Emergency stop - 08:20 Newcastle to London (Lumo) 17.4.2022

[whole diary]

[grahame]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-61136024

Lumo train passengers' panic after emergency stop

[snip]

Billie Rainer, 25, said she was left "shaken" by the incident after she caught the train from Newcastle to visit friends in the capital.

"The train was swinging from side to side as it went around the corner very fast," she told the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page).

"I felt like a massive jolt and I was lifted out of my seat. I wasn't injured but other people were, by falling items. A woman was limping because she'd been hurt.

"The train tipped to the side a bit, then loads more. My suitcase fell to the floor and a couple of people fell off chairs.

"After the train swung from side to side it came to a massive halt and stopped at Peterborough station for an hour and a bit.

"It did feel like the train had approached the corner way too fast. It was so much worse than plane turbulence."

My bolding, and a note that this has been referred to the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch).   Out of the norm ...

[JayMac]

From other forums and social media I've been reading that the train took a diverging route at excess speed. A plain line emergency stop shouldn't result in injuries to seated paasengers. Lurching over points on the other hand...

[bradshaw]

The late running 1Y16 to Kings Cross, which was booked to stop at PBO p3. It seems the Lumo service was changed to pass via p1 rather than its normal p3.

[TaplowGreen]

Quite a lot of coverage on the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) this morning, Lumo have "apologised for any distress".

[Mark A]

From other forums and social media I've been reading that the train took a diverging route at excess speed. A plain line emergency stop shouldn't result in injuries to seated paasengers. Lurching over points on the other hand...

If someone could give a quick explanation of how the railway manages locations on fast lines but which have two differing approach speeds (e.g. one for "Straight on" and another for "turn left") depending on circumstances, that would be appreciated. Does this depend on driver route knowledge and is there backup from automatic protection of some sort?

Thanks

Mark

[ChrisB]

There would be a flag on the home signal to the set of points that direct the train either through (pl 3) or round (pl 1), with a speed indicator for both routes. Reports that the pl 1 limit was 30 but the driver took it at line speed for pl 3 of 80mph.

I guess the rules here of speculation ought to cut in even though there were no serious injuries & the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) are investigating.

Automatic Protection generally only kicks in if the signal was showing yellow/red lights. Again, reports say the signal was green, so no protection kicked in.

[Electric train]

From other forums and social media I've been reading that the train took a diverging route at excess speed. A plain line emergency stop shouldn't result in injuries to seated paasengers. Lurching over points on the other hand...

If someone could give a quick explanation of how the railway manages locations on fast lines but which have two differing approach speeds (e.g. one for "Straight on" and another for "turn left") depending on circumstances, that would be appreciated. Does this depend on driver route knowledge and is there backup from automatic protection of some sort?

Thanks

Mark

There are automatic systems, AWS^▸ (Automatic Warning System) and TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System) both reliable devices, it may have been the activation one or both of these system that applied the train brakes and brought the train to an abrupt stop, from the media coverage I have seen the passengers were not disembarked from the train, the unit continued to KX, indicating the suspected cause was not a mechanical defect of the unit.



I suspect the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch), ORR^» (Office of Rail and Road formerly Office of Rail Regulation - about) will publish there initial finding fairly quickly

[Electric train]

Automatic Protection generally only kicks in if the signal was showing yellow/red lights. Again, reports say the signal was green, so no protection kicked in.

AWS^▸ (Automatic Warning System) and TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System) have time / speed approach control for reduction in speed this includes diverging routes with reduced speed  reduction

[JayMac]

The late running 1Y16 to Kings Cross, which was booked to stop at PBO p3. It seems the Lumo service was changed to pass via p1 rather than its normal p3.

Yes. And from the Sectional Appendix I see that the line speed for the crossover from the Up Fast to the Up Slow P1 is 30/25mph. The maximum speed for non-stopping trains through P3 on the Up Fast is 105mph.

Diverging routes can be 'approach controlled' where train speed is monitored and TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System) where fitted (Train Protection and Warning System) can make a brake application if the train is approaching an adverse signal too fast. If the route has been cleared for the diverging move then its possible TPWS may not intervene. TPWS is often location specific, not one size fits all. It remains down to the driver for observance of the signal sequence on the approach to the turnout, and to his/her route knowledge for appropriate speeds.

For more details on approach control and signalling of diverging routes:
http://www.davros.org/rail/signalling/articles/junctions.html

[stuving]

The late running 1Y16 to Kings Cross, which was booked to stop at PBO p3. It seems the Lumo service was changed to pass via p1 rather than its normal p3.

Whether it was really planned for the Lumo service to make an extra stop, and wait for the delayed LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about) one behind it to make its call, will no doubt emerge soon enough. At first sight it seems odd, unless Lumo run a bit slower - but maybe they do. That one (1Y80) was 3 early approaching PBO, but scheduled into KGX at 11:16. 1Y16 got into PBO 22 late at 11:24, and if it kept time from there is would get into KGX at 11:14. So on those grounds it might just make sense. Actually, 1Y16 arrived at 11:19.

A couple of points that have not got much attention:
1. This Lumo train was close behind a slower EMR^» (East Midlands Railway, also known as EMT^» (East Midlands Trains - about) (East Midlands Trains) - about) train, and both close to schedule. So it was not moving at anything like full line speed north of PBO, indeed was timetabled for 23 s from Grantham (pass-pass) - that's about 75 mi/hr.

