Fire Risk

Maybe move back to FW towed with the rods off ?

 

WHL?

 

West Highland Line.

 

The OP did say “possibly” or did you miss that?

 

You can have that argument with Network Rail Ralph who seemingly are pretty convinced, according to the information relayed to VT staff on the VERY heavily delayed train yesterday.
WCML was completely shut for a number of hours, delay minutes will be colossal.

 

A couple of points to consider here. One is the this is hearsay based on an apparently unauthorised leak of an internal Network Rail Control Log. The other point is that the Control Log is based on assessment at the time and these assessments do get subsequently rewritten in the light of later evidence. Other trains apart from steam locos have been known to start lineside fires and there are also other causes too. Only last month a similar diesel hauled steam loco move was curtailed following a report of a lineside fire which later proved to be nothing to do with the loco.

Maybe 44871 was the culprit here and maybe not. Just because Nat Pres reports it does not necessarily mean that it is so. Lets not beat ourselves up about this one just yet.

Peter

 

I was on the K1 in May 2008 taking the Jacobite stock to Fort William. As was ascended Beattock we found the lineside ablaze. No doubt we would have been blamed for it but for the evidence that it was alight before we got there.

Peter

 

Don't think there is any precedent for NR making a public statement to the extent of "naming & shaming" in circumstances such as this so unles the operator publicly confesses it will end up being 2+2 etc. There isn't any value in a blame game, we just have to hope that IF a steam loco caused the fire yesterday those that were involved are able to learn from the event and apply the wisdom in future.

 

I recall an incident a few years ago when a NR employee reported in the Control Log that a “bloody steam engine” had started a lineside fire, about 20 mins before the loco passed the location of the fire.
The actual cause was failure of lineside electrification equipment.

 

I thought they did that on a WSE a few years back that had to be diesel hauled on the return, with a loco sent from Southall, before any investigation had taken place.

 

I personally don't recall NR ever making a public statement with any such details, they're not under any obligation to divulge the details leading to an action. It is of course very possible for anybody with an interest to make an educated guess that X led to Y.
Again though, I don't see the value of doing so publicly only the parties involved need to understand the precise details involved so they can work out if there is any learning points and perhaps share them within the forums for charter TOCs.

 

Unfortunately, given the fire at Winsford yesterday and taking into account medium and longer term weather forecasts, I think we could be on the verge of a prolonged mainline steam ban.
So probably best to resurrect this thread to track any changes or indeed water from the sky!

 

Nowt to do with steam, but Saddleworth Moor is on fire as I type - and has been for most of the day!

 

Huge fire near Conwy as well, so a very wise decision not to send 44871 to Holyhead today.

 

Of course! Thank you.

 

Trying to disprove the Control Log after the event is quite a battle. I was involved many years ago within the railway industry clarifying a report of a lineside fire was or was not caused by a steam loco. Eventually the evidence was clear , the blamed steam loco working was stuck in the backlog caused by the incident.
Delay attribution was corrected BUT the control log was not updated with the correct information, so the whole argument was recycled for the benefit on senior managers the next day.

Cheers, Neil

PS it's harder from outside the industry on behalf of a promoter or loco owner!

Cheers, neil

 

Back to my point about red, black and other fire risk levels being inconsistent and often not reflecting realities on the ground. I can't understand why most of England and parts of Scotland have not been under a steam ban in recent days (notwithstanding whether any actual fires have been proved to be steam-caused). Tour promoters offering steam runs in summer need to be stronger in their information that steam runs in summer may have to be replaced by diesel in high fire risk conditions and offer partial or no refunds (dependent on each operator's business model) as a result. Potential tour passengers need to accept that fire risk steam bans are now a frequent reality and book with that risk in mind.