Train fire between Lee and Mottingham.

[philjo]

I thought most EMUs had electric batteries to provide emergency lighting and the likes for 90 minutes? Although emergency lighting is normally only minimal.

Whilst all electricity from the third rail would be lost, these batteries would kick in.

Not sure if the batteries provide electricity for PA systems though in emergencies?

The British Standard for emergency lighting states that a minimum duration of 3 hours should be used for emergency escape lighting if the premises are not evacuated immediately, such as sleeping accommodation, or if the premises will be reoccupied immediately the supply is restored without waiting for the batteries to be recharged.

Duration of 1 hour should only be used if the premises are evacuated immediately on supply failure and not reoccupied until full capacity has been restored to the batteries.

In BS 5266 there is detailed information on the duration of system in various premises.


I assume that this also applies to trains so the 3 hour duration should be used as obviously otherwise the train would have to be evacuated as soon as the power goes off.

I have been on EMUs when the power supply has gone off (once stuck near Knebworth for about 30 minutes without overhead power) the PA was still working & obviously the ability to unlock the doors.

 

[Tracky]

I am sure there are notices on board that advise of what to do if there is an incident such as a fire on the train.

I suspect they say you should remain on board if possible and move down the train to another vehicle. If not possible they will give instructions on how best to leave the train and safety information regarding hazards.

 

[Peter Mugridge]

I assume the wiring for the emergency power supply does not run anywhere near the wiring for the normal power supply though? Otherwise both sets of wiring would be taken out simultaneously by any damage to the looms.

 

[Petermount]

Just googled and found this about the southeastern fire from February at Gravesend http://trainwatch.co.uk/forums/viewtopic.php?f=9&t=847

Not a lot of info there. Just mentions cabling under train. It would be very interesting to see the results of investigations into these fires

That was all the info I had at the time for that incident & I've not seen any other reference to it since which provides anything more than what Kent Fire Brigade published.

 

[Dr.iver]

Without wishing to sound unpopular but once passengers start to remove themselves the first priority of the driver is to contact the box , cutting the power off and laying protection to protect all lines, the passengers are no longer his first priority.
One possible explanation ( just my opinion and not to be taken as gospel)for lack of PA is if it's an electrical fire which the photos seem to show then you eliminate the source by tripping the auxiilleries to cut of the source of the fire, on ohl you can drop pans to do this but on third rail you can only achieve this by cutting all power.
It's a situation I'd never want to be in again( had a rectifier catch fire once)
When I start any journey passengers are asked to read the safety notices which do tell people to move into other carriages away from the fire but unfortunately in the real world people will panic and look to the nearest exit.
this looks to me like judgement on anyone involved is left for the RAIB to make and let's just be grateful everyone is okay

 

[A-driver]

Perhaps a bit of common sense here? If the train is involved in an electrical fire then ALL electrical systems will be turned off including emergancy backups and battery supply's. If train is on fire then, unless it is dark (which it dosnt look too dark in the photos) and the lights are needed or the doors are electrical, trip out the auxes. Battery backup systems etc are there for power failures but why trip out the electrics for an electrical fire and leave the emergency power on?! That's like having a forest fire and moving a few cardboard boxes out the way to try and remove the fuel is it not!

 

[Cliveblackpool]

DOO
I would imagine IF there was a guard on the train, initially he would have simply evacuated the affected coach, and led them into the other coaches. Announcing that everyone else to remain seated!

 

[ushawk]

DOO
I would imagine IF there was a guard on the train, initially he would have simply evacuated the affected coach, and led them into the other coaches. Announcing that everyone else to remain seated!

The train was in South London - people would have forced doors open and is now common as people are purely selfish.

As someone else has pointed out, signs are on the trains in case of emergencies - if there is a fire, you move into the next coach - not force open the doors and not bother to wait for assistance and go for a wander along a live electrified railway line.

