough), they will disregard the warning signs anyway. These incidents are often down to poor route knowledge/lack of situational awareness, rather than signage.

 

[edwin_m]

or possibly just move the PSR sign to there?

That would force the trains to reduce speed earlier to pass the re-located sign at the restricted speed.

Not read the report yet, but it does seem to me that we need some sort of selective TPWS to protect high-risk diverging junction restrictions.

 

[Taunton]

I have noticed multiple times people losing their balance on the Liz at the eastbound high speed junction in tunnel after Whitechapel, between the Canary Wharf and Stratford directions - in fact it led to a conversation with a wheelchair user who then said they always noticed it there and hang tightly on leaving Whitechapel. Feel it yourselves when heading to Canary Wharf; don't know about the Stratford direction. And that's with Core section auto driving, fully compliant. Big wide trains with lots of standing space and insufficient handrails tend to this happening.

Regarding the incident in the report, I would expect the relevant signal to have a left feather, making it quite apparent you are turning off, rather than a bland 2-character code for a turnoff that many drivers on that route have never taken. I wonder when the driver was last told what "DA" there means; it's not particularly intuitive, is it?

 

[MP33]

In commuting on Greater Anglia, I can only remember being diverted onto that loop many years ago. That was to get round a failed train, and taken at low speed.

 

[zwk500]

Considering the fact that the sign was missing a direction arrow, i'd imagine it is generally ignored by drivers, especially if this track is under-used. I do (partially) agree, though... surely a warning board with a left-hand arrow under the signal and route indicator would work (or possibly just move the PSR sign to there?)

Raising the PSR sign to be mounted on the wall at (or nearer) eye level would help, particularly in avoiding it getting quite so filthy.

Not read the report yet, but it does seem to me that we need some sort of selective TPWS to protect high-risk diverging junction restrictions.

Or just crack on with ETCS fitment.

Regarding the incident in the report, I would expect the relevant signal to have a left feather, making it quite apparent you are turning off, rather than a bland 2-character code for a turnoff that many drivers on that route have never taken. I wonder when the driver was last told what "DA" there means; it's not particularly intuitive, is it?

Entirely possible space constraints prevent a feather being used in this instance. From a quick google images search the signal appears to be located quite close to the station overbridge, restricting visibility. The problem from the report though is not that the driver didn't realise what route was set but rather that they believed they were in a different position on the line (or forgot about the points). So the signal indications don't seem to be the problem here.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

The problem from the report though is not that the driver didn't realise what route was set but rather that they believed they were in a different position on the line (or forgot about the points). So the signal indications don't seem to be the problem here.

So it's down to situational awareness then; the driver was preoccupied or just assumed the status quo which can be quite understandable if you're driving a mundane commuter route day in day out

 

[dk1]

In commuting on Greater Anglia, I can only remember being diverted onto that loop many years ago. That was to get round a failed train, and taken at low speed.

Yes I got signalled round there just before Christmas. Was first time in at least 10 years. Up road avoider is every other week.

 

[304033]

The overspeed was reported to MTR control by a member of staff travelling on the train at the time of the incident. The driver felt the train jolt when it traversed the points but did not believe that this was severe enough to report. The driver continued with their shift, finishing duty at 12:09.

Is it just me, or does anyone else find this alarming and the RAIB dont seem to have picked up on it. Ie, MTR did nothing...

MTR Control knew something had happened just after 8am, and not just reported by 'Joe Public', but by 'a member of staff'.
The driver however thought nothing of it (the jolt) and carried on till their end of their shift at 12noon.

One would have through MTR would have got in touch with the driver and asked if everything was okay... etc etc.
For example, the driver could have been distracted or having a medical episode.

Put it another way round, years ago when I managed a fleet of drivers (on the road, not rail), it was customary to contact the driver if the Company HQ had received reports of their driving behaviour...

 

[Nippy]

Still useful - you’d be surprised how quickly you can scrub 10-20mph off, which could make the difference between being double the PSR, and people falling over/being injured, and being within one or two mph of it.



Generally not for loops which are approach controlled. The issue is that, if the driver doesn’t recognise which way they’re being sent, modern traction can quickly accelerate to well above the entry speed between the signal clearing and reaching the points, as seems to have happened here.

You learn something everyday. Been a signaller for 30+ years and thought all PSRs had warning boards as well. Doh.

 

[43066]

Is it just me, or does anyone else find this alarming and the RAIB dont seem to have picked up on it. Ie, MTR did nothing...

MTR Control knew something had happened just after 8am, and not just reported by 'Joe Public', but by 'a member of staff'.
The driver however thought nothing of it (the jolt) and carried on till their end of their shift at 12noon.

One would have through MTR would have got in touch with the driver and asked if everything was okay... etc etc.
For example, the driver could have been distracted or having a medical episode.

Put it another way round, years ago when I managed a fleet of drivers (on the road, not rail), it was customary to contact the driver if the Company HQ had received reports of their driving behaviour...

It’s possible that the member of staff spoke to the driver, and the driver also then spoke to control/the signaller, confirmed everything was alright, and agreed to continue. If the person who reported it just called control, that would seem a little odd, and not particularly professional/helpful, for the reasons you say.

The severity of jolts is surprisingly difficult to gauge from the driver’s seat.

You learn something everyday. Been a signaller for 30+ years and thought all PSRs had warning boards as well. Doh.

