Class 800 fails near Exeter

[royaloak]

Yes true but I wasn't working on the assist scenario.

If you isolate the front E70 on an HST it cannot go forward as this one realises the brakes (Both front and rear apply them) so an HST can only be driven from a cab which has on operable E70.

It can still go 'forward' as long as it is driven from the back cab, with the right people in 'control' and the right people on the ground anything is possible with a little thought (and compliant with Network Rails rule book), unfortunately in the modern world nobody wants to put their name to a decision to do something just in case there is any backlash, hence the 'cant do' attitude so prevalent these days and not just on the railways.

[PaulRhB]

. . . the right people on the ground anything is possible with a little thought (and compliant with Network Rails rule book), unfortunately in the modern world nobody wants to put their name to a decision to do something just in case there is any backlash, hence the 'cant do' attitude so prevalent these days and not just on the railways.

Quite true, as I pointed out to someone a few years ago on a single coach from a 159 it says to be driven from the leading cab, not which end of the coach the leading cab has to be! There are extra precautions you can put in place to protect any unusual move and most of it is covered by the rule book requirements for a wrong direction movement anyway. Competent staff with radios or GSMR cab to cab and good communication procedures combined with proper signal protection and extra safety overlaps.

I've seen huge differences in recovery times depending how quickly an experienced supervisory person gets involved.

[Southernman46]

Quite true, as I pointed out to someone a few years ago on a single coach from a 159 it says to be driven from the leading cab, not which end of the coach the leading cab has to be! There are extra precautions you can put in place to protect any unusual move and most of it is covered by the rule book requirements for a wrong direction movement anyway. Competent staff with radios or GSMR cab to cab and good communication procedures combined with proper signal protection and extra safety overlaps.

I've seen huge differences in recovery times depending how quickly an experienced supervisory person gets involved.

Agreed - some years ago at Clapham , we moved a recently re-railed VEP driving trailer using a Class 73 at the cab end from West London Junction to Clapham Yard with a least one change of direction using back to back radio's, clear understanding and a competent person hanging out of the "toilet end window controlling the movement ........................... the fact that the VEP / 73 were also coupled together with just a length of piece of rope (due to buckeye damage on the VEP) just added to the interest ....................................

[flapland]

Agreed - some years ago at Clapham , we moved a recently re-railed VEP driving trailer using a Class 73 at the cab end from West London Junction to Clapham Yard with a least one change of direction using back to back radio's, clear understanding and a competent person hanging out of the "toilet end window controlling the movement ........................... the fact that the VEP / 73 were also coupled together with just a length of piece of rope (due to buckeye damage on the VEP) just added to the interest ....................................

 

Today this would be just a ropeless cause. :-) and cause days of disruption to build the temporary road for the hired in cranes. 

[caradoc]

It can still go 'forward' as long as it is driven from the back cab, with the right people in 'control' and the right people on the ground anything is possible with a little thought (and compliant with Network Rails rule book), unfortunately in the modern world nobody wants to put their name to a decision to do something just in case there is any backlash, hence the 'cant do' attitude so prevalent these days and not just on the railways.

 

royaloak, I retired two years ago now but I can assure you that in Network Rail Scotland Route Control we used whatever means we could to clear the line and move trains as quickly and safely as possible. A fairly regular occurrence on the night shift in Autumn was a Down freight 'failing' (ie becoming overpowered or slipping to a stand on Beattock Bank), and while it is always best to assist from the front, if the only feasible option was the following train assisting the failure into Summit Down Loop, or just to Summit to get going again, that was what we did. We were always sure to obtain the consent of the Drivers and Operators concerned first, however.

[Ken.W]

Quite true, as I pointed out to someone a few years ago on a single coach from a 159 it says to be driven from the leading cab, not which end of the coach the leading cab has to be!

 

Regularly done with HST power cars running 'light' between Craigentinny Depot and Edinburgh Waverley

 

When there's a through service with a failed power car, a power car swap is often done in Waverley station. If it's the south end one this involves the replacement running in reverce from Craigentinny.

There's special instructions for this, which basically means having a second driver in the van area using the cab - cab phone and buzzer to the driver in the cab.

