Eggesford box Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Just heard that, will have to see what happens in the morning, conducted via the wcml, cotswolds, mml, who knows!! Variety is the spice of life! Quite pleased in a way as I should be 1400/2200 today and would have ended up as the RIO (rail incident officer) out at Harbury but am 2230/0930 out at Claydon for a possession tonight instead. Have not seen any updates as to the situation yet. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eggesford box Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Looks like it is going to be closed until Monday at the least Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted January 31, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2015 May have to be conducted somewhere, greenford to willesden and onto wcml or cricklewood and onto mml but i believe thats shut too! Bet It will just end up in hinksey!! It will also put the kybosh on my job on monday, bescot to hinksey l/e Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eggesford box Posted January 31, 2015 Share Posted January 31, 2015 Having seen some photos at Banbury when I picked up the van to drive to Claydon of the slip at Harbury I think Monday is more than a tad optomistic for reopening. Mind you, I am not qualified to say and they will no doubt be all over it in the daylight tomorrow to see the full extent of the problem. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted January 31, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted January 31, 2015 my train is now running from old oak common to hinksey via the chilterns instead of going to bescot, got to change ends at banbury which should be fun as no doubt there will be extra traffic terminating there tomorrow then to top it off ive then somehow got to go passenger from oxford to crewe, probably end up going via worcester, may even look at a hereford service Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ess1uk Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Pictures here http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Media-statement-Harbury-tunnel-landslip-2262.aspx Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted February 1, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 Well the landslip at harbury did indeed put the kybosh on the job today, a r vised schedule was put in to run via slough and reading to hinksey, it was then pointed out that the line to southall was shut on the refilef so we couldnt get across to the fasts to exit and we couldnt get back to paddington to cross over either! We couldnt work out why we couldnt just go to banbury to change ends and head to hinksey from there but it turned out that the line between aynho and heyford is closed until 05:00 tomorrow morning hence why they didnt want us that way Anyway after a lot of wrangling and phonecalls it was agreed by someone in network rails offices to let us run to banbury and do some sort of fanciful shunt to get us over to the up goods to stable (basically what id suggested 2 hours earlier!) as i didnt fancy having to change ends 3 times on a 1600ft train i rang banbury north box who after speaking to leamington spa box agreed for me to run through to fenny compton to change ends and simply come back into banbury from the north and run straight on to the goods which is what i did As the line north of me was blocked and i took the oportunity to grap a couple of pics from what would normally be the 'live side' of the train I also decided to remove the north end engine and run it onto the south end so when they get to hinksey the train can simply be backed in, again a different angle from what would normally be the live side And finally into banbury where i secured the train ready for the guy who is booking on at 04:00 to take it to hinksey........oh wait, thats me!! Thankfully ive got my lodge bag so i'm now in a hotel in banbury for the night getting some rest til i move it in the morning! 17 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted February 1, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 Pictures here http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Media-statement-Harbury-tunnel-landslip-2262.aspx thats not a landslide......... this is a landslide http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Media-statement-Harbury-tunnel-landslip-update-1-Feb-2263.aspx gonna take a bit of clearing up! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ess1uk Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 From that newer picture it's lucky no plant went with it. Guess it will have to be dug out, some sort of wall built and then back filled? Big job. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 1, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 thats not a landslide......... this is a landslide http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Media-statement-Harbury-tunnel-landslip-update-1-Feb-2263.aspx gonna take a bit of clearing up! Having noticed all the work going on in that vicinity in the recent past in some respects I'm not over surprised that it has gone like that. Coincidentally it happened when - for other reasons - I wasn't enroute to/from the Stafford show so perhaps I made the right decision not to go there this year. And for your next week's work Jim - working spoil trains from the site at Harbury Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted February 1, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 And for your next week's work Jim - working spoil trains from the site at Harbury joking apart, it did cross my mind! ive got an ideal train sat in banbury for it it was funny that when i passed through there yesterday morning