Spanish Rail Crash

[phil-b259]

 It has already been said back in post 15 of this topic that any form of speed warning would not be required for an 80 kph restriction.

 

 

My comments were confined to TPWS in the UK, I never said Spain had a similar system

[GoingUnderground]

I am concerned about the implicit demonisation in the newspapers (especially the Telegraph) of the Spanish train dirver. Surely he was comparing his speed with that of road vehicles: the speed limit he was breaking and the radar gun being toted would be for road, not rail vehicles? Speed is rail's competitive edge: Mallard did 203 km/h 75 years ago and BR boasted of the speed of their 1988 electric-powered successor to the Inter City 125 (=201km/h), calling it the Inter-City 225. One of the pleasures of travelling on the West Coast Main Line is to watch cars on the adjoining M6 being passed at twice their speed and I am sure every WCML driver enjoys doing that. But it does not necessarily make them dangerous.

 

Ian

 

I totally agree, speed of itself is not dangerous provided it is withing the physical constraints of the system, in this case the curvature of the track and any superelevation. Brake failure, or speedo failure could also account for the apaprent excessive speed, but so could driver error. The driver is reported to be refusing to answer police questions. Perhaps that is what is prompting people to demonise him.

 

I've read the comments on Jeremy Kyle with interest, I never realised we had the equivalent of a US style "Shock Jock" on the BBC, but then I can't stand Radio 2..

[Miss Prism]

It will be interesting to find out what the cant gradient is on the curve entry, and whether the articulation system between the generator car and the first passenger coach is designed to cope with that gradient.

[Oldddudders]

 

I've read the comments on Jeremy Kyle with interest, I never realised we had the equivalent of a US style "Shock Jock" on the BBC, but then I can't stand Radio 2..

Kyle?Vine? ISTR Deb doing a radio interview with the latter, in a programme about French Healthcare Issues in 2007. The whole thing was so badly handled that he was required to do more research and have another go a few weeks later. A radio equivalent of Kilroy on daytime tv two decades ago.

[dibber25]

Sorry - off topic but prompted by this accident ) My daughter asked me if rail passengers would be safer in an accident if they wore seat belts. An interesting thought, although it might prevent you being thrown around (if the seat remains attached to the floor, but it won't stop you being killed by someone's flying lap-top/luggage. As to the effects of sudden decelleration, I have personal experience of that from a coach trip in the South of France when I was 32 and quite fit and agile. I was seated on the rear seat that faces straight down the aisle of the coach. As we arrived back in Antibes, someone pulled out in front of us, and the driver braked very hard indeed. There was no collision, but with nothing in front of me to hold onto, I took off down that aisle like a missile and wound up under a seat about five rows forward of where I'd been sitting. I was bruised but unharmed but the feeling of total helplessness during a couple of seconds of being totally unable to control where you're going was surprising and alarming. Any time I can, I wear a seatbelt.

CHRIS LEIGH

[The Stationmaster]

It will be interesting to find out what the cant gradient is on the curve entry, and whether the articulation system between the generator car and the first passenger coach is designed to cope with that gradient.

Judging by some of the published pictures - albeit with telephoto effect - it appears that the derailment took place within the curve although whether there was a change of radius and/cant (with or without transition) at or near the point of derailment might be a contributory factor to what appears to be the principal cause.  It is just one of the various elements and facts that an investigation into such a derailment should examine and consider - and like any such investigation it remains, in my view, the preserve of experts in the field and is not an area where those without the right training or experience should get involved.

 

Hence my view not about comments on this thread but the involvement of the police and magistrates etc - while that is the Spanish legal position it does not seem to me to a wholly objective 'no fault' course of investigation.  In that respect it reminds me of one of the more serious errors in the initial UK privytisation where 'accident' investigation was placed in the hands of the BT Police - and as one of them, a fairly senior officer, said to me at about that time 'How are we supposed to know how to investigate a derailment?').  The way the Spanish authorities investigate such matters is clearly entirely up to them but 'jump the gun' blame games are, in my experience, no way to do the job.

[Miss Prism]

I agree strongly with that, Mike, but the problem in today's media-led blame game is that whilst the high level of resultant destruction and tragic loss of life was excessive speed, we know the Spanish rail authority has long regarded that curve as 'problematic', to use their own word, and I do hope the other possible contributory factors (state of and design of track, signalling, brakes, vehicle design, etc, etc) are investigated impartially and thoroughly by the non-judical experts.

