Consequences of, and Possible Responses to Train Breakdown

[Arun Sharma]

Last Saturday I was travelling from Reading to Weybridge on the 1142 Reading-Waterloo changing [hopefully] at Virginia Water for Weybridge. About 10minutes into the journey, the class 458 stopped at Winnersh as expected and them remained there for hours owing to a broken down [FGW cl165] ahead of us at Wokingham. 

I say, hours because I was on the train for two hours until I got a local bus back to Reading and abandoned my journey [for a full refund]. I understand that the 458 may have remained at Winnersh for a another couple of hours.

 

The 458's onboard staff at [what appeared to be an unmanned station] had suggested crossing to the opposite platform and catching a train returning to Reading and then going Reading-Basingstoke-Weybridge. No SWR 458s passed on the opposite line - I am guessing that the Wokingham disruption had affected Waterloo - Reading services in some way ?current turned off whilst working on the FGW casualty? but two FGW 165s passed though Winnersh at speed on their way to presumably Reading. 

 

I am guessing that this sorry state of affairs arose in part due to the removal of crossovers at, or near, stations allowing wrong-line running to get around broken down trains. 

Given the seeming lack of a crossover between Reading and Wokingham, I am guessing that this meant that neither one of the two class 57 Thunderbrirds parked in the depot at Reading that morning could reach the afflicted train and move it off the running lines. 

What really intrigues me though is why that much vaunted star of television documentaries, the TVSC could not arrange for either of the two FGW 165s en route Guildford to Reading to be signalled to stop at Winnersh to pick up stranded passengers. They must have been aware that trains were unable to leave Reading as they couldn't get past Winnersh owing to our 458 blocking the line - Thus stopping at Winnersh to pick up stranded passengers would have had zero impact on the [already compromised] timetable down the line. There again is this a simple function of SWR not thinking about speaking to FGW?

 

From a passenger viewpoint, I have to say that the fragmentation of the railway into TOCs who then don't seem to have the flexibility of mindset to think of passengers and/or speak to other TOCs when things don't run according to plan or timetable is worrying.

 

Equally worrying is the long term simplification of line diagrams presumably to allow higher running speeds and cut maintenance costs but at the expense of a total loss of flexibility when something out of the ordinary happens. I also find it hard to believe that if Winnersh had been staffed last Saturday afternoon that any railway man worth his salt would not have flagged down a passing Reading-bound train to clear his station of stranded passengers.

 

Perhaps some of RMWEB's contributors who know this stretch of line might care to comment.

Edited July 18, 2018 by ted675

[LMS2968]

That wasn't a breakdown, that was a failure. A breakdown means it's on the floor, railway speak for derailed. Unfortunately, even railway 'spokespersons' have taken to using the wrong description, another piece of railway tradition passing into oblivion.

 

As for your actual question, sorry, but I don't know that road. Nor, for that matter, the modern railway in general.

[iands]

Do you know if the FGW failed in the platform at Wokingham? If it failed elsewhere in the Wokingham area then there may have been difficulties getting assistance to the failed train using another unit or Thunderbird as there is a number of AHBs that will have required to be manned and put into local control especially if the rescue unit/loco had to work wrong line for a few miles. Don't know the area specifically, just looking at the Sectional Appendix, 5-mile diagrams etc.

 

Regards, Ian.

[iands]

Apologies for the lack of comas, full stops etc. in the above post. I didn't stop to read it through before I hit the "post" button.

 

Regards, Ian.

[black and decker boy]

I don’t think either of the 57s could be used as thunderbirds for a 165/166 turbo. The dellner fitted ones can haul 387s but none are fitted with BSI couplers for sprinter/turbo use. Normal rescue is a unit of same type.

 

It depends on what / how /why it failed. I’m sure they didn’t leave it blocking the line for 4+ hours out of ignorance or laziness.

 

As to ‘flagging down’ a passing unit, I very much doubt it’s allowed or possible under the rule book. Control could introduce a stop though as you suggest.

[woodenhead]

As to ‘flagging down’ a passing unit, I very much doubt it’s allowed or possible under the rule book. Control could introduce a stop though as you suggest.