i thought to myself 'that lot looks like it could come down anytime' as it looks so bare now they have cut all the trees away 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted February 1, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 From that newer picture it's lucky no plant went with it. Guess it will have to be dug out, some sort of wall built and then back filled? Big job. i may be wrong but i think that picture makes it look worse than it is, ok its a biggie but, the white bulk bags in the pic are sat on top of an embankment above the up side track, the while lighting tower is also on the up side whereas if you look to the right you can see another black lighting tower which is on the down side of the track (and lower down), its my opinion that in that picture the track is actually hidden below/behind the embankment with the bulkbags on the top not covered in spoil (yet!) i suppose the worry will be if it moves anymore as the 'bulkbag' embankment is pretty much a 20ft sheer drop to the cess Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_g_griffiths Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 thats not a landslide......... this is a landslide http://www.networkrailmediacentre.co.uk/News-Releases/Media-statement-Harbury-tunnel-landslip-update-1-Feb-2263.aspx gonna take a bit of clearing up! Looks like new counterfort drains dug in the face of the cutting and the slip plane developed at their base. Suspect the drains had just lowered the water content of the overburden sufficiently to remove it's cohesivitity whilst providing a natural fault line for the shear to occur. Like to see the results of the soil tests carried out on the samples, suspect the silt content is qute high. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted February 1, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 yeah, what he said ^ not the first time they've had problems there http://www.warwickshirerailways.com/gwr/gwrhc94.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_g_griffiths Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Looking again at the photograph and noting the comment above about removing trees. This would lead to a rise in the water table as the trees are no longer naturally removing the water thus assisting in the lubrication of the slip plane. Super cock up by the engineers. Bet they went for the cheap solution, dig some drains in the face of the slope. If the trees had not been there in the first place, it may well have worked. Now I suspect, with the proximity of the building works at the top of the slope, it's going to be an expensive reinforced concrete retaining wall and some interesting insurance claims by NetworkRail and the builders on the adjacent land. Hope the advising enginner is well insured. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted February 1, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 (edited) there was a minor slip there 3 years ago resulting in a long term 50mph speed restriction but at that time the trees extended right down the embankment if you look at google maps you can see the work done since that slip http://goo.gl/maps/fEUbd looking at the area now there are no trees above the tunnel mouth at all or on the embankment in the leamington direction on the up (slip) side Edited February 1, 2015 by big jim 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_g_griffiths Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 there was a minor slip there 3 years ago resulting in a long term 50mph speed restriction but at that time the trees extended right down the embankment if you look at google maps you can see the work done since that slip http://goo.gl/maps/fEUbd looking at the area now there are no trees above the tunnel mouth at all or on the embankment in the leamington direction on the up (slip) side Jim, More interesting facts. The removal of the trees would cause an increase in the level of the watertable. The wet and cold in the last few weeks, since the trees disappeared, would cause the surface ground to become saturated and the frost would have frozen the water in the surface causing the pores to become enlarged and thus proiving space for even more water to be absorbed. The result is the the top few centimetes of the soil, with the aditional water, would have become much heavier and the friction holding it in place on the slope would have decreased due to the lubricating effect of the additional water. They may have got away with it in the summer, assuming it is drier. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_g_griffiths Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 By the way, great photos. All the views joe public can't get to see. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold big jim Posted February 1, 2015 Author RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 And here is last years mini slip http://m.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-26223623 Almost exactly a year ago too!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