[ZiderHead]

If this incident had happened in the UK I would expect the driver to be arrested, questioned and then released on Police bail until such time that the CPS could decide whether it was appropriate to charge him, especially because of the evidence from sources other than the crash site. It would be negligent of the Police not to do so given the potential for criminal proceedings, and the fact that results from any investigations into the crash could take years to come out.

 

The answer "I dont recall" seems to be very common in inquiry testimonies held some time after an incident, its not so easy to claim this when questioned by police the day after ...

[GoingUnderground]

Kyle?Vine? ISTR Deb doing a radio interview with the latter, in a programme about French Healthcare Issues in 2007. The whole thing was so badly handled that he was required to do more research and have another go a few weeks later. A radio equivalent of Kilroy on daytime tv two decades ago.

 

Kyle, Vine, they're both the same in my book, but thank you for correcting my error. I should have gone back and re-read the posts to make sure that I'd got the name right.

 

Part of the problem is the need for the news media to fill space and provide instant answers. They also need sensationalism, the fact that all other Spanish high speed train services arrived safely yesterday isn't news. For the media no news is bad news. There is also today's "Blame" culture which seems to have spread across the world - if there's an accident, it must be somebody's fault. So the news media goes looking for someone to blame and can declare someone guilty even before any proper investigation is under way. 

[Norm81]

All I have to say is I hope they find the root cause(s) and identify corrective actions to reduce the probability of it happening again, along with best wishes to those who have been injured or worse and their families.

 

It's timed a little badly for me personally, as I'm in the throes of trying to plan St Pancras - Costa Del Sol by train! I'd be lying if this hadn't made me a little wary.

[Oldddudders]

So the news media goes looking for someone to blame and can declare someone guilty even before any proper investigation is under way. 

As we've said before, rail crashes are manna from heaven to the media. They provide a solid platform (sorry) from which the editorial team can work with little risk. By demanding to know whodunnit they are supporting the raw emotional response of the bereaved in a fashion likely to be popular with readers/viewers, and it fits well with the paparazzi doorstepping sensationalism of the lower orders of the media. ISTR the driver of the steam train involved in the St Johns crash (1957) was hounded until he ended up in a mental hospital, and the unfortunate S&T installer at Clapham (1988) was named and photographed at his home. People want vengeance.

[Kris]

If this incident had happened in the UK I would expect the driver to be arrested, questioned and then released on Police bail until such time that the CPS could decide whether it was appropriate to charge him, especially because of the evidence from sources other than the crash site. It would be negligent of the Police not to do so given the potential for criminal proceedings, and the fact that results from any investigations into the crash could take years to come out.

 

 

Driver has now been charged with manslaughter. 

[Fat Controller]

All I have to say is I hope they find the root cause(s) and identify corrective actions to reduce the probability of it happening again, along with best wishes to those who have been injured or worse and their families.

 

It's timed a little badly for me personally, as I'm in the throes of trying to plan St Pancras - Costa Del Sol by train! I'd be lying if this hadn't made me a little wary.

If you did this by train, with a sleeper from Paris to Barcelona, then you'd be both travelling past the site of the French crash at Bretigny-sur-Orge, and on TALGO stock...

[Fat Controller]

If this incident had happened in the UK I would expect the driver to be arrested, questioned and then released on Police bail until such time that the CPS could decide whether it was appropriate to charge him, especially because of the evidence from sources other than the crash site. It would be negligent of the Police not to do so given the potential for criminal proceedings, and the fact that results from any investigations into the crash could take years to come out.

 

The answer "I dont recall" seems to be very common in inquiry testimonies held some time after an incident, its not so easy to claim this when questioned by police the day after ...

This seems to have become standard practice in any RTA involving serious injuries or deaths in the UK of late.

[The Stationmaster]

If this incident had happened in the UK I would expect the driver to be arrested, questioned and then released on Police bail until such time that the CPS could decide whether it was appropriate to charge him, especially because of the evidence from sources other than the crash site. It would be negligent of the Police not to do so given the potential for criminal proceedings, and the fact that results from any investigations into the crash could take years to come out.

 

The answer "I dont recall" seems to be very common in inquiry testimonies held some time after an incident, its not so easy to claim this when questioned by police the day after ...

