Train Graphic
Great Western Passengers' Forum Great Western Coffee Shop - [home] and [about]
Read about the forum [here].
Register and contribute [here] - it's free.
 today - Digital Railway - Swindon
today - Owl Auction - Bath
tomorrow - Friends of Bridgwater Station
tomorrow - TW NorthWest / Liverpool
22/10/2018 - ACoRP board nominations close
29/10/2018 - Avocet line AGM
Random Image
Train Running @GWR Twitter Acronyms/Abbreviations Station Comparator Rail News GWR co. site Site Style 1 2 3 4 Chat on off
October 17, 2018, 05:59:38 am *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most liked recent subjects
[128] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[96] Four track for Filton Bank - ongoing discussion
[53] Bristol's Temple Gate layout change planned in £21m revamp
[44] Missing - a strategy for buses?
[40] IETs into passenger service from 16 Oct 2017 and subsequent pe...
[38] Smoking and wee-ing at gated interchanges
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: A Mishap at London Bridge  (Read 799 times)
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3387


View Profile
« on: December 08, 2017, 06:32:33 pm »

From the Evening Standard:

Quote
A Southern Rail train split in two as it departed London Bridge station sparking further chaos for commuters who have already been blighted by delays all day.

The train was leaving the major commuter hub on Friday afternoon when the middle carriages of the eight-car train separated, the rail operator said.

Passengers were told to avoid London Bridge station and find another route home after the train split in two as it pulled away from the platform.

Govia Thameslink Railway, which runs the Southern train, said the brakes immediately kicked in and that no-one was injured.

The train was leaving for Tattenham Corner at 3.50pm when the carriages broke away from one another and were left 10 feet apart.

Despite that news, there were not many subsequent cancellations and those were not for that route. Most of those I can see are for e.g. Brighton or Horsham, explained as: "This service was cancelled between London Bridge and New Cross Gate due to a mishap (TY)." That code in full is "Mishap‐Train Operating Company cause". That's one way of putting it.

The earlier delays were due to a signalling power failure at Gatwick.
Logged
Electric train
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 2980


The future is 25,000 Volts a.c.


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: December 09, 2017, 08:23:33 am »

From the Evening Standard:

Quote
A Southern Rail train split in two as it departed London Bridge station sparking further chaos for commuters who have already been blighted by delays all day.

The train was leaving the major commuter hub on Friday afternoon when the middle carriages of the eight-car train separated, the rail operator said.

Passengers were told to avoid London Bridge station and find another route home after the train split in two as it pulled away from the platform.

Govia Thameslink Railway, which runs the Southern train, said the brakes immediately kicked in and that no-one was injured.

The train was leaving for Tattenham Corner at 3.50pm when the carriages broke away from one another and were left 10 feet apart.

Despite that news, there were not many subsequent cancellations and those were not for that route. Most of those I can see are for e.g. Brighton or Horsham, explained as: "This service was cancelled between London Bridge and New Cross Gate due to a mishap (TY)." That code in full is "Mishap‐Train Operating Company cause". That's one way of putting it.

The earlier delays were due to a signalling power failure at Gatwick.

The Evening Standard exaggerating rail travel news to commuters .................. surely not!
Logged

Mark Carne 26 June 2015 - "The challenges of delivering myriad improvement projects while still running a railway seven days a week were simply overwhelming".
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3387


View Profile
« Reply #2 on: December 09, 2017, 06:21:56 pm »

I was looking to see if the RAIB were showing any interest in this mishap (no, not yet) when I found this:
Quote
Investigation into passenger detrainment onto electrically live line, Peckham Rye, 7 November 2017.


Image from the on-train CCTV, showing Peckham Rye station platform ahead of where the train had stopped. The third rail is initially on the right and then on the left. (image courtesy of Arriva Rail London)

At 18:46 hrs on Tuesday 7 November, an Arriva Rail London (London Overground) service from Dalston Junction to Battersea Park 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 train radio system with the service controller, train technicians, and the signaller. Following these conversations he began, with the assistance of staff from Peckham Rye station, to evacuate the passengers from the train via the door at the right-hand side of the driverís 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 (3rd rail) and walking along the side of the line about 30 metres to Peckham Rye station.

Soon afterwards, an operations manager from GTR (which manages Peckham Rye station) contacted station staff and realised they were at the side of the electrically energised track assisting in the evacuation, and that about 80 passengers had already left the train by this route. The operations manager immediately instructed staff to stop the evacuation, and requested that the train driver contact the signaller and his companyís controller for further instructions.

