Should drivers instruct passengers to head to the rear of the train in the event of an impending collision?

[Eccles1983]

I'd be off and running through the train. Collecting people as I went. And trying to get a rear facing seat as far away from the cab as possible.

It's not brave to sit at the controls of what is going to be an collision when there is nothing you can do about it. Emergency brake, emergency call and run.

That said, fear does strange things to rational thought and it's easy to say it. So my sympathies go out to the driver, horrible situation to find himself in.

 

[AdamWW]

I'd be off and running through the train. Collecting people as I went. And trying to get a rear facing seat as far away from the cab as possible.

It's not brave to sit at the controls of what is going to be an collision when there is nothing you can do about it. Emergency brake, emergency call and run.

That said, fear does strange things to rational thought and it's easy to say it. So my sympathies go out to the driver, horrible situation to find himself in.

Yes - it's very easy to think you know what you'd do in such circumstances but it's not necessarily the same as what you'd actually do.

It must be a horrible position knowing that you are in trouble and there being nothing more you can do about it.

 

[ainsworth74]

It's not brave to sit at the controls of what is going to be an collision when there is nothing you can do about it. Emergency brake, emergency call and run.

That said, fear does strange things to rational thought and it's easy to say it. So my sympathies go out to the driver, horrible situation to find himself in.

Yes, brave or not, I think we can all agree that it's a horrific situation to find oneself in!

 

[BayPaul]

Yes - it's very easy to think you know what you'd do in such circumstances but it's not necessarily the same as what you'd actually do.

It must be a horrible position knowing that you are in trouble and there being nothing more you can do about it.

We are also looking from hindsight, knowing the position of the GWR train, and knowing that it was inevitable that they were going to collide. When he first applied the emergency brakes, he probably quiickly knew he wasn't going to stop at the signal, but not that there would be another train there. I guess it was possible that if braking performance had been a bit better, and other trains had been in different locations, the 159 would have come to rest over the junction or in the tunnel. Presumably, in that case, the driver would want to move the train ASAP, to avoid another train running into him

I do wonder whether it may not have been 100% clear to the driver that there was going to be a collision when the GWR train was first seen - if the SWR train had slowed down just a little bit faster, and the GWR train had sped up just a little bit more, or had been a 2 carriage rather than a 4 carriage it might just have got to the point where they didn't quite touch. I could imagine being in the cab and shouting at the controls to work just a little bit better, and hoping for a near miss rather than a hit, until the point it was totally clear what would happen, by which point it was too late to leave the cab. This is as a layman, imagining being in a similar sort of situation

 

[norbitonflyer]

It's not brave to sit at the controls of what is going to be an collision when there is nothing you can do about it. Emergency brake, emergency call and run.

If the emergency brake is causing the wheels to lock, staying at his post trying to adjust the strength of the brake application (cadence braking, I think it's called in road transport) to control the slide might be worth a try. He may also have been sounding the horn to try to warn passengers in the other train that he was bearing down on them.

I am no fan of Richard Branson, but I thought he was unfairly criticised for commending the driver at Grayrigg (2007) for "staying at the controls" during the derailment. Whilst undoubtedly a "passenger" once the train was off the rails, his prompt action after the derailment, despite serious injury, was a factor in getting the rescue operation under way quickly. (Despite the high speed - about 95mph - no-one was fatally injured in the crash, but one passenger suffered a heart attack and died later in hospital)

 

[GC class B1]

If the emergency brake is causing the wheels to lock, staying at his post trying to adjust the strength of the brake application (cadence braking, I think it's called in road transport) to control the slide might be worth a try. He may also have been sounding the horn to try to warn passengers in the other train that he was bearing down on them.

I am no fan of Richard Branson, but I thought he was unfairly criticised for commending the driver at Grayrigg (2007) for "staying at the controls" during the derailment. Whilst undoubtedly a "passenger" once the train was off the rails, his prompt action after the derailment, despite serious injury, was a factor in getting the rescue operation under way quickly. (Despite the high speed - about 95mph - no-one was fatally injured in the crash, but one passenger suffered a heart attack and died later in hospital)

To clarify, there is no such thing as an Emergency Brake. The correct term is Emergency brake demand and this is the highest available brake force but uses the same brake system as a Full Sevice brake application. On EMUs this is generally 12% g compared with 9% g for a Full Service brake application. I believe on class 158 and class 159 the Full Service and Emergency brake Application both give the same designed retardation rate but if I am incorrect will someone please correct me. The reason for pointing this out is that the suggestion that the Emergency Brake demand made the situation regarding potential wheel slide is incorrect.

in addition after a TPWS brake demand the driver cannot release the brake for a period of time - I think it is two minutes so there wasn’t anything else the the driver could do to avoid the collision The cadence braking analogy is also not correct as WSP is similar to ABS on a car and applieds and releases the brake I.e like cadence braking.

