Swiss train crash

From the looks of those photos, it's a points/signal failure.

---

So where the hell is the signalling centre? Surely it showed 2 trains in the same block?

What signaling center? Who watches the board if there is one? How can it show two trains on one block?

Unless things have changed for the worst, there is a small electrical current going through the rails. When a train is in a section, it shows on the signalling panel. When no trains in sections, it's lit up, when one is it darkens(lights out). Simple but highly effective.

For a second train to enter the same block, either the signal has failed or the driver went past a red.

Correct, but you didn't answer the question, how can it show 2 trains on the same block!

---

I see in the latest news items that the driver of the train in the Spanish crash was on the phone.

But, he was answering a call from the rail company.

Spanish train's black boxes reveal driver was on phone to rail firm

Court says Francisco Garzón was responding to call from Renfe controller when train derailed, raising questions about firm's role in disaster

How many times do we need to see "driver was on phone to boss" before the bosses are prosecuted?

So where the hell is the signalling centre? Surely it showed 2 trains in the same block?

What signaling center? Who watches the board if there is one? How can it show two trains on one block?

Unless things have changed for the worst, there is a small electrical current going through the rails. When a train is in a section, it shows on the signalling panel. When no trains in sections, it's lit up, when one is it darkens(lights out). Simple but highly effective.

For a second train to enter the same block, either the signal has failed or the driver went past a red.

Correct, but you didn't answer the question, how can it show 2 trains on the same block!

It can't but it can be detected. 2 trains on separate tracks showing up on separate blocks on the signalling panel. Crossover shows on panel as well. Signalman looks, no trains in any section fore or aft on either track for the whole section under they're control. Just one block occupied. As a signalman, what would you think?

Scratch your butt or telephone the signal control room ahead & behind your sections? fore & Aft tell you no trains have entered from your section - time taken 3 minutes max.

What would you do next?

---

So where the hell is the signalling centre? Surely it showed 2 trains in the same block?

What signaling center? Who watches the board if there is one? How can it show two trains on one block?

Unless things have changed for the worst, there is a small electrical current going through the rails. When a train is in a section, it shows on the signalling panel. When no trains in sections, it's lit up, when one is it darkens(lights out). Simple but highly effective.

For a second train to enter the same block, either the signal has failed or the driver went past a red.

Correct, but you didn't answer the question, how can it show 2 trains on the same block!

It can't but it can be detected. 2 trains on separate tracks showing up on separate blocks on the signalling panel. Crossover shows on panel as well. Signalman looks, no trains in any section fore or aft on either track for the whole section under they're control. Just one block occupied. As a signalman, what would you think?

Scratch your butt or telephone the signal control room ahead & behind your sections? fore & Aft tell you no trains have entered from your section - time taken 3 minutes max.

What would you do next?

Haven't told me yet if there is a siding in that block where they are supposed to meet and pass each other. Haven't told me yet it if that siding has signal indicators. Haven't told me yet if the siding switches have indication on my board. Haven't told me yet if the train system has automatic brake application so even dead men can't crash them. Haven't told me yet that I'm watching that block out of a hundred on my station and I'm not dealing with a some other nasty off in another part of the road. Haven't told me yet if my board has a computer looking for idiot train drivers who blow through signals.

---

"A CFF spokeswoman said the two trains should have crossed at the station, thanks to a track system that allows them to pass one another."

Check the photo in Chris's link, it should have crossed over & passed. Crossovers are just that, points are needed. 2 trains same track either driver error or points failure. As for the points you brought up, like radar operators, if you can't handle that, you shouldn't be a signalman.

---

Here is a funny one ...do something or not your in trouble

http://www.microsofttranslator.com/bv.aspx?ref=IE8Activity&from=&to=en&a=http%3a%2f%2ftvanouvelles.ca%2flcn%2finfos%2fregional%2fmontreal%2farchives%2f2013%2f07%2f20130730-181115.html

---

As for the points you brought up, like radar operators, if you can't handle that, you shouldn't be a signalman.

Signalman? You mean the guy who stands by the track with a lantern and throws the points?

What is obvious is one of the engineers went through his mandatory stop and hold position on his written orders, or some trainmaster really screwed up the written orders or a dispatcher radioed permission to violate the orders and proceed to more distant siding and perhaps forgot to change the other trains orders.

Secondary to that, unless a dispatcher radioed permission to proceed, one or both of the engineers failed to stop for a hard stop signal.

There may be a third error here from an engineering standpoint in that the block may be too long or have visual obstruction or grade so that it is impossible to see an approaching train in time to stop given the speed limit.

Of course we don't know yet if there was signal failure, but even so someone put a train past where there should have been a stop and wait order.

---

As for the points you brought up, like radar operators, if you can't handle that, you shouldn't be a signalman.

Signalman? You mean the guy who stands by the track with a lantern and throws the points?

What is obvious is one of the engineers went through his mandatory stop and hold position on his written orders, or some trainmaster really screwed up the written orders or a dispatcher radioed permission to violate the orders and proceed to more distant siding and perhaps forgot to change the other trains orders.

Secondary to that, unless a dispatcher radioed permission to proceed, one or both of the engineers failed to stop for a hard stop signal.

There may be a third error here from an engineering standpoint in that the block may be too long or have visual obstruction or grade so that it is impossible to see an approaching train in time to stop given the speed limit.

Of course we don't know yet if there was signal failure, but even so someone put a train past where there should have been a stop and wait order.

You're making an awful lot of assumptions based on things you admit you don't know. You're even mixing different dispatching systems which don't coexist on the same line.

