Routing error at Waterloo?

[DJL]

Looking out of my office window onto Waterloo station that appears to be a 450 (8+ cars) half way into the station butted up against a 455 (also 8 cars?) at, what I think is, platform 17

This doesn't look normal to me!

I'm guessing there was a routing error, or a points failure leaving no other choice?

Given that passengers can walk through the 450 I'm guessing they instructed people to alight from the front of the train rather than mess about trying to get the train back out and back in again on a different platform?

It's not blocking all the other lines - another 450 just left platform 18
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It appears to have moved now.
I didn't see where it went

 

[Monty]

There is nothing on the company mobile about it, my guess would be a routing error as they wouldn't consciously put a train into a platform at Waterloo knowing part of it would be unaccommodated. If their was a signalling problem they would rather leave the until at the home signal and wait until they could route it in to an appropriate platform.

 

[westcoaster]

Sounds like an error on the signallers side, but that said if I'm offered a route into a permissive platform with an 8 car on a position light signal, I will always stop and challenge by calling the signaller to check it's only a 4 car in the platform.

 

[DJL]

You've both confirmed the common sense assumptions I had made.

It is possible that I am wrong about what I saw, but I don't see how.


Another of them unsolved mysteries

 

[westcoaster]

This departure from p17 was delayed around the time you said by 10 mins http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W34686/2014/01/03/advanced

Can not see an inbound to cause the problem.
Edit

This service started from vauxhall instead of Waterloo http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/W34978/2014/01/03/advanced maybe the other train involved, there is no way a service will be aloud to be boarded half in and out of a station, so they send it to the first stop to start there.

If you look over the previous hour on realtimetrains you see 2K11 arrive p17 at 09:17 followed 2 minutes later by 2U18. It them seems 2U21 the return working of 2U18 ran empty to vauxhall and started from there, and 2O19 the return working of 2K11 had a 10 late start waiting for 2O19 to move out of the way. All this is just based on what is available to read on realtometrains.

 

[WestRiding]

maybe the train already in the platform was formed of something it shouldn't have been, and the signaller didn't know, so still put the other on top of it as booked? its not always the signallers fault. tocs often neglect to tell us that they have changed a service formation, and then the next train does not fit on platform as it should do.

 

[DJL]

maybe the train already in the platform was formed of something it shouldn't have been, and the signaller didn't know, so still put the other on top of it as booked? its not always the signallers fault. tocs often neglect to tell us that they have changed a service formation, and then the next train does not fit on platform as it should do.

That would make sense.
And probably also means the driver wouldn't query it if the same thing happens every day (but with a shorter train already on the platform).

That said I can't imagine it is likely that a 4 car train would normally be booked to arrive at Waterloo at that time (unless it's come from the depot maybe).

Also doesn't the signal control centre have some kind of feedback about how long a train on a platform is?

 

[westcoaster]

maybe the train already in the platform was formed of something it shouldn't have been, and the signaller didn't know, so still put the other on top of it as booked? its not always the signallers fault. tocs often neglect to tell us that they have changed a service formation, and then the next train does not fit on platform as it should do.

Surely they can see on there panel how much of the permissive platform is occupied.

 

[GB]

Depends how the track circuits are set up and how they are displayed to the signaller.

 

[WestRiding]

Surely they can see on there panel how much of the permissive platform is occupied.

no we cant actually, it is just a given that the toc is running trains as per their stock diagram, and unless anyone says otherwise, it goes in its booked platform, as per the timetable.

