propelling

The school train at Romney always used to be propelled, out to Burmarsh Road in the morning and propelled back again in the evening (i.e. only propelled as empty stock), a driving trailer (modified guard/luggage van) was used this was fitted with a brake handle, headlight, windscreen wiper & horn. The operator of the driving trailer had no control of speed, and you felt just like a passenger.

The school train is no longer propelled, as the stock is kept overnight at Hythe, with the diesel going to Hythe light to collect the stock.

 

Happens everyday on the ECML at speeds up to 125mph and distances over 400 miles at a time.

The 91 shoves everything in front of it and a man with a controller and a brake sits several hundred feet away up front.

Properly performed propeling presents precious little hazard than any other movement - except in the dear old UK where the risk assessment rules.

The City of New Orleans is propelled the last mile or so into Chicago Union every day - and no-one has died yet!

 

Sorry Frank, but that is NOT propelling,

See the above quote from the RSSB rule book (I have highlighted the salient part)

 

If there's 100 tons at the back shoving like hell - its propelling - a bitof english, no matter what its colour does not change the physics - its still propulsion

 

We will have to agree to disagree on that one, the definition in the rule book is down to position of the driver in relation to the signals.

An interesting variation on this theme were the PCVs as used on the Royal Mail services under RES / EWS, whereby the chap in the PCV was a qualified driver who was in charge of a fully functioning brake valve, with a second driver in the loco on the rear supplying power with a system of buzzer codes between the two. If the buzzer system did not work, then an extra loco would have to be provided to haul the set when undertaking anything more than a straightforward shunt move. IIRC the sets could be worked in propelling mode at up to 40mph for short distances - Willesden PRDC to Euston Downside Shed springs to mind.

 

This would seem to relate to vision and control more than physics and risk of derailment. In this respect an IC225 has a driver in full control at the front end - so can run at line speed unless conditions necisitate otherwise. In the case of the PCV's control is shared between two crewmen, so a speed restriction is in place. And in the case of shunting passenger vehicles, control and visibility is very poor!

 

i can propel upto 300+tons down a fair gradient everyday with the awful class 08 we have

 

So long as you can stop it when you want to.

 

A bogie doesn't know whether it is being pushed or pulled in relation to the traction forces, which are transmitted through the pivot, so there is no increased risk of derailment from propelling bogie vehicles.

 

yeah but be blooming careful when its wet [-o< and the 50metre curves make the wagon's and loco squeal like mad

 

The Northampton & Lamport Railway currently runs passenger trains without the benefit of a run-round loop at each end of the line. The method used involves a specially converted coach which basically has a board over the corridor end with a windscreen. Controls for headlights, brake and horn are mounted and a person known as a "Motorman" is seated at the controls.

When propelling, the driver (at the rear) applies power and the Motorman is responsible for observing signals, sounding the horn and braking as necessary. The driver should be watching for a brake application so as to shut off power (certain diesel locomotives can do this automatically).

This method is only permitted over a certain distance, so when the new extension opens it will have a run-round loop.

Photo of the converted Mark 2 coach 9102:

Larger image

 

Lincolnshire Wolds Railway currently also does this on it's short line:

- Image - Richard Stewart

 

that is a nice red lamp on the front of that train

 

The RSSB jargon is wrong IMHO. The definition of 'propelling' is "To drive forward; to urge or press onward by force; to move,
or cause to move" A train is being propelled regardless of the position of the locomotive. A better description would be to say If the loco is at the front the train is being 'pulled' if at the back it is being 'pushed' - but I guess this language is too simple for the elf & safety brigade ](*,)

Incidentally, i have always wondered how the IC225 arrangement is allowed. i take the point about a bogie not knowing if it is being pulled or pushed as the force is acting on the pivot, but in a leading-vehicle derailment, surely it is worse if you have 60,000 lbs of tractive effort shoving the rest of the consist into the proceedings?

 

One word:

Polmont

 

One word:
Polmont[/quote:22yceam3]
don't forget selby south of the border, funny how accidents come in pairs before action is taken...

i'd like to think that there has been a significant improvement in the ability for the locomotive of a class 91 to respond to communication, or a lack of it, from the DVT. i'm probably on the wrong forum to ask if there is a system whereby the brakes are automatically applied to the engine if communication wit the DVT is lost, to ensure the locomotive doesn't plow into the front of the train?

 

Wasn't there an accident in Germany when the entire train ended up like a concertina against a bridge pillar?
Also one has to look at the accident at Great Heck. If the loco (power unit) had been leading I think the outcome would have been different. The DVT only struck the Landrover a glancing blow, but unfortunately a freight was approaching on the up line at the same time. I think the term for the force generated when a power unit is pushing (propelling) is kinetic energy.

 

Certainly a fair proportion of the train was - an ICE - in the German accident. It became derailed due to wheel failure part way along the train. Until the coaches became detached and control/brake pipes and electrical connections separated the train was still under power, even though derailed.

Great Heck was a similar situation. If at Hatfield the train had been the other way round (which I have occasionally seen on the GN main line), then the result could well have been in the same magnitude as Great Heck due to the loco still pushing.

I took up the dangers and wisdom of fast trains being propelled in this manner at the time with GNER, Virgin, Department of Transport and Railway Magazine but nothing ever came of it.

 

I remember quite a lengthy correspondence on this subject in one of the mags (railway mag?) a few years ago particularly in relation to what happens if a driving trailer is derailed when being propelled I believe. Perhaps someone with a good archive could dig it out and post the salient points?

 

It isn't RSSB jargon, its an old RAILWAY definition, and something we are losing very fast. The RSSB is changing a lot of the old wording/definitions in the modern rule book as they reckon they are difficult to understand, but I actually think the new wording is often more ambiguous. Best not to get me started on that subject...................