Britannia mainline failure

[Oldddudders]

Boris's point is, as he rightly predicts, unlikely to win him any friends. Heritage trains pay fees to use the network just like TOCs and others, of course. I offer no evidence that they are more or less reliable than TOC services. 

 

What makes me uncomfortable about excursions, be they modern or heritage traction, is that my recent years' experience of the network suggests that daily planned timetabled performance is pretty bad a lot of the time. More than 50 years ago I worked in a Control (Redhill, then Croydon), and 40 years ago I was Operating Assistant for the South Eastern Division, so I have few vague ideas about performance levels.  In another context, you would simplify traffic patterns or whatever to get the service reliable - which is what the paying public deserves. That isn't an option, of course, but increasing reliability in infrastructure, and resilience by allowing redundancy in routings, are readily achievable if someone - HM Treasury - will stump up. That would at least make people feel they get what they pay for. Having got the product right, overlaying extra trains becomes less of a risk. 

 

I also have to question Phil's (Mallard's) assertions that other trains were not affected. It clearly took some time to haul the train back to Guildford, presumably wrong road to the first available crossover. The Surrey Hills Route is used as a cross-country artery to get to Gatwick, especially from the GW main line at Reading, so I suspect some people may have missed their flight.  I wonder how they will travel next time they book a holiday? 

[woodenhead]

9 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

I also have to question Phil's (Mallard's) assertions that other trains were not affected. It clearly took some time to haul the train back to Guildford, presumably wrong road to the first available crossover. The Surrey Hills Route is used as a cross-country artery to get to Gatwick, especially from the GW main line at Reading, so I suspect some people may have missed their flight.  I wonder how they will travel next time they book a holiday? 

The same could be said though of any loco or train sitting down due to failure, everything around it will be affected until it is moved.

 

Are heritage trains more likely to fail, does having a big diesel on the back mitigate it somewhat as it can move the train out of the way without someone needing to send in a Thunderbird? 

[Barclay]

On 27/08/2023 at 09:49, APOLLO said:

Read these.

 

https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/docsummary.php?docID=287

 

https://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/MoT_Settle1960.pdf

 

Brit15

 

 

That report is fascinating reading, not least, because, despite there being blizzard conditions in an inhospitable location, the ambulance arrived in 10 minutes! 

 

Then, despite the track being ripped to pieces, again, of course, in a blizzard, the line was back in use within 14 hours! This country actually used to function didn't it?

[caradoc]

18 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

I wonder how they will travel next time they book a holiday? 

 

Possibly not by air, given the issues yesterday, today and ongoing......

 

But your point about the disruption caused by the incident is entirely valid of course.

 

 

[nigb55009]

It could be argued that Railtours are better equipped than a normal service train. As mentioned previously, there is usually a diesel loco on the rear which could be used

to push the train clear of the mainline, obviously depending on the location of the failure. Heritage locos, both steam and diesel never leave home without a support crew.

Any minor faults could be rectified by them, again to clear the mainline, or to a point where a more comprehensive examination or repair could be undertaken. A normal

service train that fails en route would be down to the Driver, whilst liaising with Control to try and rectify or isolate the fault in order to get the train moving again. If that

is not possible and the train is a total failure, then assistance would be required. These days the train behind may have different couplers, so woludn`t be able to push the

failure out of the way, leading to massive delays, probably far worse than a Railtour failure.

[rodent279]

I wonder how common that sort of failure (little end/crosshead failure, or separation of con rod & piston rod) was during steam days? Obviously there is the Settle accident already referred to, but was this a common occurrence, or a very rare one?

It seems to me that the little and big ends, and the crosshead/slide bar, are safety critical items, as a failure there clearly makes a serious accident possible.

Edited August 29, 2023 by rodent279

[Mallard60022]

1 hour ago, Oldddudders said:

Boris's point is, as he rightly predicts, unlikely to win him any friends. Heritage trains pay fees to use the network just like TOCs and others, of course. I offer no evidence that they are more or less reliable than TOC services. 

