Derailment of empty passenger train at Paddington causes major disruption - 16 June 2016

[whole diary]

[paul7575]

I thought we were calmly debating this in another topic.  Job for the moderators I think.......

That other thread is a bit of a catch all for infrastructure failures, I don't think this is one of those.   

I do prefer plain English though, why can't it just be a 'derailment' rather than a 'total outage'?

Paul

[ChrisB]

It's a "derailment" that initially led to a "total outage" of services. Seems reasonable

[johoare]

I was at Paddington shortly after midnight (would have been earlier but I got caught out by the buses refusing to stop anywhere near Paddington trick).. The first member of staff I spoke to helpfully told me I wouldn't get home till this morning. But then I asked a much more helpful lady who took me to the taxi rank where taxis were taking people home by that point and shared a ride back with four other people.

[SandTEngineer]

Looking at the picture in this BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) report, you can see that the catch points didn't even do their job of protecting the following points. The train does appear to be lying foul of Platform 1 approach line.

...err no its not.  The trap points did the job they were designed to do which is to divert the train away from a running line.  The track under the train is the connection from the sidings to Platform No.1 and the line and points immediately to the right are the running connection from Line 1 to Platform No.1 and the derailed train is not foul of that.  In any case when a train is derailed on trap points a special detector mechanism called a 'Track Circuit Interrupter' breaks a circuit to place to danger all signals for train movements that could potentially conflict.

Good to see in that report that the driver was apparently not hurt.

I also note other comments about the OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") structure being in the way.  If I remember correctly (not at work today to be able to check) there must be no obstructions within 50m of the trap points.  Looking at the position of the OLE structure and using the train length as a guide I think it travelled more than that so the OLE structure would have been in a correctly designed and risk assessed postion (but thats just my personal opinion based on many years of designing track layouts and the associated signalling).

[rower40]

The link line only leads to platform 1 in any case, which looks very limited in its usefulness. I'm sure it could contribute more to operations if its connections were changed. Is there any plan for that (I've not seen any)?

Crank up the Way-back machine...
There used to be a set of points giving access from the Royal Oak sidings to line 1 at signal SN26, which meant that the Royal Oak sidings could access platforms 2-5 via line 1, as well as platform 1 via the link line.  After the post-Ladbroke-Grove remodeling, when all sorts of bells and whistles (TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System), SPAD^▸ (Signal Passed At Danger) detection and mitigation etc) were added to the interlocking, some "space" was needed in the computer logic; so these points and their associated routes were removed.

Now that the SSI^▸ (Solid State Interlocking) (solid-state-interlocking) has been replaced by a more-processing-power Smartlock, there's "room" to re-instate these routes and points.  The points are shown as being re-instated (although clipped & padlocked) at Christmas 2016; I don't know when the routes over them will be re-commissioned.

[BerkshireBugsy]

I have just been down to Thatcham station to buy a weekly ticket for next week. The ever helpful Peter was out manning the ramps so whilst waiting I heard one customer say to another something like "I'm not sure we would be boarding this train following the recent derailment"

OK now I will be the first to admit I don't know why the initial SPAD^▸ (Signal Passed At Danger) occurred but I am now wiser as to what an "Automatic Derailment" or whatever it is called is so I shared my apparent expertise with them.

Having taken that in they seemed to be happy with things and went on their way.

Maybe I shouldn't have interfered !

[Thatcham Crossing]

Is that some OHLE wires resting on the roof of the train? 

[NickB]

Would this train have formed the 18.18 Oxford service?  I'm intrigued because a) thats my regular train and b) I'd already had a text yesterday saying that it would be 3 rather than 6 coaches due to 'higher number of necessary repairs'.

[ChrisB]

Wasn't it incoming ECS^▸ (Empty Coaching Stock) for the Henley service? I think I read that somewhere.

[paul7575]

It's a "derailment" that initially led to a "total outage" of services. Seems reasonable

I don't even like the word 'outage'.   Isn't there a better English word for that?

It must have been serious though, because it caused CJB666 to remember to cross post into this forum, which he only does quite rarely...   

Paul

[stuving]

...err no its not.  The trap points did the job they were designed to do which is to divert the train away from a running line.  The track under the train is the connection from the sidings to Platform No.1 and the line and points immediately to the right are the running connection from Line 1 to Platform No.1 and the derailed train is not foul of that.  In any case when a train is derailed on trap points a special detector mechanism called a 'Track Circuit Interrupter' breaks a circuit to place to danger all signals for train movements that could potentially conflict.
...

You may be right, in the sense that trains aren't wide enough to actually touch it. There is the usual difficulty of judging perspective at oblique view angles. But I still think it's closer the the protected line than the "design" of the catch points would call for. And yes, the distance it ran is clearly the reason for its ending up there, but that too is part of that "design".

In fact, on reflection, it could have been far worse. That stanchion took a lot of energy out of the train, so if it (the train) had been just a fraction of a metre less off line and hit a glancing blow it could have got a lot further and been pushed back outwards. And, given that the obvious reason for the signal to be red is that Platform 1 is still occupied, or its train is just coming out, a collision is quite possible. Given how busy Paddington is, automatically setting signals to danger leaves a significant residual risk. 

[ChrisB]

Indeed, and purely for clarification, although those too are my initials, that is *not* me.

[BBM]

Evening Standard's report of yesterday's chaos for passengers:

http://www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/paddington-delays-moment-city-worker-handcuffed-amid-rush-hour-chaos-after-train-derailment-a3274041.html

[ChrisB]

A Network Rail spokesman said the driver of the derailed train had not been hurt and it was “too early” to speculate about why the train had jumpped [sic] the red light.

No sympathy for the City worker though. Whatever happened, it is extremely unlikely to be anything to do with whoever he 'spoke' to.

[eightf48544]

Some interesting points re trap points and where the derailed trains end up.

I can recall an incident many moons ago when a freight train demolished the relay room at Rushcombe Junction (Twyford) when it failed to stop at the end of the Up Goods loop (long since removed). The relay room was not rebuilt on the same site.