2. How much braking and distance would it need to stop at Peterborough, which it apparently did, from that speed? Nominal service braking is 1 m/s/s, needing 560 m. It's 530 m from the P3/P1 turnout to the far end of P1, so braking a train's length before that would work, just. Nominal emergency braking is 1.2 m/s/s, needing 460 m. A Lumo unit is about 129 m long.

3. I note this comment from Clarence Yard on railforums (he's in GWR^▸ (Great Western Railway) fleet management, but Lumo is a "TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company)-lite" so relies on expertise from the rest of First Group):

For those of you that haven’t experienced an emergency brake application from a relatively high speed on an 800 series unit, it’s completely different to that experienced on an HST^▸ (High Speed Train) or modern EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit). If you are standing up or not sitting securely in your seat, you will be at risk. Luggage will move too, depending on size and how it is stowed.

I guess that implies that, with good adhesion, the combination of regenerative (traction motor) and friction braking can manage significantly more than 1.2 m/s/s - even from high speeds, where older high-speed trains struggle. Mind you, this was not really from high speed.

[eightf48544]

If someone could give a quick explanation of how the railway manages locations on fast lines but which have two differing approach speeds (e.g. one for "Straight on" and another for "turn left") depending on circumstancesis near

This can be done in several ways and is quite complicated.

1. Holding the junction signal at red until the train is nearly upon it when it changes to a proced aspect.   This occurs at many places one example being Dolphin junction on the down main when a train is routed Down main (125 mph) to Down Relief via 40 mph points. The driver picks up a double yellow East of  Langley station signal 483 TVSC^» (Thames Valley Signalling Centre - about) and a single yellow just West of the station signal 489 the junction signal 501 changing to a proceed aspect with 45 degree feathers as train approaches and the is route set. The driver has to be prepared to stop at 501 in case there's something coming on the Up Main in which case the route won't be set so if they SPAD^▸ (Signal Passed At Danger) 501 there's no collision. it's called Approach control.

The next 2 are describe in: https://www.jonroma.net/media/rail/opdocs/world/uk/RS521%20Iss%205.pdf by the RSSB^▸ (Rail Safety and Standards Board).

2. Flashing signals basically the signal before the junction signal flashes if a slower speed route is to be taken. Signal 523 Down Relief at Slough flashes if  next sigal 529 is st for Down Main. Miss reading the flashing signals led to the Colwich accident.

3 Splitting distants where by there are two signal heads  the the main plus a secondary on the side of the juction. Signal 271 on the Down Main at Southall West is a splitting distane for Airport Jn 285 at Hayes.

Which system  was in use at Peterborough I don't know.

[IndustryInsider]

Just a slight correction to eight’s post - you can now get flashing aspects from down main to down relief at dolphin as well.  TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System) and TPWS+ greatly assist in preventing incidents, and on the GWML^▸ (Great Western Main Line) you still have ATP^▸ (Automatic Train Protection) as well of course.

It’ll be interesting to read the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) report (or perhaps it’ll just be a safety digest?) to see what happened.  Good to see the train stayed on the rails though and the injuries were all minor.

A safety margin over crossings is built in of course.  I was told that a train would take a crossing at half the speed again of it’s line speed.  So a 40mph crossing would be safe at 60mph (though give quite a jolt).  I have no idea as to how accurate that is.

[DaveHarries]

Timings on RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) for the 0820 Newcastle - Kings Cross (1Y80) show that it was 4 minutes early at New England North Jcn (passed 1017, scheduled 1021) but was 40 late through Peterborough and then took 46 minutes from Peterborough to Fletton Jcn (scheduled to take ½ minute). One possibility I would have suggested, if it hadn't already been commented that the signal was green, would have been an Adverse Change Of Aspect on the signal.

I will be interested to see what the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) report says on this one.

Dave

[Electric train]

The Peterborough area was re-signalled in 2005 with some change since for Thameslink and Werrington Grade Separation, so its a modern SSI^▸ (Solid State Interlocking) signalling system.

Like mentioned already the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) report will be interesting

[stuving]

Timings on RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) for the 0820 Newcastle - Kings Cross (1Y80) show that it was 4 minutes early at New England North Jcn (passed 1017, scheduled 1021) but was 40 late through Peterborough and then took 46 minutes from Peterborough to Fletton Jcn (scheduled to take ½ minute). One possibility I would have suggested, if it hadn't already been commented that the signal was green, would have been an Adverse Change Of Aspect on the signal.

I will be interested to see what the RAIB^▸ (Rail Accident Investigation Branch) report says on this one.

Dave

RTT does not show an actual arrival time as there was no scheduled one for a pass. Liverail (for example) shows arrival 1E at 10:21, and departure 82L at 11:44. RTT is actually showing 11:02.5 as a pass time, that being the only slot is has to fill. My guess is that that is a purely fictitious time, produced by averaging the recorded arrival and departure times!

During that hour and a bit at platform, the passengers were all thrown off, and a new driver found from somewhere (KGX, most likely) to take over and remove the train to KGX. Lumo don't serve Peterborough - so presumably passenger management, including checking for injuries and directing them to onward travel options, would have been done by station staff belonging to LNER^» (London North Eastern Railway - about).