Passenger detrainment onto electrically live line, Peckham Rye

[Busaholic]

I would imagine passengers were getting somewhat irritated and may well have made their own evacuation arrangements had it continued?

Something or other hitting the fan, perhaps?

 

[Bletchleyite]

You're off the mark here.

The whole point is that an evacuation may be necessary at any point on the network where a train fails. The risk of a passenger coming into contact with the live rail is mitigated by requesting a switch off, which evidently didn't happen in this case (hence the investigation).

There are many good reasons why the juice rail changes sides as have been pointed out by other posters.

Apologies, I had misunderstood the context of this situation (i.e. the station layout).

 

[Mojo]

See the thread here...

https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/third-rail-on-the-outside-on-the-southern.157699/#post-3228602

I get that, but the detrainment was carried out from the secondman’s side, into the 6ft, and the 6ft is also where the conductor rail was during the detrainment.

 

[Bromley boy]

The third rail does also switch away from the platform side at the overwhelming majority of stations.

At the risk of going slightly off topic, are you (or anyone else) aware of any stations where the third rail is between the platform and the running rails?

 

[tsr]

At the risk of going slightly off topic, are you (or anyone else) aware of any stations where the third rail is between the platform and the running rails?

As it happens, it was on a fairly recent thread.

There are two such platform faces which are accessible to passengers but not used for boarding and alighting, at Guildford and Norwood Junction. These are “double” faced platforms with two platforms for the same line.

The Down platform at Clandon has third rail on the platform side towards the London end, due to the crossover.

There are also various locations of fourth rail with an electrified rail on the platform side, including Morden.

 

[Bromley boy]

As it happens, it was on a fairly recent thread.

There are two such platform faces which are accessible to passengers but not used for boarding and alighting, at Guildford and Norwood Junction. These are “double” faced platforms with two platforms for the same line.

The Down platform at Clandon has third rail on the platform side towards the London end, due to the crossover.

There are also various locations of fourth rail with an electrified rail on the platform side, including Morden.

Thanks.

Thinking about it, Stratford is another 4th rail location, as the Central line trains open doors on both sides.

 

[TEW]

There are two such platform faces which are accessible to passengers but not used for boarding and alighting, at Guildford and Norwood Junction. These are “double” faced platforms with two platforms for the same line.

The Down platform at Clandon has third rail on the platform side towards the London end, due to the crossover.

Part of Guildford Platform 2 also has the 3rd rail on the platform side, only a small section.

Ascot has a similar set up to Guildford and Norwood Junction, with a track with platform faces on both sides, and unit recently it was the instruction that trains using the platform in the down direction (it is generally the up platform, but signalled for use in both directions) should open doors on the side with the 3rd rail directly below. This has now changed though and a fence has been installed along the length of the now non operational platform face.

 

[philthetube]

If the train has no toilets, as LO ones do not, action will need to be taken much sooner than if it does. Keeping passengers on a train without toilets for three hours (as seems to be the typical time before an evacuation) is unacceptable.

London underground policy is to be ready to detrain in 30 mins, no idea about the overground.

 

[83G/84D]

Do Electrical Control Room Operators (or whatever their job title actually is) ever listen in on all calls between the signallers and trains to listen out for any locations that they might need to switch off the juice to?

Up until quite recently the ECO for west London lines out of Paddington was at Romford whilst the route control was at Swindon and signalling controlled from TVSC at Didcot.

I think the ECO is now at Didcot, that was the plan anyway.

 

[Filton Bank]

Up until quite recently the ECO for west London lines out of Paddington was at Romford whilst the route control was at Swindon and signalling controlled from TVSC at Didcot.

I think the ECO is now at Didcot, that was the plan anyway.

The ECO is now at TVSC, yes. Although when the role of Didcot ECO was first introduced, he/she was actually located at Romford ECR.

 

[83G/84D]

The ECO is now at TVSC, yes. Although when the role of Didcot ECO was first introduced, he/she was actually located at Romford ECR.

Thanks for the confirmation.