 This just reminds me of this

 

 

The train could be asked to stop but potentially does that then have a knock on effect for FGW if their train is then late as a result or it causes delays to other services.

[Arun Sharma]

 This just reminds me of this

 

THE-RAILWAY-CHILDREN-001.jpg

 

The train could be asked to stop but potentially does that then have a knock on effect for FGW if their train is then late as a result or it causes delays to other services.

As stated in the original posting, it would have had no effect at all as the return journey wouldn't have been possible anyway because of the 458 unable to proceed from Winnersh and blocking the single up line through Winnersh.

 

So the question becomes, "Could/Should TVSC have been asked by FGW or SWR to stop a Reading-bound train train to pick up stranded passengers at Winnersh"?

Edited July 18, 2018 by ted675

[mdvle]

As stated in the original posting, it would have had no effect at all as the return journey wouldn't have been possible anyway because of the 458 unable to proceed from Winnersh and blocking the single up line through Winnersh.

 

So the question becomes, "Could/Should TVSC have been asked by FGW or SWR to stop a Reading-bound train train to pick up stranded passengers at Winnersh"?

 

Hypotheticals given I don't know the area being talked about but in the general case

 

- the assumption regarding return journey could be false, the train could be booked to go to an entirely different destination / route after it arrives at its current destination.

 

- what is the loading on the service - ie. if they make the unscheduled stop to pick up SWR stranded passengers does that then maybe mean GWR passengers further down the line can't get onto a full train?

[Arun Sharma]

Hypotheticals given I don't know the area being talked about but in the general case

 

- the assumption regarding return journey could be false, the train could be booked to go to an entirely different destination / route after it arrives at its current destination.

 

- what is the loading on the service - ie. if they make the unscheduled stop to pick up SWR stranded passengers does that then maybe mean GWR passengers further down the line can't get onto a full train?

There are normally no stops for FGW services between Wokingham and Reading so the question of other passengers not getting on the train doesn't arise. These trains tend to run a shuttle service between Reading and either Guildford or Gatwick so these 2-3 car units use 10-12 car length terminal platforms at Reading so I would maintain that there is no additional impact on follow on services.

Edited July 18, 2018 by ted675

[caradoc]

That is a long time to be left on a stationary train. Please note that the following comments are based on my own experience of dealing with more train failures than I care to remember, and that the particular circumstances of this incident will have impacted on the action that could be, should be and was taken;

 

Once it became clear that the failure was going nowhere trapped trains would be dealt with; Perhaps by returning trains via the facing road to a suitable point (in this case, Reading), or at least to a station if not already in a platform, and then arranging road transport for the passengers.

To avoid further trains becoming trapped by the failure, and to maintain a service on as much as the route as possible, services in the opposite direction would be turned back at a suitable point short of the failure (which may be the reason no Class 458s passed on the Down line).

To assist the failure a compatible train would be sourced at quickly as possible, in this case perhaps by terminating a Down GWR service at Wokingham.

 

However, when these incidents are actually in progress it is not always clear just how serious or protracted they will become, and actions which should in hindsight have been taken sooner are delayed. It would be worth contacting South Western Railway, or Indeed Great Western Railway, to get their views.

 

Finally, I'm not sure that TVSC controls much of the route beyond Reading itself (not that that should have affected how the incident was managed).

[Banger Blue]

Last Saturday I was travelling from Reading to Weybridge on the 1142 Reading-Waterloo changing [hopefully] at Virginia Water for Weybridge. About 10minutes into the journey, the class 458 stopped at Winnersh as expected and them remained there for hours owing to a broken down [FGW cl165] ahead of us at Wokingham. 

I say, hours because I was on the train for two hours until I got a local bus back to Reading and abandoned my journey [for a full refund]. I understand that the 458 may have remained at Winnersh for a another couple of hours.

 

The 458's onboard staff at [what appeared to be an unmanned station] had suggested crossing to the opposite platform and catching a train returning to Reading and then going Reading-Basingstoke-Weybridge. No SWR 458s passed on the opposite line - I am guessing that the Wokingham disruption had affected Waterloo - Reading services in some way ?current turned off whilst working on the FGW casualty? but two FGW 165s passed though Winnersh at speed on their way to presumably Reading. 

