Re: British accident track layout

[Eddie Oliver <eoliver@efs.mq.edu.au>]

Geoff Lambert wrote:

> 
> I still can't fathom how the Down train managed to cross the path of
> the Up.  Even if it passed the signals at points (normal)  "A" at
> danger and kept going to the points at "D", how could those points
> divert it across the Up Main unless they were set reverse.  And, if
> they were set reverse, how could the Up Main be signalled for a
> movement?  Am I missing something?  One of the newspapers this morning
> suggests that the points in question were NOT (or should not have
> been) set for the crossover move and then says "but... the weight of
> the Thames train pushed it through the points and into the path of the
> express."  What can this mean, if "D" was also set normal?

Notagunzel has largely answered this. Just a couple of further points:

1. It was not a case of the points being set reverse - it was just a
matter of the train running out of anywhere else to go.

2. As long as the protecting signal for the errant train was at stop and
the overlap was clear, the HST had a clear path so its signals could
clear. One matter which is not yet clear is whether the interlocking
would put the HST's signals back to stop as soon as the overlap of SN109
was fouled. They would certainly return to stop when the train got close
enough to the trailing points.

> Is the signalling mailing list you refer to a private subscription
> one? can I find out about it and become a subscriber?

At the moment the question is a bit hypothetical because the person who
maintains the mailing list seems to have disappeared, so the membership
of the list is purely static. I will send you by private email an
address to contact, but don't expect a rapid response.

Eddie