Quote:
Originally Posted by jay
What I want to know is why the train had passed a red signal??
|
Either:
a) due to a signalling failure, the signaller authorised the train driver to pass the signal at danger. (This is a regular occurance). Obviously when this takes place you have by definition thrown away the built-in protection of the signalling system. It is conceivable for a signaller to allow a train into a section occupied by another train.
b) The train driver passed the signal at danger without authority - which would make it a SPAD
The article mentions that they were looking at the actions of the signaller and that he had been removed from duty - so I know where I'd put my money. (Though he has my sympathy, poor b*****.
)
c) It might have been a bit of both. If the driver had spadded, the signaller may have have authorised him to move the train afterwards whilst there was another train making a (legitimate) conflicting move.
No doubt in time we'll get all the sordid details. I'm just glad the two trains didn't meet !!