 

I am guessing that this sorry state of affairs arose in part due to the removal of crossovers at, or near, stations allowing wrong-line running to get around broken down trains. 

Given the seeming lack of a crossover between Reading and Wokingham, I am guessing that this meant that neither one of the two class 57 Thunderbrirds parked in the depot at Reading that morning could reach the afflicted train and move it off the running lines. 

What really intrigues me though is why that much vaunted star of television documentaries, the TVSC could not arrange for either of the two FGW 165s en route Guildford to Reading to be signalled to stop at Winnersh to pick up stranded passengers. They must have been aware that trains were unable to leave Reading as they couldn't get past Winnersh owing to our 458 blocking the line - Thus stopping at Winnersh to pick up stranded passengers would have had zero impact on the [already compromised] timetable down the line. There again is this a simple function of SWR not thinking about speaking to FGW?

 

From a passenger viewpoint, I have to say that the fragmentation of the railway into TOCs who then don't seem to have the flexibility of mindset to think of passengers and/or speak to other TOCs when things don't run according to plan or timetable is worrying.

 

Equally worrying is the long term simplification of line diagrams presumably to allow higher running speeds and cut maintenance costs but at the expense of a total loss of flexibility when something out of the ordinary happens. I also find it hard to believe that if Winnersh had been staffed last Saturday afternoon that any railway man worth his salt would not have flagged down a passing Reading-bound train to clear his station of stranded passengers.

 

Perhaps some of RMWEB's contributors who know this stretch of line might care to comment.

The offending unit was a GWR Class 166, 166201 working 1O70 11:32 Reading - Gatwick Airport, which was reported failed in the Wokingham area, with a massive air leak. The driver had requested a block on both lines whilst he examined the unit.

 

The driver was unable to rectify the fault after consultation with Maintenance Control and fitters had to be dispatched by road from Reading TCD.

 

“Thunderbird” duties for the Turbos are performed by another member of the 16x class. The Dellner coupler fitted 57 (DRS 57306) is used for rescuing 387 EMUs if necessary but is also a spare Loco for the Night Riviera Sleeper. The other 57 on Depot was on maintenance.

 

I think you are mistaking TVSC (Thames Valley Signalling Centre) at Didcot for the NR/GWR ICC (Intergrated Control Centre) at Western House in Swindon.

 

The ICC would routinely speak with other route controls, ticket acceptance on Cross Country trains, SWR or TfL is regularly organised between the relevant controls.

 

The decision to stop any Reading bound services would be the decision of the GWR LTV Train Service Controller and/or NR Train Running Controller. If the station was manned the staff could request a Special Stop Order to be issued at a previous stop for their station, (you don’t just flag down a passing train!) however it would be down to the Controllers to make that decision. In my previous role on a station I have requested a special stop after some cancellations. To us on the front line, it made perfect sense, however the Controllers didn’t see it that way (bigger picture etc) and the request was denied.

 

In a situation like that, even if the train were to be stopped at the station by a red aspect, unless it was on the drivers diagram or they had received an SSO they wouldn’t release the doors. Some drivers would even stop short of entering the platform (especially if it’s mobbed) until the relevant signal was showing a proceed aspect. If they do stop alongside there will always be the passengers who, despite tannoys / platform staff telling them the train is not ‘stopping’ will always approach and try the doors. If it’s slam door stock, a very good chance of getting a door ‘on the catch’.

[Arun Sharma]

Thank you Dougie - That all makes more sense now.

[newbryford]

Lack of crossovers isn't unique to the railway.

Spare a thought for those caught in an incident on the A1 today meant some folk didn't move for 6 hours until a gap was cut in the central reservation barrier to allow them to turn round.

 

Spare another thought for the truck driver and his family that didn't get the chance to turn round.......

[Wheatley]

That wasn't a breakdown, that was a failure. A breakdown means it's on the floor, railway speak for derailed. Unfortunately, even railway 'spokespersons' have taken to using the wrong description, another piece of railway tradition passing into oblivion.

