Random Transport Chatter

[Pilot]

All signs are pointing to either driver error and a lack of safety systems, or adhesion issues caused by leaves and wet rails.

If it's the former, it will likely see the introduction of such safety systems on trams around the country. If it's the latter it's an extremely unfortunate event, and an investigation into the Tramlinks ways of dealing with such conditions is likely to happen. It may also see a change in Public perception though and they may finally realise that leaves on the track is a potentially serious issue.

rather than an earlier possibility of the points shortly before the derailment point causing an issue, so it seems the investigators have managed to come to that conclusion quickly.

The tram was going towards the points at the time. Coming off the New Addington Branch into Sandilands Station, therefore the points are no factor in this.

[Chris]

I don't know why people are surprised about the lack of safety systems - they're basically treated as road vehicles.

[Pilot]

I don't know why people are surprised about the lack of safety systems - they're basically treated as road vehicles.

I imagine because a tram is allowed to carry 208 passengers and weighs 40 tons. A double decker bus on the other hand is licensed to carry about 70-80 passenger and weighs 20 tons. The tram has the potential to hurt a lot more people.

[Ameecher]

Trams operate on line of sight principles though which makes it very hard to implement any kind of safety system as there aren't any signals per se, essentially just some traffic lights.

[Pilot]

Trams operate on line of sight principles though which makes it very hard to implement any kind of safety system as there aren't any signals per se, essentially just some traffic lights.

However, a safety system for ensuring the trams slow down at points such as this should be able to be implemented. A system that is programmed with all the speeds restrictions, and then a system keeping track of where the tram is in relation to those restrictions. It's not like we're asking for one to avoid traffic or such, as that's impossible, especially down south!

I also remember the old days where Manchester's trams were actually signalled on the old BR lines, I think they were converted in around 2009 to be line of sight working.

[Chris]

Same reason ATP was never rolled out - cost

Trams are after all meant to be a lot cost alternative to heavy rail.

[Redirect Left]

rather than an earlier possibility of the points shortly before the derailment point causing an issue, so it seems the investigators have managed to come to that conclusion quickly.

The tram was going towards the points at the time. Coming off the New Addington Branch into Sandilands Station, therefore the points are no factor in this.

The BBC article originally had the points as a prime target for speculation (they did clarify speculation at the time). So clearly whoever wrote that wasn't aware of the direction of the tram

[welshdragon]

I'll just leave this here:



Not only is it bad that EMT are running triple 153's (are the 156's not available or something?) but that unit's there in the consist

[Dave]

rather than an earlier possibility of the points shortly before the derailment point causing an issue, so it seems the investigators have managed to come to that conclusion quickly.

The tram was going towards the points at the time. Coming off the New Addington Branch into Sandilands Station, therefore the points are no factor in this.

The BBC article originally had the points as a prime target for speculation (they did clarify speculation at the time). So clearly whoever wrote that wasn't aware of the direction of the tram

They've referre to the driver being "at the wheel" all day.

What wheel?

[Redirect Left]

Say what you want about the Pacers. But Northerns 144s are very warm in the winter as are a certain amount of 142s. Not sure why the 142s are patchy, perhaps they've been altered / retrofitted at different times with differing systems. All of the 144s i've been on during this colder snap as the season comes in have been rather toasty!

[Nawdic]

The tram was going towards the points at the time. Coming off the New Addington Branch into Sandilands Station, therefore the points are no factor in this.

There is no way the tram could've ended up like that if it came from New Addington - the only logical explanation is if the driver "blacked out" at the helm (as mentioned by some local news outlets), it rolled down the rather steep approach to Sandilands and then caught the points, OR, it was heading towards New Addington, failed to stop at Sandilands and caught the points that way.
Failing those two, I know that the length from Lloyd Park - Sandilands has an 80kph speedlimit, that when the tram hit the curve (presuming, at 80+kph) it rolled 270' before resting where it was... I'm not too sure on the weight of the tram (probably approx 30+ tonnes) but again, would be unlikely.

As far as I am aware there are safety devices for SPADs but not overspeed AFAIK.

[Geo Ghost]

There is no way the tram could've ended up like that if it came from New Addington -

It was confirmed the tram was travelling towards Wimbledon from New Addington. Thus it didn't even reach the points before it derailed. But it is a very odd position it ended up, I will admit that.
The tram derailed on the curve, not on the points. How or why it did is still very much the big question of the investigation.

My initial thought was perhaps poor rail adhesion and wheel slide coming out of the tunnel. For that time of the morning and time of year, it is quite possible.
I don't like to imagine that it was driver error as that makes me feel very uncomfortable. But of course, that could well be a thing too

[Dave]

The tram was going towards the points at the time. Coming off the New Addington Branch into Sandilands Station, therefore the points are no factor in this.

There is no way the tram could've ended up like that if it came from New Addington - the only logical explanation is if the driver "blacked out" at the helm (as mentioned by some local news outlets), it rolled down the rather steep approach to Sandilands and then caught the points, OR, it was heading towards New Addington, failed to stop at Sandilands and caught the points that way.
Failing those two, I know that the length from Lloyd Park - Sandilands has an 80kph speedlimit, that when the tram hit the curve (presuming, at 80+kph) it rolled 270' before resting where it was... I'm not too sure on the weight of the tram (probably approx 30+ tonnes) but again, would be unlikely.

