2015 Q5 Describe an accident

[Jerry1237]

Evening,

I've attached an attempt at the question- any comments, pointers or feedback would be very welcome.

I would welcome anyone unfamiliar with this incident to give their view on whether I have defined the incident well enough in part a) of the question (regardless of their experience).

Many thanks.

Hello

Lots of good points raised but without the question, difficult to be specific in commenting.

The root causes could be considered for the circuitry not being in place to prevent the signal being put back.  However, the signaller made an error and was it actually human factors, i.e. workload, that caused the first error which was compounded by the lack of circuitry. Also, how familiar was the Bobby with the 'box and was this lack of approach locking normal for their 'box or 'boxes? 

One comment, in C it was written "route causes" where "root" was meant.

Jerry

Many thanks Jerry,

I've attached the relevant question paper for reference and any other interest parties.

I did indeed mean root, not route.

Based on what was in the paper, the accident wasn't a direct cause of the signaling system. It would possibly be better to focus on an accident where there is a single root cause that is clearly defined.

Clapham is slightly different in whilst the root causes were around fatigue / human-factors etc., it was the signaling system doing something other than it should that caused the first train to stop (arguably against the rule book) whereas MoL the signaling was working correctly albeit if modern standards were applied, the initial error from the signaler would have been mitigated!