Station overrun - curious about how 'serious' it is considered

[Tom_]

Earlier this summer I was travelling on the Brighton mainline to Gatwick and the train overran its stop at Three Bridges, at considerable speed and distance.

No harm was done but having, fortunately, not been involved in any railway incident before, I am curious generally about whether it would be considered minor/commonplace or more serious; and whether some level of investigation and safety follow-up would normally occur.

Briefly: the service was one where two units join at Haywards Heath. This was delayed and we were running late by perhaps 10 minutes. Acceleration and braking at the next stop (Balcombe) were noticeably sharp. Approaching Three Bridges the train braked much later than normal and very hard; but as the platform started to pass by the window at, I would say, at least 40mph, it became clear we were not going to be able to stop. (An interesting moment. The illusion of safety one has sitting on a train one takes routinely was punctured; I was reminded I'm in a metal box moving at speeds that will kill me if we meet an obstacle; and I had long enough to wonder about bracing for some some of collision or derailment over points or something that might be coming.)

We eventually came to a near halt perhaps three or four train-lengths beyond the station, trundled on for a few minutes at jogging speed, then went on to Gatwick at a gentle pace. There was a sheepish announcement apologising for failure to call at Three Bridges and directing people to change at Gatwick to go back, but no other explanation. As we passed the end of the platform at Three Bridges I could see the signal there was at red.

Things I'm curious about are:

• Is this something that the driver/conductor/signaller would need to report, or would it not be considered serious? Is it the sort of thing RAIB would look at or just let the train operating company handle internally?
• Did we actually pass a signal at danger or would I just have seen it red as my window passed the signal because it would have changed to red when the front of the train passed it and occupied the next bit of track? (I was seated in the second-from-front carriage.)
• Were we actually in any danger? I presumed not because, busy as the Brighton mainline is, the spacing between trains is much greater than the distance we overran by (even if the next one up the line were stopped / moving slowly); and there was no great lurch or anything to suggest we hit some points that were not set yet.
  

 

[1D53]

The crew would report it to the signaller and their control but it is generally not RAIB reportable. Without knowing the incident I can't comment on the signalling sequence but if a SPAD had occurred it's likely you would have been stood a fairly long time as there is reports to complete etc. If there is no SPAD there is generally no danger in an overrun other than the inconvenience to passengers.

 

[SECR 65]

I had it a few months back on an STP football special from Brighton to Lewes (myself not for the football) which overshot Falmer.... where the stadium is. This greatly annoyed the passengers, and on the PA it was floated that we may have had to go on to Lewes and back. It was only one or two coach lengths off the platform. I saw on the signalling diagram there were services in the two berths behind, although these could have been a mile or so back. We were cleared to set back into the station.

For me this was a frustrating incident! As I headed to Brighton station I noticed a 2L on the diagram - perfect if you're trying to go to Lewes. Then I realised it was football, and spent ages faffing around the complex queuing system. And I wasn't even interested in stopping at Falmer!

 

[tram21]

Were we actually in any danger? I presumed not because, busy as the Brighton mainline is, the spacing between trains is much greater than the distance we overran by (even if the next one up the line were stopped / moving slowly); and there was no great lurch or anything to suggest we hit some points that were not set yet.

(Obviously with exceptions at unprotected signals, such as at Elstow, Bedford) all signals that have been deemed at a high risk of a SPAD, which will include all platform signals, especially on a busy mainline, will be TPWS protected on approach, which stops the train at a point at which, when going too fast, it won't overrun the signal by very much, and therefore protecting against a collision. Whilst a low speed derailment is in theory possible, at a high risk signal, such as at a station, the signal should be protected in such a way that driver error cannot cause an incident.

 

[edwin_m]

I've posted several times on here that an overrun is a much lower risk incident than a SPAD, and that treating it as such might even reinforce the respect of red signals while allowing drivers to drive a bit more aggressively when the platform starter is showing proceed.

 

[Harpo]

while allowing drivers to drive a bit more aggressively when the platform starter is showing proceed.

Pretty sure it’s a sacking offence to use ‘aggresively’ and ‘drive’ in the same sentence nowadays? Much like ‘time’ and ‘making up’.

 

[edwin_m]

Pretty sure it’s a sacking offence to use ‘aggresively’ and ‘drive’ in the same sentence nowadays? Much like ‘time’ and ‘making up’.

