Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2018 18:11:22 GMT
On my way home today, at around about 4 o'clock, my train came to a stand outside Hainault station, almost certainly at signal HAI 6751, the signal giving access to the three platforms. However I was quite far down the train so can't be perfectly sure. We then moved off and came to a smart halt, almost certainly by my judgement, we were stopped by an emergency brake application. We then proceeded in what felt distinctly like RM to the platform - in this case platform 1. We were bound for Woodford via Hainault, so 2 would be the more usual choice, but it was one and a train then departed from 2 for Hainault depot before we quickly followed, heading off to Grange Hill. I noticed that the boards were advertising the train I left at Roding Valley as being bound for Ealing Broadway and there was a Woodford very close behind. I'm also quite confident my Woodford via Hainault had been described as a Newbury Park service at Mile End.
Anyone got any juicy details? Sounds very much like a signal failure, HAI 6751 presumably passed at danger (I mean in accordance with the relevant procedures, I don't mean a SPAD), though very slickly and efficiently from my vantage point.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 17, 2018 19:05:00 GMT
There was a track circuit failure this morning at Newbury Park
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesb on Apr 18, 2018 16:50:50 GMT
On my way home today, at around about 4 o'clock, my train came to a stand outside Hainault station, almost certainly at signal HAI 6751, the signal giving access to the three platforms. However I was quite far down the train so can't be perfectly sure. We then moved off and came to a smart halt, almost certainly by my judgement, we were stopped by an emergency brake application. We then proceeded in what felt distinctly like RM to the platform - in this case platform 1. We were bound for Woodford via Hainault, so 2 would be the more usual choice, but it was one and a train then departed from 2 for Hainault depot before we quickly followed, heading off to Grange Hill. I noticed that the boards were advertising the train I left at Roding Valley as being bound for Ealing Broadway and there was a Woodford very close behind. I'm also quite confident my Woodford via Hainault had been described as a Newbury Park service at Mile End. Anyone got any juicy details? Sounds very much like a signal failure, HAI 6751 presumably passed at danger (I mean in accordance with the relevant procedures, I don't mean a SPAD), though very slickly and efficiently from my vantage point. As a passenger, I have experienced 92ts coming to an abrupt halt on numerous occasions, usually related to ATO not working well in slippery rail conditions (but on other random occasions also - for example, if somebody opens the J door leading into the rear drivers cab). As the Central line is automated, do trains 'apply the rule' in the same way as on non-ATO signalled lines if they are required to pass a signal at danger? There aren't train stops. So the ATP wouldn't allow the train to pass the signal at danger in the first place in the traditional non-ATO way? I have been on a train passing over a defective section in RM mode, with the yellow light flashing on the front of the train. This sounds like ATO threw a random hissy fit, and the driver continued into Hainault in coded manual, and passing the signal HAI 6751 was just a coincidence. All speculation from a humble passenger though! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 17:14:48 GMT
As the Central line is automated, do trains 'apply the rule' in the same way as on non-ATO signalled lines if they are required to pass a signal at danger? There aren't train stops. Well that's one of the things that got me wondering. So the ATP wouldn't allow the train to pass the signal at danger in the first place in the traditional non-ATO way? It would allow the train to pass the signal at danger, it just gets it stopped if it does. The target speed, however, may be dropped down (possibly through a few steps to quite a low speed) on approach, which means if you do SPAD it should be at a lower speed than it might have been under conventional, which means shorter stopping distances, which means shorter overlaps, which means more capacity. |
|
|
|
Post by jamesb on Apr 18, 2018 17:51:52 GMT
I suppose I was wondering why you would bother passing the signal at danger and waiting for the ATP to stop the train, instead of changing to RM mode and proceeding through the affected area without needing to come to an abrupt halt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 18, 2018 18:45:29 GMT
I suppose I was wondering why you would bother passing the signal at danger and waiting for the ATP to stop the train, instead of changing to RM mode and proceeding through the affected area without needing to come to an abrupt halt. So was I! |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Apr 18, 2018 19:02:10 GMT
If we have to go through a red signal we don't got through in CM, rather we switch to RM before and as HAI6751 is a semi automatic we wouldn't go through it until we'd been authorised by Wood Lane
According to Trackernet Replayer TO67 arrived on Plat 2 at 15:54 but another T067 arrived on Plat 3 out of the depot at 16:00. T106 WOO v HAI pulls up at HAI6751 at 16:03 while T45 Ealing Broadway heads off towards Fairlop from Plat 1. HAI6751 clears at 16:03:34 but T106 doesn't fully berth in Plat 1 until 16:05:20 with its destination up as Leytonstone.
T067 gets the shunt signal into the depot at 16:06 the same time that the Inner Road signal on Plat 1 clears for T106 to go to Woodford but now the destination is EAB and it leaves around 16:07 about the same time as T047 WOO v HAI was arriving on Plat 2.
Rather than a SPAD I think it more likely to have been an ATP failure and rather than blocking the signal section while waiting for ATP to reset the driver switched to RM
T106 was a Newbury Park train up until Stratford when it was switched to WOO v HAI
|
|
