Trains travelling in the wrong direction, will this happen more frequently?

[whole diary]

[James]

Nothing new to be honest, however it does concern me that trains seem to be heading in the wrong direction recently. One example i read was a train was coming from Gatwick Airport to Redhill and of course it has to wait a few minutes, for the points and signals to change, however on the 1013 service, the First Great Western train was put onto the same direction it came from, when it should have gone to Reigate and Reading instead. I hate it when one says oh its network rail's problem and the other says its FGW^▸ (First Great Western)'s issue. For goodness sake just run the railways properly then none of this would happen. However i wonder how frequently this happens... puts me off travelling now, what if the signaller said yep you can go, and the driver doesnt bother to look but decides yep ill proceed, when another train is coming head on... thats further evidence to avoid trains i think... Bunch of numptys

[John R]

Please give some more facts behind the example you've read, as your description is rather hard to follow.

As for "what if the signaller said yep you can go, and the driver doesn't bother to look but decides yep ill proceed, when another train is coming head on" then I would suggest the following:-

signallers set routes and signals, not say "yep you can go"

they can't set these routes and signals such that a head on collision would result

drivers do bother to look at signals and in your example the signal would have been cleared (other than it couldn't be of course)

So I think you are making up 'evidence' to suggest that the railway is unsafe and run by a 'bunch of numptys' - a phrase that I think most of those involved in railway safety would find quite offensive.

You avoid railways if you want to - I'm quite happy travelling 25,000 miles a year on a system that hasn't had a passenger fatality from a crash in over 6 years, and on which the last head on collision was over 10 years ago.

[chuffed]

Well said John R, couldn't agree with you more!

[grahame]

Please give some more facts behind the example you've read, as your description is rather hard to follow.

Yes, please do give more details, James.

As I read it, you're telling us about a Gatwick to Reading train that came into Redhill to reverse (as it has to do on that journey) and got signalled out after the reversal back to Gatwick ...

There are occasions where a Reading to Gatwick train gets capped (cut off short) at Redhill, so it comes in from the Reading / Reigate direction and the goes out in the same direction again.   Typically that happens to allow a late running train to get back into its pattern and avoid knock-on delays all day.   And it's not beyond the realms of possibility that passengers on the train may not have been informed or understood what's happening, especially if the delay's due to problems with the train which the crew are concentrating or, or if the passengers who get taken back don't understand the announcements.  Unfortunate, but hardly dangerous.

[trainer]

I'm not sure I understand completely the original post, but travelling in Europe extensively it is common practice for trains to weave from one track to another (at speed) as engineering work takes place all week while the railway is 'live'.  There are no specific issues with trains correctly following procedure using fully reversible lines.  NR^» (Network Rail - home page) has spent a fortune on installing reversible track just so delays can be minimised and safety ensured.  We have one of the safest railway systems in the world and like others posting before me, I have no hesitation in using it and actually feel safer than when I have to use the motorway.

[James]

Well i am sorry if i am offensive to people who work with the signals, but i hardly find it acceptable if a signaller says to the driver you may proceed when not all the safety checks have been completed. And u call that a good safety record, dream on!. Comeon every railway in the world has issues, so why should the uk be the exception?

[eightf48544]

James I think you have failed to grasp the main feature of railway safety in that rail signals are not traffic lights they don't change randomly in front of trains (except in an emergency when they go to red and the driver will make an emergency brake application).

Before a signal can be cleared the route to the next signal must be proved to be clear of trains (track circuits clear axle counters zero) all points in the route and others on conflicting routes (flank protection) proved to be in the correct position and locked (a separate mechanism to point changing motor). Once all this is proved then the signal will clear. If there is the possibility of a route change in front of the signal then the signal will display some form of route indicator (Feathers or Line Designation).

If as you alleged the Train from Gatwick returned towards Gatwick then the Three Bridges Signalman made a mistake in setting the route and the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) driver made a mistake in accepting the signal for an incorrect route.  However although silly mistakes it was perfectly safe any other trains in Redhill would either have been stopped at a signal until the Gatwick had cleared or be on non conflicting routes.

At worse it would cause an awful lot of delay minutes which would have to be explained away.

It is possible that had it happened as you said the Signalman and Driver would be sublject to a disciplinary hearing.

[TonyK]

And it is equally possible that the whole thing was set quite deliberately - and safely - to allow one train to pass another. Bignosemac posted video of something similar happening in Teignmouth, where the train he was on, having been delayed earlier, overtook the stopper by going through the station "wrong line". The driver knew it was happening, and I think it was announced. It was unusual, but not in any way dangerous.

Edit: See it here. Scroll down to the Youtube link.

And there's no cause for alarm, James lad, everything's under control. Grand day out, and all that...

[James]

Thankyou for clarifying that eight and what ever the number is?
I already feel nervous about travelling by train, so something like this to happen is abit concerning, but after reading what u have posted, i have more courage to board trains now, so thankyou. Once again sorry if i caused any offensive, after its was a concern...

[broadgage]

To add to the points above, many lines are signalled for use in either direction, but used primarily in one direction.
This gives valuable flexibility in case of breakdowns.
It is common practice to route the odd train in the "wrong" direction to ensure that the equipment remains in reliable working order, and the drivers remain familair with running in the opposite direction to normal.

If two trains proceed in opposite directions onto the same line line there is clearly the risk of serious accident, but this is virtualy impossible on a modern railway.

Firstly the signaller would know not to clear both routes at the same time, secondly interlocking would protect against human error by the signaller.
The drivers would be well aware of the need to carefully observe signalls, and human error by the driver will usually be gaurded against by automatic safety features.
No system is abosultely safe, but the proof of high safety standards is in the fact the fatal railway accidents in the UK^▸ (United Kingdom) are very rare, the last was several years ago.


The last fatal head on collision that I recall was at Cowden.
Two trains collided head on in a single line section, the inquiry found that the person driving one train had passed a signal at danger.
It was suggested that an unauthorised person may have been driving, but this was not proved either way
The red signal that was passed was not as bright as it should have been due to an infestation of insects within the signal.

A repeat of that tragedy should be impossible, since TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System) would have prevented the train passing the signal at danger, the system was not in use at the time.

Rail travel is very safe, the most dangerous part of a rail trip is said to be walking, cycling, or driving to the station.

[Gordon the Blue Engine]

Mrs GTBE and I went to the IOW on Thursday.  The 1045 Rdg - Bournemouth XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) went through Southampton Tunnel on what I would call the Up before crossing over to P4 (ie the Down Main).  Then on the way back the 1815 Southampton - Manchester XC left from P1 but went through the Tunnel on what I would call the Down.  Very innovative (and this was after the reported signalling problems they had earlier in the day), but perfectly safe and nothing James should be worried about.

I've noticed before that they do use the bi-directional signalling through the tunnel quite frequently, especially with the terminators coming into P2 and P3 from the east.

Incidentally, there was a 158 (?)  in P2 with the electric destination board in the cab showing "Worksop"!

[chuffed]

With the air con failings we have had this summer, do you suppose it was the closest they could get to 'WorksHop'

[James]

Thanks Guys, to add to this as well, to help with understanding the railways more (or not depending on your view point) is the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) documentary which apparently (although unconfirmed) starts next week Friday 16th August at 20:00 on channel 5, should be a good programme.

[James]

Since i am more of a visual person (prefer watching documentaries, than reading) it should also be more benefical.

[trainer]

the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) documentary which apparently (although unconfirmed) starts next week

Certainly not in the Radio Times - which is nearly as infallible as a holy book!