Banbury - station, facilities, signalling and incidents - merged posts

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

The black boxes are not geographically accurate as I understand it.  There is however a separate one for each direction for each platform, and having watched it for a few cycles of the timetable the southbound Chiltern stopping service always appears in the right hand box next to 7122, with its departure time in the other box to its left.  I'm fairly sure the train will however be physically alongside P4 during its period between arrival and departure?  Next one at 1300, 1U27, appeared in the LH box on arrival and then became 1H46 in the right hand box.   

Likewise in the down direction, the box for 7129, is not drawn alongside the platform where a train would be standing.

It's not always the case with those maps, but they are pretty accurate for the Banbury area.  The only mistake is showing a full length platform 4, as it is only half the length of platform 3 and located at the northern end.  The starting signal (OL7122) is actually located alongside OL7120 and OL3124 so is some way from the end of the platform - something drivers are not particularly happy about and are pressing for an 'OFF' indicator so they don't misread or read across their signal.  So, yes, they would be located alongside the platform.

In the down direction, OL7129 is actually located where it shows on the map.  There is a banner repeater for it at the northern end of platform 1, near the North Box.  This is to allow a freight train to be put recessed there if necessary and the Down Goods Loop towards OL7143 is fully occupied.

As for blank signals, perhaps 'poggs' can enlighten us, but I suspect that the data feed is missing, or incorrectly interpreted. There are other black signals in the area that was resignalled.

GCX is bidirectional through the station, but in the peak, it would delay incoming services, so doesn't tend to get used as compounding the delays results

Having thought about what you said, I think you'll find Gerrards Cross is only bi-directional in the up direction, so outgoing trains would be delayed when it's used and there's no way of one train passing another in the down direction - so that is only possible at South Ruislip, Princes Risborough (slow linespeeds) and Bicester North (blocks the up line).  For me, that's not enough.

High Wycombe in the up direction does indeed have the odd timetabled pass move, but only during quiet times of the day as there's nearly always a down train on the horizon that would get clobbered, especially when it comes to a delay recovery scenario.  That's not so much of a problem though as you have the passing point just down the line at Princes Risborough.

Also, there really could do with being a couple more signals between Haddenham and Bicester too as that can also hold things up a little.

[paul7575]

The black boxes are not geographically accurate as I understand it.  There is however a separate one for each direction for each platform, and having watched it for a few cycles of the timetable the southbound Chiltern stopping service always appears in the right hand box next to 7122, with its departure time in the other box to its left.  

It's not always the case with those maps, but they are pretty accurate for the Banbury area.  The only mistake is showing a full length platform 4, as it is only half the length of platform 3 and located at the northern end. 

Yes - perhaps 'not geographically accurate' was a poor choice of words.   Problem is presumably because the author is using a standardised set of building blocks for his drawings, and the minimum length he uses for a bidirectional platform is presumably that of the two 'black boxes'?   So it is hard to see how he could draw it more logically, except perhaps by increasing the the whole of P1, 2 and 3 as well, so that P4 can be shown at one end of P3;  IYSWIM...

Paul

[ChrisB]

It's not always the case with those maps, but they are pretty accurate for the Banbury area.  The only mistake is showing a full length platform 4, as it is only half the length of platform 3 and located at the northern end. 

Not even half-length - just 5 coaches long. Not sure how long platform 2 is (12 I think, but maybe 13)

[IndustryInsider]

133 metres against 300 metres.  So, just under half, or 133/300ths if you want to be precise...

Press release here:  http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/gbp-76m-signal-and-track-upgrade-completed-on-time-as-network-rail-reopens-railway-between-banbury-bicester-and-leamington

[ChrisB]

Not sure where you got those figures from, but it certainly seems shorter than 44.333% of the adjoining platform. It only runs from the north end of the island as far as the enclosed waiting area glass wall on the island...looks just over a third of the full length

[chrisr_75]

Not sure where you got those figures from, but it certainly seems shorter than 44.333% of the adjoining platform. It only runs from the north end of the island as far as the enclosed waiting area glass wall on the island...looks just over a third of the full length

44.333% is only 10% more than a third at 33.333%, so would 44.333% reasonably fall into the description of 'just over a third'? 

