Dear All,

Part of the accident database which sits behind the railways archive
relates specific accidents to safety developments which followed from
them. Since I have a huge number (~150) of accidents to consider, I
would like to recruit this group's help to do this.

The first developments I am considering are:

elimination of mk1 stock: Clapham, Cowden

introduction of AWS: harrow, lewisham

introduction of TPWS: southall, ladbroke grove

Could anyone add to this list (using the listing at
http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventlisting.php) or indeed, suggest
other developments?

"GazK"  wrote in message
news:1126434732.347567.230160@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> Dear All,
>
> Part of the accident database which sits behind the railways archive
> relates specific accidents to safety developments which followed from
> them. Since I have a huge number (~150) of accidents to consider, I
> would like to recruit this group's help to do this.
>
> The first developments I am considering are:
>
> elimination of mk1 stock: Clapham, Cowden
>
> introduction of AWS: harrow, lewisham
>
> introduction of TPWS: southall, ladbroke grove
>
> Could anyone add to this list (using the listing at
> http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventlisting.php) or indeed, suggest
> other developments?



Going futher back in history, you've got the developments of continuous,
fail-safe brakes which were resisted for a long time by railway companies
and it took accidents like one of the ones at Penistone and the one at
Armagh to force the issue. Then you've got the accidents caused during the
transition: there's an accident described in Rolt's "Red for Danger" where a
loco was equipped for either positive pressure or vacuum-braked carriages;
the accident was caused by the driver putting the lever into the wrong
position in the heat of the moment, thus totally releasing the brakes
instead of applying them fully.

Signalling improvements: interlocking and physical block working, rather
than time separation of trains. I'm sure that would have been in response to
early accidents.


"Red for Danger", "Historic Railway Disasters" (O S Nock), "Danger on the
Line" and "Danger Signals" (Stanley Hall) and "Tracks to Disaster" (Adrian 
Vaughan) are probably good places to look for pointers to the accidents that 
brought about new technology or working practices.

I had intended to cover lock block & brake in a further post, but since
you raised it, here is my proposed list for LB&B:

Cowlairs  	1850-08-01
Frodsham 	1851-04-30
Burnley 	1852-07-12
Aynho 	        1852-10-20
Straffan 	1853-10-05
Round Oak 	1858-08-23
Clayton Tunnel 	1861-08-25
Kentish Town 	1861-09-02
Welwyn Tunnel 	1866-06-10
Abergele 	1868-08-20
Tamworth 	1870-09-14
Harrow 	        1870-11-26
Brockley Whins 	1870-12-06
Stairfoot 	1870-12-12
Kirtlebridge 	1872-10-02
Bo'ness Junction 	1874-01-27
Armagh 	1889-06-12

Which Penistone accident are you referring to as being avoidable by
LB&B?

PS I should make clear that the accident listing as linked in my OP is
based on a direct extraction of the "Red for Danger" accident list.


Martin Underwood wrote:

> "GazK"  wrote in message
> news:1126434732.347567.230160@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Part of the accident database which sits behind the railways archive
> > relates specific accidents to safety developments which followed from
> > them. Since I have a huge number (~150) of accidents to consider, I
> > would like to recruit this group's help to do this.
> >
> > The first developments I am considering are:
> >
> > elimination of mk1 stock: Clapham, Cowden
> >
> > introduction of AWS: harrow, lewisham
> >
> > introduction of TPWS: southall, ladbroke grove
> >
> > Could anyone add to this list (using the listing at
> > http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventlisting.php) or indeed, suggest
> > other developments?
>
>
> Going futher back in history, you've got the developments of continuous,
> fail-safe brakes which were resisted for a long time by railway companies
> and it took accidents like one of the ones at Penistone and the one at
> Armagh to force the issue. Then you've got the accidents caused during the
> transition: there's an accident described in Rolt's "Red for Danger" where a
> loco was equipped for either positive pressure or vacuum-braked carriages;
> the accident was caused by the driver putting the lever into the wrong
> position in the heat of the moment, thus totally releasing the brakes
> instead of applying them fully.
>
> Signalling improvements: interlocking and physical block working, rather
> than time separation of trains. I'm sure that would have been in response to
> early accidents.
>
>
> "Red for Danger", "Historic Railway Disasters" (O S Nock), "Danger on the
> Line" and "Danger Signals" (Stanley Hall) and "Tracks to Disaster" (Adrian
> Vaughan) are probably good places to look for pointers to the accidents that
> brought about new technology or working practices.

"GazK"  wrote in message
news:1126434732.347567.230160@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> Dear All,
>
> Part of the accident database which sits behind the railways archive
> relates specific accidents to safety developments which followed from
> them. Since I have a huge number (~150) of accidents to consider, I
> would like to recruit this group's help to do this.
>
> The first developments I am considering are:
>
> elimination of mk1 stock: Clapham, Cowden
>
> introduction of AWS: harrow, lewisham
>
> introduction of TPWS: southall, ladbroke grove
>
> Could anyone add to this list (using the listing at
> http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventlisting.php) or indeed, suggest
> other developments?
>

Rule 55/Lever collars/Track circuiting
Norton Fitzwarren 1890. Thirsk 1892, Hawes Junction 1910, Quintinshill 1915,
St Bedes Junction 1915.

Welwyn Control
Welwyn 1935

Peter

Thanks Peter, that was exactly what I am after. All in the DB now.