 

[455driver]

I see all the assumptions are starting again, surely this, surely that! :roll:

As stated above (facts that is), all the signaller will know is that there is a train in the platform but there is some platform available and there is a booked move into the unoccupied part of the platform, the driver of the booked train will get the dots and the platform number, the driver is under no obligation to confirm with the signaller that there is enough platform available as it causes delays (although if I have more than 4 coaches I always do as it saves incidents like this one ) and it is probable that one of the trains was formed of 8 coaches instead of the booked 4 whether it is a stock allocation error or a depot error (I have been called on (dots) into an 8 coach platform with an 8 coach train, queried it and I was informed by the signaller that my train only had 4 coaches, we then had a discussion about it and he decided I was right and he then put me in a different platform, that was caused by the train booked to be split on the previous trip but no-one was booked to do it so the driver (knowing nothing about the supposed split) just carried on with the 8. It was a rostering error then and with the timetable being a bit of a mash up I would hazard a guess that that is a possible cause this time.

In the grand scheme of things its more of a 'oh shoot' moment rather than a complete eff up.

No doubt there will be an investigation, lessons will be learnt etc, will it happen again? Yes of course it will.

 

[Lockwood]

I have been called on (dots) into an 8 coach platform with an 8 coach train, queried it and I was informed by the signaller that my train only had 4 coaches, we then had a discussion about it and he decided I was right

The signaller seriously thought he knew more about the train than the guy sat at the front of it?

Was the "discussion" comprised of you saying "Hang on, let me go out and count"?

 

[Jonny]

I see all the assumptions are starting again, surely this, surely that! :roll:

As stated above (facts that is), all the signaller will know is that there is a train in the platform but there is some platform available and there is a booked move into the unoccupied part of the platform, the driver of the booked train will get the dots and the platform number, the driver is under no obligation to confirm with the signaller that there is enough platform available as it causes delays (although if I have more than 4 coaches I always do as it saves incidents like this one ) and it is probable that one of the trains was formed of 8 coaches instead of the booked 4 whether it is a stock allocation error or a depot error (I have been called on (dots) into an 8 coach platform with an 8 coach train, queried it and I was informed by the signaller that my train only had 4 coaches, we then had a discussion about it and he decided I was right and he then put me in a different platform, that was caused by the train booked to be split on the previous trip but no-one was booked to do it so the driver (knowing nothing about the supposed split) just carried on with the 8. It was a rostering error then and with the timetable being a bit of a mash up I would hazard a guess that that is a possible cause this time.

In the grand scheme of things its more of a 'oh shoot' moment rather than a complete eff up.

No doubt there will be an investigation, lessons will be learnt etc, will it happen again? Yes of course it will.

I presume they don't have "Lime Street Control" (as fitted at Liverpool Lime Street) - see here (scroll to the bottom) so there isn't a technical reason why it couldn't be fitted. I don't know if there is a signaller's over-ride but I presume he would be aware of such issues.

Most likely though, someone will decide that this is the worst that could have happened and that it's not worth the additional cost. Even then, that would only happen if there is an investigation. If being the operative word.

 

[455driver]

The signaller seriously thought he knew more about the train than the guy sat at the front of it?

Was the "discussion" comprised of you saying "Hang on, let me go out and count"?

The train was parked ona sharp curve so it was easy to see the side of it.

I had him on the CSR and he tapped away at a keyboard and informed me my train had 4 coaches.

I replied "hang on I will stick my head out the window and count, one two three four five six seven bush. Okay using my mark 1 eyeball the train is formed of at least 7 coaches but there are bushes in the way after that, I had to change ends at Leatherhead and am sure there were 8 coaches then, can you see how many there are from there?".

He conceeded defeat and there was no harm done.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I presume they don't have "Lime Street Control"

I wouldnt know that but the fact these things happen I would say no.

 

[LBSCR Times]

Not an unusual incident, happens occasionally at plenty of other locations.

Where it is more interesting is when it involves a 12 car platform.....
Often a driver will call up the signaller if he has an 8 car on, and is called on to a train, for which he is not aware of the length of. Some signallers accept this, others don't, especially where it is a booked working.
Then NR create a Trust delay down to the driver.......

More often than not the issue is that the train has more coaches on than booked, and the signaller is not aware. However, having said that, the Station Control Point should have been aware (if they had been told, of course, themselves), and in conjunction with the signaller, arranged a platform alteration.