 

Not in my 30 years experience, derailed is derailed, or possibly 'off the road' or 'on the dirt/ballast'. 'Failed' might be understood by a railwaymen but to a standard passenger 'broken down' tells them exactly what they need to know. The wrong description would be announcing that 'the up service is caped' which i've also heard. And yes, i'm aware they are/were 'breakdown cranes' but i've still never heard the term used for the actual derailment.

[LMS2968]

Alas, my experiences were from 45 years ago...

[Wheatley]

And 'railway terminology' isn't standard nationwide, even the standard terminology. 'Backboard' anyone ?

[LMS2968]

And 'railway terminology' isn't standard nationwide, even the standard terminology. 'Backboard' anyone ?

Distant signal

 

Some called signals boards, some called them pegs. The levers were usually sticks.

Edited July 19, 2018 by LMS2968

[beast66606]

2C34 (the train the OP was travelling on) arrived Winnersh 11:52, +1 , next report was Wokingham 14:18, +143

[PenrithBeacon]

Sounds horrendous.

[The Stationmaster]

Do you know if the FGW failed in the platform at Wokingham? If it failed elsewhere in the Wokingham area then there may have been difficulties getting assistance to the failed train using another unit or Thunderbird as there is a number of AHBs that will have required to be manned and put into local control especially if the rescue unit/loco had to work wrong line for a few miles. Don't know the area specifically, just looking at the Sectional Appendix, 5-mile diagrams etc.

 

Regards, Ian.

 

Exactly so.  There are crossovers at Wokingham and the next ones westwards are at Reading (less than 6 miles away), I'm not sure if the intermediate crossover at Earley still survives but it is in any case GF worked.

 

The big problem with any incident like this is that if it is right in front of you and you are working on it time passes at an incredible rate.  It is obviously the job of Control to think of the bigger picture but that might simply extend to letting the Driver of any 'trapped' train know what is happening without any indication of how long things might take to sort out.  Not nice if you area passenger - I suffered a very similar situation enroute to Swansea some years ago after a preceding train reported hitting something in the Severn Tunnel - we had an excellent and communicative Guard but all he could do was pass on what he was told - and we had a ship to catch at Swansea which added to our worries about the delay (we caught it with about 5 minutes to spare but were then told sailing was to be delayed anyway!).

 

We always found it helped if passengers on delayed trains were kept fully informed but as that incident where I was passenger showed there is not always sufficient information to say when things will get on the move or indeed what is actually happening.  Communication has got better I think and there is plenty of outside information available nowadays as well but all of that doesn't necessarily solve the problem which is causing the delay.

 

Turning trains mid-section - as would be the case at Winnersh - isn't necessarily a simple task with fewer ground staff available than in the past and thus it is often the last thing to be considered, especially if things at the source of delay are expected to be righted more quickly than actually happens.

[iands]

Exactly so.  There are crossovers at Wokingham and the next ones westwards are at Reading (less than 6 miles away), I'm not sure if the intermediate crossover at Earley still survives but it is in any case GF worked.

 

The big problem with any incident like this is that if it is right in front of you and you are working on it time passes at an incredible rate.  It is obviously the job of Control to think of the bigger picture but that might simply extend to letting the Driver of any 'trapped' train know what is happening without any indication of how long things might take to sort out.  Not nice if you area passenger - I suffered a very similar situation enroute to Swansea some years ago after a preceding train reported hitting something in the Severn Tunnel - we had an excellent and communicative Guard but all he could do was pass on what he was told - and we had a ship to catch at Swansea which added to our worries about the delay (we caught it with about 5 minutes to spare but were then told sailing was to be delayed anyway!).

 

We always found it helped if passengers on delayed trains were kept fully informed but as that incident where I was passenger showed there is not always sufficient information to say when things will get on the move or indeed what is actually happening.  Communication has got better I think and there is plenty of outside information available nowadays as well but all of that doesn't necessarily solve the problem which is causing the delay.

 

Turning trains mid-section - as would be the case at Winnersh - isn't necessarily a simple task with fewer ground staff available than in the past and thus it is often the last thing to be considered, especially if things at the source of delay are expected to be righted more quickly than actually happens.

