RAIB investigating an incident on the RH&DR
 

An incident occurred on the Romney Hythe & Dymchurch Railway in August, where 2 trains were allowed into a the single line section between New Romney & Romney Sands. A Hythe-Dungeness train and a Dungeness-Hythe train were approaching each other, stopping approx. 316 metres apart. The RAIB are investingating.

https://www.railadvent.co.uk/2019/09...h-railway.html

Tony

That's not good. At least they stopped well short of each other. :(

Despite previously living in Kent I never got to ride on the RH&DR.

Presumably the line speed is 25mph?

Do you know if the single line is controlled with tokens, or are trains signalled on and off?

Unauthorised entry onto a SL is about as serious an incident as it gets, but it will be interesting to see whether the cause is systemic, or human failng...or even both.

We await the Safety Digest which RAIB will issue in a few weeks.

Linky

Cheers, BW

Hi BW,

The RHDR is limited to 25mph as a light railway & is only 15 inch gauge.

I don't know for certain about the signalling system, but I have seen the drivers collecting and surrendering tokens for the single line section between New Romney & Dungeness. They generally collect a token at New Romney to enter the single line section, then exchange with the passing train at Romney Sands before proceeding to Dungeness. They keep this token as the end of the line at Dungeness is a balloon loop and they return to New Romney having traversed the loop, exchanging the token again with the passing train at Romney Sands.

New Romney is fully signalled & controlled by New Romney signal box, so trains entering the single line section here are signalled into the section & they should be in possession of the token. I'm not sure about the remainder of the single line section - it is either controlled by New Romney 'box or it is purely automatic signals linked into the automatic level crossings.

As I'm not in the know, I wouldn't want to speculate further as to what may have gone wrong in this instance.

Tony

Thanks for that Tony.

We'll just have to wait for the RAIB

Cheers, BW

G'day Tony and BW,
Yer RAIB mob indicate that they will publish a Safety Digest regarding this incident.
I presume due to there being NO collision nor injury resulting from the safe working incident.
I remember an incident at Zig Zag where the soot belcher collided with a work train.
OTS&T being the safe working system employed.
The collision was only at slow speed resulting in only minor damage.
But, it was one of a number of infringements which ultimately resulted in the Rail Regulator kyboshing their operating licence.
Will hafta wait and see just what yer RAIB mob command.
Steve.

Yer RAIB mob have published the incident safety notice.
https://assets.publishing.service.go...mney_Sands.pdf
Tablet tickets being then accessible without the tablet token on hand.
HMMMMM.
Our OTS&T system relies on a locked box in which the tickets are housed.
This box unlocked by the Staff which is a large key being inserted length-ways into the box.
So, without breaking open the box, it normally can only be opened when the Staff token is on hand.
The Rules are strict about keeping the ticket book in the locked box until being accessed for use and then returned.
But, nothing is perfect and accidents and "breaches of the safe working system" can occur.
Yer RH&D mob now requiring a locked box in which to house the tickets.
Steve.

Interesting reading this from the RAIB. I wondered how they made the system work of 2 trains following each other on the single line section at the RHDR, but I can see how easy it would be to get it wrong too.
Hopefully this is now going to be a much more failsafe system.

Tony

We also had the Notice of Train Ahead.
This form was issued to the crew of a second train when following the first into the section.
The first proceeding on the OTS&T Ticket, the second (if no more to follow) on the Staff.
Sectional running time was a factor in following train movements.
The following train was responsible for NOT running into the train ahead of it.
So, for long OTS&T sections, it was more preferable for the second train to wait before proceeding.
Then when the first train had reported the section clear at the staff station ahead, there was no need for the Notice of Train Ahead.
The second train could then travel at full sectional running speed.
Divisible ETS was another safeworking method for allowing following trains to enter the section.
The entire ETS token displayed to the first train, then unscrewed to be handed the Ticket portion.
The Staff portion held under lock and key until issued to the second train to enter the section.
The first train arriving handed up the Ticket portion was was then held under lock and key until the second train arrived and handed up the Staff portion.
The portions then screwed back together and sunk in the ETS instrument.
AH, bring back the good ole days.
The Train Orders that we got now, PHOOEY !
Steve.