[paul7575]

Not sure where you got those figures from, but it certainly seems shorter than 44.333% of the adjoining platform. It only runs from the north end of the island as far as the enclosed waiting area glass wall on the island...looks just over a third of the full length

What may affect the rough estimate is that the platform building isn't midway along the island, it is offset towards the London end, and a quick check with Google Earth satellite view suggests the dimensions IndustryInsider posted are correct to within a few metres.  The old bay at the south end was only about 85 metres long.

Paul

[IndustryInsider]

I got the lengths from the official Network Rail signalling alterations notice ('yellow peril') so I'd expect them to be pretty accurate.

[IndustryInsider]

All signals at Banbury are now reporting whether 'on' or 'off' on opentraintimes with the exception of Platform 4 in the up direction (OL7122).

[infoman]

A two-month-old baby suffered a head injury when their pram rolled into the side of a train travelling at 35mph, a report has revealed.

The collision caused the pram to tip over, resulting in the infant falling onto the platform at Banbury station, Oxfordshire, the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)) said.

The incident at 12.26pm on June 8 happened because the baby’s parent “momentarily released” the pram, according to the report.

CCTV^▸ (Closed Circuit Tele Vision) footage shows that in the previous 10 minutes, the parent was “either very close or in direct contact” with the pram.

Around 15 seconds before the accident, they moved the pram closer to the arriving train to prepare to board it.

With the pram’s front wheels touching the yellow safety line, the parent put one hand on a piece of luggage and turned to face a relative, “momentarily letting go of the pram”, the report said.

The pram rolled downhill towards the platform edge and hit the train, resulting in the baby falling out and suffering a minor head injury.

The small degree of slope present is unlikely to have been apparent to the infant’s parent, who possibly became momentarily distracted while unaware of the hazard created by the slope
RAIB

The RAIB said: “RAIB has been unable to determine why the infant’s parent momentarily let go of the unbraked pram.

“The small degree of slope present is unlikely to have been apparent to the infant’s parent, who possibly became momentarily distracted while unaware of the hazard created by the slope.”

Following the accident, Chiltern Railways, which operates the station, installed additional signage which includes instructions to help prevent similar incidents from occurring, the RAIB said.

[grahame]

Ouch - that looks like a very luck escape!   
I have mirrored the report for members at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/mirror/D102024_241107_Banbury.pdf

Where is the quoted text from, please

[Chris from Nailsea]

There's also a news item on the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page):

Sloping platform warning after pram hits train



Clearer warnings about sloping platforms are needed after a two-month-old baby was injured when its pram rolled into the side of a moving train, accident investigators have said.

The incident occurred as a passenger train was arriving at Banbury station in Oxfordshire shortly after 12:36 BST on 8 June.

A Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)) report found warning notices about a slight slope towards the platform edge were not conspicuous enough.

Chiltern Railways, responsible for managing the station, has since installed signs in the customer lifts warning pushchair and wheelchair users.

The RAIB report described how the infant's parent and relative had been waiting behind the yellow line with the pram and luggage.  The parent then let go of the pram "momentarily" and it rolled towards and collided with the side of the train's second carriage.

The train was travelling at about 35mph (56km/h) at the time.  The impact caused the pram to "spin and tip over", with the infant falling out on to the platform suffering minor head injuries.

The report concluded: "The small degree of slope present is unlikely to have been apparent to the infant’s parent, who possibly became momentarily distracted while unaware of the hazard created by the slope."



Rail industry research from 2018 warned that platforms sloping slightly towards the platform edge posed a "considerable risk" to those using pushchairs and wheelchairs.  The research recommended measures to aid communication in the form of platform marking, signage and station announcements to alert passengers to the hazard.

The report found there were signs on the ground at Banbury Station warning "Sloping Platform Apply Brakes" but they were painted yellow to signify a hazard and were not in passengers' line of sight.

In a statement, Chiltern Railways said: “Our station staff looked after the family involved in this incident, called an ambulance and supported the family whilst the paramedics arrived.  We have since installed additional signage at Banbury Station which reminds customers to remain vigilant and safe on the platforms.”

[ChrisB]

The report found there were signs on the ground at Banbury Station warning "Sloping Platform Apply Brakes" but they were painted yellow to signify a hazard and were not in passengers' line of sight.

Someone hasn't read the report - in there, there is a picture of the platform with those warning signs circled, along with another circle of where the pram had been located - which was right behind a warning sign (the sign being right in front of the pram)....so definitely was in line of sight as the pram was left.