Signal failure at Mile End

[will]

Central Line: No service between Liverpool Street and Epping and Woodford via Hainault only, due to a signal failure at Mile End. Estimated time of resumption is 10.00 hrs. SEVERE DELAYS on the rest of the line. Customers should avoid the Central line wherever possible. Tickets will be accepted on London Overground, London Buses, DLR and Abellio Greater Anglia services via any reasonable route.

This looks to be really serious and has gone on for about 3 hours any one know the cause ??

[suncloud]

Does that mean there was no service at all on the East End of the line? (It appears to be open now) The wording seems vague.

My best uneducated guess is that I wonder if signal/control communications was lost between Central Line Control and the east end of the line, as there is usually a fallback of running shuttle services between Epping/Woodford/Hainault and Leytonstone.

[DWS]

This shut down was due to a broken rail on the westbound at Mile End.

[suncloud]

So not signalling! Would it be something that initially presented as a track circuit issue?

[Deleted]

One-time member auxsetreq sheds some light, albeit in a rather roundabout way. (Slightly bad language warning for any younger members).

It seems that the signalling system correctly identified a fault, preventing clear signals and codes from being obtained.

[Chris M]

Presumably there must have been some reason they weren't able to operate east of Leytonstone?

[Deleted]

I was wondering that. Looking at the Central line's Twitter feed it was only suspended Liverpool Street - Leytonstone to start off with, but the suspension then spread eastwards for reasons which I'm sure someone will be able to explain.

[stapler]

I received a "personal" apology from Mr Taggart (is he related to the lugubrious, and dead, Glasgow detective?) at 1352, which states ***
I am writing to apologise for the disruption to the Central line service this morning.

This was a result of a signal failure caused by a broken rail in the Mile End area. Our engineers worked as quickly as possible to restore your train service; unfortunately this repair could not be completed until after the morning peak. ****

So signal failure first and broken rail second according to LU, possibly because signal failure sounds tecchie and minor, whereas a broken rail sounds Hatfield, Potters Bar, etc and scary.

Root cause is surely lack of routine inspection, although of course a rail has to break at a particular moment in time.
BTW, there was a service on the northern parts of the line of sorts, but since I wasn't travelling today, I didn't have to sample it.

[Deleted]

Thanks for sharing that!

I have to disagree, though, my understanding of the words of Mr Taggart are that the rail broke first, which would have caused the signal (or, more likely, block marker board) protecting that bit of track to remain at danger. Clear signals and codes would not have been obtainable until the rail was fixed.

Unless, of course, you were referring to Mr Management's wording, that is, although I'm not sure that's too significant - although he might have been looking to explain the source of the earlier information which was that the delays and suspensions were caused by 'a signal failure' - which, as we all know, can mean quite a few things in reality.

[rincew1nd]

Feb 3, 2015 21:07:45 GMT tut said:

One-time member auxsetreq sheds some light, albeit in a rather roundabout way. (Slightly bad language warning for any younger members).

It seems that the signalling system correctly identified a fault, preventing clear signals and codes from being obtained.

I miss Ceiling Cat [/off topic]

[stapler]

Feb 3, 2015 22:09:19 GMT tut said:

Thanks for sharing that!

I have to disagree, though, my understanding of the words of Mr Taggart are that the rail broke first, which would have caused the signal (or, more likely, block marker board) protecting that bit of track to remain at danger. Clear signals and codes would not have been obtainable until the rail was fixed.

Unless, of course, you were referring to Mr Management's wording, that is, although I'm not sure that's too significant - although he might have been looking to explain the source of the earlier information which was that the delays and suspensions were caused by 'a signal failure' - which, as we all know, can mean quite a few things in reality.

I was - think the letter might have said "The root cause was a broken rail, which in turn caused a signal failure..."

[Dstock7080]

Feb 3, 2015 21:30:12 GMT tut said:

I was wondering that. Looking at the Central line's Twitter feed it was only suspended Liverpool Street - Leytonstone to start off with, but the suspension then spread eastwards for reasons which I'm sure someone will be able to explain.

Initially as stated, then advertised as east of Liverpool Street due to severe overcrowding at stations, although shuttle services continued to run between Woodfood-Epping and Woodford- Hainault, trains then able to reverse at Leytonstone although arriving empty.

[Deleted]

I got on two buses to try and get to Leytonstone only to be told that there were no trains on the loop (I was going to Hainault). Although while I was at Mile End they said it was a signal failure, when I got to Leytonstone they had said it was a broken rail. TBH, the information they were supplying was top notch and although it was an inconvenience I couldnt fault the TfL staff.

[norbitonflyer]

Feb 7, 2015 12:42:29 GMT @miikey said:

at Mile End they said it was a signal failure, when I got to Leytonstone they had said it was a broken rail.

Not necessarily inconsistent - a broken rail will cause a track-circuit to fail (as the electric circuit formed by the rails is broken) and make the signals controlling the section go to red. Provided both halves of the broken rail are firmly secured to the trackbed a train can traverse the crack with caution - after passing the failed signal on the "stop & proceed" rules.

[Deleted]

Feb 7, 2015 20:39:41 GMT norbitonflyer said:

Feb 7, 2015 12:42:29 GMT @miikey said:

at Mile End they said it was a signal failure, when I got to Leytonstone they had said it was a broken rail.

Not necessarily inconsistent - a broken rail will cause a track-circuit to fail (as the electric circuit formed by the rails is broken) and make the signals controlling the section go to red. Provided both halves of the broken rail are firmly secured to the trackbed a train can traverse the crack with caution - after passing the failed signal on the "stop & proceed" rules.

I know, im a track tech for the central line.

[caravelle]

Feb 3, 2015 22:56:19 GMT rincew1nd said:

Feb 3, 2015 21:07:45 GMT tut said:

One-time member auxsetreq sheds some light, albeit in a rather roundabout way. (Slightly bad language warning for any younger members).

It seems that the signalling system correctly identified a fault, preventing clear signals and codes from being obtained.

I miss Ceiling Cat [/off topic]

I too miss ceiling cat, having known Auxsetreq/CC very briefly in this forum.

The film to which Auxsetreq is referring to in his blog post is called "Under night streets" (1958).

There is one in extremelly grainy form on youtube or alternativelly in the BTF Collection Volume Tem "London on the Move"

Cheers.