The Bletchley Derailment | Jakeso
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 31 ม.ค. 2025
- On the 3rd February 2012 a Class 90 (90046) derailed at Bletchley Junction after severely overspeeding the set of points on the line. In this video, we will find out why this happened and what was done after to prevent this from happening again, I hope you enjoy!
Sorry for this video being so late. A mix of lack of motivation, being busy and just starting college means that I have a lot on my plate at the moment, but I hope to be back as soon as I can!
Credits for images:
Special thanks to East Midlands Trainspotting for letting me use their images, you can find their socials here:
Twitter/X: x.com/ETrainsp...
TH-cam: / @eastmidlandstrainspot...
Other images used (from Wikipedia):
Tom walker
mattbuck
El Pollock
Phil Scott
ArtVandelay13
CC BY 2.0/3.0/4.0 Wikimedia Commons
RAIB Report: assets.publish...
Tags used:
railway,jakeso,train,class 90,train derailment,uk train derailment,train overspeed,virgin trains,freightliner,class 90 derailment,90046,virgin trains west coast,Bletchley,bletchley train station,bletchley train derailment,bletchley derailment,train overspeed derailment,derailment,RAIB,pendolino,class 390,pretendolino
Hope you enjoyed the newest addition to the Jakeso channel!
I nearly became derailed many years ago approaching Finsbury Park due to the poor sighting of the route indicator on approach to the signal just north of the station on the up fast line. I saw the signal had cleared to green from a restrictive aspect and so I applied power, only to see I had been routed from the Up Fast to the Up Slow line. I got quite a kick sideways upon going through that junction way too fast with a class 325 EMU.
Thanks Jake for this great vid, was worth the wait. Stay strong, you got this!😊
It's disappointing that RAIB addressed mostly the actions of the driver, not the design of the signals. Albeit that the driver *should* have noticed the unusual (but not unique) sequence of green following single yellow, the key problem was that the green aspect was seen from a much greater distance (hence the driver applying full power, believing that they were going straight ahead) than the small route indicator, which (unlike a feather) is not legible until close to the signal. The accident would not have happened, if the system held the protecting signal at yellow, ensuring drivers kept speed low. Recently installed systems don't step up (to green) until the train is right on top of the signal, where the driver can clearly see the diverging route indicator.
That's a better system. I guess there is a time delay circuit on the green relay that starts when the double yellow aspect is displayed.
According to the Signalling principles the junction signal should not clear up to a proceed aspect until the train has reached a point where the driver can see the route indication at the same time as the proceed aspect. All worked out by track circuit occupation or where there is no track joint suitable a “timer” will be built into the system before the proceed aspect and RI is displayed.
Point of order, RAIB reports "[are] inappropriate [to] be used to assign fault or blame, or determine liability".
(I make no comment on whether the report's statement of "the route indicator [being] found to be satisfactory, free of obstructions and with sufficient time for a driver to see and understand its meaning", and "the ‘F’ indication [being] clearly visible to him" are reasonable or not, but it's worth reading the recommendations the report makes, most notably the second one states "[Mitigation against overspeeding at junctions as per the incident one] may include replacement by position light junction indicators; replacement of junction indicator by one in modern equivalent form; alteration to signalling controls")
The theatre box indicator on this particular signal was not that easy to see. It had already nearly caught out a VT driver. There had been a lot going on on the WCML infrastructure & there was probably some confirmation bias added to the drivers information processing.
Thanks, great vid! PLEASE make more of these they are really interesting and well made
Thanks! I hope to do more in the future, for now though my next video may or may not involve Class 507s 👀
@@Jakeso 🤔
Only a couple of years ago, very similar driver error was to happen twice within a few months at P468 approaching Peterborough station: Drivers correctly brought speed down when passing YY and Y aspects, but then on seeing R aspect step up to G they reapplied full power having failed to register the junction indicator displayed with it. In both cases the train took the 30mph turnout at nearly 80, luckily staying on the rails but passengers and luggage were thrown about.
Think it was actually a driver manager in the chair
I found the last aspect being green with route indicates moving to fast line (f) as odd, different railways different signal aspect I guess, the NSW (AUST) rail signal system with either single or double aspect light indicator, the turnout (points) is always protected by a yellow or double yellow not green, the green indication would only be displayed if the train movement was through the turnout in normal position, not turn out.
@@afs5609 I guess this is a problem with the very intensive traffic on UK railways (and the consequent desire to keep traffic moving) and lack of appropriate investment (to match the traffic demands) in signaling. The only way to fully address this, is to add additional block sections around the turnouts, which would be very expensive, especially if it's applied to a number of junctions.
@@afs5609: Mind you, considering that signal aspects are not speed indications, it's not immediate that an incident wouldn't have happened, as nothing really is "wrong" with accelerating to a high (but permissible) speed if you're able to stop at the next signal (on yellow, or two signals down for double yellow).