 

[Chris M]

I am surprised that an evacuation was started so quickly. Considering the delay, decision to start an evacuation, the partial evacuation that happened, the decision to stop the evacuation and the eventual movement of the train into the station all too place in under one hour, that means the decision to evacuate must have been made pretty early on. Is that normal in cases where the train is fairly close to a station?

As I posted in another thread not too long ago (but which I now can't find) there are many factors that will increase, and many factors that will decrease, the length of time before passengers self-evacuate. Being in close proximity to a station is one that decreases the time before a self-evacuation happens. I don't travel regularly on that bit of the Overground, but I would be suprised if by 30 metres ahead of platform the "we are now arriving at Peckham Rye" automatic announcements hadn't started (assuming they were working) which would decrease even further the time taken before a passenger tried to self-evacuate. During the latter part of the evening peak on a metro service the train will likely have been carrying mostly commuters who want to get home, which will reduce the length of time they are willing to sit and wait - or stand and wait in many cases I suspect. However it was also dark, cold and possibly light rain (there was passing light rain in London that day, but I can't immediately find anything more precise) which would all reduce the motivation to leave the train.
At what point you choose to evacuate needs to take all these factors into account - a lightly-loaded, warm and lit intercity train with working toilets and no apparent danger on a dark, rainy, cold winter evening in a rural area a long distance from a station and passengers will normally wait several hours before getting impatient, especially if there are regular, clear and meaningful announcements that don't sound *to the passenger* as patronising or like an attempt to hide information. A packed commuter train in sight of a platform on a straight and level track in an urban area during the morning rush hour on a hot summer's day and you probably have less than 30 minutes, even with the best quality announcements. If there is visible smoke then you might not even get 10 minutes.

 

[zaax]

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/...ign=govuk-notifications&utm_content=immediate

At 18:46 hrs on Tuesday 7 November 2017, a London Overground service from Dalston Junction to Battersea Park, operated by Arriva Rail London, came to a stand shortly before reaching Peckham Rye station. A faulty component on the train had caused the brakes to apply, and the driver was unable to release them. There were about 450 passengers on the train.

The train driver spoke over the railway radio system to the service controller, train technicians, and the signaller. Following these conversations he began, with the assistance of a member of staff from Peckham Rye station, to evacuate the passengers from the train via the door at the right-hand side of the driver’s cab at the front of the train. This involved passengers climbing down vertical steps to ground level, very close to the live electric conductor rail (third rail) and walking along the side of the line for about 30 metres to Peckham Rye station.

Soon afterwards, an operations manager from Govia Thameslink Rail, which manages Peckham Rye station, contacted the member of station staff and realised where they were and what was happening. The operations manager immediately instructed the driver to stop the evacuation, and requested that he contact the signaller and his company’s controller for further instructions. The driver, after further advice from control room based train technicians, isolated various train safety systems, and found that he was eventually able to release the brakes and move the train forward into Peckham Rye station, arriving at about 19:44 hrs. It was then possible for all the remaining passengers to leave the train normally, and it proceeded, empty, to the depot at New Cross Gate. No-one was hurt in the incident.....

If people can't walk in the dark they should be out in the dark

 

[theageofthetra]

Trains which run over areas with 3rd rail electrification all carry a Short Circuiting Bar that can be applied by trained staff to discharge the traction current in an emergency.

Personally I would put the short circuiting bar down even if the signaller has confirmed switch off. Belt & Braces.

 

[theageofthetra]

What if the cess is not a safe place to walk?

Loads of locations like that.

 

[atraindriver]

<deleted>

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Loads of locations like that.

For the simple reason - it is not really maintained and kept clear - debris , bits of equipment , often overhanging or intrusive vegetation.....

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Personally I would put the short circuiting bar down even if the signaller has confirmed switch off. Belt & Braces.

Agreed - very good move - done it several times even with a confirmed (verbal) authority that the juice is off. Instances of overlapping sections "livening up" with a bridging train - you can never be too careful and it takes no time ..(not forgetting of course to take a shoe paddle and belt the underneath of the con rail to ensure a fairly decent contact before the bar goes down) ....

