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

[whole diary]

[LiskeardRich]

James, we can safely assume Get Surrey is scare mongering. If a signal fails it has a safety feature to change to Danger.

There is no danger or nothing to be concerned, and it is clearly a media making up rubbish as it suits. The signaller would be very unlikely to be in discussion with the train driver, and if he was it most certainly wouldn't make it into the media.

[James]

All people in the railway industry work hard, and there have done for along time.

[grahame]

In the very early days of railways, sending a train off on the wrong track but signalling it correctly was a danger.   The first interlocking was installed in 1843 at Bricklayers' Arms Junction and ... even at the slow speed of progress on railways in this country, it's now in use everywhere 

To quote Wikipedia (not always 100% accurate, but putting things more succinctly that I do) "An interlocking is designed so that it is impossible to display a signal to proceed unless the route to be used is proven safe."  In other words, the signaller can only set a route (right or wrong) if nothing else is set over those lines already, and if he happens to set a wrong route, that will prevent him setting any intended but now-conflicing routes for other trains.   See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interlocking .

Again from WikiPedia: The Train Protection & Warning System (TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System)) is a train protection system deployed across the entire UK^▸ (United Kingdom) passenger railway network. It automatically activates brakes on any train that has passed a signal at danger.   In other words, when the train went off the wrong way, it would still have been protected from other trains - brought to a halt even if the driver passed a signal at danger.

Can I try an analogy?     If I drive from home to work, I turn right out of the end of our road.  If I forget where I'm going one day and turn left instead (perhaps I'm going to the recycling place),  I'm unlikely to have an accident if I continue to follow the rules of the road.

[IndustryInsider]

And should there be a signal failure (which there wasn't in this case I don't think), the signaller will authorise the driver to pass that signal at red after verbally confirming which route has been set with the driver (phonetic alphabet and repeat back are in use to avoid misunderstanding) and will instruct the driver to proceed at caution at a speed that they can stop short of any obstruction (i.e. another train).

If the rules weren't so fail safe then there would be plenty more incidents and I wouldn't be 100% happy entering a cab!

[ellendune]

Ok ill say this again, it was a geniune concern...

We appreciate it is a genuine concern that you have. We are just trying to reassure you that it was safe. Inconvenient, yes! Annoying, yes! But perfectly safe.

What we are saying is over 150 years of railway signal development has tried to learn from each accident to make systems safer and safer as time has gone on.

Unlike a car a train can only make a turning if the signaller sets the points and the points can only be moved if the signals are already set so that there cannot be another train coming along the line.  In the days when there were levers it would be physically impossible to move the lever because an interlocking bar would be in the way.  If you want to see how this works a visit to the STEAM museum in Swindon is recommended. You can then even try for yourself!

Nowadays it is done with electronics which fail safe by stopping everything if they go wrong. Hence the chaos when things do go wrong. But it is safe chaos!

The most recent weakness fixed was signals passed at danger using the Train protection and Warning System as Graham has pointed out. This means that if the driver, for any reason passes a signal at danger the train will stop automatically.

[John R]

Maybe i should post this as well.
Most signaller's and drivers do a good job, however its a small minority who we has the travelling public should be aware of. And i am not scare mongering, its just a concern.

That seems to be an implication that a minority of drivers are consistently careless or reckless. Whilst nobody is perfect, and slight errors in judgment or lapses in concentration do occur (as happened in this case), again, to suggest that the travelling public need to be aware of this subset of rogue railway personnel is offensive.

Before you make such comments, I suggest you learn a little bit more about the operation of the railway. If you're interested and concerned about the safety aspect, a couple of good primers would be Red for Danger by LTC Rolt, and British Railways Signalling by Williams and Kitchenside.  And online you can read the accident/incident reports on the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) website which will demonstrate the forensic nature which goes into each incident to understand the cause and ways in which risk can be mitigated. If nothing else, that should show that the culture of the railway is "safety first".

[James]

Can I try an analogy?     If I drive from home to work, I turn right out of the end of our road.  If I forget where I'm going one day and turn left instead (perhaps I'm going to the recycling place),  I'm unlikely to have an accident if I continue to follow the rules of the road.

Now that is true, but what if you followed all those rules, but some doughnut comes rushing around the corner, with the radio blazing whilst eating nuts, drinking juice, eating crisps and reading a map, not to mention trying to answer a call, and to add to the melee an OAP now tries to reverse, without looking, with those examples of course you would have an accident. After all what do u expected from this world, all calm and everyone living in peace and without questions, obivosuly just wont happen sunny!