 

[Daz28]

DOO
I would imagine IF there was a guard on the train, initially he would have simply evacuated the affected coach, and led them into the other coaches. Announcing that everyone else to remain seated!

I suspect that if there had been a guard, it would have taken them some time to identify that there was a fire, get to the carriage affected and start directing passengers. If there were flames licking the windows, I'm sure that the passengers would already have decided what they needed to do and would already be doing it.

The danger in third rail land of evacuating trains is not quite as great as in other areas. Once the traction current has been switched off (or shorted), the risk of being hit by another train is negligible.

I think we should be celebrating that the safety systems and procedures in place are such that despite being a DOO service, a fire and full train evacuation occurred with no injuries.

Does anyone know how the train was recovered? Presumably something from Hither Green was sent to collect?

 

[A-driver]

Negligible? Seriously?! Are you saying that only electric traction passes over third rail lines? Those north Kent lines get very heavy use by freight if I remember from my days living in eltham. A diesel will have no indication the third rail is off. As for third rail units it really depends what they are doing, you will of course loose power but if you are coasting or braking then you may not notice the lack of power.

The risks are the same with evacuating a train anywhere regardless of the power source!

 

[ushawk]

http://www.btp.presscentre.com/Medi...-train-fire-Mottingham-rail-station-1ada.aspx

BTP have launched an appeal for witnessed as it is believed the train struck an object. 2 people were seen running from the scene. Seems it isnt a fault on board the train then.

 

[andchafri]

There's been a few fires on Southeastern over the past few months. One was in Sevenoaks in April - http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-kent-17797030 and another Gravesend/Dartford way. And this after a £45m refurb has just been completed. Anyone heard of what has been causing them? I wondered if the Railways Inspectorate have published anything?

As far as I am aware the fire at Sevenoaks was caused by someone setting fire to a litter bin on a 319

 

[Daz28]

Negligible? Seriously?! Are you saying that only electric traction passes over third rail lines? Those north Kent lines get very heavy use by freight if I remember from my days living in eltham. A diesel will have no indication the third rail is off. As for third rail units it really depends what they are doing, you will of course loose power but if you are coasting or braking then you may not notice the lack of power.

The risks are the same with evacuating a train anywhere regardless of the power source!

Freight on those lines are pretty infrequent these days, and don't the signals switch to danger when the traction is shorted?

 

[user15681]

I'd completely agree with what's been said. It was an electrical fire and so it would make sense that all sources of electricity were turned off. It's absolutely right the driver's priorities are to secure the line etc.

Is it me, or does that look like a guard on the right of this picture? https://p.twimg.com/AvTXRdsCAAIs8Sj.jpg It looks like the handheld ticket machines they carry.

Also, many witnesses have said that they saw people running away and the area is known for vandalism, so it would seem this could have been deliberate.

 

[30 common]

No the driver needs to lay track circuit clips to set a signal to red or contact the signaller to block the lines

 

[tsr]

Freight on those lines are pretty infrequent these days, and don't the signals switch to danger when the traction is shorted?

I should sincerely hope that the train would be protected by red signals anyway a) because it is still on the track, between signals and has not passed the next one, and b) because I am sure the driver reported an emergency and told the signaller where he or she was and what was happening.

However, as we can see, not all signals were set to danger at the incident site:

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-18436708

(See the second photo down, which appears to be from a gentleman who criticised those who didn't consider the dangers of the third rail (in the text) but who has then been credited with taking a photo standing right next to it).

The signals may have been set to danger further down the track (behind the point of view of the photo). I don't know if anyone can prove this unless the RAIB or SE post here!

 

[A-driver]

A signal at danger still dosnt mean you can assume the line is safe. And killing current n the third rail will not affect the signals. It dosnt matter how infrequent freight is or how well you think you know the time table-you should never assume any part of the railway is safe unless the signaller has personally assured you it is blocked. I sincerely hope you are not a railway worker or else something has been seriously wrong with your most basic training! As I say, it dosnt matter if the majority of trains on a route are powered by third rail, overheads, diesel, steam etc etc, it makes it no safer going on the line without someone obtaining a block first.

