Salisbury collision - RAIB report published

[martin_wynne]

Report published today:

 

 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/interim-report-012021-collision-between-passenger-trains-at-salisbury-tunnel-junction

 

Can't post in the original topic because it is locked (sigh):

 

 https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/168143-salisbury-collision-raib-press-release/

 

Martin.

[Nick C]

2 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

Report published today:

 

 https://www.gov.uk/government/news/interim-report-012021-collision-between-passenger-trains-at-salisbury-tunnel-junction

 

Can't post in the original topic because it is locked (sigh):

 

 https://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/168143-salisbury-collision-raib-press-release/

 

Martin.

Only the interim report of course, so no recommendations as yet - but it says pretty much what was expected; that 1L53 slid on leafmould-contaminated rails all the way from well before SY29 - over 1500m under a full braking application.

[Graham_Muz]

3 hours ago, martin_wynne said:

Can't post in the original topic because it is locked (sigh):

 

 

Sigh, a simple PM to @Andy Yto ask for it to be unlocked due to new relevant information is all that is needed.

[Paul.Uni]

@Graham_Muz you mean @AY Mod

[martin_wynne]

5 minutes ago, Graham_Muz said:

 

Sigh, a simple PM to @Andy Yto ask for it to be unlocked due to new relevant information is all that is needed.

 

Why make work for him? He's had a lot on his plate with RMweb recently. Locking topics just makes unnecessary difficulties.

 

Martin.

[Graham_Muz]

6 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

 

Why make work for him? He's had a lot on his plate with RMweb recently. Locking topics just makes unnecessary difficulties.

 

Martin.

 

In the case of such threads as accidents locking makes perfect sense to prevent additional work dealing with issues of unnecessary and inaccurate speculation that experience has often shown that such descend into. 

Edited February 21, 2022 by Graham_Muz

[Graham_Muz]

8 minutes ago, Paul.Uni said:

@Graham_Muz you mean @AY Mod

 

Both are valid IDs for Andy

[AY Mod]

4 minutes ago, martin_wynne said:

Locking topics just makes unnecessary difficulties.

 

In this instance it was done in consideration for, and consultation with, parties involved with the investigation. Rather than just me getting annoyed with some posters which is the usual form.

[AY Mod]

Just now, Graham_Muz said:

 

Both are valid IDs for Andy

 

Except I've blocked PMs to @Andy Y as that account had some errors and I've got enough dealing with one account at a time. 

[The Stationmaster]

So back to the Interim Report - which basically tells us what happened with one potential factor identified towards why it happened.  That apart there is an awful lot which it does not discuss and several important questions which are not yet answered - I await the final Report with some interest

[Siberian Snooper]

Looking at the photo of the two vehicles in the tunnel, looking in the up direction, things could have been an awful lot worse.

 

That reminds me, has there been any news of the injured driver? He was in a pretty grim state at the last report!

 

 

Edited February 21, 2022 by Siberian Snooper

[great central]

According to a post on WNXX he's doing pretty well.

[uax6]

What I don't understand is how signal SY29R could display double yellows as stated in the report, but yet the photo shows it as being a 3 aspect head....

 

Andy G

[Oldddudders]

2 hours ago, uax6 said:

What I don't understand is how signal SY29R could display double yellows as stated in the report, but yet the photo shows it as being a 3 aspect head....

 

Andy G

Does it not have a red, as a repeater?

[DY444]

2 hours ago, uax6 said:

What I don't understand is how signal SY29R could display double yellows as stated in the report, but yet the photo shows it as being a 3 aspect head....

 

Andy G

 

Because it is plated with an "R" suffix it has no red aspect.  Thus having 3 aspects it can display Y/YY/G.

[rogerzilla]

I don't think NR will go out and clear all the trees.  That was probably a calculated cost saving from 1960s dieselisation - no sparks* and no  clinker being thrown out, so no need to clear-cut trees.  Plus there would be an environmental backlash, even though tree cover in the UK is actually increasing (it was at itslowest level around WWI).

 

*ok, some of the early diesels could also throw impressive sparks when in a poor state of tune

[Shedmaster]

15 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

So back to the Interim Report - which basically tells us what happened with one potential factor identified towards why it happened.  That apart there is an awful lot which it does not discuss and several important questions which are not yet answered - I await the final Report with some interest

Hi Mike,

 

I note from the interim report that the RHTT had not run as planned prior to the accident? This is a key factor.

 

Putting it bluntly, I suspect there is a lot that could have been done to prevent this accident from occurring in the first place, and NR have previous form for not doing enough to prevent such things going wrong. So, I would respectfully ask you to consider the following…it’s not meant as a rant, but this stuff is all too common and now people have been hurt, which I think may have been avoidable?

