Someone hasn't read the report - in there, there is a picture of the platform with those warning signs circled, along with another circle of where the pram had been located - which was right behind a warning sign (the sign being right in front of the pram)....so definitely was in line of sight as the pram was left.

 
There's also a news item on the BBC:

 
Ouch - that looks like a very luck escape!   
I have mirrored the report for members at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/mirror/D102024_241107_Banbury.pdf

Where is the quoted text from, please

 
A two-month-old baby suffered a head injury when their pram rolled into the side of a train travelling at 35mph, a report has revealed.

The collision caused the pram to tip over, resulting in the infant falling onto the platform at Banbury station, Oxfordshire, the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) said.

The incident at 12.26pm on June 8 happened because the baby’s parent “momentarily released” the pram, according to the report.

CCTV footage shows that in the previous 10 minutes, the parent was “either very close or in direct contact” with the pram.

Around 15 seconds before the accident, they moved the pram closer to the arriving train to prepare to board it.

With the pram’s front wheels touching the yellow safety line, the parent put one hand on a piece of luggage and turned to face a relative, “momentarily letting go of the pram”, the report said.

The pram rolled downhill towards the platform edge and hit the train, resulting in the baby falling out and suffering a minor head injury.

The small degree of slope present is unlikely to have been apparent to the infant’s parent, who possibly became momentarily distracted while unaware of the hazard created by the slope
RAIB

The RAIB said: “RAIB has been unable to determine why the infant’s parent momentarily let go of the unbraked pram.

“The small degree of slope present is unlikely to have been apparent to the infant’s parent, who possibly became momentarily distracted while unaware of the hazard created by the slope.”

Following the accident, Chiltern Railways, which operates the station, installed additional signage which includes instructions to help prevent similar incidents from occurring, the RAIB said.

 
All signals at Banbury are now reporting whether 'on' or 'off' on opentraintimes with the exception of Platform 4 in the up direction (OL7122).

 
I got the lengths from the official Network Rail signalling alterations notice ('yellow peril') so I'd expect them to be pretty accurate.

 

What may affect the rough estimate is that the platform building isn't midway along the island, it is offset towards the London end, and a quick check with Google Earth satellite view suggests the dimensions IndustryInsider posted are correct to within a few metres.  The old bay at the south end was only about 85 metres long.

Paul

 

44.333% is only 10% more than a third at 33.333%, so would 44.333% reasonably fall into the description of 'just over a third'? 

 
Not sure where you got those figures from, but it certainly seems shorter than 44.333% of the adjoining platform. It only runs from the north end of the island as far as the enclosed waiting area glass wall on the island...looks just over a third of the full length

 
133 metres against 300 metres.  So, just under half, or 133/300ths if you want to be precise...

Press release here:  http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/news/gbp-76m-signal-and-track-upgrade-completed-on-time-as-network-rail-reopens-railway-between-banbury-bicester-and-leamington

 

Not even half-length - just 5 coaches long. Not sure how long platform 2 is (12 I think, but maybe 13)

 

Yes - perhaps 'not geographically accurate' was a poor choice of words.   Problem is presumably because the author is using a standardised set of building blocks for his drawings, and the minimum length he uses for a bidirectional platform is presumably that of the two 'black boxes'?   So it is hard to see how he could draw it more logically, except perhaps by increasing the the whole of P1, 2 and 3 as well, so that P4 can be shown at one end of P3;  IYSWIM...

Paul

 

It's not always the case with those maps, but they are pretty accurate for the Banbury area.  The only mistake is showing a full length platform 4, as it is only half the length of platform 3 and located at the northern end.  The starting signal (OL7122) is actually located alongside OL7120 and OL3124 so is some way from the end of the platform - something drivers are not particularly happy about and are pressing for an 'OFF' indicator so they don't misread or read across their signal.  So, yes, they would be located alongside the platform.