 

[Michael.Y]

I appreciate that it probably wasn't the right thing to have done.......but as nobody told us what the right thing was, what were we to do?

Read the posters.

 

[tsr]

A signal at danger still dosnt mean you can assume the line is safe.

Not at all. All sorts of things can go wrong, as we know. The key thing to remember, to paraphrase, is that nothing can ever be expected to be safe and any change in circumstances can occur at any moment. Not that you don't know that...

And killing current n the third rail will not affect the signals.

No, although in an incident such as this you would rather hope that the driver, the ECO and the signaller would work together to help remove many (but obviously not all) the hazards from the situation, including setting the relevant signals to danger and turning off/discharging the traction current.

It dosnt matter how infrequent freight is or how well you think you know the time table-you should never assume any part of the railway is safe unless the signaller has personally assured you it is blocked.

No, indeed. You are quite right. Even if it is blocked, you should still be vigilant, because all railway communications of this nature are safety critical and any misunderstanding of what is blocked (for example) can be fatal.

I sincerely hope you are not a railway worker or else something has been seriously wrong with your most basic training!

I sincerely hope you are not referring to any of my posts. I never advocated any unsafe action, as I merely commented on what I have read, what I have seen in the photos available and thus what I think the situation may have included.

As I say, it dosnt matter if the majority of trains on a route are powered by third rail, overheads, diesel, steam etc etc, it makes it no safer going on the line without someone obtaining a block first.

I completely agree.

 

[A-driver]

No, wasn't referring to your posts 'tsr', was 'Daz28' who was worrying me as he seems to think that just shutting the current off makes the tracks a safe place to be!

 

[Daz28]

No, wasn't referring to your posts 'tsr', was 'Daz28' who was worrying me as he seems to think that just shutting the current off makes the tracks a safe place to be!

You misunderstood my comments.

I said that in this scenario, the risk of being hit by another train is negligible (but not zero). That does not mean that I think it is safe, I am fully aware that there are many other risks that exist.

 

[millemille]

Traction current on the down was discharged before the train came to a stand as the supply breakers opened and stayed open after the 3rd and final tripping. Tripping had started ~2 minutes before breakers opened for good.

Driver immediately shut the train down.

Traction current was discharged and protection on the Up was in place shortly after 1st passengers started to detrain themselves.

There were several off duty rail staff on board who assisted with ensuring that any vulnerable passengers had been safely detrained from leading vehicles before emergency services were on scene.

 

[Failed Unit]

DOO
I would imagine IF there was a guard on the train, initially he would have simply evacuated the affected coach, and led them into the other coaches. Announcing that everyone else to remain seated!

Maybe - but equally as the train don't have corridor connections they could be in the wrong half of the train! Meaning by the time they swap units the passengers already bail out.

 

[John55]

The train was in South London - people would have forced doors open and is now common as people are purely selfish.

As someone else has pointed out, signs are on the trains in case of emergencies - if there is a fire, you move into the next coach - not force open the doors and not bother to wait for assistance and go for a wander along a live electrified railway line.

I am interested to hear you think it is selfish to try and avoid being involved in a fire in a restricted space. I for one do not agree.

In addition can you tell me where there are signs saying what to do in the event of fire on a Networker? I travelled home this evening on 466.033 and went out of my way to find such a sign in my coach and could not see it.

 

[user15681]

In addition can you tell me where there are signs saying what to do in the event of fire on a Networker? I travelled home this evening on 466.033 and went out of my way to find such a sign in my coach and could not see it.

I too have never seen such posters on any SE trains. I've seen posters on FCC that show diagrams of the carriage and the evacuation procedure, or advice to move down the train during an incident. I've never seen one on SE.