Substitute "assertively" if preferred...

 

[Haywain]

I was reminded I'm in a metal box moving at speeds that will kill me if we meet an obstacle;

I thought you were on a train, not in a car? Recent rail incidents have demonstrated that modern trains are remarkably safe.

Is this something that the driver/conductor/signaller would need to report, or would it not be considered serious? Is it the sort of thing RAIB would look at or just let the train operating company handle internally?

It would be reported by the driver and guard, if applicable, to control and the driver would probably be asked to explain. RAIB are unlikely to have been interested if there was no risk or injuries.

Did we actually pass a signal at danger or would I just have seen it red as my window passed the signal because it would have changed to red when the front of the train passed it and occupied the next bit of track? (I was seated in the second-from-front carriage.)

It seems unlikely - signals go back to red after a couple of coaches have passed so it's often the case that you will see a signal being apparently passed at red if you are sitting further back in the train than the front couple of coaches.

Were we actually in any danger?

It doesn't appear so.

 

[Tetragon213]

I'd have thought that, if it was a minor overrun, the driver would be getting signaller's permission to run bang road back to the platform, then doing the "Walk of Shame"?

 

[Horizon22]

Things I'm curious about are:

• Is this something that the driver/conductor/signaller would need to report, or would it not be considered serious? Is it the sort of thing RAIB would look at or just let the train operating company handle internally?

Yes the driver would need to report it to the signaller. The signaller (or the driver directly) would also need to inform their control. It may be then dependent on various factors that the driver may be relieved as soon as possible / next convenient location to be met by an approriate manager. An internal investigation would probably take place, but this isn't an RAIB reportable incident. It's towards the lower scale of 'operational incidents' overall.

• Did we actually pass a signal at danger or would I just have seen it red as my window passed the signal because it would have changed to red when the front of the train passed it and occupied the next bit of track? (I was seated in the second-from-front carriage.)

Hard to know without knowing the specific details and log item (which isn't publicly available). It may have been that even though the train was booked to stop at Three Bridges, the route ahead was already set and was showing a proceed aspect. As you say, it may have already occupied the next section of track, hence why you saw a red signal.

• Were we actually in any danger? I presumed not because, busy as the Brighton mainline is, the spacing between trains is much greater than the distance we overran by (even if the next one up the line were stopped / moving slowly); and there was no great lurch or anything to suggest we hit some points that were not set yet.

Again if the train / driver didn't actually have a SPAD (signal passed at danger) then no - the safety of the train was not compromised as the route was set ahead. The only potential issue might be if people try and self-egress onto the platforms if any part of the train was still occupying the platform.

An overrun can occur for a number of reasons including driver error / lack of situational awareness, poor traction control (wheelslip) or a differing unit fault (rarer).

I'd have thought that, if it was a minor overrun, the driver would be getting signaller's permission to run bang road back to the platform, then doing the "Walk of Shame"?

Many TOCs have "forward only" policies, which do not allow drivers to 'set back' and instead continue to the next station only.

 

[Tom_]

Thanks for the replies, all very interesting to learn a bit more.

 

[SECR 65]

I'd have thought that, if it was a minor overrun, the driver would be getting signaller's permission to run bang road back to the platform, then doing the "Walk of Shame"?

Yes, this is what happened when I experienced an overrun (post #3). I was quite surprised that, when returning to the leading cab in the direction of travel, the driver smiled at me! (By this point the train was virtually empty, and I may have been wearing a t-shirt which gave away that I'm an enthusiast.)

If I recall correctly, when walking from the leading cab to the reverse cab to set back, the driver walked along the outside of the train, most of which was platformed. The train was busy and many people were standing, but I feel he could have made it through without too much trouble. (Although, it was a train of football fans.)

Why couldn't a local door or doors have been opened, giving that over half of the train was platformed?
I wonder if it was considered quicker to set back, given there were multiple hundred passengers wishing to alight at the station.
Maybe despatch would have been an issue, with the driver being the only safety-critical staff member on board. There were platform staff available, but these might have been football marshalls and not despatch people.

 

[Kilopylae]

Why couldn't a local door or doors have been opened, giving that over half of the train was platformed?

I know that 377s have selective door opening - do 387s?

