'Runaway train' on London Underground

[ralphchadkirk]

A driverless train ran for almost four miles on the London Underground on Friday morning.

The engineering train on the Northern line was allowed to roll between Archway and Warren Street stations, TfL has confirmed.

The incident, which happened at 0640 BST, is now being investigated by London Underground.

Transport for London (TfL) said the train moved at slow speed with no risk to the safety of passengers or staff.

A TfL spokesperson said: "A full investigation has been launched into this incident."

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-10964766

I take it this would explain why Camden Town-Kennington(CharingX) and Archway-Finchey Central was suspended this morning?

 

[Metroland]

A Tube disaster was narrowly averted this morning when a driverless train careered down the Northern line for almost four miles.

Tube staff rushed to divert passenger trains out of the way of the engineering train after it became detached at Archway and began rolling south.

It was not stopped until it reached Warren Street station 13 minutes later, when a steep rise to the station platform brought it to a halt.

Underground controllers frantically ordered trains ahead of the runaway train not to stop at stations to prevent it crashing into them when they called at stations.

Other trains were diverted at Camden Town down the Northern Line's Bank branch while the runaway train was allowed to run onto the Charing Cross branch.

Transport for London and the Rail Accident Investigation Bureau today launched an urgent investigation into the incident and banned similar engineering trains from the Underground network.

TfL has yet to work out how fast the train was running but insiders admit that it was only the quick-thinking of the Northern line's control room staff that averted a crash.

The incident began at 5.25am when the engineering train - being used for rail maintenance work - became defective as it headed south into Archway station.

Engineers began to move the defective train northbound by coupling it to an out-of-service Northern line train. However, for reasons that are now under investigation, at around 6.44am the engineering train became detached from the Northern line train and began to move southbound.

The journey between Archway and Tufnell Park normally takes 13 minutes when the train stops at the intervening five stations. This suggests the runaway train would have been travelling at speeds of around 50mph.

A TfL statement said that Underground staff “undertook a swift assessment of the incident” and decided to allow the train to continue, until it came to a stand at Warren Street, which it did at 6.57am.

TfL said: “Throughout the incident, London Underground staff monitored the situation, including the position of passenger trains. LU staff moved to divert passenger trains to the City branch, and direct the engineering train to the Charing Cross branch where passenger trains had been cleared. Services on the Charing Cross branch of the Northern line were then suspended.”

The incident resulted in the suspension of the Northern line between Finchley Central and Archway and Camden Town to Kennington via Charing Cross. The line remained suspended at lunchtime to allow the investigation to continue. TfL said it was working to restore services as soon as possible.

London Underground director Richard Parry said: “Safety is London Underground's top priority, and we have of course launched an immediate and thorough investigation into this incident to establish the cause. Once that investigation is complete, we will publish the report, making its conclusions and recommendations clear. In the meantime we have prohibited the use of this design of engineering train on the Underground.

“From the start of this incident, an immediate assessment was made and operational decisions taken to minimise the safety risk to our customers and staff.

“Our Engineers are working to restore full services as soon as possible, and we apologise for the inconvenience caused to our customers while we investigate this incident.”

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/stand...-travels-three-miles-on-london-underground.do

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Updated BBC Report:

A runaway train went through six stops on a 13-minute journey on London's Tube with other trains having to be cleared out of its path.

The engineering train became uncoupled as it was towed on the Northern Line near Archway station on Friday morning.

Passenger trains were diverted to another branch of the Northern Line while trains were cleared from the Charing Cross branch.

The train ran for nearly four miles before it stopped at Warren Street.

The incident has caused disruption on the line for most of the morning.
Investigation launched

At about 0525 BST, the engineering train, which was undertaking rail maintenance work, became defective as it approached Archway, travelling southbound on the High Barnet branch of the Northern Line.

Engineers began to move the defective train northbound by coupling it to an out of service Northern Line train.

But at about 0644 BST, the engineering train became detached from the out of service train and began to move southbound.

London Underground had to divert passenger trains to the City branch while directing the engineering train to the Charing Cross branch where passenger trains cleared.

The engineering train came to a stand at Warren Street at 0657 BST.

A Transport for London (TfL) spokesman said: "A full investigation has been launched into this incident."

The line was suspended between Finchley Central and Archway and between Camden Town and Kennington via Charing Cross, leading to widespread disruption.

 

[Old Timer]

That does not read very good at all, even allowing for the usual sensationalist stance.

 

[At_traction]

Do I have to understand that the engr. train was still in the vicinity of Archway an hour after it had become "defective"?

If the engr. train was originally on the soutbound track (SB trains were "running away" from the berserker train), was the idea to pull it to some nearby crossover to the north of the station (how far) to take it to a properly northbound track?

 

[ukrob]

Do we know if it was an engineering train or just a battery loco? Obviously if it was a heavy train there would of been a lot more momentum behind it, and any collision could have been much much more serious.

 

[9K43]

Thats why trains should not run DOO.
Today you get away with it tomorrow all hell will let loose.
Where is your compitant person who you magic out of a top hat?
If it happens on the tube, just imagine on the big railway above.
What happened to the driver, have they not got DSD?

 

[Lampshade]

Couldn't they have just cut the power? :?

 

[ukrob]

Couldn't they have just cut the power? :?

