Trains travelling in the wrong direction, will this happen more frequently?

[whole diary]

[eightf48544]

Incidentally, there was a 158 (?)  in P2 with the electric destination board in the cab showing "Worksop"!

By coincidence went through Worksop yesterday but on a 14x coming into Retford it amply  demonstrated why they are called "Nodding Donkeys". Front coach pitching in different direction to rear.

Incidently packed out with shoppers returning from Meadowhall all with Primark bags!

[James]

the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) documentary which apparently (although unconfirmed) starts next week

Certainly not in the Radio Times - which is nearly as infallible as a holy book! 

Ah, the good old radio times, maybe its more accurate than whats put on the internet although now i cant find it... Technology hey

[paul7575]

Mrs GTBE and I went to the IOW on Thursday.  The 1045 Rdg - Bournemouth XC^▸ (Cross Country Trains (franchise)) went through Southampton Tunnel on what I would call the Up before crossing over to P4 (ie the Down Main).  Then on the way back the 1815 Southampton - Manchester XC left from P1 but went through the Tunnel on what I would call the Down.  Very innovative (and this was after the reported signalling problems they had earlier in the day), but perfectly safe and nothing James should be worried about.

I've noticed before that they do use the bi-directional signalling through the tunnel quite frequently, especially with the terminators coming into P2 and P3 from the east.

I was thinking of this earlier, as some of the normal day to day practices at Southampton are very well used examples of having fully bidirectional signalling on all routes.  Container trains heading for the smaller of the yards, which is on the up side at Millbrook, often run at reasonably high speed through the 'up main' platform in the down direction, having switched over alongside Northam depot.  I've left the station heading towards St Denys and the Netley line on what is nominally the down line often enough to not really notice anymore...

Paul

[John R]

Well i am sorry if i am offensive to people who work with the signals, but i hardly find it acceptable if a signaller says to the driver you may proceed when not all the safety checks have been completed. And u call that a good safety record, dream on!.

But you still haven't given us the evidence, just a rather confusing summary of what you read or think happened.  So please don't jump to conclusions without the full facts.

[James]

I cannot provide a link since i cant do it on my iphone. If you really must read it go to the top of the forum click Rail News and go to 'an apology after the 10:13 from Gatwick Airport is sent down the same track it came from, in other words 'originated from'. Its reported in GetSurrey News in the Redhill/Reigate Area, unless something has since been edited or removed. And it is true. Sorry should have done it already, my mistake...

[Worcester_Passenger]

Link is at http://www.getsurrey.co.uk/news/local-news/apology-after-train-sent-wrong-5691923.

[John R]

OK, thanks. Here's the contents of the link.

Rail passengers in Redhill had a surprise on Wednesday (August 7) when their train to Reading went the wrong way.

The 10.13am First Great Western (FGW^▸ (First Great Western)) service, which originated from Gatwick Airport, was due to make its next stop at Reigate.

However, a signalling error by Network Rail meant the train headed back down towards Earlswood station, on the route to Gatwick.

Chris Culnane, a passenger on the train, said: "New low for @FGW Redhill to Reading train missed the turning to Reading! Changed direction again, back at Redhill for another go."

First Great Western apologised to Mr Culnane, explaining the error was not made by a member of their staff as signalling is controlled by Network Rail.

The train was delayed by approximately 10 minutes while it was turned round at Earlswood and sent back to Redhill station before departing for Reigate and on towards Reading.

A spokesman for Network Rail explained both the signalman and driver had responsibility to ensure the train went in the right direction.

The signaller told the driver the train could leave and received an acknowledgement before it departed incorrectly.

"The signaller and driver will be spoken to as both have a responsibility to ensure the train is travelling on the correct route," the spokesman said.

"Passengers were delayed by around 10 minutes and we apologise for any disruption this caused."

Network Rail also said there were no safety implications as a result, with the train correctly signalled back into Redhill after the mistake.

A First Great Western spokesman said: "The 1013 service from Redhill to Reading was routed towards Earlswood by a Network Rail signalling error. On realising the error the service was taken back to Redhill and onwards towards Reading.

"First Great Western would like to apologise to customers for the delay caused."

So, thinking about the layout at Redhill, because the driver has to change ends to head towards Guildford, he always starts by heading back in the direction of Gatwick, before then diverging right. In this case the signaller set a route back to Gatwick, which the driver should have noticed and not set off. But the driver had a clear signal so nothing would have been coming in the other direction.