 

[Statto]

This happened last Friday 4th September were a train overshot the platform at Rhosneigr, train ended up arriving in Holyhead 70 late which caused chaos for a couple of hours, it's not helped that Rhosneigr is a request stop too.

 

[bahnause]

The most common cases I’m aware of here involve train drivers in training, who sometimes slightly underestimate the effect of the gradient when braking. There are a few well-known spots. And I can usually tell quite early on in the braking phase that it’s going to happen.

In most cases, the front door is no longer at the platform. That’s the moment when they get to make their ‘walk of shame’. They are then required to stand by the first door and direct people round to the next door at the back of the carriage .

 

[westcoaster]

The platform signal has a very short overlap at Three bridges, so most likely the signal reverted to red before you passed.
Also the signal has TPWS due to conflicting moves across the junction ahead, iirc it also has TPWS+ fitted.
If there had of been a SPAD the train would not have moved forward for a while.

 

[Doubleyellow]

In general "interlocking" and signal design is to prevent the hazard of collision/ derailment (hitting something or running over points in state you shouldn't). While running through a station isn't convenient, the signalling might not "care" if you are not going to run into anything you shouldn't.


Basically the main hazard associated with stopping long or short [You can also stop short if you are a long train and inadvertently stop at the marker boards for a short train.] is if you open doors not adjacent to platform. Different stocks have different "protections" (from fully "located "correct side door enable CSDE functions implemented by ATPs, to half train door cut our and end door cut out - these being planned/ offered for when a long train is planned to stop at a short platform).

Victoria Line trains had approach controlled station starter signals (so the signal was at red until the station berth was occupied - and this was enforced by the ATP -we also discussed a hazard for tube stations of whether running through at full speed created a hazard of dragging people off a crowded platform by a (piston in cylinder) vacuum effect (I had to work very hard not to write sucking people off there)). [the vic was also built so the run in to a platform was up hill, and the run out down]

 

[sjm77]

The most common cases I’m aware of here involve train drivers in training, who sometimes slightly underestimate the effect of the gradient when braking

Interesting! I was on a train in the mid-1980s which overran Bempton station on the Yorkshire Coast Line. The Guard (as they were called) signalled on the buzzer to back up over the level crossing into the platform, I remeber seeing the buzzer code options on the old BR DMU's in the guards van when leaving my bike. We had approached the station going down a 1:92. A few months later the level crossing was converted to automatic so not sure if we could have done that.

 

[DelW]

[the vic was also built so the run in to a platform was up hill, and the run out down]

I believe that principle goes back as far as the original "twopenny tube" aka the Central Line. It was done to save electricity, wear and tear on brakes and motors, and give better acceleration and braking, but the gradient probably helped to remind drivers (were they motormen then?) of their approach to the next station.

 

[Sheridan]

This happened last Friday 4th September were a train overshot the platform at Rhosneigr, train ended up arriving in Holyhead 70 late which caused chaos for a couple of hours, it's not helped that Rhosneigr is a request stop too.

This seems an awfully long time to resolve a fairly simple matter with no level crossings involved, and midway through a long signal section - unless there were any other issues at play such as a brake fault or allegation of such, or a traincrew issue (if the driver doesn’t feel able to continue, a 70-minute delay is of course better than them carrying on and something worse occurring. The fact that it’s a request stop shouldn’t complicate things especially.

All this is assuming the train was on time before the overrun, of course!

 

[Harpo]

I believe that principle goes back as far as the original "twopenny tube" aka the Central Line.

Visitable on the Central Line. Many stations were extended using the top end of the gradient, so you can stand on a sloped platform end in a section with a different tunnel profile.

 

[trivran]

I found it very interesting when riding high-frequency metro services in Tokyo, that a very minor overrun was corrected with a very quick reversing move to the correct position. I presume this was done from the front cab as I would be surprised if there were somebody in the rear cab.

 

[fishwomp]

I was on one last year that overshot the platform by about one coach length - at Chapeltown heading to Barnsley.

As a passenger, all I heard was a different bell code, we moved back, and then a single buzz for stop, and then doors opened as normal. There is no signal, so no signaller consequences at the end of the platform. Whether that gets reported or not - then via GSMR or afterwards - I don't know, but the train carried on as normal.

 

[sharpener]

I believe that principle goes back as far as the original "twopenny tube" aka the Central Line. It was done to save electricity, wear and tear on brakes and motors, and give better acceleration and braking, but the gradient probably helped to remind drivers (were they motormen then?) of their approach to the next station.