 

When it comes to P-Way or S&T work, there are certain things which are regarded as ‘Golden Assets’, things like Axle Counters, which simply must not be disturbed during works, because they are so critical to the safe operation of the system. They are basically protected by hierarchy in that they are deemed so important, measures are in place not to damage or disrupt them. I ‘think’ I understand this in the way it is intended to be applied but am happy to be corrected.

 

When it comes to Train running, their is a real problem with the hierarchy of importance both normally and during degraded conditions.

 

Some things, should have absolute priority TO RUN AD-HOC and NOT BE AMMENDED unless signed off from maybe Director level. The same theory as weight or gauge restricted freight traffic ( RT3973 ) but of a stricter and overriding priority.

 

RHTT and MPV workings are simply considered a nuisance that are in the way, as opposed to an absolute priority that everything else MUST stop for, maybe not all the time granted, but definitely when conditions have deteriorated to a certain point. I understand that NR want to run trains and satisfy contractual obligations but there comes a point when things deteriorate enough, they sometimes won’t be able to run anything at all!

 

Having driven MPV and RHTT circuits for many years, I have seen this for myself.

For example, a colleague waiting to leave Horsham several years ago with an MPV de-icer,  ‘clever’ NR delayed the MPV de-icer to allow the first EMU train of the morning up to London in front of it, despite proper validated timings existing for both trains, the MPV being first in the queue.

The said EMU got a little way ahead of the yard exit and welded itself to the conductor rail that was supposed to have been treated by the MPV de-icer. There you go, job stopped. Obviously no understanding of what the MPV’s purpose in life was, despite it being an NR working! The ensuing drama could easily and should have been easily avoided!
 

On another occasion, I was taken off my booked London circuit and dispatched to Oxted with a leaf busting MPV. Things were so bad that trains were disappearing off of track circuits due to the contaminated railhead and NR wanted several passes to fix things. They were in full panic mode when I got the phone call.

When I got to Oxted, I was put in the siding there, as the ‘clever’ individual at NR control wanted to run the passenger service instead, despite the terrible problems being experienced and the inability to actually run any of the passenger services.

Hang on a minute, YOU CALLED ME because of how bad things were! I still remember the guys name who made that call, it wasn’t the Signaller.

 

If anything had gone wrong on that day, I often wonder if he’d be in a jail cell right now!
 

Apologies for the long post, but, I think going forwards, and maybe possible with the GBR thing, the whole train class hierarchy needs rethinking.

 

Things like 1Z99 could still apply as now for normal problems such as train failures.
What about maybe rework the classification system so that under certain degraded or emergency conditions such as trains stranded or serious weather events, certain trains such as RHTT’s can have carte blanche authority to do what they need, within operational rules and regs of course, overseen by NR as they are paying the bill, and not penalised for delays etc, simply because they would only be working where service disruption delays are out of control anyway?
 

(Maybe not obvious, but was the MPV commandeered somewhere else first on this occasion, hence the reschedule?)
 

Of course, this new approach would need to be properly briefed out to all NR staff.

 

I am aware of the whole bigger picture that NR have to work with and the multi agency approach whereby certain obligation have to be met but, sometimes, I think it could be prudent to put Safety first by reassessing just what that means and how you go about achieving it.

 

I think what mystifies me is just how well the system works normally and how many train movements take place each and every day under NR and their excellent staff teams. But, sometimes you get things that seem to be such own goals that it’s like a chalk and cheese thing, from absolutely amazing to….questionable at best.

 

Kindest Regards,

 

Shed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[KingEdwardII]

4 hours ago, rogerzilla said:

I don't think NR will go out and clear all the trees.

Clear all the trees is exactly what should be done - the ones growing directly alongside railway lines are nothing less than a menace. If they are not dropping leaves all over the lines, they are playing kamikaze and falling across the lines. Even worse where the lines are electrified and the trees take the overhead equipment with them as they go.

 

Trees close to the track are a clear safety hazard - any 'environmental backlash' should be given short shrift. Safe and efficient operation of the railway comes first here - plant trees elsewhere.

 

Yours, Mike.

[Lurch]

11 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said:

Clear all the trees is exactly what should be done - the ones growing directly alongside railway lines are nothing less than a menace.

 

I disagree. Some provide some assistance to hillside rigidity and also provide noise screening where stations are in urban areas for example. I've been in properties where the trees have been cleared and you can then hear all station announcements and the general "station noises".

[great central]

10 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said:

Clear all the trees is exactly what should be done - the ones growing directly alongside railway lines are nothing less than a menace. If they are not dropping leaves all over the lines, they are playing kamikaze and falling across the lines. Even worse where the lines are electrified and the trees take the overhead equipment with them as they go.

 

Trees close to the track are a clear safety hazard - any 'environmental backlash' should be given short shrift. Safe and efficient operation of the railway comes first here - plant trees elsewhere.

 

Yours, Mike.

 

The thing is you'd also need some pretty potent plant killer to keep them away. A few years ago there was a massive clearance of trees a little to the east of Nottingham, around Colwick crossing for those who know the area.

