|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jan 23, 2020 17:42:08 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Jan 23, 2020 17:59:18 GMT
Tweet from LO linked to Network Rail media centre showing some photos of the damage.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 23, 2020 19:33:41 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz285 on Jan 23, 2020 21:57:06 GMT
apparently 1500 sleepers and 6000 tonnes of ballast are needed for the repairs & up to 14 days of work.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Jan 23, 2020 22:59:51 GMT
Reported elsewhere to be a westbound (Barking to Acton) service hauled by a Class 66 locomotive.
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Jan 24, 2020 8:32:08 GMT
No service at all?
No trains running on the entire route?
Is it single track? I thought it was an important route, which is why so much time and money was spent on electrifying it.
Clearly not.
|
|
|
|
Post by whistlekiller2000 on Jan 24, 2020 8:54:37 GMT
No service at all? No trains running on the entire route? Is it single track? I thought it was an important route, which is why so much time and money was spent on electrifying it. Clearly not. No great surprise really is it? I'd have thought that the repairs will require engineering trains to use the non-damaged line so no services would be possible. Even then, the worksite perimeter for correcting such damage would likely include the other track as well so it's understandable that the service is suspended throughout initially. It remains to be seen if a short run service can resume as things settle down. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 24, 2020 10:16:46 GMT
No service at all? No trains running on the entire route? Is it single track? I thought it was an important route, which is why so much time and money was spent on electrifying it. Clearly not. Because its perfectly safe for track workers to replace rails, sleepers and ballast with trains going by six foot away... |
|
|
|
Post by cudsn15 on Jan 24, 2020 10:30:38 GMT
This is a major repair job and it's quite right that it has to be done properly and safely. The Goblin users - unfortunately - are well used to finding alternative routes when the line is not operational! They will come back though - we're nothing if not resilient and stoic about using this useful service when it's available.
|
|
|
|
Post by elsombernie on Jan 24, 2020 13:24:41 GMT
I stand to be corrected, but isn't the very limited service (between Gospel Oak and South Tottenham only according to the TfL status pages) because there are no crossovers between South Tottenham and Woodgrange Park?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Jan 24, 2020 14:29:07 GMT
From comments on another forum, Network Rail have taken a possession of the whole line between Woodgrange Park Junction and South Tottenham (East, presumably) Junction. Those limits will be the reason for the service offered, but they might be driven by crossover locations.
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Jan 25, 2020 8:24:30 GMT
Because its perfectly safe for track workers to replace rails, sleepers and ballast with trains going by six foot away... It was when the railways were vital to the lifeblood of the nation... Thankfully we no longer live in those times. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743 
|
Post by class411 on Jan 25, 2020 8:55:23 GMT
You see people working on track adjacent to live rails quite frequently on NR.
It's safe if you have extremely strict safety rules and they are rigidly enforced.
However, there is no way that you could ever provide adequate safety measures for a task of this magnitude.
Even if you could, it would be counter-productive as working in that way would take orders of magnitude more time and hence cause vastly more disruption.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 25, 2020 10:01:21 GMT
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by class411 on Jan 25, 2020 10:35:38 GMT
This incident is so serious I doubt it would even be possible to do with any service running, since, as has already been pointed out, the adjacent track will be needed for engineering vehicles. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Jan 25, 2020 10:58:12 GMT
This incident is so serious I doubt it would even be possible to do with any service running, since, as has already been pointed out, the adjacent track will be needed for engineering vehicles. In places the adjacent track may even need to be (partially) taken up to fix damage to supporting structures and/or signalling, depending on the nature of the structure/signalling and nature of the damage of course. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by class411 on Jan 25, 2020 12:47:26 GMT
This incident is so serious I doubt it would even be possible to do with any service running, since, as has already been pointed out, the adjacent track will be needed for engineering vehicles. In places the adjacent track may even need to be (partially) taken up to fix damage to supporting structures and/or signalling, depending on the nature of the structure/signalling and nature of the damage of course. Good point. And the service would obviously have to be shut completely for the bridge repairs. |
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Jan 25, 2020 16:37:05 GMT
Because its perfectly safe for track workers to replace rails, sleepers and ballast with trains going by six foot away... It was when the railways were vital to the lifeblood of the nation... Thankfully we no longer live in those times. Thankfully trackworkers can now expect to go home without injury unlike the thirty thousand who were injured or killed in 1913. Edit to add: the 30000 figure comes from the NRM: www.railwaymuseum.org.uk/objects-and-stories/caution-railway-safety-1913 |
|
cso
Posts: 1,043
|
Post by cso on Jan 26, 2020 9:34:43 GMT
I',m glad you stated your source... otherwise you looked good for your age! Surely all that track damage couldn't have been caused by the derailment directly??? |
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Jan 26, 2020 12:05:47 GMT
I',m glad you stated your source... otherwise you looked good for your age! Surely all that track damage couldn't have been caused by the derailment directly??? It could. There’s more than one RAIB report documenting a minor derailment not immediately noticed by the driver and where track has been damaged for a distance. |
|
|
|
Post by pgb on Jan 26, 2020 19:01:17 GMT
It could. There’s more than one RAIB report documenting a minor derailment not immediately noticed by the driver and where track has been damaged for a distance. Indeed. If your train weighs 3000t, then one wheel in the dirt isn't going to make that much difference. If train is quite long, then signaller will be used to a track circuit being occupied for a quite a while. It'll probably only become apparent when you have "occupied" (broken!) "free" (no train) and "occupied" (train). Train is then bought to a stand for the driver to check his train - all this takes time of course which accounts for the distance travelled! |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 26, 2020 19:50:44 GMT
My source tells me that the derailment was caused by three cars on the freight train being overloaded.