 

[tiptoptaff]

To clarify, there is no such think as an Emergency Brake. The correct term is Emergency brake demand and this is the highest available brake force but uses the same brake system as a Full Sevice brake application. On EMUs this is generally 12% g compared with 9% g for a Full Service brake application. I believe on class 158 and class 159 the Full Service and Emergency brake Application both give the same designed retardation rate but if I am incorrect will someone please correct me. The reason for pointing this out is that the suggestion that the Emergency Brake demand made the situation regarding potential wheel slide is incorrect.

On our 158s emergency and step 3 (full service) are the same. But I can't speak for SWR 158/9s as we'd stopped the hire-in diagram long before I became a driver

One thing is for sure and that is they will sand in Emergency regardless of whether the WSP is fooled by the slide

 

[GB]

If the emergency brake is causing the wheels to lock, staying at his post trying to adjust the strength of the brake application (cadence braking, I think it's called in road transport) to control the slide might be worth a try. He may also have been sounding the horn to try to warn passengers in the other train that he was bearing down on them.

That would be one brave driver to mess about with an emergency brake application once it has been initiated. The people in suits wouldn't look to kindly on that and would leave yourself open to awkward questions if a collision still occurred.

 

[ainsworth74]

If the emergency brake is causing the wheels to lock, staying at his post trying to adjust the strength of the brake application (cadence braking, I think it's called in road transport) to control the slide might be worth a try. He may also have been sounding the horn to try to warn passengers in the other train that he was bearing down on them.

I believe that is counter to the training given on WSP stock where the instruction is to select the desired braking level and if a slide develops to allow the WSP to do it's thing. Changing the braking level would interfere with WSP's ability to try and keep the wheels rotating and counter the slide. I believe this is identical to the advice for road drivers on cars fitted with ABS. Just press the brake pedal and allow the ABS to do it's thing rather than manually pumping the brakes!

However not being a train driver I am open to correction on this point!

 

[ashkeba]

The derailment at Kemble in 2007 was one such incident where the driver saw an imminent potential for derailment and ran for safety while alerting passengers. There's no comment how the passengers reacted to this though.

Report 07/2008: Derailment at Kemble

Derailment of a train at Kemble, Gloucestershire, 15 January 2007.

www.gov.uk

I hope most passengers would welcome a "brace! brace! brace!" call, instead of being left to guess from the braking and maybe long horn noize.

 

[1955LR]

I hope most passengers would welcome a "brace! brace! brace!" call, instead of being left to guess from the braking and maybe long horn noize.

I would suggest such a call would just add to confusion as its meaningless unless advised what the brace position is .

 

[LowLevel]

I'm fairly sure that if I became aware of an impeding collision picking up the TrainFX handset, waiting several seconds for it to decide to go into PA mode or freeze completely and making an articulate announcement about bracing or being daft and telling people to start running around and crushing each other about the train would be at the bottom of my list of things to do.

You gain absolutely nothing and introduce more risk by suggesting people who might otherwise have been seated with a degree of protection become potential missiles or cause panic and if what you assume will be a safer location becomes something like a terrible secondary impact zone (see Hatfield with the restaurant car wrapped around an OHLE mast) your well meaning attempts to save people could end up making things worse.

 

[Llama]

This is true - TrainFX effectively removes this option in an emergency.

 

[HowardGWR]

I would suggest such a call would just add to confusion as its meaningless unless advised what the brace position is .

I disagree. Most people have flown nowadays and those who have would know exactly what to do.

 

[RPI]

I disagree. Most people have flown nowadays and those who have would know exactly what to do.

I'm nearly 40 and never flown! (Though I appreciate I'm in a minority lol)

 

[LSWR Cavalier]

I have flown, but do not know what the brace position is.