As Sirius said, (assuming there is a Centralized Traffic Control system in place; if not and it's only Automatic Block Signals, the dispatcher doesn't even have a board) the crossover plant is one section on the board and the blocks to each side of it are other sections. If we assume that one driver or the other went past a Stop signal, the dispatcher should have gotten some sort of alarm. But there wouldn't be much he could do about it. He could try to radio the train to ask what was going on, but it was probably too late. If that is what happened, there will be a record of it. If the trains are equipped with some sort of cab signals (which is likely), the driver would also have gotten an alarm, but again probably too little too late. Even if there's a system that would automatically stop the train, it may have been too late. You can't blame the other driver, either. He would have been looking at some sort of signal allowing him to proceed right up until the moment the other train went past the Stop, so he probably wouldn't have had time to stop either, even if he could react instantly.

Some years ago, there was a collision between an Amtrak train and a commuter train in Maryland. One of them stopped at a station and when he departed, the engineer forgot that the last signal he'd seen was less than Clear, so he accelerated to full speed and was then unable to stop when he came around a curve and saw a Stop signal. As a direct result of this, there is now a rule that when a passenger train stops at a station between signals, it is considered to be "Delayed in Block" and must run at Restricted Speed until it reaches the next signal. The collision in Chatsworth in 2008 was a violation of this rule, caused by sending text messages instead of paying attention to his job. Of course, this is an American rule; I can't say if Switzerland has a similar one.


(BTW, the employer of the engineer in Chatsworth was not either a railroad or the commuter agency, it was a private contractor with a contract to operate the commuter trains. In Chicago, commuter trains are operated by employees of either the railroad they run on (BNSF and UP) or Metra itself (all other lines, whether or not Metra owns the track). My personal feeling is that there is more employee accountability this way.)

---

David
Sitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

He would have been looking at some sort of signal allowing him to proceed right up until the moment the other train went past the Stop, so he probably wouldn't have had time to stop either, even if he could react instantly.

That is an engineering design flaw. And it may be systemic in the railroad industry. In a properly designed system no combination of circumstances, timing or positions, would allow permit both engineers to see proceed signals. This may require an empty block between to get the signaling safe, or a complete redesign of the signaling system so it knows more than just block occupied. This way both get stop signals with at least a full block of track between them.

IIRC some US roads are set up this way with the signals, but the operating rules permit passing, at restricted speed, what was intended to be a hard stop when the system was designed. Costs them too much money if they actually had to keep the trains that far apart. Unfortunately this cuts safety and accidents result.

As to blocks, there are blocks and there are signal blocks. They are not the same. There may be several blocks inside a single signal block. In a yard would be an obvious example. However it happens on single track mainline as well. Industrial areas where they have loops so cars in the middle can be set out on spurs are a prime example.

---

The TV News now says the Spanish driver was on the phone at the time with His boss at Renfe who had called the driver on the official phone, so is 79 charges of negligent homicide even warranted? I'm not so sure. I'd like to see the boss charged, but We'll have to wait and see what happens of course.

---

The T1 Trust, PRR T1 Class 4-4-4-4 #5550, 1 of America's First HST's

In the UK if a driver receives a call on his phone and is not in a position to take that call he is required to either reject the call or respond with a "call back later" message. Some of the prohibited situations are approaching a tunnel, approaching a change in speed limit, approaching a signal at danger. Since this accident occurred just beyond a tunnel, and shortly after a change in speed limit there were two situations where he should have told control to wait a few minutes.
Also the conversation with control was about the driver's next trip, not the one he was on at the time, so it should have been deferred until he arrived at the next station.

---

Bob Smith
Member of Seti PIPPS (Pluto is a Planet Protest Society)
Somewhere in the (un)known Universe?

There's always a possibility of calling handsfree...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

There's always a possibility of calling handsfree...

That according to most research is not much safer. And the reports say the driver looked at some papers, which is definitely not safe.

Quote from guardian.

In an official statement, the court handling the case said that "minutes before the derailment, [Garzón] received a call on his professional telephone to signal to him the route he had to take on arriving in Ferrol. It appears, from the content of the conversation and the background noise, that the driver consulted a plan or some similar paper document."

What about the times before the GPS existed. Then people had to look at a map while driving...

---

rOZZ
Music
Pictures

What about the times before the GPS existed. Then people had to look at a map while driving...

No, I always stopped my car before consulting a map.
Tullio

---

What about the times before the GPS existed. Then people had to look at a map while driving...

Really? Any driver that did or still does that is a very bad driver. Ever heard of planning a route? Anything untowards happens while on that route, take a break, grab a coffee & recheck map.

As for a train driver checking paperwork? The damned fool should know the route he has to take.

---

Quote from guardian.

In an official statement, the court handling the case said that "minutes before the derailment, [Garzón] received a call on his professional telephone to signal to him the route he had to take on arriving in Ferrol. It appears, from the content of the conversation and the background noise, that the driver consulted a plan or some similar paper document."

He may have been consulting a track chart to make sure he understood the instructions he was given. I don't think that's a good excuse, though.

---

David
Sitting on my butt while others boldly go,
Waiting for a message from a small furry creature from Alpha Centauri.

Why would a train driver need a map? In case he makes a wrong turn somewhere?

---

Life on earth is the global equivalent of not storing things in the fridge.

Train drivers have to go where the rails take them. But they have the ability, or should have, to know where they are supposed to end up. If some idiot signalman/dispatcher/controller pulls the wrong lever or presses the wrong button, the driver has the option of stopping and querying what he is being asked to do.

Incorrect! If the signal gives access to a "wrong" road, the driver has no option but to stop & contact signalman, otherwise you'll have a Manchester train heading for Portsmouth [that route is not physically possible but you get the picture).

---