Looked almost scorched earth by the time they'd finished, the following year it was all green shoots and now 5 or 6 years later it's back how it was ,probably more densely packed.

[Oldddudders]

9 hours ago, uax6 said:

What I don't understand is how signal SY29R could display double yellows as stated in the report, but yet the photo shows it as being a 3 aspect head....

 

Andy G

If SY29R is only a repeater, as we believe to be the case, it presumably repeats the indication at SY29. Do repeater signals have AWS? If SY29R was showing a double yellow, as stated, it implies that was true of SY29, and thus SY31 must have been at yellow, not red. Not at all clear to me. 

[St. Simon]

1 minute ago, Oldddudders said:

If SY29R is only a repeater, as we believe to be the case, it presumably repeats the indication at SY29. Do repeater signals have AWS? If SY29R was showing a double yellow, as stated, it implies that was true of SY29, and thus SY31 must have been at yellow, not red. Not at all clear to me. 

 

'R' now just means Distant rather than exactly repeating the aspect of its associated signal, so it is possible for SY29R to show a Double Yellow Aspect, known as a Whiltshire Distant and SY29 to show Single Yellow, a standard arrangement.

 

The Aspect Sequence would be:

 

SY29R @ Double Yellow >>> SY29 @ Single Yellow >>> SY31 @Red

 

All Main Aspect Signals are fitted with AWS Inductors.

 

Simon

[Oldddudders]

Thankyou Simon. Drivers would know all that, having been given a 'Yellow Peril', or modern equivalent when new systems were installed, or been route trained if afterwards. 

[St. Simon]

31 minutes ago, KingEdwardII said:

Clear all the trees is exactly what should be done - the ones growing directly alongside railway lines are nothing less than a menace. If they are not dropping leaves all over the lines, they are playing kamikaze and falling across the lines. Even worse where the lines are electrified and the trees take the overhead equipment with them as they go.

 

Trees close to the track are a clear safety hazard - any 'environmental backlash' should be given short shrift. Safe and efficient operation of the railway comes first here - plant trees elsewhere.

 

Yours, Mike.

 

If everyone had that attitude of 'plant trees elsewhere', then the there wouldn't be any trees anywhere.

 

Trees close to the tracks are a clear safety hazard, but one that can be managed (and the ways of management are well known and practised), and the fact is that getting rid of trees creates other problems, such as risking hillside rigidity, increase some drainage problems, removing sound and vision barriers as well as environmental concerns.

 

Trees should just be managed rather than gotten rid of.

 

Simon

[Ken.W]

4 hours ago, Shedmaster said:

RHTT and MPV workings are simply considered a nuisance that are in the way, as opposed to an absolute priority that everything else MUST stop for, maybe not all the time granted, but definitely when conditions have deteriorated to a certain point. I understand that NR want to run trains and satisfy contractual obligations but there comes a point when things deteriorate enough, they sometimes won’t be able to run anything at all!

For example, a colleague waiting to leave Horsham several years ago with an MPV de-icer,  ‘clever’ NR delayed the MPV de-icer to allow the first EMU train of the morning up to London in front of it, despite proper validated timings existing for both trains, the MPV being first in the queue.

The said EMU got a little way ahead of the yard exit and welded itself to the conductor rail that was supposed to have been treated by the MPV de-icer. There you go, job stopped. Obviously no understanding of what the MPV’s purpose in life was, despite it being an NR working! The ensuing drama could easily and should have been easily avoided!
 

On another occasion, I was taken off my booked London circuit and dispatched to Oxted with a leaf busting MPV. Things were so bad that trains were disappearing off of track circuits due to the contaminated railhead and NR wanted several passes to fix things. They were in full panic mode when I got the phone call.

When I got to Oxted, I was put in the siding there, as the ‘clever’ individual at NR control wanted to run the passenger service instead, despite the terrible problems being experienced and the inability to actually run any of the passenger services.

Hang on a minute, YOU CALLED ME because of how bad things were! I still remember the guys name who made that call, it wasn’t the Signaller.

 

Hi Shed

Nothing new there I'm afraid, reminds me of an incident l had in the early/mid 80s

 

Booked to work an evening Newcastle - Carlisle service after a day of heavy snow, l turned up for the train to find, instead of the booked DMU, a 45 and 3 Mk1s.

I got stopped at Blenkinsop 'box, West of Haltwhistle and then still an L.C. on the A69, to be cautioned for a Miniture R/G crossing ahead out of order (it was under about a foot of snow).

While getting away after this caution, but still only up to about 40, rounding a curve in a lowish cutting towards Gillsland, there was a drift of probably 4ft deep against the bank side and across my line. No time to do anything but let the 45 plough its way through, sending the drift over the top of the train and probably back down again behide us! The only time I've seen a blizzard going upwards!

 

After arrival at Carlisle, guess what followed us in?

Yes... the SNOWPLOUGHS!!

The booked DMU of course, would never have made it through