In the down direction, OL7129 is actually located where it shows on the map.  There is a banner repeater for it at the northern end of platform 1, near the North Box.  This is to allow a freight train to be put recessed there if necessary and the Down Goods Loop towards OL7143 is fully occupied.

As for blank signals, perhaps 'poggs' can enlighten us, but I suspect that the data feed is missing, or incorrectly interpreted. There are other black signals in the area that was resignalled.


Having thought about what you said, I think you'll find Gerrards Cross is only bi-directional in the up direction, so outgoing trains would be delayed when it's used and there's no way of one train passing another in the down direction - so that is only possible at South Ruislip, Princes Risborough (slow linespeeds) and Bicester North (blocks the up line).  For me, that's not enough.

High Wycombe in the up direction does indeed have the odd timetabled pass move, but only during quiet times of the day as there's nearly always a down train on the horizon that would get clobbered, especially when it comes to a delay recovery scenario.  That's not so much of a problem though as you have the passing point just down the line at Princes Risborough.

Also, there really could do with being a couple more signals between Haddenham and Bicester too as that can also hold things up a little.

 
ok, understood.

7122 protects the platform 4 through line out onto the UP mainline, not sure why it is white though. Ditto 7120 which protects the freight UP loop onto the UP mainline, again, why it's white?

 

The black boxes are not geographically accurate as I understand it.  There is however a separate one for each direction for each platform, and having watched it for a few cycles of the timetable the southbound Chiltern stopping service always appears in the right hand box next to 7122, with its departure time in the other box to its left.  I'm fairly sure the train will however be physically alongside P4 during its period between arrival and departure?  Next one at 1300, 1U27, appeared in the LH box on arrival and then became 1H46 in the right hand box.   

(This happened while I was editing this post, I guess the sequence will show again in another hour.)

Likewise in the down direction, the box for 7129, is not drawn alongside the platform where a train would be standing.

Paul

 
9128 signal has been replaced and commissioned as has 9135 and 7122.  Not sure about 7120.  Perhaps there is no data feed for the blank signals, or it just hasn't been added yet.  The '1244' you see would be a signaller reminder of the time of departure of the train in the platform.

 
The new platform 4 is now at the other end of the island - the north end, protected by signal 9135 northbound. Interestingly, there is currently 1H43 sitting in the south end loop behind '1244' in the platform! Something slightly amiss there!

7122 protects the exit from the through line that now holds the built-out new platform 4 onto the up main line.

 
Yet trains are using P4 - as I write 1H44 is sitting there due to depart at 1244?   Does that mean there is another signal that isn't shown on the diagram?

Paul

 
That platform/siding is decommissioned. There is still (disconnected) track in the platform, waiting to be lifted.

More interesting is 7120 - its possible that the freight loop is not yet commissioned, and 9128- the bi-directional southbound signal off the down through iine - I'll see if that's been replaced tomorrow morning. I didn't look this morning..

 

Very interesting.  It looks as if the signalling boundaries are shown, and I guess OL is "Oxford to Leamington" under WMCC control, but is "NA" on the Bicester to Aynho section right - it doesn't seem obvious so is it just a placeholder?

Do the signals that aren't showing either red or green (such as 7122 Banbury P4 up direction) signify a limitation in the data feed?

Paul

 
That section is used in the timetable to allow fast trains to pass slows in the up direction

 
Yes that's not useful in the majority of cases, nor is the similar situation at High Wycombe in the up direction.

 
GCX is bidirectional through the station, but in the peak, it would delay incoming services, so doesn't tend to get used as compounding the delays results

 

Well, actually, it's both isn't it.  A late stopper will delay an on time fast, and (as happened quite a lot yesterday) a late fast that departs after an on time stopper will then incur significant further delay when it catches the stopper up. 

All part of the problem of running an intense skip-stop timetable on a two track railway without enough passing points.

I noted several stoppers/semi-fasts recessed in the South Ruislip platform yesterday, to allow fasts to pass as best they could but the benefits were limited as the stopper then got in the way of later fast trains that had caught them up further along the line.

A bi-directional loop at Beaconsfield, or even better Gerrards Cross (but that would be more expensive) would be very useful.

 

Actually, it's delayed stoppers affecting on-time fasts in the evening peak that causes problems.

In the morning, any delayed fasts on the up at Risborough passing stoppers is very easy.

 
For clarity, the box is shut - they are running visits in the few weeks before that too is demolished.

If you're volunteering there on the 27th, I'll see you there (as a visitor)

 
Was working at Banbury North Signalbox today and en route from Oxford saw the queue of up trains between Anyho Jnc and Banbury around Kings Sutton. My goodness, signalling equipment is heavy! But he-ho all for a good cause. Beautiful 'box though.

 
Yes, though noticeable how the lack of passing places on the Chiltern Line south of Bicester is causing hassles with on time stoppers in front of delayed fast trains from Marylebone.  The loop at South Ruislip is being used to get the fasts past, but other than that the next realistic* option is right down the line at Bicester.  Reinstatement of a through bi-directional loop at Beaconsfield would be so useful on such occasions.

* Signalling at Princes Risborough does allow for a down train to be overtaken, but it's quite a time consuming process due to the linespeeds involved.

 
On time & within budget no less!

Trains running up to 15 late as at the time of this post...

 
Good to see the new signalling up and running this morning as planned.  Less good to see an axle counter failure at Kings Sutton around lunchtime causing delays of up to an hour.  Normal working resumed at 15:24 so hopefully won't cause too much hassle in the peaks.

 
The new diagram linked to above shows mo direct access from the south to Banbury depot without a shunt, as I discussed a few months ago

 
In connection with the work, lots of additional freights through Taplow. Mostly container trains.

 
The Didcot to Banbury map at opentraintimes has been altered to reflect the new track and signals at Banbury.  Nothing currently showing on them as there's no trains yet of course.  The map has also been extended north as far as just before Leamington Spa, and the line from Oxford to Oxford Parkway is shown ready commencement of trains in December.

http://www.opentraintimes.com/maps/signalling/oxford

 
Passive provision is at least a start

 
Yes - it would make economic long term sense to invest for traveller numbers in 30 years time. However the rail industry and governments do not have all the cash resources as well as staff resources to look that far ahead for action now. 30 year ahead problems are therefore very low on the priority ratings to be built into today's projects when many other current needs cannot be met.

 
Possibly both at the same time too....!

 
.....and as I have said in discussions before about depot layouts, they will come to regret a single exit point....

 

This is correct - moves from other platforms/the south will need a shunt move. They'll regret that.

 
Yes, does seem a slightly short-sighted decision, but passive provision is being made to extend it as and when needed - which may well be sooner rather than later.  More details of the new layout at the station here:

http://www.townend.me/files/banbury.pdf

And details of the new depot here:

http://npa.cherwell.gov.uk/AnitePublicDocs/08154090.pdf

As can be seen from the map, the South Box will get demolished shortly after closing next year, to allow for the current 15mph down loop platform to increase to 30mph.  The newly built platform has 25mph access.  All platforms are bi-directional, crossover speeds are increased from 15mph to mostly 40mph and the access to the up freight loop raises to 50mph meaning freights will get out of the way much quicker than they currently do.

These are most welcome improvements, but overall though, I'm a little disappointed a 'proper' job hasn't been made of the blank canvas created by closure of the two boxes as a few corners have been cut.  The new platform being only 5-car length isn't great and it looks from the diagram that access to and from the depot isn't particularly flexible requiring shunt moves to access all platforms except platform 1.

 
No money to build the island out behind the waiting area/staircase, which if you know the station, their boundary walls are actually the edge of the island

 
 through, yes, but not full length, just 5 cars.

Why

Graham has just posted in another thread that by 2045 there will be double or more the number of passengers.

So why spoil the ship for hapeth of tar! It's something we seem very good at in this country.

 

No it isn't apparently - only the part of the island at the north end (beyond the staircase/witing enclosure will become a platform - through, yes, but not full length, just 5 cars.

 

Oops. Must have been looking through the wrong end of my own time machine. Obviously I wasn't suggesting that the time machine NR don't have has that kind of range.

 

It's actually 2011. 

 

No, it's not - for two reasons.

1. The 20012011 calendar on the desk - unless NR do have a time machine that works forwards (we all known they have one that goes the other way).
2. Because it's nothing like the right layout - in fact, it's the Crewe and Stockport line (Cheadle Hulme lower right)!

 
I'm hoping to set up a meeting with an NR LNWR manager (who are in Birmingham Mailbox I believe) sometime soon, and those are something I'm going to try for, certainly

 
That all makes sense in providing a nice flexible layout.  Hopefully bi-directional signalling will be provided to all platforms and Platform 1 will also be modified to increase the line speed as the current 15mph limit is quite restrictive.  If anyone has any access to maps and plans then please post them here as I've been unable to source any as yet.

 
First closures over the Mayday bank holiday I understand.

Yes, platform 4 will become a full length up platform! A number of the stabling lines are going too, to preserve the up goods loop, and hence why Chiltern want to develop a new depot at Banbury, south of the south signal box.

 
After many a false dawn over the years, preliminary work has now started on the Banbury resignalling project which will mean the closure of Banbury North and South signalboxes (control transferred to the West Midlands Signalling Centre), replacement of the many semaphore signals with modern colour light signalling (presumably based on axle counters) and a modified track layout that, AIUI, includes removal of the bay platform and widening of the current platform 3 to create a new through platform along the formation of the current 'Up Goods Loop'.  Time to get down there quick if you want to record the absolute block signalling still in operation at this busy main line location!

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/infrastructure/single-view/view/siemens-starts-work-on-banbury-resignalling.html

 
IPCC passed it back to Thames Valley Police....from the Banbury Guardian


Fat chance of a proper inquiry now.

 
I'm posting the following three news items as a summary of what is known so far about what happened at Banbury. However, as I hope we're all agreed, any further speculation would be inappropriate: we need to await the Independent Police Complaints Commission's findings.

From the BBC:


From the Banbury Guardian:


From the Oxford Times:

 
Have a read of this rather long document in regards to arms and tasers. These are the rules the police are expected to follow. I reckon that the guy who was tazer'ed could technically actually sue the police force under HRA. If anything happens out of it would be a matter for the courts and judicial process.

I would be interested to see which force shot first and the grounds, something im sure the IPCC will find out if the police forces co-operate.

http://www.westmercia.police.uk/assets/_files/documents/jul_13/wmp__1372866447_APP_Armed_Policing_Printable_f.pdf


_{Disclaimer: Im not a lawyer blah blah.}

 
Indeed. Let's see what the IPCC makes of both referrals.

 
And? Is there anything in the Police use of Taser^ code of practice that says they can't use it on someone with mental health issues?

Don't answer that. As it would only be further unfounded speculation. Let's just let the agencies involved get on with investigating what happened.

 
From the Oxford Mail


So the Police tasered a known Mental Health patient.....hmmm

 
One assumes that there was an initial delay to see if the police could tempt him down quickly - by which time, there were trains being held at those stations as well as between & no way back....

 
What surprises me is that people were trapped on trains for up to 5 hours. Surely it should have been possible to work them back wrong line one by one to say Leamington, Oxford or Bicester North

 
Details should be made available on the website of the Independent Police Complaints Commission, at http://www.ipcc.gov.uk/investigations_and_reports

 
Do they publish their findings in every case they investigate?

 
Indeed: this incident has already been referred to the Independent Police Complaints Commission, by the police themselves.

We should await the results of their investigation before commenting further. 

 
The tazer would not have been used in gun ho manor, the Police Officer would only use it if there was a treat of injury themselves, a member of the public or the suspect; its unlikely they would have used it as a first choice of restraint high up on a signal gantry.

I believe if a tazer is discharged it is treated the same as if the Police Office discharged a firearm .......... = lots of form filling and report writing

 
From the BBC:

 
At first I thought it was BTP that had used a tazer on the suspect, and would have believed that with the gun crazy BTP met rejects, but it appears from the log that it might have been TVP.

Just hope the guy is in safe hands now and receiving the treatment that they need.



Core Incident message: 25

1515: No update

1455: Buses to stand down at 1530 with ticket acceptance still in place and to remain so until ICC advise.

1435: Platform 1 will be closed UFN. Declared a scene of crime. Platforms 2 and 3 will remain open.

1429: Platforms 2 and 3 at Banbury now open. Platform 1 will remain closed until further notice ([Message Sanitised])

1426: UPDATE: 1G40 1345 MYB-BSW will be the first train through Banbury heading north (now approaching Haddenham and Thame)

1424: 1R42 1415 MYB-BMO will be the first train to run through Banbury as booked. It is hoped that a full service shall resume from between 1500-1530 although with delay on most services and possible part/full capes.

1415: 1H33 0809 KID-MYB has moved through the section on the UP and has now passed Banbury after passengers have alighted at Banbury. More when known.

1405: Suspect is now off the signal at Banbury and recieving treatment at Banbury on platform 2. More info when known.

1340: No further update from site. 1H33 is to procede forward to Banbury goods loop to detrain. All lines remain blocked:
Road Transport:
8 coaches currently shuttling BCS-BAN-LMS. Attempting to source more. Additional coaches being directed towards BCS as station have reported approx 250 passengers on site.

1255: Here follows service plan UFN:
All MYB- BAN & BCS services and return workings to be cancelled. 2TPH (XX15 and XX45) to run MYB-BCS and return, calling HWY, PRR & HDM). XX12, XX21, XX25, XX42, XX52 services to run as booked from MYB.
2TPH BMO-LMS, XX15 & XX55 alongside the booked 2L/2R services. Snow Hill will not be served.

1235: 70 seater coach enroute to BAN tramway. ETA 10mins.

1225: NO further updates from site. Services continue to spin LMS and BCS. Road transport status: 6 X coaches shuttling LMS-BCS via BAN along with several 16 seaters. Attempting to source more, however, most companies need buses back on depot circa 1400 for school runs so currently proving difficult.

1210: No further updates from site. Permission has now been granted to move stranded trains forward to BAN to detrain. Line will remain blocked.

1140: No further updates from site. Tentative plans being made to detrain passengers from 1R15, which has been standing just south of BAN. Additional buses now being sourced to BCS, ETA 10mins. FGW have 2 buses running BAN-OXF, ETA 15mins.

1120: This has now been declared a critical incident; male has lost a significant amount of blood. Services continue to spin at LMS and BCS.

1105: Local police have advised that male is very unresponsive to communication and are not confident of a speedy resolution.
Road transport LMS: 2 X 16 seaters ETA 5mins & 2 coaches ETA 1200. BCS 2 x COaches ETA 5mins.

1050: No further updates from site. Services at a stand on the up: 1O08 (XC), 1H35 and 1H37 (CR). At a stand on the down: 1R15 (CR) and 1M30 (XC). 1G17 is currently setting back to KGS to detrain.

1040: No further updates from site. Services presently being turned at BCS (from the south) and LMS (from the north).

1020: Negotiator onsite. Male continues to self harm. Attempting to source road transport, however, Banbury station has been cordened off by police.

1005: Banbury station now partially cordened off. At present 1R15 and 1G17 standing on the down, 1H35 and 1H37 standing on the up.

0955: Thames Valley Police on site. Male is armed with a knife and is asking for a negotiator.

0945: A suicidal male has been sighted atop signal post BN4 at Banbury. All lines blocked. 1R15 stands outside the station on the down. More info when known.

 
Line reopened just before 3pm but part of the station still sealed off.

 
I hear the suicidal trespasser is down from the gantry

 
Indeed, he might have subsequently fallen from said gantry afterwards & hurt himself further. Whichever way you look at this, tazering was not the answer.

The station is in lockdown, and drivers are stuck in their rest room wanting to go home too.

 
If he was indeed tazered that may well have been an attempt to get him in the hands of the emergency services as he is reported to have lost a lot of blood rather than just get him down so everything can get moving again.  As always we should be careful not to jump to conclusions.

 
Further, I'm hearing this guy has been tazered by the police, which has annoyed him so much that he threw his bag at them, and is now into a major stand off.

Negotiators needed, not heavy-handed coppers....

 
Pax are tweeting that they've been stuck on southbound trains for over 3 hours now.

 
Services on FGW, Chiltern and Cross Country all being affected by a line closure at Banbury while a trespasser remains on a signal gantry.

XC are turning round at either Oxford or Reading for the south while Chiltern are running as far as Bicester North from Marylebone.

Line has been closed since just before 10am.

Updates here from the Banbury Guardian http://www.banburyguardian.co.uk/news/local-news/banbury-railway-station-closed-after-man-climbs-signal-gantry-1-6299131

 
http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/2593429

And at long last and apologies for the delays , but here it is .There is a full preview of the book available online . Blurb is a print on demand service allowing the book to be available in different formats . Books are printed and shipped to the customer directly from Blurb Printers


 Blurb are offering a 25% Discount until 31st October with the code GLOBAL1

kind regards

Martin

http://www.flickr.com/photos/martincreese/
http://www.blurb.com/user/store/Martincreese

 
A very warm welcome to the forum, sidmouth! 

 
Many thanks Chris for the plug

I'm about 3/4 of the way there at the moment , Captions to write , plus an introduction and one or two last images to gather but all being well not too far away

It will be similar in style to my North Warwicks book http://www.blurb.com/bookstore/detail/1682489 . There is a full preview so if you are interested please have a look

If you woudl like to have a look at my images my gallery is http://www.flickr.com/photos/martincreese/

Regards

Martin

 
More info here

I have no monetry interest in this. Provided for info only

 
Update - I have now received an e-mail reply from the RAIB:


C. 

 
Thanks, chaps!

I happen to have a contact at the RAIB, and I have sent them an e-mail, seeking clarification on this.  As soon as I have any details, I'll post them here!

C. 

 
Good, I'm not going mad, I was sure I remembered reading a notification on the RAIB site about the investigation. It's definitely not there now though, nor is there a discontinuation report. 

 
Very odd then - because they stuck out a notification a few days after it happened saying they *were* looking into this....

 

Oddly there is no mention of this incident in the "current investigations" section of the RAIB's website.

 
Yes, there's a whole range of issues that make this incident very strange. The only sure fact beyond question (viewed on the Turbo's front-facing CCTV camera) is that the driver passed a semaphore shunting disk stack with all three disks 'on', i.e. at danger.

 
BUT - The RAIB are still investigating - it seems as though statements from interested parties don't agree....

 
It wasn't particularly dramatic. Low speed and only one axle of one bogie was derailed I believe.

 
there must be pictures somewhere

 
It was commented on - but only in the frequent posters club, so get posting! 

 
Surprised that nobody has commented on our little mishap at Banbury yesterday afternoon. A 165 got derailed on an ECS move, leaving the Oxford-Banbury local service suspended for most of the rest of the day, and lots of other TOC services 'delayed'!

 
Thanks, Phil - a good clarification! 

 
It's maybe worth mentioning that this festival took place at an Aerodrome in Westbury close to Brackley in Northamptonshire, rather than in the better-known rail junction of Westbury in Wiltshire - just in case anyone else was wondering why people would be jumping into a taxi some 60 miles away at Banbury!

 
Police were called to Banbury Railway Station twice on Saturday after a high demand for cabs to the Gatecrasher Festival in Westbury caused tempers to flare.

http://www.oxfordmail.net/display.var.2295937.0.police_called_as_tempers_flare_at_cab_rank.php