Train hits platform buffers at Chester - platform now being rebuilt

[kieron]

Train hits platform buffers at Chester - platform now being rebuilt

Last November, a train went through the buffers at platform 1 in Chester and caused some damage to the bit of "platform" behind it (it's not accessible from public areas, but I can't think of a better term), as well as to a bicycle which was parked on it, as described in this thread.

They installed replacement buffers soon after, but all they did with the "platform" was to check it was safe and put warning tape around it.

I saw some people working on the "platform" yesterday, so it may be being repaired now.

 

[gordonthemoron]

isn't there a bike rack there?

 

[High Dyke]

isn't there a bike rack there?

Not now...

 

[HarleyDavidson]

isn't there a bike rack there?

It went to rack & ruin.

 

[185]

The bike arrived amazing. :P

 

[Zoidberg]

For those interested, the RAIB has published its report into the incident referred to in this thread and in the closed thread http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=92792

The report may be accessed from http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/investigation_reports/reports_2014/report262014.cfm with the PDF itself at the end of http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources/141124_R262014_Chester.pdf

An extract from the summary:

At 12:12 hrs on Wednesday 20 November 2013 the 10:10 hrs passenger train from London Euston to Chester collided with the buffer stop at the end of the platform as it arrived at Chester station. The impact destroyed the buffer stop and caused the leading vehicle of the train to start to override the platform, demolishing a glass screen and damaging the platform. It was fortunate that there was no-one in this area at the time.

...

The accident was caused by the train sliding on wet rails that were also contaminated with leaf residue and traces of lubricating oil. The train was not equipped with automatic sanding equipment, which could have applied sand to the rails to improve adhesion. The train was fitted with emergency sanding equipment but the driver did not activate this until the train was too close to the buffers to be able to stop before striking them.

...

The RAIB has identified two key learning points and made three recommendations. The operators of class 220 and 221 trains are recommended to fit equipment to their trains to automatically apply sand when wheel slide is detected during heavy braking (Virgin Trains has recently informed the RAIB of its intention to fit such equipment to its fleet of class 221 trains). A recommendation is made to Virgin Trains to amend its operating instructions to drivers and a recommendation is made to RSSB to update the standard which governs the fitment of train sanding equipment.

The first learning point concerns the analysis of data from train data recorders to provide information on the location of low adhesion conditions on the network. The second learning point is that infrastructure managers need to be aware of changes in traffic patterns which necessitate the reassessment of the adequacy of buffer stops in terminal platforms.

 

[Crossover]

I was at Chester only a few weeks ago and new buffers aside, saw that the rest of the buffer end remained a building site - hopefully it will get cleared up soon then

 

[PG]

One wonders at the apparent lack of competence by ORR with respect to a RAIB report published over 6 years before this incident in that it (the ORR) considered Voyagers complied with the recommendation by RAIB to fit automatic sanding equipment. Looking at footnote 16 to paragraph 124 in this report (Chester) we see that the RAIB says

"For the purposes of this analysis, driver operated sanders fitted to trains without WSP systems are included with the automatic sanding category as the sand can be applied at will for as long as required."

I fail to see how the one-shot sanders fitted to Voyagers, which could only be activated by use of the emergency brake, could be considered by ORR to fall within the definition of automatic sanders.

Previous RAIB recommendations relevant to this investigation
153
The following recommendations, which were made by the RAIB as a result of its previous investigations, have relevance to this investigation.
Recommendations that could have affected the factors
154
The RAIB considers that wider implementation of the following recommendations could have addressed one of the factors and either prevented this accident or mitigated the consequences.
Autumn Adhesion Investigation Part 3: Review of adhesion-related incidents Autumn 2005. RAIB report 25(part 3)/2006 published Jan 2007
156
Recommendation 9 read as follows:
Train operators to fit automatic sanding equipment to those multiple units of five cars or less that are not currently so equipped, unless they are specifically excluded from doing so by GM/RT2461.
The ORR has informed the RAIB that sanders were fitted to a number of types of passenger trains that were previously unfitted (eg class 390 ‘Pendolino’, class 333 and some class 158 units).
The absence of automatic sanders on class 220 and 221 trains was not mentioned in connection with this recommendation. Virgin Trains was not asked by the ORR to respond to this recommendation as ORR considered that its trains were already fitted with sanders (albeit one-shot sanders in the case of class 220 and 221 trains).

Also interesting is the post incident analysis conducted by the RAIB - in particular the last sentence of paragraph 122.

122
The number of low adhesion braking events for each generic group was normalised by the total number of units of that type on the network to give
the number of low adhesion braking events per unit. The results were further normalised by the typical number of stops per hour that each type of train is scheduled to make (as an indicator of how often a train is exposed to the potential for a low adhesion event during braking). This normalisation was only approximate as the diagrams worked by the trains vary within each class. The figures used for this normalisation are given in appendix C. The results of the normalisation of the low adhesion incident data for autumn 2013 are given in figure 12. This indicates that the Voyagers (classes 220 and 221) are significantly more likely to be involved in a low adhesion incident each time they attempt to stop than any other classes of train.