37410 Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Looks like new counterfort drains dug in the face of the cutting and the slip plane developed at their base. Suspect the drains had just lowered the water content of the overburden sufficiently to remove it's cohesivitity whilst providing a natural fault line for the shear to occur. Like to see the results of the soil tests carried out on the samples, suspect the silt content is qute high. Ian Looking again at the photograph and noting the comment above about removing trees. This would lead to a rise in the water table as the trees are no longer naturally removing the water thus assisting in the lubrication of the slip plane. Super cock up by the engineers. Bet they went for the cheap solution, dig some drains in the face of the slope. If the trees had not been there in the first place, it may well have worked. Now I suspect, with the proximity of the building works at the top of the slope, it's going to be an expensive reinforced concrete retaining wall and some interesting insurance claims by NetworkRail and the builders on the adjacent land. Hope the advising enginner is well insured. Ian Jim, More interesting facts. The removal of the trees would cause an increase in the level of the watertable. The wet and cold in the last few weeks, since the trees disappeared, would cause the surface ground to become saturated and the frost would have frozen the water in the surface causing the pores to become enlarged and thus proiving space for even more water to be absorbed. The result is the the top few centimetes of the soil, with the aditional water, would have become much heavier and the friction holding it in place on the slope would have decreased due to the lubricating effect of the additional water. They may have got away with it in the summer, assuming it is drier. Ian Ian, I'm afraid I have to disagree with the majority of your comments regarding the landslip and the reason why the slope failed. The issue is still under investigation and comments such as a "super cock up by the engineers", "went for the cheap solution" and "hope the advising engineer is well insured" are unhelpful and may well be picked up and reported by others as being factual when at present they are purely speculative. I appreciate you are trying to convey possible reasons for the failure in terms non-specialist Engineers can understand but without site specific knowledge of the event perhaps waiting for the NR Engineers to confirm what went wrong maybe better under the circumstances. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ian_g_griffiths Posted February 1, 2015 Share Posted February 1, 2015 Ian, I'm afraid I have to disagree with the majority of your comments regarding the landslip and the reason why the slope failed. The issue is still under investigation and comments such as a "super cock up by the engineers", "went for the cheap solution" and "hope the advising engineer is well insured" are unhelpful and may well be picked up and reported by others as being factual when at present they are purely speculative. I appreciate you are trying to convey possible reasons for the failure in terms non-specialist Engineers can understand but without site specific knowledge of the event perhaps waiting for the NR Engineers to confirm what went wrong maybe better under the circumstances. My apologies for those of you who feel agrieved. These suppositions are based solely on the information provided on and through this forum, are solely my deductions and in NO MANNER represent any formal technical analysis of the situation. Nor shold they be construed as a statement from NetworkRail or any appointed examining engineer. I too, look forward to reading the official engineering report. Ian Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold The Stationmaster Posted February 1, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 I think it might well be a long term slip site which has proved troublesome off & on over the years - there are certainly one or two in that part of the world. However what concerns me is what appears to be building work going on at the top of the bank and the potential impact that might have on the way surface water and run-off behave. I'm no civil engineer (obviously) but there does seem to be a worrying trend to go in for building construction near the top of railway embankments and the associated foundation work must surely have an impact in terms of ground pressure? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RMweb Gold TheSignalEngineer Posted February 1, 2015 RMweb Gold Share Posted February 1, 2015 This looks like the Big One which has been threatening around there for many years. NR are estimating 350,000 tonnes of spoil needs to be moved. They are saying it will take at least a week to be able to assess the long term situation. Chiltern are saying no trains this week between Leamington and Banbury. Regarding the cutting itself, I understand that the original proposal was for a longer tunnel but when the line was being constructed c1850 the ground was deemed too unstable so a deep cutting was dug instead. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popular Post D1059 Posted February 2, 2015 Popular Post Share Posted February 2, 2015 there was a minor slip there 3 years ago resulting in a long term 50mph speed restriction but at that time the trees extended right down the embankment This is how it used to look in the 80s Railfreight Grid To The Rescue by D1059, on Flickr 20 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Talltim Posted February 2, 2015 Share Posted February 2, 2015 I think it might well be a long term slip site which has proved troublesome off & on over the years - there are certainly one or two in that part of the world. However what concerns me is what appears to be building work going on at the top of the bank and the potential impact that might have on the way surface water and run-off behave. I'm no civil engineer (obviously) but there does seem to be a worrying trend to go in for building construction near the top of railway embankments and the associated foundation work must surely have an impact in terms of ground pressure? Are you sure that isn't to do with the work they have already been doing to stabilise the bank since the slip last year? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now