Alas you are far from right as regards testimony and recounting of facts.  For example two police officers who were first on the scene at the Taunton sleeper fire recounted to the Inquiry, reading from statements made at the end of their shift, certain things they believed they had seen - at least one of which was physically impossible and another which was highly dubious; and they are folk supposedly trained to observe.

 

It is not at unusual in investigations into railway incidents to get completely different statements from those who were involved or who witnessed what happened even when they are interviewed a short time after the incident took place - in fact any seasoned investigator will immediately become suspicious if all the witnesses tell exactly the same story.  And I have even experienced the phenomenon myself when asked at an Inquiry what colour handsignal was shown by someone approaching a signalbox after a derailment - potentially key factor and to be honest I hadn't got the faintest idea.

 

Personally I would sincerely hope that those involved in the Uk are not immediately arrested as that takes them out of the situation in which they can make a statement to those who actually know how to investigate incidents and who not only know what to look for but also know how top phrase questions in a neutral and non-leading manner.  Carting someone off in policy custody immediately puts them into a defensive position - which is the last thing anyone wants when trying to establish facts.  I think the very badly mishandled example of Southall - where the process of law interfered seriously with the process of inquiry and the making of recommendations was an example of how not to do it.  And one might also be tempted to say that the failure to carry out proper process in the older style on that occasion might in some way have not helped matters in subsequent incidents, particularly Ladbroke Grove.

 

The police are trained to carry out certain tasks and their knowledge and experience simply does not extend to the potentially wide ranging features involved in a train derailment - as Potters Bar showed.

[Poor Old Bruce]

Well, Mike I just cant help but think those short wheelbase vehicles (as apposed to a MK3 for example) will be more prone to jack knife because of their short length.

I also think that the death toll was unusually very high for such a modern train, retaining wall or not!

One factor that I think the investigators will conclude is that the train separated far to easily. If the derailed vehicles had stayed coupled for longer,  chances are it would  have stayed in-line for longer and the death toll would have been lower!

If the front of the train stops suddenly, the energy contained in the rest of the train has to go somewhere so, unless the coaches separate or 'telescope' like old wooden coaches used to, jacknifing, vertically or laterally is practically inevitable. This was clearly demonstrated at Eschede and at Stafford where a mail train ran into a derailed freight train. Where there is no obstruction, the train design means it should stay intact and in line.

 

 

All the Morpeth accidents (except the 1992 engineers train collision) were due to overspeed around a curve

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rail_accidents_at_Morpeth

 

Andi

The two major incidents at Morpeth due to excess speed occurred under 'normal' signalling arrangements. There was no provision at the time for signalling to cause the driver to slow for speed restrictions, that was down to route knowledge. Other overturning derailments which spring to mind are Eltham, Maidstone and Skelton Bridge, north of York.

  

It will be interesting to find out what the cant gradient is on the curve entry, and whether the articulation system between the generator car and the first passenger coach is designed to cope with that gradient.

The cant gradient (rate of change of cant) on entering a curve will assist the train round the curve as in induces some extra vertical load on the wheels doing the steering. The cant gradient at the end of the curve will reduce the wheel load which, if excessive, may possibly induce flange climbing. So-called 'High Speed' lines should have shallower limits on the permissible cant gradients. A track survey leading up to the point of derailment should be a routine part of the investigation but the mechanism of derailment by overturning (if that was indeed what happened) will have left distinctive marks on the wheels and rails.

 

 

Judging by some of the published pictures - albeit with telephoto effect - it appears that the derailment took place within the curve although whether there was a change of radius and/cant (with or without transition) at or near the point of derailment might be a contributory factor to what appears to be the principal cause.  It is just one of the various elements and facts that an investigation into such a derailment should examine and consider - and like any such investigation it remains, in my view, the preserve of experts in the field and is not an area where those without the right training or experience should get involved.

 

Hence my view not about comments on this thread but the involvement of the police and magistrates etc - while that is the Spanish legal position it does not seem to me to a wholly objective 'no fault' course of investigation.  In that respect it reminds me of one of the more serious errors in the initial UK privytisation where 'accident' investigation was placed in the hands of the BT Police - and as one of them, a fairly senior officer, said to me at about that time 'How are we supposed to know how to investigate a derailment?').  The way the Spanish authorities investigate such matters is clearly entirely up to them but 'jump the gun' blame games are, in my experience, no way to do the job.