That’s interesting! I think there are lots of myths going both ways between drivers and signallers. It’s worth getting out into a few cabs if you can - I spent a day in a ROC early last year and it was incredibly useful.

 

[12LDA28C]

How many warning boards would we have in that case.

One, is as normal on the approach to a PSR where there is a significant reduction in line speed unless the controlling signal is approach controlled.

You learn something everyday. Been a signaller for 30+ years and thought all PSRs had warning boards as well. Doh.

I've always understood that not all PSRs have warning boards and only those that feature a reduction of more than a third of line speed have an AWS magnet associated with the warning board although I'm happy to be corrected.

 

[Class15]

Just to confirm, this is the connection between the Down Main and Down Electric that runs ‘around the flyover’?

 

[chuff chuff]

One, is as normal on the approach to a PSR where there is a significant reduction in line speed unless the controlling signal is approach controlled.

I responded to this from nippy.....
That’s a start of restriction board, there should have been a warning board in place approaching there.

Basically nippy thought every psr board had a warning board,my point was how many warning boards would we have if that was the case.

 

[dk1]

Just to confirm, this is the connection between the Down Main and Down Electric that runs ‘around the flyover’?

Yes. Known as the Down Avoider.

 

[Horizon22]

Is it just me, or does anyone else find this alarming and the RAIB dont seem to have picked up on it. Ie, MTR did nothing...

MTR Control knew something had happened just after 8am, and not just reported by 'Joe Public', but by 'a member of staff'.
The driver however thought nothing of it (the jolt) and carried on till their end of their shift at 12noon.

One would have through MTR would have got in touch with the driver and asked if everything was okay... etc etc.
For example, the driver could have been distracted or having a medical episode.

Put it another way round, years ago when I managed a fleet of drivers (on the road, not rail), it was customary to contact the driver if the Company HQ had received reports of their driving behaviour...

If an operational incident had occured, control would inform an On-Call manager. The On-Call driver manager would speak to the driver (probably on arrival at Shenfield) and then report back about whether the driver needed to be relieved / continue duty etc.

That is then down to what the expert (the on-call driver manager) deems suitable, not control. It may be that the driver was unaware of what they had actually done and therefore that is what was reported back. If I recall when the initial notification came out of an RAIB investigation it was some time after the incident - we're talking weeks - because I don't think anyone was able to connect the dots until perhaps a train download had been completed and report to RAIB.

The Down Avoider is generally only used disruption and occasionally during late night (after 2300) two track closures. This driver had a particularly odd routing as it served Maryland P3.

 

[Nippy]

I responded to this from nippy.....
That’s a start of restriction board, there should have been a warning board in place approaching there.

Basically nippy thought every psr board had a warning board,my point was how many warning boards would we have if that was the case.

Sorry, to clarify, I thought every PSR at a diverging route had a warning board. I know from cab rides along the Berks and Hants that not all plain line PSRs have warning boards.

 

[chuff chuff]

Sorry, to clarify, I thought every PSR at a diverging route had a warning board. I know from cab rides along the Berks and Hants that not all plain line PSRs have warning boards.

Ah okay ta.....

 

[Nippy]

That’s interesting! I think there are lots of myths going both ways between drivers and signallers. It’s worth getting out into a few cabs if you can - I spent a day in a ROC early last year and it was incredibly useful.

Fat chance of that. Trying to get a cab ride is hard these days. The cab pass is only officially valid with a travel ticket. I used to enjoy cab rides on the Western Route when I was over there.

 

[43066]

Sorry, to clarify, I thought every PSR at a diverging route had a warning board. I know from cab rides along the Berks and Hants that not all plain line PSRs have warning boards.

Generally not when you have an approach controlled signal into a loop or lower speed diverging route, because being checked down to the signal and the junction indicator/theatre box indication is seen as enough of a warning.

The rule of thumb as @12LDA28C stated is that reductions of more than 1/3 line speed on plain line should have a “Morpeth board” and magnet, but even these don’t always.

Overall it’s a mixed bag depending on when lines were rebuilt, when different standards came in etc. Quite a few speed boards are totally illegible/missing/incorrectly placed, and they aren’t maintained particularly well.

Fat chance of that. Trying to get a cab ride is hard these days. The cab pass is only officially valid with a travel ticket. I used to enjoy cab rides on the Western Route when I was over there.

That’s a real shame. I don’t think it’s true that they’re only valid with a ticket, though? Worth asking your LOM.

 

[mcmad]

That’s a real shame. I don’t think it’s true that they’re only valid with a ticket, though? Worth asking your LOM.

Pretty sure it is as we've been told the same and (pre COVID) the office had a couple of 'wildcard' passes to allow cab riding. Having said that, never been asked to see my ticket, just usually the pass itself.

 

[43066]

Pretty sure it is as we've been told the same and (pre COVID) the office had a couple of 'wildcard' passes to allow cab riding. Having said that, never been asked to see my ticket, just usually the pass itself.

Fair enough, if that what you’ve been told, although that just seems absolutely ridiculous (and personally whenever I have someone from NR in the cab it wouldn’t occur to me to ask for a ticket!)! I suppose I should know better than to be surprised by anything in this industry .

Route learning cab passes given by TOCs to drivers don’t need to be accompanied by tickets, or at least I’ve never heard of such a requirement.