Although travelling with the railways can also been fun and games, and you dont even have to travel by train for something to happen. Now its monday morning you are in a rush after discovering you woke up late... dam the day of my interview in sunny london. So u rush to put on your clothes and whilst u do this you have creeses all over your shirt and trousers but you havent got time to, iron them, grr. Oh well i now need to go but cant go without breakfast.... Lets take a banana and coffee machine, then slams the front door awaking all the local animal life... Ok i now have 20 minutes to get to Maidenhead Station so should i run, walk or take the bus... ok lets get the bus. Zoom... bus goes by, not another for 20 minutes, oh what shall i do dam. Ok lets run. So we are now running and whilst doing so, i twist my ankle... ouch!!. only got 10 minutes, so hop on to a bike. Dont worry its just for hire, finally get to the station. Walking through the subway, and going to platform 2 when someone comes flying down the stairs after tipping up. (Not surprised as everyone is in such a rush these days), finally get to the top of the stairs and my anckle is now better rush to the train and the doors slam on my foot. Train departs and stops a little way down the platform. Not having a good am i. So there we have it, the railways regardless of trains, signals or points, have other issues and they obivously should be also setting a standard of safe stations as well as safe trains that dont trap people when the train is about to move. (Sorry for long analogy, just felt i like writing

[James]

I recognise the railways are an interesting place and i agreed the railway has a much improved safety record than it did before

[Super Guard]

Deleted. Apology accepted and reasons understood, time to move on.

[grahame]

Now that is true, but what if you followed all those rules, but some doughnut comes rushing around the corner ...

Cutting to the 'quick' of this, I think you're suggesting that the extra mileage adds extra danger.  Yes - but that's minuscule because the railways are so safe.

Although travelling with the railways can also been fun and games, and you dont even have to travel by train for something to happen. ..., i twist my ankle...

If something goes awry - a missed bus, a malfunction of some sort, there's a tendency to panic and other things will go wrong.  Have I understood that right?     Yes - may be the case to some extend, but there are so many systems in place that check and countercheck each other that it's pretty darned difficult to rush things and compound errors, and that's by design.   I'm tempted to point you to another thread which describes how a train sat in rural Wiltshire for over five HOURS while a breakdown situation was dealt with.  Certainly no dangerous corner cutting to save time there, as far as I can see, but a system which was irritatingly slow for those people who were stuck on the train.

So there we have it, the railways regardless of trains, signals or points, have other issues and they obivously should be also setting a standard of safe stations as well as safe trains that dont trap people when the train is about to move. (Sorry for long analogy, just felt i like writing

I believe that - statistically - the railways are leaders in terms of trade l safety.  I'm more likely to have a serious accident in the mile I walk to the station than in the 100 miles on the train to London.   Yet, having said that, there's such a strong backup to investigate those very, very few occasions where something goes wrong and creates an identified risk, even if no accident follows.  It's that very system that has made it as safe as it is.

[John R]

John R, please dont keep using the word 'offensive'
If someone is mucking around and geniunely doesnt care

Are you seriously suggesting that there are railway staff who falll into that category?

[James]

Theres anything else for me to put on this thread. However if posters want to continue to post then please feel free to post here, as all comments are welcomed

[Lee]

Its not often that I step in an official moderation capacity these days, but in order to take the heat out of things, I am temporarily locking this topic, pending further consultation with the rest of the team.

[grahame]

Its not often that I step in an official moderation capacity these days, but in order to take the heat out of things, I am temporarily locking this topic, pending further consultation with the rest of the team.

Thanks, Lee ... I'm just back and also have a message of apology (to all the posters in this thread who have been offended) and some background.   This is a holding post ... will be back, further, later on.   At work today, very busy day, one team member down too ... so it may not be until quite a bit later

[grahame]

I have received, from James, an explanation, a clear understanding that he was very much out of order, and a thorough apology, which I have passed on as requested to the posters most directly concerned or will be doing very shortly as I check back through the thread.  It's probably fair to say that the apology should also go to any and all British rail industry readers who feel slighted.  Ladies and gentlemen - you are a totally professional and caring bunch on safety issues in particular.

James has posted nearly a hundred messages to the forum, and this thread has been somewhat out of character - it's the first time which I might describe as "beyond the pale".  I'm going to unlock the thread as I don't expect it to "blow" again now after the overnight cooling off period; clearly, there are other actions that the moderators / admins could take if it blows again here or on another thread.

Thank you, everyone, for your forbearance while we sorted this.