One major role of BTP is to establish whether a crime has been committed and, if so, to collect evidence to enable a prosecution to take place. To that end, they can take control of any derailment site where foul play is suspected and restrict access for the duration of their investigation. BTP were also able to call upon the services of the Derailment Investigation Team from BR Research (presumably the facility also exists with RAIB) who were available 24/7 to investigate derailments where there was doubt or dispute about the cause or where independent investigation was required in the event of a major incident. In such cases the team was mobilised by the relevant rail authority e.g. Railtrack/Network Rail at an early stage and all parties usually worked together to investigate. At Hatfield for example BTP decided to 'sieze' all the bits of broken rail under advice from the DI team but subsequently passed the bits to the Health and Safety Executive for them to sort out. That was actually done at a HSE site by BR Research staff. So if BTP don't know how to investigate a derailment, they should know a man (or woman) who can.

[station cat]

Sorry - off topic but prompted by this accident ) My daughter asked me if rail passengers would be safer in an accident if they wore seat belts. An interesting thought, although it might prevent you being thrown around (if the seat remains attached to the floor, but it won't stop you being killed by someone's flying lap-top/luggage. As to the effects of sudden decelleration, I have personal experience of that from a coach trip in the South of France when I was 32 and quite fit and agile. I was seated on the rear seat that faces straight down the aisle of the coach. As we arrived back in Antibes, someone pulled out in front of us, and the driver braked very hard indeed. There was no collision, but with nothing in front of me to hold onto, I took off down that aisle like a missile and wound up under a seat about five rows forward of where I'd been sitting. I was bruised but unharmed but the feeling of total helplessness during a couple of seconds of being totally unable to control where you're going was surprising and alarming. Any time I can, I wear a seatbelt.

CHRIS LEIGH

 

BBC article on the possibility of fitting seatbelts to trains (and what happened then the Finns tried it) http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/1987324.stm

Inquiry into the suitability of seatbelts undertaken after the Ufton Nervet accident in 2004 http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=1277

 

 

 

 

The pictures I've seen show most of the train stood up well, contained by the retaining wall and sliding to a halt, but one coach has lost one side and most or its seasting and another has lost one end.   I haven't seen enough to know if all sections of the train are accounted for - remembering at Ladbroke Grove that one coach of the Turbo unit virtually disintegrated.  As we know the train was close to capacity I think it is likely that most of the fatailities will have been in this section, which has possibly struck the leading end of the retaining wall and been rammed by the heavy rear generator and power car.  As well as looking at reasons for the overspeed I think the investigation needs to consider whether the lightweight Talgo bodyshell stood up as well as it might have done, and whether the inclusion of the heavier diesel generator cars was wise. 

 

[irrelevant sections removed]

 

BBC quotes 140ish injured, 36 seriously. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23448002. This Sun article with some interesting pics quotes 247 passengers total http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5032680/THE-number-of-people-dead-after-a-train-derailed-in-one-of-Spains-worst-rail-disasters-has-risen-as-high-as-56.html Plenty of different numbers in other articles and I don't think definitive figures have been given yet. However...

 

With not far short of half of those on board killed or seriously injured (I make it 46% based on the numbers above which is obviously high given that the 247 aboard doesn't include staff) there were probably serious casualties in every carriage. I do wonder whether a breakdown of the type/mechanism of injuries will be produced as I suspect a number may have been caused by flying luggage. Given the high speed collision with a very solid object I wonder if some of the types and patterns of injury might be more like those expected in a plane crash than in a train crash. Certainly though it does seem logical that the most damaged carriages would have the highest number of casualties.

[phil-b259]

Hence my view not about comments on this thread but the involvement of the police and magistrates etc - while that is the Spanish legal position it does not seem to me to a wholly objective 'no fault' course of investigation. 

 

According to sources on the net, the Code of criminal instruction as laid out under the Napoleonic Code has been criticized because:

 

The possibility for justice to endorse lengthy remand periods was one reason why the Napoleonic Code was criticized for de facto presumption of guilt, particularly in common law countries. Another reason was the combination of magistrate and prosecutor in one position.^[7] However, the legal proceedings did not have de jure presumption of guilt; for instance, the juror's oath explicitly recommended that the jury did not betray the interests of the defendants, and paid attention to the means of defence.