[royaloak]

royaloak, I retired two years ago now but I can assure you that in Network Rail Scotland Route Control we used whatever means we could to clear the line and move trains as quickly and safely as possible. A fairly regular occurrence on the night shift in Autumn was a Down freight 'failing' (ie becoming overpowered or slipping to a stand on Beattock Bank), and while it is always best to assist from the front, if the only feasible option was the following train assisting the failure into Summit Down Loop, or just to Summit to get going again, that was what we did. We were always sure to obtain the consent of the Drivers and Operators concerned first, however.

Unfortunately a lot has changed in 2 years, I am not saying it doesnt happen, just that when it does happen it has taken about 10 times longer to arrive at that decision, I will leave it at that!

[PaulRhB]

Regularly done with HST power cars running 'light' between Craigentinny Depot and Edinburgh Waverley

 

When there's a through service with a failed power car, a power car swap is often done in Waverley station. If it's the south end one this involves the replacement running in reverce from Craigentinny.

There's special instructions for this, which basically means having a second driver in the van area using the cab - cab phone and buzzer to the driver in the cab.

That's exactly what we did, the look on their faces was great and they already had the radios. Often it's just someone saying 'why don't we do this?' and everyone knows it's possible. When we had the snow earlier in the year we knew we could get the train down but it was possible we could have problems with points on the way back. I just said well as long as we can get one way we can always do this. It was safe, in the rule book anyway it just wasn't in the snow plan. The rules can't cover every exact situation but they do allow you several options as long as you work back and someone is prepared to authorise it as an exceptional reason. I've had the control manager on the phone and referenced appropriate passages so they can read them for themselves and got things done several times.

I can think of one incident where the RAIB investigated a slide through and complemented the Driver and Signalman on making a decision that while technically broke a rule was absolutely the right reaction in this particular situation and avoided a very possible collision.

I'm all for getting control staff and managers out on the ground and in boxes if they haven't done the job as it makes it clear why certain things work

[The Stationmaster]

Quite true, as I pointed out to someone a few years ago on a single coach from a 159 it says to be driven from the leading cab, not which end of the coach the leading cab has to be! There are extra precautions you can put in place to protect any unusual move and most of it is covered by the rule book requirements for a wrong direction movement anyway. Competent staff with radios or GSMR cab to cab and good communication procedures combined with proper signal protection and extra safety overlaps.

I've seen huge differences in recovery times depending how quickly an experienced supervisory person gets involved.

 

Ah - time for a history lesson I believe.  The reason leading cab is stated in the Rules was to try and stamp out the practice of driving locos from the back cab.  Technically, and in R&R terms, driving from the back cab (or a trailing cab) is regarded as propelling but there was at one time quite a lot of difficulty getting that idea through to rather a lot of people.

 

There is nothing wrong with driving from a trailing cab provided it is treated as a propelling movement and that the Rules, and any relevant location specific Instructions are complied with.  Where propelling is not permitted there should be a suitable Instruction in place to cover the eventuality of driving from a trailing cab (but I doubt there is everywhere beyond any general provision in the Rules!).  As you say most of it is covered in the Rules in respect of wrong direction moves and propelling - or should be if they haven't been messed about too much in recent years.

[PaulRhB]

Certain preserved railways have fallen foul due to that practice and damaged stock.

Hopefully they've had a full investigation start and it will lead to a proper contingency plan. From what I'm hearing though the solution may be fairly simple to prevent the failure, but that will have to wait for confirmation in the report.

[caradoc]

Ah - time for a history lesson I believe.  The reason leading cab is stated in the Rules was to try and stamp out the practice of driving locos from the back cab.  Technically, and in R&R terms, driving from the back cab (or a trailing cab) is regarded as propelling but there was at one time quite a lot of difficulty getting that idea through to rather a lot of people.

 

There is nothing wrong with driving from a trailing cab provided it is treated as a propelling movement and that the Rules, and any relevant location specific Instructions are complied with.  Where propelling is not permitted there should be a suitable Instruction in place to cover the eventuality of driving from a trailing cab (but I doubt there is everywhere beyond any general provision in the Rules!).  As you say most of it is covered in the Rules in respect of wrong direction moves and propelling - or should be if they haven't been messed about too much in recent years.

 

At my local station, Neilston, occasionally a Driver would change ends in the platform before driving from the rear cab into the headshunt, and yes, at least twice to my knowledge a train went through the bufferstops as a result ! To be fair, this was many years ago now.

