Train too long for the platform at Manchester Piccadilly

[pdq]

Interesting occurrence tonight.

The 1641 MAN to HULL was routed into p2, which was already holding a 323 and a 150. As a result the 6 car 170 didn't fit and the driving cab is a long way forward of the signal.

Cue much faffing around as doors are isolated in the front car. Now delayed by 15 mins or so as they are having problems with doors / brakes not releasing.

 

[pdq]

Left 19 late in the end.

 

[Xenophon PCDGS]

Forward planning at its finest, in the knowledge that this was a 6-car set...:roll:

 

[northwichcat]

So it also delayed the 16:49 Piccadilly-Sheffield stopper, which departed platform 2 at 17:03. Northern have put the reason for the delay as 'congestion on the line.'

 

[The Planner]

Normally a 6 car set or does it turn up with 3? Could well go down to the signaller if they knew the diagram.

 

[pdq]

They've been 6 car (3 x 2 car) since the timetable change. I'm not sure the new platform arrangements are quite sorted at MAN yet. The 1628 MAN to YRK has been shifted at the last minute a few times in the last couple of weeks.

 

[coxxy]

There's quite a few 6 car 170 diagrams since may timetable change.

 

[ac6000cw]

Quick thought - while obviously everything is expected to run according to the diagrams etc. (and these days Automatic Route Setting might have 'organised' this instead of a human), but might there be a case for having axle counters on the approach routes to busy stations where trains frequently have to use already occupied platforms. That way the signaller or ARS could know for sure approximately how long an approaching train was and act accordingly ?

 

[455driver]

but might there be a case for having axle counters on the approach routes to busy stations where trains frequently have to use already occupied platforms. That way the signaller or ARS could know for sure approximately how long an approaching train was and act accordingly ?

How often does this problem occur and how much would it cost to implement this idea?

 

[ValleyLines142]

Apologies for any ignorance here, but Piccadilly has FOURTEEN platforms. Could ANY other platform not have been free? Why have a 323, a 150 and a 6-car 170 ALL using the same platform? Je ne comprends pas?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

With modern tech for big stations could there be some sort of beacon or radio device that communicates with the signalling computers/electronics to inform it how many cars (and overall length) of a train, then based on that it could decide which platforms have too much stock in already for the train to be routed into?

 

[ac6000cw]

How often does this problem occur and how much would it cost to implement this idea?

It was only a 'what if' question, not a fully costed proposal - this is a discussion forum, 'blue sky' ideas are allowed, I think.

I don't know the answers to your questions - can you enlighten me please ?

 

[The Planner]

Can axle counters do that? I thought they just counted in and made sure the same went out again?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Mind you, it could have just been crap platforming in the timetable....

 

[87015]

Quick thought - while obviously everything is expected to run according to the diagrams etc. (and these days Automatic Route Setting might have 'organised' this instead of a human), but might there be a case for having axle counters on the approach routes to busy stations where trains frequently have to use already occupied platforms. That way the signaller or ARS could know for sure approximately how long an approaching train was and act accordingly ?

ARS does/can do exactly that, at least on my patch, reads train length through a number of short track circuits on approach to last signal and in the platform. If it has any doubt (and it has a tendency to if the driver stops a little short of the signal) it won't set the calling on route and awaits manual intervention from signaller.

 

[ac6000cw]

With modern tech for big stations could there be some sort of beacon or radio device that communicates with the signalling computers/electronics to inform it how many cars (and overall length) of a train, then based on that it could decide which platforms have too much stock in already for the train to be routed into?

That was my other thought about train-length information exchange - maybe use the GSM-R radio links ?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Can axle counters do that? I thought they just counted in and made sure the same went out again?

I was thinking about counting axles in general (rather than the specific piece of signalling equipment) - I should have made the wording more generic.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

ARS does/can do exactly that, at least on my patch, reads train length through a number of short track circuits on approach to last signal and in the platform. If it has any doubt (and it has a tendency to if the driver stops a little short of the signal) it won't set the calling on route and awaits manual intervention from signaller.

Thanks - interesting information - I've just learned something

 

[Llama]

AKA Lime Street Control.

 

[Tomnick]

Not just applicable to ARS either - in fact, I don't think it stops the route being put in at all, only preventing the signal clearing.

 

[Welshman]

So how did the train depart in the end?

Presumably the starting signal could not be cleared due to the track circuit ahead being occupied, so was the driver given permission to pass it at danger?

 

[GB]

The cab was already passed the signal so he wouldn't have been told to pass it at danger but rather he had permission to start ahead of the signal after the signaller manually set and checked the route. Starting ahead of a signal is a pretty common occurrence on freight.

