Weather induced panic part 2

[Bon Accord]

Perhaps you might like to have a look at the BBC News website and consider the amount of actual damage that has occurred today. Not only railways but roads and power supplies have been seriously affected (railway staff have to get to work somehow, and railways depend on reliable electricity supply to operate). If YOU were the manager of a railway company, would you ignore Met Office Weather Warnings and send trains out at line speed hoping that nothing goes wrong ? Do you fancy being in court on a corporate manslaughter charge ?

 

Why would they have to run at line speed? I take issue with the common reluctance to even attempt to run a basic service at low speed as it at least keeps things moving as there is invariably a lot of stranded people. During the big blow of '68 - which was much worse than this one - BR put a huge amount of effort into running a service.

I travelled down to York on Wednesday and yesterday I was travelling behind Bittern to Newcastle and back (3rd time lucky). At the time we were the only train heading North (at 50 mph) as all those of both the diesel and electric variety were cancelled, the irony that the 75 year old museum piece was still running was not lost on most people.

[Pete 75C]

Blanket cancellations are a recent thing. As a driver between the mid 80s and early 00s, if I was booked to work the first morning train over a line after the possibility of storm damage, I would simply be told to run at caution with maybe the guard in the cab as a second pair of eyes.

[jamie92208]

I think that things changed drastically after the incident on the central wales line where the DMU ended up in the river.

 

Jamie

[ColinK]

Hi Colin.

 

Who do you work for?

 

Is it the terrible Worst group or the dreaded Slavecoach?

I've recently started working part time for Kirkby Lonsdale Coach Hire; they are a real pleasure to work for, everyone is so helpful and friendly. I count myself very fortunate as I look forward to going to work.

[Pete 75C]

I think that things changed drastically after the incident on the central wales line where the DMU ended up in the river.

 

Jamie

 

That was in 1987 (see link to the accident report below). I don't think things changed that much in light of that particular accident. I well remember being cautioned between Horsham and Dorking as late as the early 00s with the first passenger train. Pitch black, and still able to stop before hitting a fallen tree at Warnham one morning.

 

http://www.railwaysarchive.co.uk/documents/DoT_Glanrhyd1987.pdf

[The Stationmaster]

I think that things changed drastically after the incident on the central wales line where the DMU ended up in the river.

 

Jamie

 

That is correct Jamie - the main things which happened were a requirement to 'keep a watch' on certain bridges and a lot of scour investigation on bridges deemed to be at risk of the same sort of fate as had befallen Glanrhyd.  The other thing which I think was done for the first time in the 'big wind' in the late '80s was the imposition of blanket speed restrictions on high speed lines for a variety of reasons but mainly because of the risk of trees and other objects (e.g. garden sheds) being blown onto the railway - normal speed at that time was reduced to either 80 or 50 mph.

 

Part of the problem since then has been the even greater spread of trees and large shrubs etc on the lineside - it was noticeable yesterday just how much clearer and better things look where the undergrowth and overgrowth has been cut back for GWML electrification work.  The 'leaves on the line' problem plus fallen trees are basically a comparatively recent phenomenon related solely to the vast increase in lineside vegetation and if I had the say so the whole lot would be felled and torched and all the tree roots killed.  Bet that would upset all the juvenile tree huggers who don't know what a railway bank really should look like.

[ColinK]

Interesting that we had a letter from Network Rail delivered to our house a few days ago. We back onto the WCML. They are going to remove vegetation 5 metres either side of the line between 2330 and 0900 on 7th & 8th December. The machine to do it is already parked in their compound.

[Pete 75C]

Interesting that we had a letter from Network Rail delivered to our house a few days ago. We back onto the WCML. They are going to remove vegetation 5 metres either side of the line between 2330 and 0900 on 7th & 8th December. The machine to do it is already parked in their compound.

 

A victory for common sense.

I remember some years ago a machine was used to clear undergrowth either side of the West Croydon - Sutton line in South London. Unfortunately that didn't last long and the undergrowth had to be cleared by hand. The machine's blades were almost instantly blunted by all the old washing machines and bed frames that were hidden in the bushes having been dumped "over the back fence".