 

[tsr]

No, wasn't referring to your posts 'tsr', was 'Daz28' who was worrying me as he seems to think that just shutting the current off makes the tracks a safe place to be!

Good! Thanks for clarifying that! I was just checking. Sorry if I sound rude (I'm most certainly not trying to be), but please do quote the post you're referring to!

In addition can you tell me where there are signs saying what to do in the event of fire on a Networker? I travelled home this evening on 466.033 and went out of my way to find such a sign in my coach and could not see it.

This sounds somewhat worrying - was there any reference at all to leaving (or indeed not leaving) the train in an emergency?

 

[lookingforit35]

I use Southeastern Networkers pretty frequently. I have to say that if there are any emergency instructions they are not hugely apparent. TempleRyan is correct that they are very obvious on other services, FCC being one of them, but not a lot seems visible on SE.

I admit it might be a case of being over familiar (a bit like frequent flyers not listening to the safety demonstartion), but I cant for the life of me picture what SE provide by way of instructions.

 

[ushawk]

I am interested to hear you think it is selfish to try and avoid being involved in a fire in a restricted space. I for one do not agree.

In addition can you tell me where there are signs saying what to do in the event of fire on a Networker? I travelled home this evening on 466.033 and went out of my way to find such a sign in my coach and could not see it.

Always thought the Networkers had a couple of posters in each carriage, of course if they cant be clearly seen the Southeastern need to get that sorted out.

Of course it isnt selfish to move, but walking unattended along a potentially live railway line without being told to by any railway staff is pure stupid - you wait for advice from Train Crew or the emergency services, not start going for a walk. Should be noted that the fire was at the FRONT of the train and the train was heading TOWARDS Mottingham, the station where pax started walking along the line too, so they would have walked straight past the fire - please tell me if that is safer than staying on the train. As i said, you MOVE into the next carriage. I have no time for people who just cant be bothered to wait to be moved safely from the line, especially after being stuck on a packed train last Summer (coincidentally also in South London) because some people couldnt be bothered to wait for their train to get moving again (was originally a tresspass incident, which resulted in a further tresspass incident).

From the BBC News article that tsr posted - i pick this out

The driver asked passengers to move down the train but to stay on board. However, many travellers got off and began walking along the tracks.

"I was amazed at how many people did not seem to think about the live rail issue and just got off," Mr Alexander added.

So it seems that some passengers think they know more than a professional driver who has probably worked on the railways for some time and knows what they are doing and totally ignore what they say - that is pure selfishness as it requires extra people to go and see where these people are on the line.

 

[Clip]

I use Southeastern Networkers pretty frequently. I have to say that if there are any emergency instructions they are not hugely apparent. TempleRyan is correct that they are very obvious on other services, FCC being one of them, but not a lot seems visible on SE.

I admit it might be a case of being over familiar (a bit like frequent flyers not listening to the safety demonstartion), but I cant for the life of me picture what SE provide by way of instructions.

The electrostars all have them in - not much use to you who doesnt use them but they are in there.

 

[BestWestern]

In reality, safety posters are not read by the vast majority of people and are put in place because the TOC has to, not because they expect most people to take it all in and memorise the content for the duration of their journey. They are also often found damaged or missing on many trains, and in many cases some of the information can be baffling; for example a diagram showing specific parts of the track highlighted in a certain colour is more detail than most people are likely to take in at a casual glance. If there is what people judge to be an immediate emergency, they will very likely open the doors and bail, and fire is the prime example.

As for the Guard being elsewhere on the train, that is a valid point but they would be on the scene very quickly and at the very least would be able to make efforts to direct people who are wandering off and risking their lives. DC land is not a safe haven just because one particular train has come to a halt, even if your train is a 'juicer' and trips the current all by itself there is nothing to stop a freight, NR, RHTT or indeed a DMU appearing out of nowhere on the adjacent line. Unsupervised pax lineside is not a good thing, and is worse still when they have misguided 'knowledge' of how things work.