 

What makes me uncomfortable about excursions, be they modern or heritage traction, is that my recent years' experience of the network suggests that daily planned timetabled performance is pretty bad a lot of the time. More than 50 years ago I worked in a Control (Redhill, then Croydon), and 40 years ago I was Operating Assistant for the South Eastern Division, so I have few vague ideas about performance levels.  In another context, you would simplify traffic patterns or whatever to get the service reliable - which is what the paying public deserves. That isn't an option, of course, but increasing reliability in infrastructure, and resilience by allowing redundancy in routings, are readily achievable if someone - HM Treasury - will stump up. That would at least make people feel they get what they pay for. Having got the product right, overlaying extra trains becomes less of a risk. 

 

I also have to question Phil's (Mallard's) assertions that other trains were not affected. It clearly took some time to haul the train back to Guildford, presumably wrong road to the first available crossover. The Surrey Hills Route is used as a cross-country artery to get to Gatwick, especially from the GW main line at Reading, so I suspect some people may have missed their flight.  I wonder how they will travel next time they book a holiday? 

It was the weekend, it isn't/wasn't that busy at that time of day and there are alternative routes etc. The reason Brit was there at that time is that it is a quiet route and that is where specials should be, where they are the least likely to cause disruption. It is a frequent and popular circuit for these specials.

However, I am happy (but not happy) to be told that loads of services were held up and flights missed which will no doubt be available soon.

Phil

[Mallard60022]

I should remind folk that Tornado and Train once 'rescued' a load of stranded commuters in Kent when the Snow crippled all other services. 

I need to point out that something as simple as a plastic bag in the OHL can bring the ECML to a grinding halt.

I must also remind folk that after the big failure of Tornado at Sandy a few years back, Steam on the ECML south of York has almost disappeared and that is understandable. 

Stuff happens on the Railway and until a heritage working creates total and absolute carnage, then why should those services not run after all existing safety and contingency plans have been agreed?  

OK so Brit had an incident. How many other steam Loco's have operated Main Line this month without the slightest of issues other than maybe being a bit late and in that same time, how many public/Freight services have been disrupted by  issues?

I am not blind to, or fuming at the reasons why very few Steam specials now run through my home Town of 36E (or Container Trains for that matter). It is after all the premier, high speed (usually) Main Line Route from London to the North and Scotland with 'that other route' being mainly a freight Route these days! :)

Phil

[Rivercider]

I have mixed feelings about incidents like this.

 

I have been a railway enthusiast for as long as I can remember, that is over 60 years, and I have a few memories of the last years of mainline steam. I have also enjoyed travelling on a mainline steam charter.

I was also a professional railwayman for 30 years, so appreciate that delays are more likely to accumulate quickly when things go wrong during amendments to the normal train service pattern. I have also been on a heavily delayed service train that was following a steam charter that got into difficulties.

As a TOPS clerk for a few years I made inputs to the TRUST train running system, and could see how delay minutes could rapidly build up at times.

As I say I have mixed feelings.

 

cheers

 

[Mallard60022]

26 minutes ago, Rivercider said:

I have mixed feelings about incidents like this.

 

I have been a railway enthusiast for as long as I can remember, that is over 60 years, and I have a few memories of the last years of mainline steam. I have also enjoyed travelling on a mainline steam charter.

I was also a professional railwayman for 30 years, so appreciate that delays are more likely to accumulate quickly when things go wrong during amendments to the normal train service pattern. I have also been on a heavily delayed service train that was following a steam charter that got into difficulties.

As a TOPS clerk for a few years I made inputs to the TRUST train running system, and could see how delay minutes could rapidly build up at times.

As I say I have mixed feelings.

 

cheers

 

As do we all I suspect RC?

