Bridge bashing

[F-UnitMad]

2 hours ago, LMS2968 said:

Driving a train is very different from driving a road vehicle. If the last signal was green, then the section ahead is clear. If it isn't, there isn't usually much the driver can do; he can rarely stop within his seeing distance. Many (ab)users of level crossings have failed to realise this, to their cost.

Well I realise it's very different, for lots of reasons, but I would still think it's a good idea to keep looking where the train's going; there was an account in Rail or Traction many years back of a driver who saw someone on a bridge waving something red at him. Train was a 47 on Containers. He assumed it was a makeshift warning, & went to emergency on the brakes; as he rounded the bend saw a herd of stray cows on the line. IIRC he came to a halt before hitting any, & was thankful he'd reacted to the pedestrian warning him. 

Maybe in most instances especially at high speed there won't be a lot he can do, but it still stands to reason that he should look where the train is going.

[caradoc]

As mentioned, we do not know the full circumstances, but given that the Driver should have had route knowledge of the BPGV, how could they possibly not know that a non-cut down 08 would not fit ? Or perhaps it was believed that the location of the failed train was before the low bridge ?

[caradoc]

8 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

Interesting that in this thread drift to the cut-down 08s etc, no one at all has mentioned anything about the driver of the 'full size' one that rammed that bridge. If it had been an HGV incident I'm sure there would've been a lot said about the driver then, 100% of it derogatory.

 

Just saying....

 

That's an interesting point, although I would expect some form of action would have been taken by BR against the staff responsible.

 

However; We are discussing one incident of a train striking a bridge, over 30 years ago; How many lorry bridge strike incidents have there been in the same period - To give a clue, in the one Region/Zone in which I worked there were usually several each week, and during a single shift I once had three ! Not to mention those strikes which do not get reported.

 

[F-UnitMad]

48 minutes ago, caradoc said:

 

That's an interesting point, although I would expect some form of action would have been taken by BR against the staff responsible.

 

However; We are discussing one incident of a train striking a bridge, over 30 years ago; How many lorry bridge strike incidents have there been in the same period - To give a clue, in the one Region/Zone in which I worked there were usually several each week, and during a single shift I once had three ! Not to mention those strikes which do not get reported.

 

Agreed - the difference, as pointed out earlier, of a 'closed' versus an 'open' transport system; clearly for the most part the railways work altogether safer & better than the roads do, which is why we lament the decline of freight on the railways.

The fact that the UK railways in particular are hampered by a very small loading gauge, which decreases it's effective competetiveness against road haulage, as well as the short distances in the UK, is another matter. Anyone who has seen Tesco's intermodal trailers next to standard road trailers, never mind high-cube double deckers, will know what I mean.

Edited April 7, 2020 by F-UnitMad

[PhilJ W]

Surely there would be a report somewhere about the incident? 

[corneliuslundie]

Re the Burry Port bridge bash. From “The Burry Port & Gwendraeth Valley Railway and its antecedant canals. Volume two. The railway and dock” by R W Miller (Oakwood Press, 2009):

“It was on 9th November 1988 that diesel-electric locomotive No. 08995 Kidwelly failed when working a train at Pontyates and Landore (Swansea) rather foolishly dispatched unaltered 08898 cab-first on a rescue mission. This engine was too high to go under the lowest of the BP&GV structures with the result that the top of the cab struck the Glyn Abbey road bridge, moving the bridge by four feet and fracturing the water main. The resulting cascade of water caused the driver to believe for a moment that the locomotive had fallen into the river! Fortunately, the driver (Max Elmer Cadman of Llandybie) and his assistant (Nigel Morgan of Ammanford) escaped any injury. In contrast, the damage received by the engine was sufficient to have her withdrawn. No. 08995 on the other hand was overhauled and shortly afterwards re-appeared smartly painted in the latest Railfreight Coal Section (sic) two-tone grey livery.”

The line was laid on the bed of the former canal and there were therefore several low bridges, this one being the lowest. So reconstruction to allow standard height locomotives would have been prohibitive.

Jonathan

[Trog]

I know of a couple of arched bridges that have a V shaped notch worn into the under side of the arch where the outside top corner of passing container traffic had been rubbing on the brickwork.

[62613]

15 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

Well I realise it's very different, for lots of reasons, but I would still think it's a good idea to keep looking where the train's going; there was an account in Rail or Traction many years back of a driver who saw someone on a bridge waving something red at him. Train was a 47 on Containers. He assumed it was a makeshift warning, & went to emergency on the brakes; as he rounded the bend saw a herd of stray cows on the line. IIRC he came to a halt before hitting any, & was thankful he'd reacted to the pedestrian warning him. 

Maybe in most instances especially at high speed there won't be a lot he can do, but it still stands to reason that he should look where the train is going.

Jenny Agutter?

[peanuts]

38 minutes ago, 62613 said:

Jenny Agutter?

yes please 

 

[melmerby]

16 hours ago, F-UnitMad said:

 

The fact that the UK railways in particular are hampered by a very small loading gauge, which decreases it's effective competetiveness against road haulage, as well as the short distances in the UK, is another matter. Anyone who has seen Tesco's intermodal trailers next to standard road trailers, never mind high-cube double deckers, will know what I mean.

