Runaway train - Odisha, India

[nlogax]

In the Indian state of Odisha, nearly 1000 passengers were onboard a train (22 carriages long) that rolled backwards from its loco for a distance of seven miles, only being stopped by rocks placed on the tracks by rail staff. Must have been terrifying for everyone concerned. Thankfully no injuries.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/2...-train-engine-in-india-and-roll-away-at-speed

India’s railway ministry said a “ghastly” accident had narrowly been avoided after 22 passenger carriages carrying about 1,000 people became detached from a train engine and sped backwards for miles before being stopped.

The runaway carriages rolled for seven miles in the north-eastern state of Odisha before being brought to a shuddering halt by rocks placed on the tracks by railway staff.

A spokesman for the railway ministry’s eastern division said on Sunday that none of about 1,000 passengers had been injured in the incident on Saturday night.

Seven railway employees who were reported not to have followed proper procedures were suspended and an investigation was opened into how the carriages became separated during the journey from the western state of Gujarat to Odisha, said JP Mishra, a spokesman

 

[gazthomas]

So lucky nobody was injurred!

 

[kermit]

Has anyone ever heard of this method of stopping a train? I guess lots of ballast stones in a line would be the best way, to minimise risk of derailment, and at least the material would be at hand.....

 

[ChiefPlanner]

Has anyone ever heard of this method of stopping a train? I guess lots of ballast stones in a line would be the best way, to minimise risk of derailment, and at least the material would be at hand.....

The disastrous Armagh collision of 1889 featured an overloaded special seaside excursion stalled on a severe upgrade , the train was (stupidly) uncoupled (there was a following passenger train that could have been cautioned onto it to push it over the summit - but this was discounted.

The loco on the excursion set back a tad - which was enough to set the uncoupled section back - out of control - there was one handbrake in the rear brakevan - panicky efforts were made by staff to throw ballast onto the rails to absolutely no avail. The collision - on a high embankment was truly disastrous and led to legislation changes of fundemental importance.

 

[hexagon789]

The disastrous Armagh collision of 1889 featured an overloaded special seaside excursion stalled on a severe upgrade , the train was (stupidly) uncoupled (there was a following passenger train that could have been cautioned onto it to push it over the summit - but this was discounted.

The loco on the excursion set back a tad - which was enough to set the uncoupled section back - out of control - there was one handbrake in the rear brakevan - panicky efforts were made by staff to throw ballast onto the rails to absolutely no avail. The collision - on a high embankment was truly disastrous and led to legislation changes of fundemental importance.

I was just about to mention Armagh, but you beat me to it. The use of stones there was disastrous and demonstrates why automatic continuous brakes are essential.

I'm wondering how the brakes didn't apply. Even if they were vacuum (not sure if that's still prevalent in India), they should still apply when the loco get detached or am I missing small some detail?

 

[Adlington]

In the Indian state of Odisha, nearly 1000 passengers were onboard a train (22 carriages long) that rolled backwards from its loco for a distance of seven miles, only being stopped by rocks placed on the tracks by rail staff.

CNN says it was wooden wedges:

The train was eventually stopped after railway workers placed wooden wedges on the tracks, bringing it to a crunching halt.

According to the same source the train started rolling away while stationary at a station:

The incident is believed to have occurred when rail staff neglected to apply the skid-brakes as workers were attaching a new engine to the passenger carriages,

 

[Ploughman]

Film clip from the BBC about this.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/world-asia-india-43697965/india-engineless-train-scares-passengers

 

[edwin_m]

The most common reason for this is if no handbrake is applied on the train when uncoupling the loco, and the vacuum (or indeed air) brake either leaks off or is released individually on each coach.

 

[Taunton]

This used to happen at Bristol TM northbound in steam loco, and early diesel, days, ex-GWR locos, and the diesel hydraulics, had 25" vacuum exhausters whereas ex-LMS locos and other BR diesels had 21" exhausters, so would have difficulty releasing the brakes which had been applied on arrival. A shunter would go along the train while they were changing engines, pulling the cords on the vacuum cylinders on the coaches, releasing the brakes. It's level there, I don't know what if any additional precautions were in place. This is not likely the cause of the India incident, but shows how straightforward it is to have a recently arrived passenger train standing with no brakes on.

https://www.rcts.org.uk/features/querycorner/page.htm?id=query/Q11.02

 

[Lucan]

As it went for 7 miles without meeting anything I'm guessing it was going on the right direction track. I notice in the video that there was a tail lamp on both ends.

As for no-one stopping the train with an emergency brake, I'm guessing that the brakes were out of vacuum or air pressure to apply them, or if it was going the right way then passengers did not realise anything was wrong. However there are many open doors (sliding by the look of it) which suggests some people were thinking of jumping, unless open doors in transit is common on Indian railways (I've heard that worse than that goes on).

 

[hexagon789]

unless open doors in transit is common on Indian railways (I've heard that worse than that goes on).

It is common, even Portillo tried the experience out at what looked to be about 50 mph.

 

[Adlington]

As it went for 7 miles without meeting anything I'm guessing it was going on the right direction track.
As for no-one stopping the train with an emergency brake, I'm guessing that the brakes were out of vacuum or air pressure to apply them

The CNN story (already quoted earlier) says "Railway staff notified the control room immediately as the train started rolling away [...] The control room then ensured that the tracks for the next two stations were cleared."
As to emergency brakes, I guess there may be manual brakes in all/some carriages, but I'm not sure folks would know how to operate it. And you don't start messing around with emergency equipment in the middle of the night unless you are sure it's an emergency.