I think the delay/difficulties experienced would also depend on the nature of the failure suffered by the "failed" unit (well it used to matter, I'm not sure if it is still the case these days with modern units), whether "assistance" is required from the front or rear, or whether it could have been something fixable by an RST. Would be interesting to find out if the fault was mechanical or electrical or some other fault (e.g. broken windscreen or failed radio, etc.), but I guess we'll never get to know the full details.

 

Regards, Ian.

[caradoc]

Exactly so.  There are crossovers at Wokingham and the next ones westwards are at Reading (less than 6 miles away), I'm not sure if the intermediate crossover at Earley still survives but it is in any case GF worked.

 

The big problem with any incident like this is that if it is right in front of you and you are working on it time passes at an incredible rate.  It is obviously the job of Control to think of the bigger picture but that might simply extend to letting the Driver of any 'trapped' train know what is happening without any indication of how long things might take to sort out.  Not nice if you area passenger - I suffered a very similar situation enroute to Swansea some years ago after a preceding train reported hitting something in the Severn Tunnel - we had an excellent and communicative Guard but all he could do was pass on what he was told - and we had a ship to catch at Swansea which added to our worries about the delay (we caught it with about 5 minutes to spare but were then told sailing was to be delayed anyway!).

 

We always found it helped if passengers on delayed trains were kept fully informed but as that incident where I was passenger showed there is not always sufficient information to say when things will get on the move or indeed what is actually happening.  Communication has got better I think and there is plenty of outside information available nowadays as well but all of that doesn't necessarily solve the problem which is causing the delay.

 

Turning trains mid-section - as would be the case at Winnersh - isn't necessarily a simple task with fewer ground staff available than in the past and thus it is often the last thing to be considered, especially if things at the source of delay are expected to be righted more quickly than actually happens.

 

Agree, Stationmaster, with how quickly time passes during a major incident; Sometimes none of the staff involved, Signallers or Controllers for example, has time to step back for a moment and consider if everything that should have been done has been (I speak from personal knowledge here !).

 

I experienced this from the passenger's viewpoint one day on the way into work for a (rare) 9 to 5 shift; The train came to a stand between Queens Park and Pollokshields East stations, near Glasgow Central, and stood and stood. A major signalling failure had occurred, IIRC due to a fault with the 25kV feeder between Eglinton Street and Polmadie. Eventually I was able to borrow the Ticket Examiner's mobile phone and contact Control who arranged for the Signaller to return the train via a wrong direction move to Queens Park, from where we all detrained and caught buses into Glasgow. It transpired that the train I was on had simply been forgotten about, there being so many trains affected, combined with the loss of signalling indications. 

[Arun Sharma]

I think the delay/difficulties experienced would also depend on the nature of the failure suffered by the "failed" unit (well it used to matter, I'm not sure if it is still the case these days with modern units), whether "assistance" is required from the front or rear, or whether it could have been something fixable by an RST. Would be interesting to find out if the fault was mechanical or electrical or some other fault (e.g. broken windscreen or failed radio, etc.), but I guess we'll never get to know the full details.

 

Regards, Ian.

see post #11 for more information from "Banger blue"

[iands]

see post #11 for more information from "Banger blue"

Many thanks for that. Somehow I'd managed to skip past post #11.

 

Regards, Ian.

[roythebus]

Many years ago I had this scenario, driving a train (VEP/CEP/whatever) approaching Wokingham towards Reading. It had gone through my mind "what would happen if a DMU failed in front of my,could I assist as my train is air braked, the DMU vacuum etc.

 

The home signal for Wokingham showed red, not unusual. But then for a long time. I got on the phone to Wokingham, guess what I was told? Yes, the DMU had failed in the platform! I went through the "assistance in the rear" in my head again, knew what to do. We sat there a lot longer. Maybe half an hour, then the signal cleared!

 

The simple answer was to wait for the next DMU to come along, couple that up and continue to Reading! Remember along that line there were 2 DMUs and 2 juice trains every half hour. But I don't suppose anything is that simple these days.

 

If as someone said earleir, there was a horrendous air leak, that is usually a fitters job these days. You need air to release the spring parking brakes and a lot more.