|
|
Post by Nortube on Nov 9, 2016 13:08:57 GMT
No Tram section, so I've posted this here: Updated 20:18 In view of further information now being made available in the media, I've updated this and a second message and merged them into one This may mean that some of the links have appeared in a different order!: A Croydon tram at derailed at Sandilands Junction just after 06:00 this morning, with 50+ reported causalties, including at least seven dead (18:00). According to the RAIB, the tram was approaching Sandilands Junction from the tunnel and was travelling faster than the 12mph limit on the bend. The aerial view photo on this link shows the damage to the track on the other branch approaching Sandilands Junction from Addiscombe. This gives the impression that the front of the tram carried straight on from the tunnel then jumped the tracks at the start of the bend. The front of the train coming to a rest whilst the rear then swung 90 degrees anti-clockwise before coming to a rest at the retaining wall, overturning in the process. Of course, I was assuming that it was running to Sandilands in the normal railway manner of keeping to the right (e.e., on the NB track - I think that's the standard routing through the tunnel section). It may have been running wrong direction to Sandilands on the opposite (SB) track, as a lot of Tramlink seems to be set up for bi-directional working. This might explain why there doesn't seem to be any damage to the NB track or the inner rail of the SB track. www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37919658"Tram derailed as it negotiated a 'sharp, left-hand curve' - accident investigators Posted at 16:58 The Rail Accident Investigation Branch said the tram derailed as it was negotiating a "sharp, left-hand curve" with a speed limit of 12 mph. A spokesman said: "Initial indications suggest that the tram was travelling at a significantly higher speed than is permitted." " Police are investigating if, amongst other things, the driver had fallen asleep: www.bbc.co.uk/news/live/uk-england-london-37811029BTP have arrested the tram driver Location: carto.metro.free.fr/cartes/metro-tram-london/index.php?gpslat=51.374134&gpslon=-0.075212&zoom=5  click to enlarge TfL Status: 12:09 London Tramlink: No service between East Croydon and Addington Village / Harrington Road / Elmers End while we deal with a derailment www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-37919658www.suttonguardian.co.uk/news/www.suttonguardian.co.uk/news/14876358.Update___Some_loss_of_life__and_more_than_50_injured_after_Croydon_tram_overturns/www.standard.co.uk/news/transport/croydon-tram-derailment-several-people-killed-and-dozens-injured-after-tram-overturns-at-sandilands-a3391096.html |
|
|
|
Post by Nortube on Nov 10, 2016 9:42:09 GMT
|
|
drico
Station Inspector
Thank you driver, off clips.
Posts: 202
|
Post by drico on Nov 10, 2016 11:03:11 GMT
BTP have released the driver on bail.
|
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Nov 11, 2016 16:19:52 GMT
BTP have released the driver on bail. The same happens in most cases I seem to remember that the driver of the Purley crash went through the same after being arrested. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Nov 11, 2016 16:21:12 GMT
I am not speculating but I think it stands out why the tram left the track but I am sure there are other factors to be taken into account as well.
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 11, 2016 19:51:29 GMT
From the photos I have seen it isn't at all clear which way the tram was travelling but 'left hand curve' clarifies that. It must've been going at a hell of a lick to end up in the final position. The way it looks suggests that it was being powered from the rear or perhaps that it was being braked far too late with the rear end already having left the track.
Hard to believe that such systems are not speed controlled and rely only upon the driver to act in accordance with the planned line speed.
|
|
Jim
Box Boy
Posts: 48
|
Post by Jim on Nov 15, 2016 6:08:35 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Nov 15, 2016 8:15:48 GMT
Jim If that report is correct he is like you say in up to his neck and I think it's obvious from the photos that he was not going 12mph. |
|
|
|
Post by Nortube on Nov 16, 2016 15:35:04 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 17, 2016 13:47:05 GMT
Interesting, in the final analysis I would expect the RAIB to recommend some proper speed control, I just don't think relying upon the driver is enough especially in this day and age when people are so easily distracted from their 'boring' jobs. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Nov 17, 2016 14:24:23 GMT
Interesting, in the final analysis I would expect the RAIB to recommend some proper speed control, I just don't think relying upon the driver is enough especially in this day and age when people are so easily distracted from their 'boring' jobs. It does surprise me like you say that no measures were put in but as always it seems they wait for something to happen, this applies to a lot of areas. You would have thought with computers being available so as to give a warning or even apply the brakes when things are reported. |
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 18, 2016 10:30:17 GMT
Interesting, in the final analysis I would expect the RAIB to recommend some proper speed control, I just don't think relying upon the driver is enough especially in this day and age when people are so easily distracted from their 'boring' jobs. It does surprise me like you say that no measures were put in but as always it seems they wait for something to happen, this applies to a lot of areas. You would have thought with computers being available so as to give a warning or even apply the brakes when things are reported. For me speed control would've been a no-brainer particularly as the trams operate on roads shared with other vehicles but also to take account of the tight curves on the routes. There are several possible approaches to speed control i.e. on board or on track detection of overspeed with corresponding bogie braking or track braking. GPS tracking could also be used to determine speed on open sections and initiate on board or trackside braking. Another possibility would be full monitoring of driver control compared to a 'perfect' drive profile used to automatically restrict working the controls more than a safe percentage outside the ideal usage. The cost implications are perhaps much of a muchness in financial terms but the human cost with no speed control must be seen as unacceptable. I do wonder what the allowable cost of human expendability was calculated as and accepted to be in financial terms when the tram system was installed. I also wonder if that calculation has ever been reviewed. I think we all know that the travelling public are expendable and that it is normal to make such calculations and to put measures in place to mitigate potential fatalities and serious injuries but at the end of the day it will always resolve to a financial calculation. Such mitigation of course impacts upon day to day operation and may restrict the number of services that can be offered. Such might make the system less than viable in financial terms where reinvestment requires profits from the services that can be run. To my mind all main public transport services should be maintained and operated in public hands and without profits being made for private shareholders. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Nov 18, 2016 13:00:14 GMT