Phil

[31A]

5 hours ago, Oldddudders said:

I also have to question Phil's (Mallard's) assertions that other trains were not affected. It clearly took some time to haul the train back to Guildford, presumably wrong road to the first available crossover. The Surrey Hills Route is used as a cross-country artery to get to Gatwick, especially from the GW main line at Reading, so I suspect some people may have missed their flight.  I wonder how they will travel next time they book a holiday? 

 

It looks as though the rest of the service through Chilworth was cancelled for the rest of the day after Britannia's train (1Z94) failed, so not inconsiderable disruption to other trains!

 

[Mallard60022]

3 hours ago, 31A said:

 

It looks as though the rest of the service through Chilworth was cancelled for the rest of the day after Britannia's train (1Z94) failed, so not inconsiderable disruption to other trains!

 

Ah thanks Steve, that was all Reading to Gatwick. Bus replacements would have coped if available and there are alternative routes, especially from Gatwick. 

It would be interesting to see how many actual passengers were going for flights at that time of night with normal Flights stopping at midnight.

Not trying to deny there was disruption but  how many won't use the Train again for a flight connection? I'd say none would be a fairly safe bet.

Phil  

[caradoc]

19 hours ago, Barclay said:

Then, despite the track being ripped to pieces, again, of course, in a blizzard, the line was back in use within 14 hours! This country actually used to function didn't it?

 

We also used to have a railway on which fatal crashes were an annual occurrence; While it is still one too many, there has been one such accident in the last 16 years. I know which version I prefer. 

 

 

[Barclay]

I quite agree on that score, it is a much safer place than it used to be (so many road deaths back then as well). I was thinking more in terms of the Services' general ability to cope - perhaps because there were so many more accidents they were better prepared to deal with it. Interesting to see if Britannia's problem is the same as the 1960 accident, because if so the consequences could have been just as tragic.

[Phil Bullock]

33 minutes ago, Barclay said:

I quite agree on that score, it is a much safer place than it used to be (so many road deaths back then as well). I was thinking more in terms of the Services' general ability to cope - perhaps because there were so many more accidents they were better prepared to deal with it. Interesting to see if Britannia's problem is the same as the 1960 accident, because if so the consequences could have been just as tragic.

Although the failure has occurred in the same mechanical area as the 1960 issue I think it’s clear that it isn’t the same. The current issue is the failure of the cross head with the piston rod becoming detached whereas the 1960 issue related to the bolts which attached the lower slide bars to the upper slide bars and hence the mounting brackets. These had been reported several times previously as working loose…. And in this instance despite the fact that the cross head became detached from the slide bars and flailed on the end of the connecting rod the cross head casting remainded intact with the piston rod attached . 
 

1960s issue …. Failure of fastenings 

2023 issue … failure of cross head casting

Edited August 30, 2023 by Phil Bullock

[jjb1970]

I would see the main risks to heritage trains as being a combination of it becoming increasingly difficult to fit them into some lines and a more generalised issue with environmental emissions. Even as a rail enthusiast with a fondness for kettles and  BR diesels I can see why all the smoke and emissions are increasingly problematic.

[rodent279]

37 minutes ago, jjb1970 said:

I would see the main risks to heritage trains as being a combination of it becoming increasingly difficult to fit them into some lines and a more generalised issue with environmental emissions. Even as a rail enthusiast with a fondness for kettles and  BR diesels I can see why all the smoke and emissions are increasingly problematic.

Emissions from steam & diesels are a drop in the ocean in the grand scheme of things, however, they are very visible drops, that by their very nature draw attention to themselves.

[Steamport Southport]

17 hours ago, 31A said:

 

It looks as though the rest of the service through Chilworth was cancelled for the rest of the day after Britannia's train (1Z94) failed, so not inconsiderable disruption to other trains!

 

 

As a regular rail passenger that looks quite like a normal day to me.

 

 

Jason

[Northmoor]

Why did so much of the delay seem to build up between Worplesdon and Guildford when the failure was at Chilworth?  