It's interesting to compare lorries & railways, here in the UK and in the US.

Vast lengths of US railways are cleared for double stackers, whilst there are an awful lot of low road bridges & structures, restricting truck heights. Here we have the reverse, 5 metre high trucks but much lower trains.

The US trucks can be 20% heavier but are also often longer than UK trucks.

[The Stationmaster]

4 hours ago, Trog said:

I know of a couple of arched bridges that have a V shaped notch worn into the under side of the arch where the outside top corner of passing container traffic had been rubbing on the brickwork.

There were several like that in the Thames Valley between Tilehurst and Didcot - mainly on the Up Relief Line.

[Trog]

17 minutes ago, The Stationmaster said:

There were several like that in the Thames Valley between Tilehurst and Didcot - mainly on the Up Relief Line.

 

Presumably the 'Fast' line bridges being built while the rails were still the wrong distance apart, have larger spans and hence tend not to be so tight at the corners.

Edited April 8, 2020 by Trog
poor spellin.

[The Stationmaster]

19 minutes ago, Trog said:

 

Presumably the 'Fast' line bridges being built while the rails were still the wrong distance apart, have larger spans and hence tend not to be so tight at the corners.

Quite likely although oddly the Mains had all been deep blasted when they received cwr although the Reliefs also later had some deep balasting.  The other thing was that some of the Main Line arches had been rebuilt because they were older (oddly Twyford is the other way round where the older Relief Line arch is still there but the newer Main Line arch was rebuilt a long while back).

[Wickham Green too]

29 minutes ago, Trog said:

 

Presumably the 'Fast' line bridges being built while the rails were still the wrong distance apart, have larger spans and hence tend not to be so tight at the corners.

...... and presumably the 'Fast' lines tend to be used by 'Fast' ( passenger ) trains rather than over-height freights.

[The Stationmaster]

26 minutes ago, Wickham Green too said:

...... and presumably the 'Fast' lines tend to be used by 'Fast' ( passenger ) trains rather than over-height freights.

The container trains weren't normally run on the Mains because that wouldn't have meant crossing over twice - as it was they had to cross the Mains at Reading West Jcn to get round Oxford Road curve to reach the B&H and Basingstoke.  Later somebody had the excellent idea of v building a flyover at Reading West Jcn of course.

[eastglosmog]

6 hours ago, Trog said:

I know of a couple of arched bridges that have a V shaped notch worn into the under side of the arch where the outside top corner of passing container traffic had been rubbing on the brickwork.

I was told that the lining of Whitwell tunnel has score marks where the coal hoppers rubbed along it.  No idea how true the tale is, though.

[62613]

6 hours ago, peanuts said:

yes please 

 

Bit old for you!

 

[stewartingram]

6 hours ago, eastglosmog said:

I was told that the lining of Whitwell tunnel has score marks where the coal hoppers rubbed along it.  No idea how true the tale is, though.

The Bakerloo line, north of Oxford Circus where there are reverse curves under the BBC building, is very tight. The train roofs occasionally rub on the tunnel roof, apparently the cast iron segments have been infilled with cement to provide a smoother (! - that must mean relatively?) surface. I have actually seen ventilators on the roof of the train that have been scraped.

 

Stewart

[Wickham Green too]

7 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

............  Later somebody had the excellent idea of building a flyover at Reading West Jcn of course.

A little odd that wasn't done earlier - maybe when the flying junction was put in at the Somerset end of the Berks & Hants ! 

[The Stationmaster]

18 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

A little odd that wasn't done earlier - maybe when the flying junction was put in at the Somerset end of the Berks & Hants ! 

I suspect that when Cogload jcn was opened in 1906 the designers had more concrete thoughts about fast trains on both routes and a lot of traffic on the Bristol route than the builders of Reading West (aka Oxford Road) Curve in 1856 had any thoughts at all about half hourly service intervals of fast trains to/from Bristol and South Wales and hourly container trains to/from Southampton

 

Reading West Jcn really only became a problem when the number of fast trains on the Main Lines and the number of container trains to/from Southampton started to increase considerably.  Even in the 1970s it was no sort of problem and it wasn't a major in the late 1980s although things were starting to get awkward at times by then.   I was a member of the Reading Layout Improvement working group in the early 1990s and even by then we couldn't justify thoughts of a flying junction at Reading West jcn because any money to pay for simply wasn't there or likely to be forthcoming although we did have a slightly devious plan to try to get higher line speeds to/from the curve. 

[RJS1977]

A bridge bash with a difference!

 

https://youtu.be/0qTBdcWHYCg?t=91

[Wickham Green too]

Was his overall height marked inside his helmet ?

[jcm@gwr]

9 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Was his overall height marked inside his helmet ?

 

That's a bit of a personal question, isn't it?  

Edited April 11, 2020 by jcm@gwr

[LMS2968]

19 hours ago, Wickham Green too said:

Was his overall height marked inside his helmet ?

7 3/4?

[Wickham Green too]

3 hours ago, LMS2968 said:

7 3/4?

Big head !