It does surprise me like you say that no measures were put in but as always it seems they wait for something to happen, this applies to a lot of areas. You would have thought with computers being available so as to give a warning or even apply the brakes when things are reported. For me speed control would've been a no-brainer particularly as the trams operate on roads shared with other vehicles but also to take account of the tight curves on the routes. There are several possible approaches to speed control i.e. on board or on track detection of overspeed with corresponding bogie braking or track braking. GPS tracking could also be used to determine speed on open sections and initiate on board or trackside braking. Another possibility would be full monitoring of driver control compared to a 'perfect' drive profile used to automatically restrict working the controls more than a safe percentage outside the ideal usage. The cost implications are perhaps much of a muchness in financial terms but the human cost with no speed control must be seen as unacceptable. I do wonder what the allowable cost of human expendability was calculated as and accepted to be in financial terms when the tram system was installed. I also wonder if that calculation has ever been reviewed. I think we all know that the travelling public are expendable and that it is normal to make such calculations and to put measures in place to mitigate potential fatalities and serious injuries but at the end of the day it will always resolve to a financial calculation. Such mitigation of course impacts upon day to day operation and may restrict the number of services that can be offered. Such might make the system less than viable in financial terms where reinvestment requires profits from the services that can be run. To my mind all main public transport services should be maintained and operated in public hands and without profits being made for private shareholders. RT But surely in this case it would have helped? Just think if another tram had been coming round that bend in the opposite direction! It would have increased the amount of fatalities by a considerable amount. If there had been some sort of device wither it would apply the brakes or alert the driver to the fact that he was well over the speed would have reduced the number killed and may have stopped anyone being killed. As it was a 12 mph and the tram was doing 43.5 mph that's some difference not just a few mph over. Had the warning been given say at 15 mph and if no change in speed then on with brakes at 20 mph. Yes the trams share the roads with others but what happens when the same thing happens on normal roads we have a mass pile up but cars etc do not have anything except the driver although not far from where I live there are a number of roads that have signs that light up to warn you when overspeeding. I agree with you that the public are expendable years ago those in power would start a world war to reduce the population and in the light of recent events that me be. Investment is important but we know what politicians and governments are like they would sell their own mothers to get your vote, I remember when Horace Cutler proposed massive extensions in South London just to get in and he did but did the extensions get built not many of them. The mayor has announced today that fares will be frozen until 2020 and all this when the government wants to cut subsidies to TfL. |
|
|
|
Post by railtechnician on Nov 18, 2016 14:05:26 GMT
For me speed control would've been a no-brainer particularly as the trams operate on roads shared with other vehicles but also to take account of the tight curves on the routes. There are several possible approaches to speed control i.e. on board or on track detection of overspeed with corresponding bogie braking or track braking. GPS tracking could also be used to determine speed on open sections and initiate on board or trackside braking. Another possibility would be full monitoring of driver control compared to a 'perfect' drive profile used to automatically restrict working the controls more than a safe percentage outside the ideal usage. The cost implications are perhaps much of a muchness in financial terms but the human cost with no speed control must be seen as unacceptable. I do wonder what the allowable cost of human expendability was calculated as and accepted to be in financial terms when the tram system was installed. I also wonder if that calculation has ever been reviewed. I think we all know that the travelling public are expendable and that it is normal to make such calculations and to put measures in place to mitigate potential fatalities and serious injuries but at the end of the day it will always resolve to a financial calculation. Such mitigation of course impacts upon day to day operation and may restrict the number of services that can be offered. Such might make the system less than viable in financial terms where reinvestment requires profits from the services that can be run. To my mind all main public transport services should be maintained and operated in public hands and without profits being made for private shareholders. RT But surely in this case it would have helped? Just think if another tram had been coming round that bend in the opposite direction! It would have increased the amount of fatalities by a considerable amount. If there had been some sort of device wither it would apply the brakes or alert the driver to the fact that he was well over the speed would have reduced the number killed and may have stopped anyone being killed. As it was a 12 mph and the tram was doing 43.5 mph that's some difference not just a few mph over. Had the warning been given say at 15 mph and if no change in speed then on with brakes at 20 mph. Yes the trams share the roads with others but what happens when the same thing happens on normal roads we have a mass pile up but cars etc do not have anything except the driver although not far from where I live there are a number of roads that have signs that light up to warn you when overspeeding. I agree with you that the public are expendable years ago those in power would start a world war to reduce the population and in the light of recent events that me be. Investment is important but we know what politicians and governments are like they would sell their own mothers to get your vote, I remember when Horace Cutler proposed massive extensions in South London just to get in and he did but did the extensions get built not many of them. The mayor has announced today that fares will be frozen until 2020 and all this when the government wants to cut subsidies to TfL. Dave, "RT But surely in this case it would have helped?" That is what I said, perhaps you misread what I wrote, "For me speed control would've been a no-brainer" ! I simply laid out the probable reason for having no form of speed control ! As for trams only public roads, they are larger than road vehicles and have the potential to do far more damage than a speeding motorist, hence a particular reason why they should have automatic speed control. |
|
|
|
Post by dave1 on Nov 18, 2016 14:57:53 GMT
RT sorry about that I thought I had read it correctly but for some reason I replied as I did having failed to read correctly.
|
|