 

[Lockwood]

The train was parked ona sharp curve so it was easy to see the side of it.

I had him on the CSR and he tapped away at a keyboard and informed me my train had 4 coaches.

I replied "hang on I will stick my head out the window and count, one two three four five six seven bush. Okay using my mark 1 eyeball the train is formed of at least 7 coaches but there are bushes in the way after that, I had to change ends at Leatherhead and am sure there were 8 coaches then, can you see how many there are from there?".

He conceeded defeat and there was no harm done.

So, I was right in assuming the tone, if not the words. :P

 

[Tomnick]

I presume they don't have "Lime Street Control" (as fitted at Liverpool Lime Street) - see here (scroll to the bottom) so there isn't a technical reason why it couldn't be fitted. I don't know if there is a signaller's over-ride but I presume he would be aware of such issues.

Most likely though, someone will decide that this is the worst that could have happened and that it's not worth the additional cost. Even then, that would only happen if there is an investigation. If being the operative word.

Lime Street Control works best when trains are mostly formed of units of a consistent length (e.g. 4-car). It'd be difficult to provide measuring track circuits to suit every, or even most, situations when trains are formed of various combinations of 2, 3, 4 and 5 (?) car units. Probably best to accept that these things sometimes happen and leave it at that .

 

[455driver]

Pretty much yes.

He was actually quite snotty about it which is very unusual for Guildford box, they are a good bunch in there.

 

[WessexEclectic]

It used to be the case that the bobby could just lean out the window and count the number of carriages...

 

[D1009]

Lime Street Control works best when trains are mostly formed of units of a consistent length (e.g. 4-car). It'd be difficult to provide measuring track circuits to suit every, or even most, situations when trains are formed of various combinations of 2, 3, 4 and 5 (?) car units. Probably best to accept that these things sometimes happen and leave it at that .

Very true. When I was involved in train planning for Kings Cross, we had an incident during the evening peak where a 6 car 313 was booked to come in on top of a Hull Trains 180, I think on platform 8. Although in theory there was enough room, the Lime Street control prevented the 313 arriving, and train planning had to take the resultant delay, which was quite significant as it was during the period that platforms were being taken out of use for reconstruction.

 

[W230]

Lime Street Control works best when trains are mostly formed of units of a consistent length (e.g. 4-car). It'd be difficult to provide measuring track circuits to suit every, or even most, situations when trains are formed of various combinations of 2, 3, 4 and 5 (?) car units. Probably best to accept that these things sometimes happen and leave it at that .

OOI, as a signaller, how do you feel about drivers contacting and checking that they have room when given the calling on?

Only reason I ask is that when I was in training I once got a pretty abusive/sarcy reply back from the signaller when doing it (and since qualifying I've not had to do it again). Maybe he was just having a bad day but I certainly wasn't calling his signalling into doubt - I just wanted to make sure I didn't **** up!

I would still check again next time though.

 

[Sanatogen]

I would never whinge at a driver checking he has the correct signal, 99% of the time it will be correct but the 1 time it's not I'll be thanking him for checking.

 

[Tomnick]

It's not something that we have to worry about, happily - none of the stations on our line have permissive platforms or have passenger trains booked to do anything 'interesting'. Generally, though, I'd always encourage drivers to check if they're not sure...better to ask, in my opinion, than to end up stopping the job somehow (might just save the signalman from a sticky situation too, of course). Freight drivers sometimes question what I'm doing, for example if we're able to keep one running (early) when it's booked to be recessed...the call's always appreciated, as it's so easy to pull off in error and end up with it getting to the ECML early and screwing the job up. No excuse for an abusive response really - even if the chap's under pressure or having a bad day.

The only problem is that if, in calling to query something that proves to be correct signalling, a driver causes a delay that TRUST demands an explanation for, it'll invariably end up coded TG (it has be attributed somewhere!). I've read such delay reports, but never come across it myself (manual reporting in TRUST helps ). Still, it's far better to put three minutes into the job than to end up with trains standing everywhere!