The train was operated by DB Regio, a subsidiary of Deustche Bahn, who will have to pay compensation to Network Rail and London Overground for the disruption.
London Overground is currently run by Arriva London, a subsidiary of Deutsche Bahn.
So Deutsche Bahn will be compensating Deutsche Bahn plus fees paid to administrators, lawyers, accountants, etc.
Privatisation at its finest!
|
|
|
|
Post by jukes on Jan 26, 2020 22:08:31 GMT
Actually it will be DB Regio (registered and capitalised in UK) who will compensate NR and LO. Although LO is ARL and owned by DB via its Arriva UK subsidiary, which is also a UK registered and capitalised company, the money I suspect will go to TfL as LO is a concession not a franchise. Simples. (cue chorus of meerkats)
|
|
|
|
Post by trog on Jan 26, 2020 22:47:18 GMT
No service at all? No trains running on the entire route? Is it single track? I thought it was an important route, which is why so much time and money was spent on electrifying it. Clearly not. Because its perfectly safe for track workers to replace rails, sleepers and ballast with trains going by six foot away... We used to do CWR re-railing of the middle roads of the WCML in the 1980's with the outer lines open at line speed. We did it almost every week day for a couple of years with no safety incidents. You just needed to know what you are doing and take proper precautions.
At the week-ends we would work doing relaying and reballasting work with two lines blocked, if you were working on one of the middle lines, the adjacent line would be open at 20MPH. With trains being stopped and cautioned before they passed the site by a traffic inspector under the old version of rule T4. While doing this you would be digging right up to the sleeper ends of the open road.
A twin track line is more problematic due to the need to use the second line to stand spoil trains on. But it would have been possible to do the removal of the damaged track, which for a minor derailment on plain line might amount to removing the damaged sleepers and the top ballast only.
By unclipping and moving clear the rails while the other line is single line worked, then over night blocking the second line forking out the damaged sleepers and top ballast into open wagons, then scarifying, dozing and compacting the ballast to level. Before laying the new sleepers. The rails could then be replaced and clipped up during the following day, and the top ballast dropped from wagons such as Seacows and tamped, with the adjacent line again being single line worked. This could be repeated for as many nights as were required, but you should be able to do a reasonable amount each night as the volumes of material to move are relatively limited, It the existing ballast is good, and train drivers do seem to have a gift for derailing their trains just before they reach a stretch of new track. You can save a bit of cash by loading the top ballast into hopper wagons, then dropping it back into the new track.
Given the proper use of the safety rules to ensure that any machine work is paused before a train passes, and by having suitable lookout arrangements and a TSR on the open adjacent road I don't see why this should be unsafe.
|
|
|
|
Post by goldenarrow on Jan 27, 2020 17:28:39 GMT
RAIL's Mr Clinnick tweeted this showing the damage sustained to one of the numerous single trough bridges on that section of line. |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Jan 27, 2020 19:39:32 GMT
Oh my goodness!
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Jan 28, 2020 11:07:30 GMT
To the casual observer, this looks like a one-off freak incident. It's actually no such thing; it's a recognized hazard of railway operation, and no efforts are being made to alleviate it. Such an incident occurred on the Leeds Northern approaching Yarm, and I was fortunate to know the driver, and be given a first-hand account of how the situation came to happen.
Long ago, in the days of unfitted freight, the guard would have been watching the train, and noticed the derailed wagon. He had no communication with the footplate crew, but would wind on the brake, and the added load, combined with the extra drag of the derailed axle, would have caused the fireman to look back, and see the problem.
We now have the benefit of the continuous brake, and radio communication. Although the driver is isolated from the outside world, with only a view forward; and despite the fact that the extra load of the derailed wagon may not be immediately obvious, the guard can apply all the brakes, and report to the driver by radio. So such widespread destruction ought to be a thing of the past.
Except they sacked the guard...
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by class411 on Jan 28, 2020 11:21:58 GMT
Surely a fairly (relatively) cheap solution would be to have OCTV (Open circuit TV) fitted to the rear wagon, transmitting by radio to the driving cab.
Then the driver would be able to 'guard' his own train.
Your first thought might be, "that would cost a lot", but I suspect that the cost of this derailment might well get into double figures.
|
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Jan 28, 2020 16:48:34 GMT
OK that photo clearly shows extensive damage and why repairing a couple of miles of track is not going to happen overnight.
So is there any upsides? On several trips on the line I noticed locations where the service seemed to slow to a crawl - crossing seemingly clapped out bridges.
So does this incident allow Network rail to finally improve the formation to allow full speed running - and better still have someone else pick up the bill?
Knowing the almost continuous run of bad luck experienced in recent years by users on this line I suspect the speed restricted bridges will probably not be directly affected by the repairs... Which got me thinking - if half the route is currently closed to traffic surely it still provides Network Rail with a free possession window, when perhaps they could get those speed restrictions sorted out.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jan 28, 2020 16:57:17 GMT
Network Rail have probably had to cancel engineering work elsewhere to get people to fix the damage so I doubt if they could fit any additional unplanned work into their schedule.
|
|