[Lyddrail]

I had to send staff to Dover Substation in the early hours of this morning to see if it was under water due to the extreme tide. It wasn't but the areas around it were under water. Higher tide is expected soon.

 

Cheers.

 

Paul.

[Oldddudders]

I had to send staff to Dover Substation in the early hours of this morning to see if it was under water due to the extreme tide. It wasn't but the areas around it were under water. Higher tide is expected soon.

 

Cheers.

 

Paul.

Good to know an "old railway" response to such situations is still possible. I note the report of the enquiry into the 1987 bridge collapse included interviews with a number of competent engineers, whose understanding of bridge scour was nevertheless found wanting. Given the enormous reduction in staff of the engineering functions during and after privatisation, I wonder how many equivalent posts NR is able/required to maintain, and how well the revised instructions issued by DoCE in the wake of the report, or an NR equivalent, are able to be undertaken 25 years later.

[Legend]

But there is a difference to how we deal with these issues now compared to 20-30 years ago, and I don't recall countless people being maimed back then.  Of course we need to take sensible precautions but there needs to be common sense applied as well.  What is the result of Scotrail shutting down..........a lot of people took to their cars, causing chaos (according to my taxi driver) in Glasgow that didnt clear till 7pm. So folks out in their cars in the thick of it was that any safer?

 

Yes I know there are actual differences from 20 years ago. We don't clear lineside foliage as well as in the past hence more fallen trees, people seem obsessed with having trampolines in their back gardens which are seldom securely tethered and tend to take off in inclement conditions but I do wonder if actually we like a bit of drama and over react to some of these things.

 

Some things that are definitely more prevalent today than in past:

 

Train services close down completely. Almost unheard of in BR days

Bridges shut at lower wind speeds than in the past   (the Erskine bridge seems to shut in a stiff breeze) Is this because people who manage these bridges (Amey or others?) seek to avoid litigation?

Motorways shut for hours on end when accident ahead. Previously Police would have got one lane open, hard shoulder as priority.

Roads close completely for resurfacing entailing huge diversions. What was wrong with closing one lane at a time with traffic control. How many workmen got splattered because cars travelled at slow speed in adjacent lanes ( clearly one is too many, but do you recall any accidents?)

 

Is the country going to pot or have I turned into a Grumpy Old Man

[mike knowles]

 

 why do we love them so much and model them??????

 

 

Now there's an idea for our next exhibition outing. Put a large fan at one end of the layout, don't bother running any trains and spend the weekend "socialising" !!

[eastwestdivide]

At the risk of going off-topic:

...How many workmen got splattered because cars travelled at slow speed in adjacent lanes ( clearly one is too many, but do you recall any accidents?)

 

Highways Agency: "Between 2005 and 2010, nine road workers were killed and ten seriously injured while working on motorways and major A roads in England as a direct result of accidents at road works"

(http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/road-projects/m62-junctions-25-to-30/  (click the "About" tab)

[The Stationmaster]

At the risk of going off-topic:

Highways Agency: "Between 2005 and 2010, nine road workers were killed and ten seriously injured while working on motorways and major A roads in England as a direct result of accidents at road works"

(http://www.highways.gov.uk/roads/road-projects/m62-junctions-25-to-30/  (click the "About" tab)

 

And that is why much greater attention is now paid to keeping them out of contact with passing motorists - often by not allowing the motorists to pass.  The only question that is relevant is  the one posed by Legend (who seems to be in the same sort of 'grumpy old man' box as me) and that is have we placed over-protection of workers etc above all other consequences?  

 

In my view we probably have and I suspect you could readily make out a financial case to prove that we have.  What seems now to be the watchword is to absolutely minimise risk as opposed to being prepared to accept it to an adult level and train people accordingly.  I was recently very surprised to see the amount of reliance seemingly placed on a COS (controller of Site Safety) by staff working on/near running lines.  Now the level of briefing given to people who should know a location before they're let loose on it far exceeds that which we originally gave to folk who weren't passed but had to be carefully shepherded and informed about the area they were entering.  To me this sounds very much like an abrogation of many areas of personal responsibility for someone working on - in particular - rail infrastructure where the trains aren'y going to leap off running lines to attack you.  They are trains, they run on track, they can approach very quietly in either direction on any line at any time and you need to get well clear of them when they do - it really is as simple as that and if you're daft enough to apply for a Darwin Award that's in many respects your own silly fault and hard luck on those who have to pick up the pieces.  The safest thing to have when working anywhere near any railway lines is a sense of your own insecurity and not have to rely on someone to tell you about it other than the Lookoutman.