 

Note the combined Magistrate / Prosecutor role, this is normal in countries that use the inquisitorial system

 

From the net :-

 

An inquisitorial system is a legal system where the court or a part of the court is actively involved in investigating the facts of the case, as opposed to an adversarial system where the role of the court is primarily that of an impartial referee between the prosecution and the defense. Inquisitorial systems are used in some countries with civil legal systems as opposed to common law systems. Also countries using common law, including the United States, may use an inquisitorial system for summary hearings in the case of misdemeanors such as minor traffic violations. In fact, the distinction between an adversarial and inquisitorial system is theoretically unrelated to the distinction between a civil legal and common law system. Some legal scholars consider "inquisitorial" misleading, and prefer the word "nonadversarial".^[1] The function is often vested in the office of public procurator, as in Russia, China, Japan and Scotland.

The inquisitorial system applies to questions of criminal procedure as opposed to questions of substantive law; that is, it determines how criminal enquiries and trials are conducted, not the kind of crimes for which one can be prosecuted, nor the sentences that they carry. It is most readily used in some civil legal systems. However, some jurists do not recognize this dichotomy and see procedure and substantive legal relationships as being interconnected and part of a theory of justice as applied differently in various legal cultures.

In some jurisdictions, the trial judge may participate in the fact-finding inquiry by questioning witnesses even in adversarial proceedings. The rules of admissibility of evidence may also allow the judge to act more like an inquisitor than an arbiter of justice.

 

 

If Spain still basically uses this system of law then this will explain the legal manoeuvres that have taken place. As much as we in the UK might consider the process impartial the fact remains that the accident happened in Spain and any investigation must be done according to Spanish norms however strange they may be to us.

[34theletterbetweenB&D]

If this incident had happened in the UK I would expect the driver to be arrested, questioned and then released on Police bail until such time that the CPS could decide whether it was appropriate to charge him, especially because of the evidence from sources other than the crash site. It would be negligent of the Police not to do so given the potential for criminal proceedings, and the fact that results from any investigations into the crash could take years to come out...

But only when there are reasonable grounds for suspecting that the driver's voluntary actions were contributory to the incident. Which in this case does appear reasonable. Though we may yet learn that the train had developed a fault and the driver was desperately trying to get the brake to apply, or that he personally suffered an incapacitating problem so that he was unable to make a correct brake application; innocent until guilt is proven is a very sound principle.

[buffalo]

According to sources on the net...

 

From the net...

 

Why so vague? It's always good practice to name your sources, in this case Wikipedia Napoleonic Code and Inquisitorial System pages.

 

Nick

[The Stationmaster]

 

BBC quotes 140ish injured, 36 seriously. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-europe-23448002. This Sun article with some interesting pics quotes 247 passengers total http://www.thesun.co.uk/sol/homepage/news/5032680/THE-number-of-people-dead-after-a-train-derailed-in-one-of-Spains-worst-rail-disasters-has-risen-as-high-as-56.html Plenty of different numbers in other articles and I don't think definitive figures have been given yet. However...

 

With not far short of half of those on board killed or seriously injured (I make it 46% based on the numbers above which is obviously high given that the 247 aboard doesn't include staff) there were probably serious casualties in every carriage. I do wonder whether a breakdown of the type/mechanism of injuries will be produced as I suspect a number may have been caused by flying luggage. Given the high speed collision with a very solid object I wonder if some of the types and patterns of injury might be more like those expected in a plane crash than in a train crash. Certainly though it does seem logical that the most damaged carriages would have the highest number of casualties.

It looks as if the usual, often inexplicable, pattern might have emerged for example wife very seriously injured, husband sitting adjacent walks away with hardly any physical trace of being in a serious collision; young woman injured and requiring hospital attention but seemingly discharged within 24 hours judging by her appearance on tv news had found herself surrounded by bodies in the late aftermath.  As Ufton and Potters Bar - for example - showed where you are sitting, even be it on the left or right of your travelling companion, can make a major difference between death/serious injury and being able to walkaway from the wreckage.

