At some companies, yes.
I know; it does my head in to see some people in lofty positions within the industry act in a way that suggests they want to do as much harm to it as possible.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Avanti Service failed to call at LPY (20/05)
- Thread starter Ellis101
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Kilopylae
Member
Whose safety was endangered on (say) GWR's argument? The passengers on board? Because of what - breaking? The risk they might break the emergency glass and detrain themselves to get off when the doors don't open?
Ericscollar
Member
that’s fair comment
The argument Virgin had was that if you can overshoot a platform you might overshoot a signal at danger.
Logic that doesn't really stand up when you consider that red signals are preceded by yellow ones to remind you to slow down.
fodphil
Member
DAS was done away with when 3G was switched off (they wouldn't pay for the upgrade)
That doesn’t seem to tally with other posts about it being available on the Hitachi fleet.
My goodness there's some utter nonsense being posted on here!
For clarification, Avanti's 805/807 fleets use DAS although that is irrelevant to this incident. On Avanti's 805/807s, as long as the headcode has been correctly inputted and accepted into the TMS, this should give an audible alert to the driver on approach to a station that they are booked to call at and it will do this whether DAS is working or not.
The comment about an influx of new drivers to the industry is also way off the mark in this case.
I'll say no more on the matter as there will be an investigation into this operational incident (no, not a Safety of the line incident).
For clarification, Avanti's 805/807 fleets use DAS although that is irrelevant to this incident. On Avanti's 805/807s, as long as the headcode has been correctly inputted and accepted into the TMS, this should give an audible alert to the driver on approach to a station that they are booked to call at and it will do this whether DAS is working or not.
The comment about an influx of new drivers to the industry is also way off the mark in this case.
I'll say no more on the matter as there will be an investigation into this operational incident (no, not a Safety of the line incident).
bahnause
Member
That‘s our policy. If you can’t, don’t. People will end up on the track. We‘ve seen this many times.
It would still be dealt with as an operational incident - there's a sliding scale here from SPADs/TPWS interventions (safety of the line incidents) all the way to an unauthorised additional call ('right-side' failure). It's all about attentiveness and also accepting that drivers are ultimately human. There's lots of different factors to consider which we will never be privy to in these forums.
Whilst the driver isn't going to be sacked, it's also not simply going to be swept under the carpet; things are generally not that black and white and are a little more nuanced than that. And ultimately some passengers have been inconvenienced who should not have been.
Whilst the driver isn't going to be sacked, it's also not simply going to be swept under the carpet; things are generally not that black and white and are a little more nuanced than that. And ultimately some passengers have been inconvenienced who should not have been.
I have heard this at another TOC. The idea being a lot of stations have a signal on the end so if you mess up the approach to the station you could pass a signal at danger. I agree that with a signal you get a yellow as a warning but there may be some merit to the argument with regard to, for example, low adhesion and braking technique.
I think this argument requires the distinction between a ‘fail to call’ and a ‘station overrun’. A fail to call was where the driver had not attempted to stop and an overrun was where they had but overshot for whatever reason.
This is I believe where the idea that if you’d missed your braking point it was better to take the fail to call and not brake was born.
If you attempted to brake and missed the station you can then open yourself to the previous argument of “what if the signal was red”. If you were running on greens and claimed you’d misread the docket or forgot the idea was it didn’t sound ‘as bad’.
When I started driving there was a definite feeling an overrun was viewed as worse than a fail to call.
The other argument I’ve seen advanced by management is the ‘precursor’ theory. Essentially you have a relatively minor incident but if it isn’t fully investigated and you have for example personal issues or an undiagnosed illness that contributed to the incident then a more serious incident could occur that may have been preventable.
A real example I heard was a driver tripped a TPWS grid approaching a buffer. They were c12mph and distracted by a very unusual amount of passenger numbers due to a large event.
The on call manager accepted their version. Didn’t remove them from driving and left their own manager to deal after the weekend. The driver then had a SPAD only a few days later and the original incident was still not resolved. The manager who told me this said that from that point any incident would see you removed from driving immediately until fully resolved.
If only the powers that be were on the same wavelength.
I’d love to see what the ratio of fail to calls were v correct calls.