Only just seen this update.

As soon as I originally heard about this incident I was reminded of something I read as a kid in 'Red for Danger' - namely the Abermule collision.

Link here...Wiki

The similarity is where inexperienced ticketing staff are placed into the safety-critical signalling path. :rolleyes:

Cheers, BW

As they say after an airline prang, if some operational improvements occur as a result of the tragedy, then it is not all in vain.
I remember my initial railway safe working tuition many moons ago and how it was drummed into us to CHECK the tokens for single line sections before proceeding.
Mistakes can occur and the results be devastating.
Back in the days when multiple single line sections adjoined therefore there being different section tokens involved.
I also recollect some confusion expressed by train crew when we were inflicted with Train Orders.
With token working, we were used to proceeding into the location to the staff hut to perform the safe working.
But, with Train Orders, you could be authorized only to the Yard Limit Board, if not into that location.
There being TWO yard limit boards did confuse some blokes.
The arrival board and the departure board.
I shuddered at the implications should a crew mistakenly continue into the location to the departure board.
I enjoy reading accident investigation reports as they highlight the potential failures of a system when mistakes are made.
I have found the official Abermule collision report at yer Archive mob.
https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/do...ermule1921.pdf
I presume that this is the accident BW mentioned.
I will peruse it later off line.
Steve.

Yo Steve.

1) Yes, that report is the one. If I remember correctly, it was a combination of untrained platform staff being involved in handling the token, and the train crew not physically checking the token when they received it (I think it had a leather cover to protect it and they just didn't bother to open it - the devil is in the detail often in train collisions).

For the RH&DR incident there are similarities

2) Stop/Limit boards. Yes they scare the c**p out of me sometimes.

I know of a stabling yard with 2 access lines with several stop boards. Movement into and out of the yard via the access lines required permission from the Signaller for some boards, and the Shunter for others. The boards didn't say who they belonged to - see photo of a similar board below. Drivers only communicated with the Shunter, who obtained permission from the Signaller for them to pass 'his' boards. One day a Manager went poking around and declared that he'd just observed 3 SPADs.

(To any readers who may not be aware, a STOP board has the same standing as a signal at danger. Therefore if a train passes a board without authority, it is classed as a SPAD).

When it was investigated, it turns out that the Yard Shunter and the Signaller had developed a method of working between them whereby they'd only call each other if a movement which wasn't booked was to take place. When a train that he was expecting arrived, the Shunter would just wave it past the boards without ever calling the Signaller for permission. This had been going on for years, and it even turns out that there was a misunderstanding into which of them 'owned' the board in several places.:eek:

It was such a legal mess, that in the end the Yard Shunter got 'retrained', and new boards got put up which clearly said either 'Stop - Obtain Signaller's permission to proceed' or 'Stop - Obtain Shunter's permission'. Drivers are now required to speak directly to the signaller to pass his boards.

Drivers were mildly dazed when all this came to light, because what had been going on for years had become become accepted practice - but it has to be said that since the speed throughout the area is 5mph, there was NEVER any danger of a collision.

But it goes to show how easy it is for irregular operating practices to creep in.

Cheers, BW

Ah STOP boards.
Also shunt limit boards, which provide a blocking purpose to prevent shunting towards a signal at which another train could be perched.
We have em everywhere here.
Yes, I guess that some confusion could exist as to just who the train crew must beg permission to pass a stop board.
Generally here to enter a yard , or continue in a yard past STOP boards you were begging the shunters.
To exit a yard, you would be begging the signalman.
Though, in the Good ole Days, the shunter would be the bloke liaising with the signalman to grant permission to depart a yard.
A green handsignal from the shunter which would be acknowledged by a hooter blast.
What you didn't wanna hear were TWO separate whistle blast acknowledgements when rail activity was hectic in a yard.
OI, he was aiming that green handsignal at me NOT you !
Both shunters and signalmen are rare beasties these days outside of the smog hollow metrop.
Today TC would be the bloke to grant permission for passing stop boards, and he can be hundreds of miles away in some gloomy office.
Get caught nudging past a shunt limit board and you would be copping a bung.
Steve.