As far as I am aware there are safety devices for SPADs but not overspeed AFAIK.

Whoever you're quoting wasn't me.

In any case, RAIB have already issued an interim statement which basically says you're wrong:

The tram was operating an ‘inbound’ service from New Addington to Wimbledon via Croydon town centre. Sandilands Junction is the point where inbound trams from the Beckenham Junction/Elmers End and New Addington routes converge, shortly before they arrive at Sandilands tram stop (to the east of Croydon town centre). Trams approaching from the New Addington direction have to negotiate a sharp, left-hand curve with a speed limit of 20 km/h (12 mph) before reaching the junction. The derailment occurred on the curve and initial indications suggest that the tram was travelling at a significantly higher speed than is permitted.

Think we should be careful about speculating about the cause - a criminal investigation is ongoing...

[Geo Ghost]

Think we should be careful about speculating about the cause - a criminal investigation is ongoing...

Hold up, can we actually get in trouble for talking about and discussing things that happen?

[Dave]

Think we should be careful about speculating about the cause - a criminal investigation is ongoing...

Hold up, can we actually get in trouble for talking about and discussing things that happen?

We can talk about them, but we should always keep public speculation to a minimum in cases where there's a criminal investigaton.

Generally the view around the rail community online, anyway.

[Redirect Left]

It has now been widely claimed and speculated in the media that the driver of the tram may have been texting. (Daily Mail, Metro & The Sun). It's also claimed that detectives are scouring his phones records, meaning it seems to have been on site at least. If that is the case, regardless of whether the phone was involved in overturning the tram, then I'm surprised there isn't a regulation that demands rail drivers to not carry their mobiles and leave it in a locker at their assigned depot, and only carry the radio used for communication between rail workers (if there even is one other than the stuff built into the trains/trams).

Do trams (and trains?) carry black boxes, and audio-visual (or at least CCTV) recording of the cab areas? That'd quickly get to the bottom of exactly what happened in there.

[Geo Ghost]

(Daily Mail, Metro & The Sun).

Ah, absolutely fine reporting sources there...
To be honest, anything that those 3 papers publish I tend to dismiss entirely. Seen so many times they just post rubbish and speculation in order to sell papers. So i wouldn't trust in that too much.
A phone being checked is perfectly normal procedure for this kind of incident, the same as a drugs/alcohol screening. It's about as standard as questioning into the incident.

Regarding mobile phones, there is a regulation regarding phones. They are to be switched off and left in a bag or locker.
Company phones at the same. Bottom line is, and always will be, no usage of portable electronic equipment in the cab whilst driving. Same as you may expect for a car.

Trams/Trains do carry Black Boxes. On trains it's known as a OTDR (Or OTMR on some traction), an On-Train Data/Monitor Recorder. I imagine they'd have the equivalent for trams.
As for CCTV.. on most modern traction you'll get forward-facing CCTV cameras (I say most as not all trains have CCTV of course). However there is no kind of recording equipment for cab areas at all. It's been debated some times, but heavily frowned upon and is unlikely to ever exist thankfully. Whether that goes for Trams as well, I'm not sure.

[Redirect Left]

. It's been debated some times, but heavily frowned upon and is unlikely to ever exist tthankfully.

What are you doing in there that you don't want recorded, especially considering itd be in the name of healthy and safety and accident investigation?

[Geo Ghost]

What are you doing in there that you don't want recorded, especially considering itd be in the name of healthy and safety and accident investigation?

If you worked in an office, would you want a camera watching you ever second of everyday, monitoring every thing you say, write, do?
If you working from home, would you want something recording your every movement?
If you worked as an engineer, would you have someone following you with a camera all day filming what your doing and recording what you say?

I imagine the vast majority of people wouldn't want that. The cab is more of less a drivers little office. That's their space to work comfortably, privately, and without pressure.
No one would feel comfortable with a camera and microphone constantly watching their every move. You are then becoming like some big brother society at that point
CCTV should be there to offer security to people. Not watch them like a hawk like some kind of threat of "You better behave yourself, and say nothing bad. We're always watching your every move!". That to me just isn't right!
All cab controls and systems are recorded in data terms, but nothing visually or audibly monitors people in the cab.

[Dave]

You foster good driving via trust, good teaching and confidence. Not surveillance and fear.

The tram will almost certainly have forward facing CCTV and OTDR because of the litigation factor in road accidents.

Mobile phone records will be checked by RAIB - they've done this for previous investigations (in fact I think there was one fairly recently).

I don't hold much by what those toilet rags say, but unfortunately it's likely to have some weight if they're reporting it so soon after the event - newspapers are very mindful of publishing false information in the immediate aftermath of events like this because what they say becomes part of the narrative of the event. In a few weeks if the initial findings are published and there's no mention of a mobile, the public remember and give the paper in question some serious stick.

Anyway, I'm drifting towards that naughty speculation so I'll stop.