But rest assured, a minor cock up maybe, and inconvenience for passengers but absolutely safe, 100pc, so no need for any disparaging comments about safety please.

[TonyK]

Agreed, John R, and James is vindicated so far as the mistake is concerned, if not on the safety worries. The wrong route was set as a mistake, but it was set incorrectly safely. No-one hurt, some passengers inconvenienced, and a couple of red faces. I bet there were people on that train that didn't realise it was a mistake.

[ellendune]

Ahh that makes sense now.

The driver did not have to change ends as the train reverses at Redhill. So it was due to turn right to go to Reigate but the points and signals were set for it to go straight on.

Shouldn't the driver have noticed a signal with some sort of indicator saying which way the route was set before he/she got there? In which case shouldn't he/she have been able to stop and advise the signaller of the error?

Whatever way the route was set so there was no risk of an accident.

[James]

Wow john R, i said earlier it was a concern, would have been a different story if another train came quickly around the corner, and that train with the gatwick could have had a head on collision. thank goodness nothing happened, but it raises all sorts of questions which does include safety.

[IndustryInsider]

Shouldn't the driver have noticed a signal with some sort of indicator saying which way the route was set before he/she got there? In which case shouldn't he/she have been able to stop and advise the signaller of the error?

Yes, they should.  The onus is on the signaller and driver (and even the guard) to spot that a wrong routing has been made.  My guess is that due to the fact the drivers are used to seeing both indications (i.e. a route towards Gatwick and a route towards Reading) regularly when they reverse at Redhill, the driver simply didn't notice that the wrong route had been set.  A mistake by both parties, and a word will be had with both of them I'm sure, but an inconvenient mistake rather than one that had any safety implications.

Wow john R, i said earlier it was a concern, would have been a different story if another train came quickly around the corner, and that train with the gatwick could have had a head on collision. thank goodness nothing happened, but it raises all sorts of questions which does include safety.

No train would have 'come quickly round the corner', James.  It was a signalled move that happens every hour when trains are supposed to be going to Gatwick, and as such any other signals that might have conflicted with it would have been interlocked to stay at red.

[SandTEngineer]

I'm sorry James but you and the press are trying to create a scare story here.  The signalling fully protected the movements concerned and there was absolutely no chance of a collision.  This was simply a mis-routing cases of which occur all over the network wether we like it or not.  Humans are not perfect

[grahame]

Wow john R, i said earlier it was a concern, would have been a different story if another train came quickly around the corner, and that train with the gatwick could have had a head on collision. thank goodness nothing happened, but it raises all sorts of questions which does include safety.

I think I can answer the "safety" question.

Railway signalling systems have a system called 'interlocking' on them, which avoids two trains been routed onto the same line or in conflict with each other.   So - once a route is set, whether it's for the right route (99.99% of the time) or the wrong route (when a highly unusual error such as this is made), all routes that could conflict are automatically block and cannot be signalled.    It would then require a SPAD^▸ (Signal Passed At Danger) (Signal passed at Danger) error by a driver for there to be any risk, and there's no more risk if he's going on the right properly signalled route to the wrong but properly signalled route.

Is there is ANY concern of there having been accident possibility at Redhill, the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) will take a look and will report, and we'll here about it.  

[SandTEngineer]

Thank you Grahame (I'll make a signal engineer of you yet ).  Just to add that a SPAD^▸ (Signal Passed At Danger) would have also been protected by TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System) and would have brought a conflicting train to a stand before the conflict point.

[James]

Ok ill say this again, it was a geniune concern...
Yes i agree it was a human error totally, but there's another issue.
As industryinsider says the trains travel hourly throughout the day and have to come to Redhill to change direction. Now i understand the signal interlocking thing, and that trains in that location travel at low speeds, however how often do those signals and points fail (due to moving parts), and then you have a situation when whilst the signal is blanked out and the points are set in the wrong direction, and the signaller (as reported on getsurrey) said to the driver yep the way ahead is clear when a Class 377 is approaching around the corner... If the people (such as the driver or signaller are reckless  like they have reported, that doesnt give me confidence on travelling by train).  I am not being offensive, but this act is unacceptable, and remember that there are human beings travelling after all.