 

Regarding HST power cars running blunt end first, an issue at Edinburgh was TPWS activations because the blunt end passed a signal, which therefore returned to danger, before the receiver on the cab passed it - Not sure how this has been overcome ?

[PaulRhB]

Regarding HST power cars running blunt end first, an issue at Edinburgh was TPWS activations because the blunt end passed a signal, which therefore returned to danger, before the receiver on the cab passed it - Not sure how this has been overcome ?

There's a temporary isolation option that reactivates it after a short period, you just have to isolate it as you are at the signal. It's used anyway for talking by signals they'd just need a reminder notice for doing moves in reverse.

[The Stationmaster]

Certain preserved railways have fallen foul due to that practice and damaged stock.

Hopefully they've had a full investigation start and it will lead to a proper contingency plan. From what I'm hearing though the solution may be fairly simple to prevent the failure, but that will have to wait for confirmation in the report.

 

They're not the only ones - there was stopblock collision at Theale on 06 Aug when a Driver failed to halt a propelling movement with a stone train after he lost radio contact from the Shunter.  Seems that some folk can't even follow the simplest of Rule Book procedures.  My oppo and I tend to try to discourage the use of radios during propelling moves on preserved railways because of the potential difficulty in ensuring radio discipline although I have made provision for it in a couple of the Rule Books I've written when sighting problems would have left no alternative.

[jim.snowdon]

They're not the only ones - there was stopblock collision at Theale on 06 Aug when a Driver failed to halt a propelling movement with a stone train after he lost radio contact from the Shunter.  Seems that some folk can't even follow the simplest of Rule Book procedures.  My oppo and I tend to try to discourage the use of radios during propelling moves on preserved railways because of the potential difficulty in ensuring radio discipline although I have made provision for it in a couple of the Rule Books I've written when sighting problems would have left no alternative.

Which is why the required USAF practice when reversing a C-17 under its own power is that the man at rear of the aircraft, standing on the rear loading ramp, talks to the pilot all the time. If he stops for any reason, the pilot stops the movement.

 

Jim

[Fat Controller]

Which is why the required USAF practice when reversing a C-17 under its own power is that the man at rear of the aircraft, standing on the rear loading ramp, talks to the pilot all the time. If he stops for any reason, the pilot stops the movement.

 

Jim

Same with the SNCF 'REFO' setting-back procedure: if there is a break in communication, the movement stops.

[Siberian Snooper]

When doing propelling movements on a preserved railway, as the shunted, I only ever used hand or lamp signals, even if it meant dismounting and slowing or stopping it in order to get back on, if the movement was over a distance.

[87023Velocity]

Hi,

 

Class 800's can be loco hauled. If you remember the early testing, a class 66 was used to haul between test sites. There is a connector in the nose end for attaching a brake hose, the brake pipe is fed into the Driving Trailer and converted to an electrical control signal to then control the EP style brake units. You do need the train batteries powered for this though (if 1 power unit is running, then I suppose could be hauled quite a distance.) The driving trailers effectively act like translators. Ps been a long day - hope that makes sense and apologies for any errors.

PPS, going bit off topic but CAF 195, 331 and 397 are the same as can be hauled by a loco and have the brakes controlled from the locos brake pipe (again requires train batts set though).

 

Cheers

 

Simon

[GoingUnderground]

I hated the HSTs when they arrived in 1976. They had displaced loco hauled trains, had smelly brakes (for a while); but worst of all they continued the move away from Mk2a style seating which (to me) was the pinnacle of open carriage design. High backed seats with wings to rest my head on when dozing off.

 

I don't want to be able to see all the way down the carriage every time I look up, because if I can, so can everyone else. I like the 800s; and the ones I have travelled on have seemed an improvement on the Mk3s. I don't want luggage racks at the end off the carriage. I want to put my bag above my seat.

 

Fit an 800 with Mk2a seating and luggage racks and I will be very happy.

 

.....from Mr Grumpy.

The problem with luggage racks above seats is that they're fine for a small bag, or coat, but try putting a suitcase up there! The best place for suitcases is between the seats, if there's space.