What would that achieve other than stopping service trains which were right in its path? It wouldn't of been taking power - hence being a runaway.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Cue the speculation and silly guesses... :roll:

Shall we wait for an investigation?

 

[ukrob]

Cue the speculation and silly guesses... :roll:

Shall we wait for an investigation?

I was wondering how long it would be before someone said that.

Good idea.

Lets not discuss anything on a discussion forum unless it is proven 100% fact. No opinions or thoughts allowed.

 

[455driver]

Shall we wait for an investigation?

No, where is the fun in that

I am sure all the ex spurts will come out of the woodwork and enlighten us to the exact cause of this incident!

 

[starrymarkb]

One thought - why wasn't it caught by the train stops?

 

[swt_passenger]

One thought - why wasn't it caught by the train stops?

I think the trip cock arms might have to be lifted on a train being rescued, but don't quote me on that.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I shall have a look at the LUL Rule Book when I get home.

 

[the sniper]

This'll make for a good read when the RAIB report comes out (in about 7 years... :roll: ). I'd love to see some CCTV footage of it flying though the stations!

 

[ChrisCooper]

If it was a failed train that was being towed surely a competant person should have been available to apply the brakes in the event of this sort of thing happening? I know NR rules allow situations where there is not brake continuity through a none passenger train, but one of the criteria is that there is a way to apply the brakes on the rear vehicle in the formation, either by someone riding at the rear or someone riding in another vehicle that has brake continuity with the rear. A coupling braking and a train running away with no way to stop it is one of those things that should never happen (hence why unfitted trains had a brakevan at the rear).

I wish the RMT didn't always jump straight on the bandwagon in these sorts of things. I imagine they could look pretty daft if either it's shown to be one of their staff who didn't follow proceedure, of if proceedures were such that this sort of thing was waiting to happen and they had allowed it. The only other alternative really is a freak incident in which case there is little to get wound up about anyway. Talking about outside contractors is particularly daft because I'm sure outside contractors have nothing to do with the running of the trains and that is what this is most likely about.

 

[NSE]

Been reading the reports online and haven't managed to work out what the runaway train was formed of.
Could anyone shed some light? Was it a battery loco with some sort of trucks/wagons or indeed a regular Northern Line train?

 

[Old Timer]

Thats why trains should not run DOO.
Today you get away with it tomorrow all hell will let loose.
Where is your compitant person who you magic out of a top hat?
If it happens on the tube, just imagine on the big railway above.
What happened to the driver, have they not got DSD?

Who said DOO had anything to do with this ?

Can you tell me a single incident where DOO has been the contributory factor since it was introduced in 1985 ?

DOO operates quite successfully in the UK, and indeed around the world.

You personally may not agree with it, but it is a fact of life and to speculate that DOO is a factor is reprehensible, especially when you appear to be uisng the scenario to make a political point.

 

[Daniel]

The engineers train had failed and was being dragged as part of a WDM by a not in service 95TS. As it was being dragged, in compliance with the rule book the defective unit had it's trip-cock and all associated equipment isolated - including SAPB's and air.
Emergency coupling failed, train rolled away down.

The engineers on the failed train jumped off onto one of the platforms after the train had begun to roll away. There was nothing they could have done to stop the train, bar leaning over the front of the train and trying to switch the IC's - not a smart move.

And without going into too much detail on a public forum, I wouldn't call statements from certain places entirely factual.

It was interesting reading the comments on the Evening Standards website about this, some blaming Bob Crow for the runaway and one even saying that the fact no-one was injured by a runaway train surely means that driverless trains are safe.

 

[Aictos]

At last some facts are available, thank you.

 

[Gavelex]

The engineers train was a rail grinder.

 

[Sun Chariot]

Not wanting to belittle the, potentially serious, event but I would give my proverbials if my daily Jubilee Line grind could run through a few stations non-stop...

 

[A60K]

Thats why trains should not run DOO.

Quite logical and a very good argument for DOO. If the brakes have completely failed on a train on a downhill gradient it's much better to have two people jumping off rather than one

 

[Gavelex]

I'm all for DOO, but on LU, where on most lines the coupler at the cab hardly gets used I think there should be one person in each unit (Where did the driver of the Rail Grinder bugger off to?) - especially when it's two totally different types of stock like this !

 

[Daniel]

(Where did the driver of the Rail Grinder bugger off to?

The engineers on the failed train jumped off onto one of the platforms after the train had begun to roll away.

...(and apparently quotes don't count towards minimum character numbers)!

 

[talltim]

Why do the rules say to disable the tripcocks? Surely they are there to prevent runaways? (as well as SPADS)

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Why do the rules say to disable the tripcocks? Surely they are there to prevent runaways? (as well as SPADS)

I understand that the train would be "multi-tripped".

 

[Daniel]

As it was working in the wrong direction it would have been rear-tripped had the tripcocks not been isolated. However it ran away in the right direction.

 

[Gavelex]

I understand that the train would be "multi-tripped".

Not unless the driver SPADed by over 6 cars !

If the driver of the 95 went past a green signal, the tripcock would go up again by the time the second car is starting to pass it. So then by the time the rail grinder goes past it the tripcock on the rail grinder gets tripped as the signal is red.

Talltim, at no point was a train running with no tripcocks cut in.