SVR General Discussion

I am reminded how the Cumbres & Toltec deal with this situation, with one following every train. But then, they don't have tokens.

 

Flat?

 

Even if you have tokens, you could do such things with “staff and ticket” type arrangement. (i.e. the driver of the train is shown the token, and then collects a ticket that gives authority to proceed, “and the token will follow”). The issue then becomes that the following vehicle needs a procedure for following through the section (with the token) on a “line of sight” basis. But I am sure on a heritage line you could write suitable procedures.

A practical issue would be how close to follow behind. Too close and the risk is you may miss a fire that hasn’t established. Too far and you might as well allow the next train through the section to inspect, particularly on a busy day. But it could be an option to use on days with a sparse service, or to follow the last train of the day.

Tom

 

Thanks Martin, obviously what I heard the other week week was obviously complete BS then, as I did say I wasn’t trying to stir anything up, I just found it concerning.

 

However you look at it though you have two trains in section at the same time. For most railways that would be a breach of the sealed undertaking given when the LRO was granted. It might prove tricky to negotiate that. Not impossible perhaps, but tricky.

As mitigation the fire fighting vehicles would have to have a higher brake performance than the trains, and there would have to be I would suggest strong and reliable radio contact between the train and the firefighting vehicle. It would be a fascinating conversation to have with the ORR.

 

The Talyllyn has fire trolley working. In simple terms the passenger train is stopped given the relevant form and shown the token for the section. The trolley with a water bowser attached follows with the token. There must be a minimum gap of 5 minutes between the two and it is only in place between Pendre and Brynglas

 

There must be provision for this somehow, otherwise in the case of a failure how can the train that has failed be recovered without having g a mechanism to allow another loco, or train into section to effect a rescue?

Seems like an ideal role for an RRV side-by-side ATV, access via the track, can carry a fairly reasonable load upon itself, can propel or tow a trolley and can be driven off the track lineside on rough ground.

Chris

 

The failure is stationary before the rescue move begins.

 

And protected in accordance with the rules using detonators.

 

I remember doing time interval working on the Talyllyn in the 60”s when some specials had to be fitted in with the timetable. This was when there was only a passing loop at Brynglas. The first train would set off and call at each station where the guard would leave a slip of paper in a box which each station had, stating the time it left. The following train stopped at each station and could not leave until 20 minutes later. On arrival at Aber the first train detrained its passengers and then moved up onto the extension to clear the platform. Time interval working was the only time detonators were issued.

 

Detonators have no place on heritage railways. (Not just my view, that is the HRA's position)

 

In which case, why does their use remain even in recently modified rule books? And what alternative is recommended?

 

Because of a perverse desire to be like the big railway, in my experience. On a line where the the maximum speed under any circumstances is 25 mph, the Mk 1 eyeball is an adequate substitute.

 

Not so good in the dark though. <BJ>

 

Lamp, flag or person waiting at the protection point.

 

I've never found the argument that "we might need to rescue a failed train, after dark, in thick fog, with no mobile phone coverage and all the batteries in all the lamps have gone flat" to be particularly compelling justification for retaining something (detonators) that require elaborate control measures and present a potentially high level of physical and reputational risk. As a former civil servant, I'm reminded of the Daily Mail test: when considering what can go wrong, how would it look on the front page of that newspaper? "Toddler Finds Explosives in Thomas Train"

 

What does it have to do with the HRA, they are not the regulator for our industry?

 

Just before any more babbling on on this subject continues….

The SVR are removing use of Dets in the new rule book which should be out next year. But for many heritage railways writing a new rule book is costly and time consuming, and in some cases will take time to phase out. These things don’t just happen overnight, and safe practices must be put in place other than just “eye sight”.

The HRA advice is clear and is being taken on, like it always is. But your comments about a desire to be like the big railway, are just unnecessary and unhelpful really.