[Banger Blue]

Hi,

 

Class 800's can be loco hauled. If you remember the early testing, a class 66 was used to haul between test sites. There is a connector in the nose end for attaching a brake hose, the brake pipe is fed into the Driving Trailer and converted to an electrical control signal to then control the EP style brake units. You do need the train batteries powered for this though (if 1 power unit is running, then I suppose could be hauled quite a distance.) The driving trailers effectively act like translators. Ps been a long day - hope that makes sense and apologies for any errors.

PPS, going bit off topic but CAF 195, 331 and 397 are the same as can be hauled by a loco and have the brakes controlled from the locos brake pipe (again requires train batts set though).

 

Cheers

 

Simon

 

They can indeed. Shortly after introduction, coupling tests were carried out at Reading TCD with an 800 and one of GWR's Class 57's:

 

 

 

[Zomboid]

At the risk of thread drift, voyagers have what looks like an ETS socket under the coupler - I always wondered why, but would it be so that an ETS fitted loco could haul them and supply the power for the braking system? Of course, it could actually be something else - depot shore supply maybe...

[87023Velocity]

At the risk of thread drift, voyagers have what looks like an ETS socket under the coupler - I always wondered why, but would it be so that an ETS fitted loco could haul them and supply the power for the braking system? Of course, it could actually be something else - depot shore supply maybe...

Yes thats for shore supply. Voyagers like class 390's can be loco hauled even electrically dead. Going right off topic Virgin did some tests of a 390 hauling a 221 and vice versa, all fully braked using what is refered to as brake pipe mode. There is a video on Youtube, the pan was only up on the 390 to provide power for the engineers etc on the train.

 

Cheers

 

Simon

[phil-b259]

There's a temporary isolation option that reactivates it after a short period, you just have to isolate it as you are at the signal. It's used anyway for talking by signals they'd just need a reminder notice for doing moves in reverse.

 

However this temporary isolation of the TPWS is only able to be performed when the train is proved to be stationary by the on train kit - as logically TPWS should only ever need to be isolated when authorised to pass a signal at danger by a signaller.

 

This isolation lasts for 30 seconds, after which he TPWS system is armed again.

 

Therefore if there are concerns over a spurious TPWS intervention when propelling, then the train must come to a stand at every signal where this may take place (even if the signal concerned is shown a proceed aspect) to undertake the isolation procedure.

 

Where propelling moves are regularly scheduled to take place, the usual mitigation is to change the signal from 'first wheel replacement' to 'last wheel replacement' in the interlocking. We had a situation at Three Bridges where the position of pointwork, impedance bonds, IBJs, a platform and the signal meant that slow speed shunt moves into the new Thameslink depot were getting tripped by the TPWS. An alteration from 'first wheel' to 'last wheel' with respect to the shunt routes corrected the problem.

[Ken.W]

However this temporary isolation of the TPWS is only able to be performed when the train is proved to be stationary by the on train kit - as logically TPWS should only ever need to be isolated when authorised to pass a signal at danger by a signaller.

 

This isolation lasts for 30 seconds, after which he TPWS system is armed again.

 

Therefore if there are concerns over a spurious TPWS intervention when propelling, then the train must come to a stand at every signal where this may take place (even if the signal concerned is shown a proceed aspect) to undertake the isolation procedure.

 

Erm no, what's discribed there's the Train Stop Overide, on the TPWS desk panel, and used as discribed to overide the train stop at a signal you're standing at when authorised to pass the signal at danger.

 

There's also a Temporary Isolation, using a sealed switch located in the engine room (or otherwise out of reach), which isolates the TPWS only (not the AWS), and it remains isolated until reset by the switch. A warning light on the desk panel's illuminated during this isolation. Without this procedures such as Temporary Block Working wouldn't be possible.

 

As I'm not involved in them, I don't know the procedure for the power car movements at Edinburgh

[The Stationmaster]

Erm no, what's discribed there's the Train Stop Overide, on the TPWS desk panel, and used as discribed to overide the train stop at a signal you're standing at when authorised to pass the signal at danger.

 

There's also a Temporary Isolation, using a sealed switch located in the engine room (or otherwise out of reach), which isolates the TPWS only (not the AWS), and it remains isolated until reset by the switch. A warning light on the desk panel's illuminated during this isolation. Without this procedures such as Temporary Block Working wouldn't be possible.

 

As I'm not involved in them, I don't know the procedure for the power car movements at Edinburgh

 

And various sections of the Rule Book very clearly differentiate between use of the Train Stop Override and isolation of the TPWS.