 

Sorry, just re-read that and it's the strange way RTT has recorded the passing times.  Believe me that it WILL have been disruptive to people, there is rarely a time when the North Downs Line trains are NOT well-filled.  Perhaps we should be grateful that the failure didn't occur about 30 minutes earlier when the loco was on the SWML.  For the support staff to inspect or do any minor repair to allow the loco to move, would have required a power isolation.  That would NOT have been popular at 8pm on a Tuesday.

 

I do tend to agree with the idea that steam's place on the busiest lines is probably coming to an end.  There are plenty of routes 60 minutes travel (or less) from London where a steam train could be fitted into the timetable without difficulty.  The calls from some quarters to allow them to operate at higher top speeds misses the point: running at 90 instead of 75 doesn't make much difference when the service trains are doing 125, while on the busiest routes, it is the very slow acceleration compared to modern EMUs that means they get in the way.  Remember, this was part of the justification of the Hastings electrification in the late-80s; the DEMUs' slow acceleration (as well as their lower top speed) meant they needed longer paths between London and Tonbridge. 

Edited August 31, 2023 by Northmoor

[roythebus1]

Maybe the Belgian railways have the right idea and have banned ALL heritage traction much to the chagrin of the Belgian railway enthusiasts. They look to us with great envy; the Czech railways have just had a 3 day steamfest, no doubt the Germans will have another plandamf before the year is out. the SNCB/NMBS authorities blame it on ERTMS, can't be fitted to steam locos! 

[adb968008]

On 19/09/2023 at 20:39, roythebus1 said:

Maybe the Belgian railways have the right idea and have banned ALL heritage traction much to the chagrin of the Belgian railway enthusiasts. They look to us with great envy; the Czech railways have just had a 3 day steamfest, no doubt the Germans will have another plandamf before the year is out. the SNCB/NMBS authorities blame it on ERTMS, can't be fitted to steam locos! 

Belgians I find arent that enthusiastic about steam anyway, so not really a surprise.

[Michael Hodgson]

8 hours ago, adb968008 said:

Belgians I find arent that enthusiastic about steam anyway, so not really a surprise.

Really?  Monsieur Poirot always seems to use them.

[rogerzilla]

On 29/08/2023 at 12:47, rodent279 said:

I wonder how common that sort of failure (little end/crosshead failure, or separation of con rod & piston rod) was during steam days? Obviously there is the Settle accident already referred to, but was this a common occurrence, or a very rare one?

It seems to me that the little and big ends, and the crosshead/slide bar, are safety critical items, as a failure there clearly makes a serious accident possible.

The original Britannia design, based on LNER practice, I think, had a new flaw in that it was very difficult for fitters to check the tightness of the fasteners due to the location of the bolt heads.  So they didn't bother.  The design was tweaked later to make inspection and maintenance easier.

[rodent279]

What's the current situation of Britannia? I've tried Royal Scot Locomotive & General's website, but it is impressively uninformative, no actual news and very little information, just series of links to each locomotive that turn out to be blank pages, apart from the inevitable "follow us on Facebook" link.  

[adb968008]

On 29/10/2023 at 09:46, rodent279 said:

What's the current situation of Britannia? I've tried Royal Scot Locomotive & General's website, but it is impressively uninformative, no actual news and very little information, just series of links to each locomotive that turn out to be blank pages, apart from the inevitable "follow us on Facebook" link.  

I’d imagine getting a new crosshead cast may take quite a bit of time, from the looks of the pictures I would be surprised if it was repairable.

whilst it takes time LSL do a proper job, 70000 was laid up at Ropley for several months circa a decade back whilst having its axles done.

it wont be left wanting.

 

Someone said a 9F crosshead was the same, LSL do have a 9F out of ticket, 92214.. so if it was possible they could use that one in the interim, but depends on any cylinder damage too.

Edited October 31, 2023 by adb968008