In this case the driver put the brake in and overshot so will have reduced speed but I disagree about the lack of risk to safety - the auto announcer will announce the train, people will regardless of the yellow line move towards the edge and then the train blasts through.
Having experienced it several times on a 120 mph running line it is actually quite scary to witness!
What makes Liverpool South Parkway inappropriate for it?
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The platform is too short. Pendolino SDO only does 11 down to 9.
Thank you!
I've only had an overshoot once - and that was adhesion-related rather than driver error. As soon as it became plain that we weren't going to be able to stop I got 2-2 on the buzzer to warn me not to release the doors. The unit stopped a couple of hundred metres clear of the platform.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I've only experienced two as a passenger myself. One was a Merseyrail train in the early 90s which overshot about half a coach length at Aughton Park - as things were back then the doors were opened as normal with one fully off the platform (though nobody fell out). That one was due to adhesion, the train wasn't approaching fast. The other one was a Class 37 run on the North Wales Coast (may have been the last one, I can't remember) which appeared to approach Bangor way too fast and attempt European style positive braking, which ended up stopping with the vehicle I was in (the rearmost one) close to the overbridge and some vehicles off, but as this was (a) the 1990s and (b) slamdoor without CDL nothing appeared to be done as a result at least on the day.
Can you explain this?
pokemonsuper9
Established Member
I don't recall any overshoots, but I have been on an Avanti that skipped Penrith, we went through at seemingly full speed, we were running 3 minutes late and that was all recovered by that skip.
On the announcement after they blaimed the paperwork.
There is no auto announcer at Liverpool South Parkway station.
Tazi Hupefi
On Moderation
I wonder how they're able to legally square that - it's an equality as well as safety issue. Probably Merseyrail not wanting to invest in what they see as "mainline" trains. I'm sure I saw an Avanti train on the CIS there being shown as Virgin Trains too.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
It just refers to using maximum service brake to a stand pretty much, including in bay platforms. The UK approach has more slack. I remember finding it quite remarkable when I first started knocking around the rails of Europe in the 1990s.
Merle Haggard
Established Member
Used to be standard practice in the days of steam when brakes were reliable every time. The LT&S, for instance or Liverpools St suburban, wouldn't have worked otherwise
The uncertainty of disc brakes seems to be one reason it declined. Commuting to/from Euston in the early days of AM10s it wasn't unusual for the speed to drop from 75 rapidly down to about 15 when the platform ramp was reached, only to glide through with little further retardation eventually coming to a halt past the platform.
After discussion on the signal post 'phone reversal into the platform was usually done, doesn't seem possible nowadays. Mishap form produced in power box then, of course.
Tetchytyke
Veteran Member
There is on the mainline platforms, just not the Merseyrail platforms.
It is possible for a train to set back after an overrun. There are some conditions that must be met but if they are then it’s usually done.
Are you sure on this? I stop there every day and I've never heard it even when trains are arriving.
No more than a quarter of a mile.
No automatic level crossing (AHB, AOCL, etc).
Signaller's authority.
Merle Haggard
Established Member
I'm surprised the criteria doesn't include passing a (obviously proceed) signal.
I recollect when I worked on an accident section (long, long ago admittedly) we had a case where an AM10 overshot a station completely and also ran past an auto 4 aspect signal (with a proceed aspect). Reversing past it into the station occupied the previous track circuit and instantly reduced the approaching (auto) signals by one aspect which, understandably, alarmed the driver of a following train.
Perhaps more modern signalling has better logic, though. Or perhaps the signaller shouldn't have given authority. I can't remember the outcome.
Must have been a considerable overrun if the train had cleared the overlap
Merle Haggard
Established Member
Yes indeed. Sometimes one happened to be passenger on a train involved (they were not uncommon) and it was interesting to compare the reports with actuality.
Conversation usually was noted as Signaller, 'how far past' - driver, 'just a few yards...'. Mmmm.
On one occasion, the reversing train had passed two signals & overlaps with the result a following train saw the aspects reduce x 2 - can't remember whether it was G to YY or YY to R.
If you read 1960s-early 1970s accident reports on Railways Archive you may have a flavour of attitudes of the day, I will say no more. We had a lot of mishap forms arrive every morning back then. Five clerks and a head of section (and a cat
. ) kept busy on the Division.- Status