The driver, with further advice from train technicians, then isolated various safety systems which enabled him to release the brakes and move the train forward into Peckham Rye station, arriving at about 19:40 hrs. It was then possible for all the passengers to leave the train normally, and it proceeded, empty, to the depot at New Cross Gate. No-one was hurt in the incident.

Nothing to do with the thread, but isn't that much more scary?
Logged
broadgage
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2158



View Profile
« Reply #3 on: December 10, 2017, 12:33:42 am »

If some accident or emergency required that I go on or near the track, I would be very careful of the conductor rail even if others presumed it to be dead.

The emergency notices in the doorways of DC stock do state "do not step on or touch any rail" if evacuation to the track is needed.
Logged

"When customers say that they want a seat, they dont mean they want to sit with their knees behind their ears so that 4 more can sit down. They mean that they want an extra coach so that 74 more can sit down"
"Capacity on intercity routes should be about number of vehicles, not compressing people"
Chris from Nailsea
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 17451


I am not railway staff


View Profile Email
« Reply #4 on: December 10, 2017, 02:36:18 am »

I agree: if I were to find myself in that particular situation (having to alight from a train otherwise than onto a platform at a station), I would avoid treading on anything metal, quite frankly.  Roll Eyes

Logged

William Huskisson MP was the first person to be killed by a train while crossing the tracks, in 1830.  Many more have died in the same way since then.  Don't take a chance: stop, look, listen.

"Level crossings are safe, unless they are used in an unsafe manner."  Discuss.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3387


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: October 10, 2018, 02:01:43 pm »

The RAIB report into the second of these incidents - the passenger evacuation on a live line at Peckham Rye - has been published. As usual it's hard to do it justice in a short comment, but I think "Chinese whispers isn't best for managing hazardous incidents" is the key. Or how about this to wake you up: "No-one asked for an isolation of the conductor rail, or a line blockage to stop trains on adjacent lines, at any point during the incident."

This is a short list of formal non-compliances, and note that NR and ARL (the TOC for LOROL) were as bad as each other:
Quote
Examples of non-compliance with documented processes and principles include:
  • The signaller was not notified that the train was stranded before the decision had already been made by ARL strategic command to detrain the passengers (which the train driver interpreted as an instruction to evacuate the train in its current position);
  • Even after the signaller became aware of the planned evacuation no effective command of the incident was established to oversee the arrangements needed to carry out the evacuation in safety;
  • The driver was offered neither advice about the need to protect the site nor support to establish safe conditions to enable safe evacuation; and Network Rail neither communicated with ARL strategic command to confirm which organisation was leading in the management of the incident nor established an Incident Response Commander.
« Last Edit: October 10, 2018, 07:06:15 pm by stuving » Logged
SandTEngineer
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 2330


In a Linemans Hut in the far Southwest


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: October 11, 2018, 04:51:48 pm »

Welcome to the Modern Day Thrusting Railway....... Roll Eyes
Logged

Out of this nettle, Danger, we pluck this flower, Safety.
[Henry IV, Part 1, Act 2, Scene 3]
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1539


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: October 11, 2018, 05:52:43 pm »

Talking of the danger from live rails and passenger evacuations on the Underground reminds me of the time I saw a man, waiting on an Underground platform, drop a banknote (might have been £5 or £10, can't remember, many years ago), which fell down between the rails. He took a good look in both directions, jumped down and retrieved his money, then clambered back up. I'm not sure whether he was at greater danger from an oncoming train or from the live rails, but either way it seems brave not to say reckless.

Logged

Day return to Infinity, please.
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1163


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: October 12, 2018, 02:56:08 am »

Does this and other incidents of this nature hignlight the unions attitude for keeping guards/second safety trained person on a train. At least in this case two heads would probably have been better than one in asking the / seeking the answer to the question of "IS THE POWER TO THE THIRD RAIL OFF ? ".
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3387


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: October 12, 2018, 08:50:38 am »

Does this and other incidents of this nature hignlight the unions attitude for keeping guards/second safety trained person on a train. At least in this case two heads would probably have been better than one in asking the / seeking the answer to the question of "IS THE POWER TO THE THIRD RAIL OFF ? ".

But the driver would have said "yes".

The one major thing that would have prevented this one was following communications discipline: say what you mean clearly, with proper words, and make sure you were understood.
Logged
Western Pathfinder
Global Moderator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 832



View Profile
« Reply #10 on: October 12, 2018, 09:01:18 am »

And then repeat back again so that both parties understand correctly.
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 3387


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: October 12, 2018, 09:10:26 am »

And then repeat back again so that both parties understand correctly.

That's what I mean by "make sure you were understood" - control room staff in particular may need to push outside staff into doing so.
Logged
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by a customer of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants