District line engineering works on sundays

Class 66s are (allegedly) 127 tonnes. An awful lot of restrictions for other types seem to be, to be polite, stretched for GM locos. I suppose the weight would pack the ballast......

The track at that end of the District might need a fair bit of fettling, but provided the 66s don't go too quick there shouldn't be a problem - ISTR that the bogies and wheel coning on the 66 are especially designed to reduce track wear.

Track geometry with transverse sleepers and longitudinal rails is well designed to spread the load; a class 66 only has a 21 ton axle loading.

No doubt in this day and age somebody somewhere has done a risk and asset assessment, so the possibilities of something going wrong have been factored in and discounted - otherwise it wouldn't be happening.

Probably not... on the District.

On the proper railway, where we use proper trains and also invite those from the big railway, the rails are made of much stronger steel. To be precise, it's more an alloy of rock hard steel, blood, sweat and tears ;D

I've just had another thought - how much weight are the wagons with all the ballast carrying?

One of the things I've found with risk assessments etc is that they are usually based on data available at the time - its calculated usually by a computer, the computer says yes and thats it. If it doesn't match certain criteria then it may get a no or possible... We had a problem at work where tests were done on casing back in the 70s and it was met with the appropriate abuse that it should get over say 50 years, it passed the test so was successfull. However... over a longer period of time, even though the amount of exposure etc, its now been found that the casing developed faults and therefore failed, something which wasn't picked up at the time!

I don't know if any Class 66s have ever used the Wombledon branch but I was on a tour in 1980 hauled by a Class 50 plus at least 16 bogies. A 50 must weigh a similar amount.

I reminded myself that the line coped with the double-headed 1905 District Railways electric locos as far as Barking until October 1939. I wonder how much they weighed? They only had 800hp x 2 but with a Bo-Bo + Bo-Bo arrangement.

Yes, but they haven't been maintained to the same standards for decades

Another point that some may have been missed (as it's not been made clear at all) - we are not necessarily talking about the locos traveling along the line; the main concern stems from seeing these locos (and their loads) sitting at location 'X' on a Saturday morning........and seeing it still there on Sunday evening - some of these locos don't move for pretty much the entire possession. That is where much of the concern stems from......the possibility of the track being damaged by supporting extra weight in one spot for over 24 hours.

Discussion of assessments of bridges for route clearance for "heavier" locomotives has been raised as the weights surpass the normal loading standards assets are maintained to. Yes it's quite likely that the bridges were originally built to a higher standard but there often isn't adequate existing information to demonstrate this or there may be concerns about their current condition. LU developed their own RL loading standard in recognition that the majority of their rolling stock carried lighter axle weights. A tube stock train is roughly 50% of RL loading though RL is not the weight of a real train.

It would be expected that engineers employed on the Railways act in a professional and responsible manner. Assessments and any recommendations for additional maintenance can take time be it on LU or Network Rail. On track inspections for condition and other tests are needed in order to carry out the assessment. It may be the case additional maintenance may not be needed if certain restrictions are enforced. Until such adequate assessments are carried out and doubts exist it would be reasonable to withhold clearance. For instance the calculations carried out for Class 66 on the District line west of Barons Court were based on an assumed a maximum speed of 15mph.

There are often no historical records of original design calculations for older structures if there were any at all so structural analysis would be required. Design codes will have changed too. As pointed out structural condition is a function of age. Materials like steel are susceptible to corrosion and fatigue and there will be a point where maintenance will not prevent insidious decline. LUL and HMRI would be looking for a rational approach and would find it hard to accept decisions based on anecdotal evidence. The courts would also take a dim view should a serious incident occur and the engineer had not made basic checks. Maybe any lawyers on the forum can comment?

In an earlier post I mentioned "failure" of structural elements. I now realise that perhaps it wasn't the appropriate word and it could be misinterpreted as something more catastrophic. In engineering terms, it means an over-stress failure where a material yield failure occurred and a structural element has deformed and cannot recover it previous shape. You can imagine this being a problem on bridges of limited clearance or members supporting the track.

Maybe running of the Railways should be left to the proper Railwaymen and -women and the engineers are only let out their box occasionally

To Colin,
As a District line dirver, would you happen to know what Metronet/LUL are doing during the shutdowns between Whitechapel and Embankment/Earls Court?

P.S. For those of you going to the depot for the open weekend, there is no District line between Whitechapel and Earls Court at all that weekend.

Minories Junction was renewed this time last year. The work may well be related to the closure of Blackfriars.

In a nut shell, track replacement.

All of the track, throughout the District line (and the H&C/Met too), has to be renewed before S stock can run on it.

No - The H&C's are running in that area!! ;D ;D ;D

As Tom & Jim said, track replacement work at Blackfriars - there's also track replacement work at Upminster. Because trains from the west can't go past Embankment, and trains cannot get out of Upminster depot.........well that's the reason for the large District suspension.

Its more than 300m, may be up to 1000m.

tower hill is indeed getting 2 sets of M63's

at easter weekend upminster is getting 9 ends of the lovely machines