A partly related note is what happened when HSTs were introduced under the former "free yellow" junction signalling: they'd get a double yellow, and (reasonably) expect to stop two signals down, which their improved braking meant that could be done much later - only to encounter a yellow with junction indicator and need to brake hard for the appropriate speed, hence flashing yellows were introduced.
@@afs5609
The UK has always used signalling principles based on route not on speed. Drivers shown a particular signal aspect must control train speed according to their route knowledge which is backed up by lineside speed signage. A green with a white 'feather' can be a considerably slower route than a green alone, and this case is a classic example.
Perhaps an exorcist could be employed to reduce possessions ?
The late great Hannibal Lecter wants you for dinner
Awesome video
That aspect of British signalling is really strange, to rely solely on approach checks with the inherent danger of speeding up again erroneously. Some have noted here feathers, but that's a band-aid because (to my limited understanding) there is no ATP integration. For instance, with German signalling and Indusi/PZB there would have been a Vr2 (diagonal yellow-green, or blinking newer Ks1 with Zs3v advance speed indication) advance signalling triggering a constantly lowering speed limit supervision to 40kph. Instead of the fatal green aspect with route indicator that requires exact knowledge without room for mistakes, a German driver would have been in speed limit supervision of 40kph and seen an Hp2 yellow-green main aspect or steady Ks1 green aspect with speed indication Zs3. There still is a gap when it comes to such very slow turnouts, but ETCS is covering this by balises announcing and enforcing lower speeds in such cases. Thankfully, no casualties, especially as there could have been a train on the opposite direction. Did I miss it or is the British ATP still stuck in this model with these no-protection holes?
TPWS wasn't fitted here for some reason. IIRC the track has been modified meaning this can't really happen again but it seems like TPWS hasn't been installed.
Very interesting 👌
The white line "graphical" route indicators are most certainly a more intuitive way of letting a driver know that they're about to diverge from the current track, compared with an alphanumeric route indicator. Having the signal clear while the trains is still a significant distance away also seems a bad idea. Also, on one video I saw recently, the actual divergence was so far away from the signal that a driver might just forget.
The “ F” type indicator are ok from terminus stations but route changing whilst running I think the Lunar lights or feathers as so called are better. And that junction ffs probably a throw back from the old BLY triangle now no more from steam days.
Nice video!!
The signal should have had " Feathers " . A set of white lights at a 45 degree angle to indicate a change of route !
Fatigue may not have been a factor, but this happened during circadian low, which will likely have had an effect.
It was a bit insane to have a 15mph crossover in a place like this. I see it's since been changed to 40mph
That constant engine stopper is Start/Stop technology
This incident of 12 years ago has me wondering why an overspeed TPWS wasn't fitted to the up slow line through the platform at Bletchley to enforce the speed restriction through the crossover from slow to fast lines. It's all history now that track alterations have taken place but I wonder if Network Rail have twigged to this obvious precaution at other locations.
Money is always a factor. Plus TPWS is not an “intelligent” system that calculates for all potentials. From memory there would have been TPWS for the signal but not enough room after to install the over speed sensor & trigger loops before entering the points.
1:34 THAT'S MY LOCAL STATION
Wasn't there a similar incident around a year ago, again on the WCML South where a 90 was driven in excess of the permitted speed on a light engine move.
@@andyburbidge4938 The RAIB report I is this one: Report 05/2024: Signal passed at danger at Stafford Trent Valley Junction No. 1
Hey, just wanted to make you aware.
Your rail accident playlist has a Jimmy Here Try Not to Laugh video in it. Not that I'm complaining, I like his content too 😆
AHAH! That’s quite funny, I’ll fix it though! 🤣😭
That's a real shame is that. It sounds like slow to fast was not a common movement and the driver genuinely thought he was to proceed up the slow line at the limit of his speed restriction. Had the aspect remained at single amber, its likely he would've passed through the junction completely unscathed.
will you do a video about when a class 450 derailed near wimbledon
Do we know what happened to the driver concerned? Is he still driving was his contract terminated?
I'm not too sure, the RAIB hasn't (and usually doesn't) mention the employment state of the driver after. I don't know what the usual procedure is here.
He left the industry a short while later.
He left the rails and then the railway?
Are any of you actual drivers- just gauging knowledge of rules and regs
Human error yet again.
If on approach to cross overs, why is it there not some form of automation to take over and reduce the trains speed to within the required parameters, overriding any driver input setting?
Excess speed approach to crossovers should long be a thing of the past.
@@BegudMaximan-zp2tc *error not 'era'.
@@robtyman4281 whoops!
It's three not free
bletchley is my closest mainline station and knowing that a derailment happened just outside it is crazy
It wasn’t the first…
skill issue
Bet he got his butt kicked for this!
first :D