Certainly antedates the Vic line. I remember a book in the local children's library in the '50s with lots of technical detail of the Tube system which fascinated me, including this. Another thing I recall from it (now superseded I think) is the pair of bare wires which you could clip a telephone to, or if shorted together notified control and put tunnel lights on.

 

[WideRanger]

I found it very interesting when riding high-frequency metro services in Tokyo, that a very minor overrun was corrected with a very quick reversing move to the correct position. I presume this was done from the front cab as I would be surprised if there were somebody in the rear cab.

Most metro lines in Tokyo have a guard in the rear cab at all times.

 

[foggy69]

A lot of trains from Haywards Heath do not stop at Three Bridges, so maybe the driver had just thought they were on a fast service. Sometime the PIS announcing the next station is the wakeup call, but it can be a little late depending on how fast you are going, and generally the on the up fast at Three Bridges, that is about 80-90mph.
As for not setting back into the platform, by the time this could all be arranged, you could have dropped the passengers at Gatwick and they could already be back at Three Bridges. Plus the fact that there was probably a number of other trains already stuck behind it.

 

[Horizon22]

A lot of trains from Haywards Heath do not stop at Three Bridges, so maybe the driver had just thought they were on a fast service. Sometime the PIS announcing the next station is the wakeup call, but it can be a little late depending on how fast you are going, and generally the on the up fast at Three Bridges, that is about 80-90mph.
As for not setting back into the platform, by the time this could all be arranged, you could have dropped the passengers at Gatwick and they could already be back at Three Bridges. Plus the fact that there was probably a number of other trains already stuck behind it.

And also, as mentioned, GTR may have a "forward only" policy following a 'fail to call' incident.

 

[Kentish RYS]

Yes, this is what happened when I experienced an overrun (post #3). I was quite surprised that, when returning to the leading cab in the direction of travel, the driver smiled at me! (By this point the train was virtually empty, and I may have been wearing a t-shirt which gave away that I'm an enthusiast.)

If I recall correctly, when walking from the leading cab to the reverse cab to set back, the driver walked along the outside of the train, most of which was platformed. The train was busy and many people were standing, but I feel he could have made it through without too much trouble. (Although, it was a train of football fans.)

Why couldn't a local door or doors have been opened, giving that over half of the train was platformed?
I wonder if it was considered quicker to set back, given there were multiple hundred passengers wishing to alight at the station.
Maybe despatch would have been an issue, with the driver being the only safety-critical staff member on board. There were platform staff available, but these might have been football marshalls and not despatch people.

Local door (if the stock can do a local door only open) needs a guard which Southern no longer has for the case given. Almost all SDO systems are open first X coaches' doors (if not something more basic like Unit De-select.

From memory the ones that weren't just front X coaches are some HSTs which had guard panels that would unlock:

• all doors
• All door forward
• All door behind

And someone has a system (SWT reings a bell but may be wrong, may have been a demonstration or proposal) which had effectively a beacon in the 4 foot, one saying platform on the left starts here and one at the other end that says platform ends here so an overshot would allow doors still platformed to open.

Many systems l, if not a driver selects how many doors to open, have a beacon/balise to say how long and what side the platform is and the approach. Trains tops and doors release in the given length. It the front is beyond the platform it doesn't know. Some have GPS or a GPS reinforcement element

This ain't my area of expertise so may be wrong in bits

 

[43096]

From memory the ones that weren't just front X coaches are some HSTs which had guard panels that would unlock:

• all doors
• All door forward
• All door behind

This ain't my area of expertise so may be wrong in bits

You are correct with that bit. FGW modified their (slam door) HSTs with SDO on the CDL system. A really rather neat modification and is backwards compatible in that unmodified vehicles can still run in the train.

 

[Towers]

I was on one last year that overshot the platform by about one coach length - at Chapeltown heading to Barnsley.

As a passenger, all I heard was a different bell code, we moved back, and then a single buzz for stop, and then doors opened as normal. There is no signal, so no signaller consequences at the end of the platform. Whether that gets reported or not - then via GSMR or afterwards - I don't know, but the train carried on as normal.

That sounds very much like the sequence of events which would unfold if a driver were to propel the train back into the platform under the supervision of somebody else in the back cab - which would certainly be an interesting event in this day and age!