 

[bramling]

Personally I would put the short circuiting bar down even if the signaller has confirmed switch off. Belt & Braces.

Isn’t the point of the SCD more to prevent accidental *recharge* rather than as a means of discharging? Whilst it can be used as an emergency means of discharge, that certainly shouldn’t be regarded as its primary purpose AIUI.

 

[atraindriver]

<deleted>

 

[bramling]

Don't have SCDs in my part of the world, but isn't it a bit like putting TC clips down on your own line even in an axle-counter area? It's not going to hurt, and it might just help, so why not?

Quite so, but the point is that it’s not just a case of a “nice to have”, but actually more fundamentally important than that. Switching errors can and have happened at times, so having the SCD down mitigates against that.

One doesn’t really want to be laying one on a live rail unless absolutely necessary. One hazard is if it doesn’t manage to trip the breakers in the substation for whatever reason - this happened on LU a few years ago when a breaker in Leicester Square substation stuck, resulting in the SCD failing to discharge the juice... and the small matter of the SCD arcing round the person trying to lay it.

 

[atraindriver]

<deleted>

 

[Taunton]

Personally I would put the short circuiting bar down even if the signaller has confirmed switch off. Belt & Braces.

I thought this was always standard procedure, and trained as such. Even if the current has been discharged there is still the risk that another train will overrun the section breaker and its collector shoes bridge across from a live to the isolated section. Don't London Underground do driver training on this, including actually training on a live conductor rail and seeing the sparks etc, as a standard matter?

Disappointed that the report, although just mentioning in passing that there were 450 passengers on the train, does not emphasise that this means nearly 100 per coach, getting on for crush-loaded conditions. Once again, it is a management attitude of "they have to sit (actually stand) there and shut up for an hour while we all discuss how to handle it".

 

[Komma]

I also believe it would help if staff across the industry could get to spend a day every so often shadowing staff in other grades; signallers with drivers, drivers with signallers or in the control office, the controllers with drivers or signallers, so that all involved get some idea of what the others are dealing with. Every so often a company will start doing it, but it rapidly peters out.

When working for Virgin at Euston 6 years ago, they did this for a few months and was a really good idea, but being the railway good ideas don't last too long. Tried to get this introduced at London Midland a few years ago, but told business needs took president.

 

[atraindriver]

<deleted>

 

[Elecman]

Hall Road training school had a short section of 3rd Rail with its own breaker that was used for training of dropping SCds onto a live 3rd Rail. Did it a few times myself! Now all sadly closed and gone.

 

[Dstock7080]

Don't London Underground do driver training on this, including actually training on a live conductor rail and seeing the sparks etc, as a standard matter?

Not on live track, short dummy section of unelectrified track.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

One wonders if there were not any off duty rail staff on the train , who could have possibly assisted the driver (obviously in non safety critical roles*) , to take the pressure off and give some communication to the passengers or whatever. ? - done it more times than I care to recall , but a little support in a pressured time can really help. Even by just talking to people etc.

Fragmentation of the railway not helpful here of course , - as off duty staff of another company might not feel "qualified" to assist. Regrettably.

* even more helpful if they were passed out on safety stuff - but even then , it is the issue of "I do not work for your company" ......

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Not on live track, short dummy section of unelectrified track.

I did some basic LUL stuff when I worked on Crossrail 1 and on the NLR with Bakerloo colleugues . Track competent , possession master etc ...all very interesting. Then the LUL SCD's were of this "hinged" type where you had to assemble it first then apply it. Is this still the case ?

(PS - it was not part of the training we did at White City !)

 

[bramling]

I did some basic LUL stuff when I worked on Crossrail 1 and on the NLR with Bakerloo colleugues . Track competent , possession master etc ...all very interesting. Then the LUL SCD's were of this "hinged" type where you had to assemble it first then apply it. Is this still the case ?

(PS - it was not part of the training we did at White City !)

No they’re now just a bar with a terminal at each end, weighted so that it naturally falls the correct way.