 

[Crossover]

That's one fine looking mess right there! As someone said, of 14 platforms could they not have put it somewhere more appropriate?!

I saw something similar happen at Huddersfield not too long ago, though that was with a unit in the platform and another coming in on top to couple (with the first unit not having been taken far enough in) which involved quite a bit of faff to sort out

 

[Philip Elliott]

Can axle counters do that? I thought they just counted in and made sure the same went out again?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Mind you, it could have just been crap platforming in the timetable....

That's what NR LNW are famous for!

 

[pdq]

Given the number of times the York train has shifted recently, I was really surprised that it didn't go to p1 which was vacated a couple of minutes before my train arrived. I had guessed that a six car wouldn't fit so I assumed that either it was only 4, or it would be moved.

Whilst I heard mutterings between the crew about the issue, they were very diplomatic on the PA. Part of the delay was clearly the time it took to offload the front set through a single door before releasing the doors on the rest; then there was the interlock (I assume) problem which I guess wouldn't have happened but for the need to isolate doors. Nevertheless the problem was described only as a train fault which got rectified.

Good job there wasn't any more gap between the 323 and 150 or the whole of the front carriage might have been off the end.

 

[route:oxford]

Interesting occurrence tonight.

The 1641 MAN to HULL was routed into p2, which was already holding a 323 and a 150. As a result the 6 car 170 didn't fit and the driving cab is a long way forward of the signal.

Cue much faffing around as doors are isolated in the front car. Now delayed by 15 mins or so as they are having problems with doors / brakes not releasing.

*Should* platform 2 be capable of holding a:-

3-car 323
2-car 150
& a
6-car 170

Sometimes it's not just about space available, it's about the spacing of the stabling.

 

[northwichcat]

I think the problem was the failed unit for this service: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y75272/2014/06/16/advanced was the 323 at platform 2 so it shouldn't have been there. Maybe as it had failed they kept a generous space between it and the 150 working the Hope Valley service to allow engineers to get close to it?

With regards to the comments about Piccadilly having 14 platforms the lower number terminus platforms do seem to be used a lot more intensively than the higher number terminus platforms.

 

[Moonshot]

I think the problem was the failed unit for this service: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/Y75272/2014/06/16/advanced was the 323 at platform 2 so it shouldn't have been there. Maybe as it had failed they kept a generous space between it and the 150 working the Hope Valley service to allow engineers to get close to it?

With regards to the comments about Piccadilly having 14 platforms the lower number terminus platforms do seem to be used a lot more intensively than the higher number terminus platforms.

Which wont be an issue once the Ordsall Chord is built....

 

[The Planner]

Went down to a brake defect in the end on the TPE, apparently the MCB tripped. 95 trains delayed and 684 minutes delay in total. 2H77 having failed is also mentioned.

 

[northwichcat]

Well it shouldn't happen today, the 16:41 Manchester-Hull service is set to be short formed. This is due to being a 185 down and a 170 being taken to plug the gap.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

With regards to the comments about Piccadilly having 14 platforms the lower number terminus platforms do seem to be used a lot more intensively than the higher number terminus platforms.

I've often noticed this, too- In particulare the South TPE services I'd have though could use the higher numbered platforms to reverse to/from the airport. It wouldn't be so easy for the North TPE services though as they'd have to cross the whole of the throat to get to Ardwick- and there's already quite enough of that until the Ordsall Chord opens!

 

[185]

Happened a number of times to me.

After despatch, driver was given direct authority to proceed by the Manchester Panel controller via the SPT/signal post telephone.

The errors occur due to the box stacking up similar direction trains on the one platform in order to reduce the number of conflicting moves & points changes, which usually have a lag time of 30 seconds or so each - a huge delay when all added up.

 

[Starmill]

Apologies for any ignorance here, but Piccadilly has FOURTEEN platforms. Could ANY other platform not have been free? Why have a 323, a 150 and a 6-car 170 ALL using the same platform? Je ne comprends pas?

That's one fine looking mess right there! As someone said, of 14 platforms could they not have put it somewhere more appropriate?!

185's comment about stacking similar pathed trains in platforms to save time partly explains this. You might stand there and see 14 platforms, you might even see platforms 11 and 12 sitting there empty but assuming the 323 was working a Glossop train (which, if it was in platform 2, it would have been set-swap notwithstanding). The Hope Valley, TPE North and Glossop trains all take routes via Ardwick, so it is my understanding that under normal circumstances only platforms 1-4 are available for them. Starting them from platforms further south might bring them into unnesecary conflict with trains routed via Levenshume.