There would very rarely be more than a few seconds warning. I am wondering if I should sit facing backwards in future.

 

[NSEFAN]

Would the brace position even make sense to do in a train, where seats are faced forwards and backwards, passengers not buckled in, and also with standing passengers?

I wonder if warning people of a collision would make them tense up and more prone to injury? And certainly panic won't help matters.

 

[ExRes]

I am wondering if I should sit facing backwards in future.

It all depends on where you're sitting facing backwards, if you happened to have two/three people facing you then they become the missiles that could be heading your way

The comment about running wildly about the train collecting people as you go has got to be the most dangerous thing anyone could possibly do

 

[Bigman]

It surely depends on how long the driver has got to think. You could go round a corner and see a landslide and you might not even have 10 seconds to think never mind pressing the PA button.

 

[dakta]

Realistically, if a train suddenly braked hard and the tannoy on a train crackled into life with 'brace' I reckon most people will be still mentally processing it (in the what the fudge is he on about sense) at the time of impact.

I do think the time lag, for want of a better word, to convince people not expecting to receive such a message, to comprehend that it is real, that it needs acting on, what needs doing and convert it into an action would be considerable relative to the time you may have available.

 

[AlterEgo]

I would suggest such a call would just add to confusion as its meaningless unless advised what the brace position is .

But people would at least be aware of an impending collision.

 

[43096]

I have flown, but do not know what the brace position is.

So you've never listened to the safety announcements or read the safety card on a plane, then?

 

[Eccles1983]

It all depends on where you're sitting facing backwards, if you happened to have two/three people facing you then they become the missiles that could be heading your way

The comment about running wildly about the train collecting people as you go has got to be the most dangerous thing anyone could possibly do

Really?

I know exactly where the crumple zone is, as I was sitting in it seconds before.

Anyone in the vestible in a 158 is likely to get seriously hurt. Its designed to fold in on itself. Collecting them as I burst out of the door is the best of a terrible situation.

The most dangerous thing to do is to remain in the drivers seat. Because you are useless after the event. I know the direction of safety, and the requirement to protect the train as well as access points. That knowledge is useless if I am trapped or dead in the cab.

 

[Ianno87]

It happened during the Northern Line runaway in 2010.

The passenger service in front of the runaway engineering train ran non-stop to keep ahead, with passengers advised to move through the train towards the front in case of being re-ended.

Quick thinking from Contol sent the Northern Line towards one branch at Camden Town, with the engineering train to the other, where upward gradients stopped it.

 

[Irascible]

Are there any studies about whether getting standing passengers ( in any transport ) to sit/lie on the floor before an impact makes a difference?

 

[jfowkes]

I disagree. Most people have flown nowadays and those who have would know exactly what to do.

In an aircraft emergency landing you'd have several minutes of time and a cabin crew to help you out. Plus you'd be primed to "expect" to enter the brace position.

On a train you've little time, no help and you're not expecting it. If there was a PA "brace positions" message on a train I'd be just as likely to think it was some sort of prank than an actual instruction.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The safest place to be would be a rear facing seat, sat bolt upright with your head against the headrest.

Facing forward on a train, the airline brace position would be likely to result in a snapped neck. It's an anti-flail position designed for use when wearing a waist-only seatbelt which would stop you going too far forwards. I'm genuinely not sure what the best position would be.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

In an aircraft emergency landing you'd have several minutes of time and a cabin crew to help you out. Plus you'd be primed to "expect" to enter the brace position.

On a train you've little time, no help and you're not expecting it. If there was a PA "brace positions" message on a train I'd be just as likely to think it was some sort of prank than an actual instruction.

Yes. I think on a train it would be counter-productive.

 

[thelongestroad]

Reminds me of the below video where the driver of a train in Poland ran out of his cab and told people to get on the floor.

No idea if that's the right thing to do or not in an impact situation.

 

[6Gman]

I am wondering if I should sit facing backwards in future.

There are (usually) small risk reductions by:

1. Sitting backwards;
2. Sitting on the nearside rather than the offside;
3. Sitting in the centre of the train.

I normally prefer a facing, offside seat - and sit wherever is convenient within the train.

Because the chance of being involved in a collision is tiny and I place my enjoyment of the journey above the miniscule additional risk.