 

 

One major role of BTP is to establish whether a crime has been committed and, if so, to collect evidence to enable a prosecution to take place. To that end, they can take control of any derailment site where foul play is suspected and restrict access for the duration of their investigation. BTP were also able to call upon the services of the Derailment Investigation Team from BR Research (presumably the facility also exists with RAIB) who were available 24/7 to investigate derailments where there was doubt or dispute about the cause or where independent investigation was required in the event of a major incident. In such cases the team was mobilised by the relevant rail authority e.g. Railtrack/Network Rail at an early stage and all parties usually worked together to investigate. At Hatfield for example BTP decided to 'sieze' all the bits of broken rail under advice from the DI team but subsequently passed the bits to the Health and Safety Executive for them to sort out. That was actually done at a HSE site by BR Research staff. So if BTP don't know how to investigate a derailment, they should know a man (or woman) who can.

Apart from very obvious examples such as vandalism or even terrorism it is very difficult to immediately judge at the scene if a crime has taken place.  However the police have to work on the usual police assumption that a crime has taken place; as anyone who has attended an on-track fatality will know the police start at murder and work downwards from there ruling various levels of crime as they go.  Regrettably this is where privytisation went desperately wrong by injecting into the process a near automatic assumption that the train operators would try to obscure evidence which might put them in the dock - a very serious misjudgement of the then professionalism of railway managers.  as a result people who were fairly quickly on the scene at Southall and knew exactly what to look for following a SPAD were not allowed access to the places they needed to look.  

 

All incidents have an immediate trail of visual evidence but some of it is very fragile (for want of a better word) and can be quickly lost in rescue operations let alone clear-up and the only folk who know what to look for and understand it are the professionals.  Gerry Fiennes recounted a lovely tale regarding the arrival of Derby Research at a plain line derailment scene and some of what he said still holds true - you have got to get there quickly or evidence could be lost and wrong conclusions drawn.  On one occasion, at night, I was on the scene of a serious freight train derailment within 20 minutes of it happening and I knew exactly what to look for and where on the loco - if an amateur had stumbled along several hours later the evidence I saw would probably have gone (leaked away), and potentially have left the Driver in serious trouble for failing to stop soon enough and, at the very least, facing hours of questioning about his actions.

[roythebus]

That was a Deltic that side-swiped a DMU was it not? Amazing I can remember that but not what happened at work on Monday!

Yes. My driver and I were questioned as to whether we had prepared the loco properly in passenger loco at KX. Of course we had, we'd taken it over after the fitters had checked it as was usual practice there.

 

As for seatbelts on trains, they're not used that often on road coaches and are in my opinion a waste of time there too! (except in Dibber's case).

[martin_wynne]

I know this is going to be a very contentious statement of mine, but as far as I can see it, by not answering questions I assume automatic guilt.

 

He may not know the answer to the questions. His legal advisor may have barred him from answering. His memory of the events may be blank. The police questions may be so ignorant of technical matters that they can't be sensibly answered.

 

Don't be so ready to jump to conclusions. Don't believe a single thing you read in the media.

 

Martin.

[Torr Giffard LSWR 1951-71]

Aft'noon all,

 

There is nothing new in the use of a secondary brake system, in the event of problems with the primary. In the 1980s I occasionally drove class 304 EMUs (triple brake stock). The drawback of the secondary system was that once an application had been made, the brakes couldn't be released until the train had stopped. Therefore, you may stop half in/ half out of a platform if you misjudged the application with passengers on board...hence a trend to practice with that particular system whilst running ECS. Practice made perfect and once competent, a full application could be made approaching a platform and an inch perfect stop be made. All part of the competence required for the job.

 

As long as one system was operable then there could be no excuse for excessive speed on any section of track. 

 

Dave

[Dagworth]

Aft'noon all,

 

There is nothing new in the use of a secondary brake system, in the event of problems with the primary. In the 1980s I occasionally drove class 304 EMUs (triple brake stock). The drawback of the secondary system was that once an application had been made, the brakes couldn't be released until the train had stopped. Therefore, you may stop half in/ half out of a platform if you misjudged the application with passengers on board...hence a trend to practice with that particular system whilst running ECS. Practice made perfect and once competent, a full application could be made approaching a platform and an inch perfect stop be made. All part of the competence required for the job.

 

As long as one system was operable then there could be no excuse for excessive speed on any section of track. 

 

Dave

Not quite, the triple valve brake could be released any time, but you couldn't then re-apply it until the reservoirs had recharged, which took about seven seconds. Releasing the brake recharged the pipe which exhausted the air from the cylinders, it took quite a lot of experience to be able to release the brake enough to hold an amount of air in the cylinders but not release it totally. Exactly the same as the brake we had on the EPBs.

 

Andi