Near miss(?) - Chesterfield South Junction

[londonmidland]

First seen on X, it appears as though 195 working 1Y14 had been incorrectly routed onto the line from Barrow Hill, whilst 4099 consisting of Class 66 on an Intermodal service service was directly in its path. Thankfully, the 66 was sat at a red signal, just ahead.

Credit to the original poster for the photos.

The pictures below show 195023 halfway across the points, with a view from both behind and in front of the train.

 

[bigmanaiq]

Could have been something bad, I assume RAIB will look into this?

 

[D1511]

Oh dear......that top pic is not a good look......

 

[rower40]

Note the state of the trailing points that the train is approaching. They’re lying ‘normal’. Unusual for them to be in that state if the facing points under the train are ‘reverse’.

 

[bigmanaiq]

EMR describing at as a “points failure” on twitter

East Midlands Railway (EMR) (@EastMidRailway) on X

#EMRUpdate There is a points failure at Clay Cross continues. This is between Chesterfield and Derby and is disrupting our trains on the Liverpool/Manchester/Sheffield/Nottingham/Norwich route. Buses are running between Chesterfeild and Nottingham https://t.co/WRSaT1I9uM

x.com

There is a points failure at Clay Cross continues. This is between Chesterfield and Derby and is disrupting our trains on the Liverpool/Manchester/Sheffield/Nottingham/Norwich route. Buses are running

 

[800001]

Could have been something bad, I assume RAIB will look into this?

I can't find the tweet now, but a tweet I saw stated RAIB had attended.

 

[saismee]

Note the state of the trailing points that the train is approaching. They’re lying ‘normal’. Unusual for them to be in that state if the facing points under the train are ‘reverse’.

I should hope its a points failure as the signalling system shouldn't allow an unprotected move like this, even if the signaller attempts to set it.

What is the line speed?

 

[Falcon1200]

Unusual for them to be in that state if the facing points under the train are ‘reverse’.

Yes indeed. How the one end of the crossover came to be in the reverse position with the other end normal will be key to this incident.

 

[800001]

Yes indeed. How the one end of the crossover came to be in the reverse position with the other end normal will be key to this incident.

Quick reaction/observation skills by the driver, and a very well done for stopping as quick as they have.

 

[tcm1106]

RAIB not attending

 

[saltywalrus]

RAIB not attending

Really? How come?

 

[GB]

Really? How come?

At a guess I would presume it is already pinpointed as human error.

 

[AlterEgo]

At a guess I would presume it is already pinpointed as human error.

Has it? What would cause one set of points to be set for a route but not the other? Aren't they interlocked?

 

[Ashley Hill]

I cannot view the pictues.
Edit: Viewed ok on a more modern device. Oh dear!

 

[GB]

Has it? What would cause one set of points to be set for a route but not the other? Aren't they interlocked?

Points failure and the signaler (or points operator) has not manually set or checked the points were laying correct before authorising the train to pass the signal at danger. As I said, just a guess but if the RAIB are not attending it doesn't sound like a system failure.

 

[800001]

Northern's 1Y27 Leeds to Nottingham has terminated at Chesterfield just now, staying points failure as the reason.

 

[tpfx89]

Points failure and the signaler (or points operator) has not manually set or checked the points were laying correct before authorising the train to pass the signal at danger. As I said, just a guess but if the RAIB are not attending it doesn't sound like a system failure.

Would it not still count as a dangerous occurrence? Difficult to argue against it looking at the photos?

 

[MadMac]

Points failure and the signaler (or points operator) has not manually set or checked the points were laying correct before authorising the train to pass the signal at danger. As I said, just a guess but if the RAIB are not attending it doesn't sound like a system failure.

Certainly would appear that way. It never rains but it pours…..

 

[D1511]

Presumably RAIB would be there if the unit had run forward and hit the intermodal, so what's the difference here?

 

[skyhigh]

Allegedly there was a points failure requiring the points to be secured, but the points were clipped in the wrong position.

 

[norbitonflyer]

Woud/should a signal clear if the points are unable (because clipped) to be in the correct position?

 

[skyhigh]

Woud/should a signal clear if the points are unable (because clipped) to be in the correct position?

No, so presumably the driver was authorised to pass the signal at danger.

 

[Tetchytyke]

RAIB will generally only investigate something if there are learning points to be gleaned from an incident.

In this case it may not be the case. It looks as though the train was running at a very slow speed and was able to stop immediately when it went over the points. So if the points were clipped due to a failure, and those points were clipped incorrectly, everything still worked as it should. Embarrassing, but no need for a huge investigation.

 

[HC1998]

What could’ve caused this? Incorrect pathing then driver applying brakes when they realised?

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

RAIB will generally only investigate something if there are learning points to be gleaned from an incident.

In this case it may not be the case. It looks as though the train was running at a very slow speed and was able to stop immediately when it went over the points. So if the points were clipped due to a failure, and those points were clipped incorrectly, everything still worked as it should. Embarrassing, but no need for a huge investigation.

NR will investigate it as a formal for something like this but wont be released into public domain.

 

[saltywalrus]

What could’ve caused this? Incorrect pathing then driver applying brakes when they realised?

I don't believe that the interlocking would allow a route towards the freight train unless the line was bidirectionally signalled.

If the points failure that EMR reported occured before this incident and meant that the signaller was unable to set the correct route for the Northern train, then a MOM may be dispatched to set the points manually. I understand that this requires them to actuate the points to the correct position, then clip and scotch them to prevent them moving under the train. The MOM would inform the signaller when they had done this, and the signaller would then give the Northern driver permission to pass the signal at danger and travel over the points.

If this is the case I think the most likely scenario is that there was a communication breakdown between the MOM / signaller / driver which resulted in the driver passing the signal at danger when the points where not secured in the correct position, leading to the near miss.

 

[chris.lambert.]

Really? How come?

RAIB can attend & investigate any incident or accident, but they are only legally obliged to investigate "serious accidents" — defined as including a train derailment or collision resulting in at least one death, five or more serious injuries, or extensive damage to rolling stock, the infrastructure, or the environment

 

[RailwayRookie]

I don't believe that the interlocking would allow a route towards the freight train unless the line was bidirectionally signalled.

Varies by place but the interlocking will let the route be set regardless of signalling direction, it will be the signal interlocking itself that checks the occupation (or lack thereof) of the section ahead, then a valid route is set and then shows a proceed aspect.

Theoretically if the passenger train was 200 meters back and behind a signal, the signaller could route the trains into each other, but the signal wouldn't clear (if everything is working correctly)

Essentially what im saying is the signalling doesn't know which train will move next and so allows a route to be set as long as all other prerequisites for the route are met.

 

[saltywalrus]

Varies by place but the interlocking will let the route be set regardless of signalling direction, it will be the signal interlocking itself that checks the occupation (or lack thereof) of the section ahead, then a valid route is set and then shows a proceed aspect.

Theoretically if the passenger train was 200 meters back and behind a signal, the signaller could route the trains into each other, but the signal wouldn't clear (if everything is working correctly)

Essentially what im saying is the signalling doesn't know which train will move next and so allows a route to be set as long as all other prerequisites for the route are met.

I more meant that if the line was only signalled in one direction, then the route from the signal protecting the points to the line occupied by the freight train wouldn't even be listed as a possible route in the interlocking.

 

[TrainOnLine]

Would some fault lie on the driver also if this is the case? Drivers are instructed to check position of points during an S5: Pass Signal At Danger.