Peter Masson wrote:

> "GazK"  wrote in message
> news:1126434732.347567.230160@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
> > Dear All,
> >
> > Part of the accident database which sits behind the railways archive
> > relates specific accidents to safety developments which followed from
> > them. Since I have a huge number (~150) of accidents to consider, I
> > would like to recruit this group's help to do this.
> >
> > The first developments I am considering are:
> >
> > elimination of mk1 stock: Clapham, Cowden
> >
> > introduction of AWS: harrow, lewisham
> >
> > introduction of TPWS: southall, ladbroke grove
> >
> > Could anyone add to this list (using the listing at
> > http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventlisting.php) or indeed, suggest
> > other developments?
> >
> Rule 55/Lever collars/Track circuiting
> Norton Fitzwarren 1890. Thirsk 1892, Hawes Junction 1910, Quintinshill 1915,
> St Bedes Junction 1915.
> 
> Welwyn Control
> Welwyn 1935
> 
> Peter

Interesting to see the accident book from Crewe on display at the
recent open days.

-- 
Chris Game

Capt'n!  The spellchecker kinna take this abuse!

On 11 Sep 2005 03:32:12 -0700 someone who may be "GazK"
 wrote this:-


>elimination of mk1 stock: Clapham, Cowden


Despite all the words expended on the subject I'm not sure that any
crash can be said to have led to particular pressure to replace
these coaches. Rather it was their age, as Southern Region EMUs were
built to this design rather late. BR had a plan to replace them all,
but the party politicians intervened. Only later was the issue of
crashes used to campaign for their withdrawal, because the
Franchising Director had not made their withdrawal a condition and
the privateers were quite happy to paint them a different colour and
continue to run them.

When they were introduced extra safety was promoted as an advantage,
due to the couplings, ends/gangways and general construction. Some
railway companies had built coaches as good in some respects, but
they replaced a rather motley collection of coaches.


>introduction of AWS: harrow, lewisham


The crashes that removed the final (institutional and financial)
obstacles to wide scale introduction of something that had already
been devised, but other crashes are probably at least as
significant.

Slough 1900 - the Directors of the GWR decided to do something to
reduce the chances of a recurrence and the result was ATC.

Ais Gill 1913, Charfield 1928, Castlecary 1937, Bletchley 1939 (and
Bourne End 1945, though not all may recognise this) - showed that
the lack of ATC on other railways left a gap. The work of the two
Pringle Committees (1920-22 and 1928-29) might have borne fruit
earlier had the 1939-45 war and its aftermath intervened.


>introduction of TPWS: southall, ladbroke grove


I think the lesson learnt from Southall was that safety equipment
which is turned off is not much use and alternative methods must be
used to manage risk if it is. Also, as part of the change to single
manning, people should have considered what would happen if AWS (and
ATP) was turned off.

I think Ladbroke Grove is rather like Harrow & Wealdstone and
Lewisham St Johns, it made the deployment of TPWS a priority.
Questions of whether ATC/AWS does enough date back to Norton
Fitzwarren 1940. After the introduction of ATC/AWS there were a few
crashes AWS should have prevented but did not (Milton 1955, Ludlow
1956, Norton Bridge 1963, Lenton South 1971, Shields Junction 1973,
Hayes & Harlington 1981, Wembley 1984, Battersea Park 1985, Colwich
1986 [as with Bourne End there were other factors], Purley 1989,
Cowden 1994 [possibly], Watford South 1996 and Winsford 1999.
Development of TPWS actually started in 1994.


Warnings of severe speed restrictions: Morpeth 1969.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"David Hansen"  wrote

>
> Warnings of severe speed restrictions: Morpeth 1969.
>

But the specification for the warnings had to be changed after the later
Morpeth derailment and Eltham Well Hall.

Peter

"GazK"  wrote in message 
news:1126434732.347567.230160@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

> Dear All,
>
> Part of the accident database which sits behind the railways archive
> relates specific accidents to safety developments which followed from
> them. Since I have a huge number (~150) of accidents to consider, I
> would like to recruit this group's help to do this.
>
> The first developments I am considering are:
>
> elimination of mk1 stock: Clapham, Cowden
>
> introduction of AWS: harrow, lewisham
>
> introduction of TPWS: southall, ladbroke grove
>
> Could anyone add to this list (using the listing at
> http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/eventlisting.php) or indeed, suggest
> other developments?
>

Quite an unususal one this, hope it may be of help:

Tay Bridge 1879 and Norwood Junction 1891
Both involved the collapse of cast iron bridges and essentially spelt the
end of cast iron as a tensile bridge material. After Norwood Junction the
LB&SCR (followed by other railway companies) began to systematically replace
cast iron bridges with wrought iron or steel structures (source: Red For
Danger) - the Forth Bridge was one of the first all steel structures.

Paul

Cowden could have been prevented by the provision of trap points at the
entry to the single line sections. As the Uckfield line had been singled as
part of a an economy drive there was plenty of track space to provide trap
points and say a 300 yd sand drag to stop the errant train from fouling the
single line on which the train from the opposite direction had right of way.
Unhappily, as part of the same economy measure this was not done afterall it
would have involved another point lead plus the attendant control system.

Incidentally, the buckeye coupler is often mentioned in accident reports as
having maintained the integrity of train  i.e. kept it in line or stopped
vehicles from breaking away or toppling over.

MJW