142 vs 159s at Exeter

[whole diary]

[Super Guard]

From what i've heard today, the driver has been cleared of any responsibility.

I wonder if this leads to the end of permissive working at EXD^» (Exeter St Davids - next trains), just like a similar incident at Newton Abbot a few years back.

I suspect it won't, afterall that would cause a lot of headaches for timetable planners all for the same of one very rare incident. Besides, as far as i'm aware drivers should approach at 10mph when given a proceed aspect that is not from a signal aspect (ie. the white shunt lights) or am I spouting a load of rubbish!

Headaches for timetable planners yes - especially with SWT^▸ (South West Trains) to Waterloo already causing problems with regards to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) services using "the bank" between St. Davids and Central, but I doubt that the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) are going to be too bothered about that.

As for the 10mph, I cannot say I know, as I just drive from the rear 

[woody]

Was told that the driver applied the brakes which worked as normal but the 142 simply slide into the back of the 159 due to the extreme weather/poor rail adhesion conditions.

Correct. As I understand it swabs have been taken from the railheads between the Red Cow level crossing and the collision site. Some suspicion as to whether road treatment (rock salt) of the crossing road surface has been rolled along the rail heads by a previous rail movement, there by setting a trap for the 142.

Thats what I heard today as well.

[gaf71]

From what i've heard today, the driver has been cleared of any responsibility.

I wonder if this leads to the end of permissive working at EXD^» (Exeter St Davids - next trains), just like a similar incident at Newton Abbot a few years back.

I suspect it won't, afterall that would cause a lot of headaches for timetable planners all for the same of one very rare incident. Besides, as far as i'm aware drivers should approach at 10mph when given a proceed aspect that is not from a signal aspect (ie. the white shunt lights) or am I spouting a load of rubbish!

Headaches for timetable planners yes - especially with SWT^▸ (South West Trains) to Waterloo already causing problems with regards to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) services using "the bank" between St. Davids and Central, but I doubt that the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) are going to be too bothered about that.

As for the 10mph, I cannot say I know, as I just drive from the rear 

A position light authorises the train to move as far as the line is clear, but not past any other signal, and at a speed which you can stop clear of any obstruction.

[The SprinterMeister]

I suspect it won't, afterall that would cause a lot of headaches for timetable planners all for the same of one very rare incident. Besides, as far as i'm aware drivers should approach at 10mph when given a proceed aspect that is not from a signal aspect (ie. the white shunt lights) or am I spouting a load of rubbish!

Unfortunately you are spouting a load of rubbish.

There is no set speed laid down for movements on the authority of a position light signal of either associated with a main aspect or a ground position light. However the driver shall control the movement in such a way that it can stop short of any obstruction. From what I gather the speed of 2F53 was not excessive and very considerably below the 25mph line speed. I am further advised that inspection of the 142 at 83C revealed no pre-existing faults with the braking system.

[Trowres]

... As I understand it swabs have been taken from the railheads between the Red Cow level crossing and the collision site. Some suspicion as to whether road treatment (rock salt) of the crossing road surface has been rolled along the rail heads by a previous rail movement, there by setting a trap for the 142.

Very interesting. Salt is hygroscopic, and will cause the rail surface to become  (and remain) damp. It will also promote rusting of the rail surface, and damp rust can be rather slippery...

Anyone fascinated by rail adhesion can read:
http://portal.railresearch.org.uk/Shared%20Documents/Reports/rssba2a.pdf

[Chris from Nailsea]

The RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) have now published their full report into this incident on their website.

Summary of Conclusions
Immediate cause
76 The immediate cause of the accident was that the driver^s application of the brakes did not stop the Barnstaple train before it collided with the Waterloo train.
Causal factor
77 A causal factor was a length of low adhesion at Red Cow level crossing and at the eastern end of platform 1 at Exeter St Davids station.
Contributory factors
78 A contributory factor was the lack of sanding equipment on the class 142 unit.

[JayMac]

From this is Devon (05/08/2010):

Rail crash cause will remain a mystery

Mystery surrounds the precise cause of a rail collision which left nine people injured, an investigation found. The Rail Accident Investigation Branch arrived at no certain explanation for the crash, involving a train from Barnstaple, at 7.25pm on January 4. A suspicion that road salt contaminated rails, affecting braking, was dismissed as unlikely.

The First Great Western train from Barnstaple crashed into the South West Trains service for London Waterloo, at Exeter St Davids station. The Barnstaple train was travelling at 11mph and none of the injuries ^ to six passengers and three members of staff ^ was serious. There were 14 people on the Barnstaple train and 11 on the stationary Waterloo service.

The RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) found that January 4 was a clear night and the temperature was -4C.

About seven minutes before the collision, a number of vehicles, including a Devon County Council salt-spreading lorry, went over a nearby level crossing. The driver of the Barnstaple train received correct signals and braked as he travelled towards the platform. But four seconds later, the wheels started to slide. The driver applied an emergency brake. The train continued to slide for 100 metres until it hit the back of the London train.

Investigators analysed the rails at the crossing and found that "low adhesion" ^ reduced friction ^ was a causal factor. They were unable to establish the exact reason for this but said the likely cause was moisture on the rail head, possibly reacting with minute amounts of contaminant. Investigators reported that chlorine on rails might have indicated the presence of road salt.

Between December 21, 2009 and January 11, 2010, salt was applied on the road approaches to the level crossing on 36 occasions. The council's policy is to switch off the salt supply when travelling over the crossing.

But the RAIB concluded it was unlikely that road salt drawn onto the level crossing and along the railway caused low adhesion on the evening of January 4.

The Barnstaple train did not have a "sanding system" in which the driver can release sand to improve friction. The lack of such a system was found to be a contributory factor in the crash.

The RAIB re-iterated a previous recommendation that a way be found for sanding equipment to be installed on the type of train used on the Tarka^▸ (Line from Barnstaple to Exeter) Line.

[inspector_blakey]

Is there some kind of six-week satellite delay between Derby (offices of RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)) and Devon...? I know the stereotype is of a slower pace of life down that way, but really... 

[The SprinterMeister]

Is there some kind of six-week satellite delay between Derby (offices of RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)) and Devon...? I know the stereotype is of a slower pace of life down that way, but really... 

Slow news day for the 'Excess & Error' / Thisisdevon people I expect. No cats stuck in trees in Burnthouse Lane, no Exeter City Football team loosing at home again or any massive fare hikes / service reductions on the Stagecoach Exeter buses to report so they had to find a 'news story' to make up the weight.....
 

[Super Guard]

From this is Devon (05/08/2010):

The Barnstaple train did not have a "sanding system" in which the driver can release sand to improve friction. The lack of such a system was found to be a contributory factor in the crash.

The RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) re-iterated a previous recommendation that a way be found for sanding equipment to be installed on the type of train used on the Tarka^▸ (Line from Barnstaple to Exeter) Line.

I'm sure that'll be the case come this winter when we still have 142s !

[Chris from Nailsea]

Hmm.  A possible alternative version:

The RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) re-iterated a previous recommendation that a way be found to upgrade the type of train used on the Tarka^▸ (Line from Barnstaple to Exeter) Line.

Chris 

[vacman]

Is there some kind of six-week satellite delay between Derby (offices of RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch)) and Devon...? I know the stereotype is of a slower pace of life down that way, but really... 

Slow news day for the 'Excess & Error' / Thisisdevon people I expect. No cats stuck in trees in Burnthouse Lane, no Exeter City Football team loosing at home again or any massive fare hikes / service reductions on the Stagecoach Exeter buses to report so they had to find a 'news story' to make up the weight.....
 

well, at least in two weeks they'll be able to report on Exeter City losing at home (and away) every week 

[eightf48544]

Those of you with long memories will recall 165 102 slid over the stops at the end of platform 6 at Slough and onto the platform due to sliding due to poor adhesion (leaves). I was always a bit aprehensive if I travelled on it afterwards.

Subsequently 165/6 were fited with sanding gear.

[inspector_blakey]

It's a long time ago, and my memory may well be flawed, but wasn't that partly down to the 165s being some of the earlier DMUs^▸ (Diesel Multiple Unit) to be fitted with disc brakes? As I recall, the logic went that the traditional "shoe" brakes fitted to older stock, since they bear on the tyre, scrape off the assorted slime, mulch, grease and cack that accumulate on wheels during the leaf-fall season and therefore help adhesion. Disc brakes on the other hand obviously don't seeing as they're gripping a brake disc on the axle and not the wheel itself. Didn't this also result in "scrubber" brake blocks being fitted to some disc-braked units to clean off the wheel tread?

Slow news day for the 'Excess & Error' / Thisisdevon people I expect. No cats stuck in trees in Burnthouse Lane, no Exeter City Football team loosing at home again or any massive fare hikes / service reductions on the Stagecoach Exeter buses to report so they had to find a 'news story' to make up the weight.....
 

Love it! 

[rogerw]

well, at least in two weeks they'll be able to report on Exeter City losing at home (and away) every week 

Does that mean that Exeter City will win their first two games?  The football season starts tomorrow!!