Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all,
Vanilla are planning an update to the site on April 24th (next Wednesday). It is a major PHP8 update which is expected to boost performance across the site. The site will be down from 7pm and it is expected to take about an hour to complete. We appreciate your patience during the update.
Thanks all.

Runaway train

Comments

  • #2
    choo choo man
    Registered Users Posts: 132 ✭✭choo choo man


    Yes they do. But as far as locomotives and trains are concerned, nearly every system has a by-pass fitted in case of a system failure. Common practice is to have a second man in the cab if a vigilance system is by-passed.
    Who knows what the real issue was ?


  • #3
    goingnowhere
    Registered Users Posts: 4,131 ✭✭✭goingnowhere


    The suggestion is someone tampered with the equipment. Fairly easy to do, release the brake, put the controller to full power, isolate the deadman and jump off.

    We had a case in Dublin for this, deadman was isolated, train stopped due a parted brake hose, but driver failed to set the controller to idle or set the brake, guard reseated the hose and the train took off before the driver reboarded. The power controller is locked out if the brakes are on, so as soon as vacuum reached a threshold the controller was unlocked and and the engine powered up to the selected notch and took off. It crashed into the back of another train 22 miles later at Gormanston.

    When leaving the train the procedure, set the controller to idle, loco and train brakes ON and remove the control key or reverser handle (can only be removed if in neutral and idle selected)


  • #4
    loyatemu
    Registered Users Posts: 14,713 ✭✭✭✭loyatemu


    takes me back...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NRtvqT_wMeY


  • #5
    tabbey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    goingnowhere wrote: »
    The suggestion is someone tampered with the equipment. Fairly easy to do, release the brake, put the controller to full power, isolate the deadman and jump off.

    We had a case in Dublin for this, deadman was isolated, train stopped due a parted brake hose, but driver failed to set the controller to idle or set the brake, guard reseated the hose and the train took off before the driver reboarded. The power controller is locked out if the brakes are on, so as soon as vacuum reached a threshold the controller was unlocked and the engine powered up and took off. It crashed into the back of another train 22 miles later at Gormanston.

    When leaving the train the procedure, set the controller to idle, loco and train brakes ON and remove the control key or reverser handle (can only be removed if in neutral and idle selected)

    Yes, that was in 1974.

    There were so many breaches of operating rules in that case, that it was amazing that nobody went to jail.

    That shunters were isolating the deadman system so they could unofficially drive the locos without a trained and qualified driver, was the most shocking feature of this disaster, but the question remains why the guard did not apply his brake, which would have somewhat decelerated the train. Was he asleep in his van?, was he ill? This was never made clear.


  • #6
    goingnowhere
    Registered Users Posts: 4,131 ✭✭✭goingnowhere


    Had the guard applied the brake the train would have stopped as the locomotive would have gone to idle notch.

    The Australia incident sounds far to like this, for these uber long lone drives there is a portable dead mans switch you can carry around so you can cook food etc, normally these systems operate on a random timer so after a period you have to release and press again to confirm you have not just passed out or put a brick over the pedal


  • Advertisement
  • #7
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,409 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    tabbey wrote: »
    Yes, that was in 1974.

    There were so many breaches of operating rules in that case, that it was amazing that nobody went to jail.

    That shunters were isolating the deadman system so they could unofficially drive the locos without a trained and qualified driver, was the most shocking feature of this disaster, but the question remains why the guard did not apply his brake, which would have somewhat decelerated the train. Was he asleep in his van?, was he ill? This was never made clear.

    Yeah I've read that accident report a few times. So were the shunters doing it out of necessity due to a lack of drivers around at the time(I've no idea of the staffing levels in Connolly in 1974) or was it as you seem to suggest that they were doing it of their own accord in which case is very serious.

    Yeah it's not made clear why the guard never stopped the train. I think at least one signalman said they tried to get the guards attention down the line. Was the brake pipe coming apart when going over points or was that another incident ?


  • #8
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,409 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    http://www.raiu.ie/download/pdf/accident_gormanstown.pdf

    And seeing how the accident at gormanstown has been referenced several times in this thread I've posted a link to the report on the accident above for your viewing pleasure.


  • #9
    Losty Dublin
    Registered Users Posts: 12,950 ✭✭✭✭Losty Dublin


    goingnowhere wrote: »
    Had the guard applied the brake the train would have stopped as the locomotive would have gone to idle notch.

    You still have to wonder how the train guard never guessed something was awry when his train never stopped at its station en route or how it was on a completely different track to the short run to Howth :confused:


  • #10
    Itssoeasy
    Registered Users Posts: 39,409 ✭✭✭✭Itssoeasy


    Having re read the report on the accident.

    -the driver in question was off sick for four months(not my issue) and he was given tablets by the CIE doctor to take and he said he had no idea what they were. So they could have been smarties for all he knew.
    - two signalmen laid detonators on the track and the guard didn't hear them(it's said they could be hard to hear at the back of the train. But losty makes a good point about what did the guard think was happening when howth junction passed and the train didn't take the line to howth ?
    - He states he assumed the driver was at the controls yet two signalmen said the train was going at a speed "faster than an express" ? I can assume or pressume that angelina Jolie is madly in love with me, but it doesn't mean it's actually true.
    - The guard had according to him never reconnected a brake hose back up before but decided to do it this time. Why would he do something he'd never done before ?

    There are more utterly baffling things said in the report that makes you wonder how more of this didn't happen.


  • #11
    goingnowhere
    Registered Users Posts: 4,131 ✭✭✭goingnowhere


    Its a classic railway accident, multiple points where the chain could have been broken

    1. Had the seal not been broken (train would not moved without deadman pressed)
    2. Had the vaccum pipe not parted (the incident would never have happened)
    3. Had the driver set the brake correctly (the incident would never have happened)
    4. Had the driver set idle (the incident would never have happened)
    5. Had the guard applied the brakes (guard would have applied the rule book for this scenario and train would have stopped hopefully before trouble, i.e just past Howth Junc)


  • Advertisement
  • #12
    tabbey
    Registered Users Posts: 1,943 ✭✭✭tabbey


    Historically accident investigators blamed the lower ranks in the workforce, rather than management.

    In 1944, when oil for tail lamps as well as everything else, was in short supply, the guard of the front train went to jail because he had not filled the tail lamp, consequently the driver of the second train could not see it. This was the Straboe collision between Portarlington and Portlaoise, where a (goods?) train ran into the backof the night mail train, which had failed (due to lack of fuel?)

    If the guard had been acquitted, the driver of the second train would have been jailed instead. It was a case of which would be found guilty.

    In the Gormanston incident, there was enough evidence for charges against both the driver and guard. As for the shunters isolating the deadman system, this in my view was absolutely criminal.

    What seems to me to be a factor here is that management could also be held responsible for not ensuring staff were trained, and for allowing rule breaches to happen over an extended period. In particular operating grades claimed to have not been trained in the working of push-pull trains, which were new to CIE. The establishment were not yet ready to jeopardise the careers of management, so allowed the matter to rest.


  • #13
    Under His Eye
    Closed Accounts Posts: 907 ✭✭✭Under His Eye


    Why was the loco left in notch 8? That's madness.


  • #14
    demanufactured
    Closed Accounts Posts: 5,756 ✭✭✭demanufactured


    Under His Eye wrote: »
    Why was the loco left in notch 8? That's madness.

    Because the driver wanted to do a power take off.


Advertisement