[5050]

 

Is the country going to pot or have I turned into a Grumpy Old Man

Yes and Yes

 

(Or possibly perhaps and yes?)

 

Along with me and many more

[Mallard60022]

I was actually quite worried several times during yesterday morning as the wind was gusting and swirling around 36E far more than I have experienced here in ten years.

There was a fatality in our local park around 13.00. A gentleman in/on a mobility scooter was crushed by a huge falling tree as he crossed the park. That is so sad; a few seconds either way and.....

So, let's not get too complacent about these freaky weather incidents. It is far better to be safe than sorry IMO and if that means stopping trains etc. then so be it.

P

[Les Bird]

When I travelled back from Northallerton to Middlesbrough yesterday, the train was stopped and cautioned because trees had fallen close to the line. There was no question of closing the line, the driver simply approached very slowly and waited for the staff on the lineside to tell him whether he could get past safely. They did so and we proceeded with less than five minutes' delay. A very sensible decision in my view and completely safe.

[byron]

I find this world (well the UK bit anyway) gets odder as I get older. Once upon a time there was British Rail, funded by the state, who employed lots of bods who would not have been able to find other employment. When things went haywire there were always staff available to clear the mess.

Then, to save money, all these good folk were made redundant and became unemployed.

The same state who paid them to work, paid them not to. And the railway started to fall apart because of lack of manpower.

 

Can someone please explain the sense behind this thinking.

 

Mike

[Bon Accord]

I was actually quite worried several times during yesterday morning as the wind was gusting and swirling around 36E far more than I have experienced here in ten years.

There was a fatality in our local park around 13.00. A gentleman in/on a mobility scooter was crushed by a huge falling tree as he crossed the park. That is so sad; a few seconds either way and.....

So, let's not get too complacent about these freaky weather incidents. It is far better to be safe than sorry IMO and if that means stopping trains etc. then so be it.

P

 

Granted, but if we look at the wider picture; those couple of deaths yesterday are being used to justify the measures imposed by various organisations with many people approving of the same. Yet at the same time an average of 5 people are killed on Britain's roads every day; the 2012 death toll being 1754 people with 23039 serious injuries, yet there seems to be distinct public, private and political aversion to exercising similar levels of control, restriction or prohibition on the roads to curb these totally avoidable deaths and injuries.

The difference in official attitude and public acceptance between what is acceptable on the railway and the roads is a curious state of affairs, is it not?

[5050]

I find this world (well the UK bit anyway) gets odder as I get older. Once upon a time there was British Rail, funded by the state, who employed lots of bods who would not have been able to find other employment. When things went haywire there were always staff available to clear the mess.

Then, to save money, all these good folk were made redundant and became unemployed.

The same state who paid them to work, paid them not to. And the railway started to fall apart because of lack of manpower.

 

Can someone please explain the sense behind this thinking.

 

Mike

 

If we could answer that then we'd be politicians.

 

Although, on second thoughts, probably not

[figworthy]

I turned up at Man Picc. to get a train south at 1650 today to get a train south to find that just about everything south of the airport was canceled (Virgin were managing 1 an hour to London). Every hotel in central Manchester was booked solid, I eventually managed to get a room out at Old Trafford. Hopefully they are running tomorrow.

 

 

Adrian

 

And indeed they were running this morning, pretty much without delay.

 

And thanks for the "supports".

 

 

Adrian

[roundhouse]

We had booked to stay in Boston some weeks ago. So this morning when I found out that it had flooded and no trains I thought that we would be making alternative plans. Luckily the trains are running again and despite the hotel being right next to the river only the restaurant was affected enough that they had to close it.

Even more importantly the pubs we wanted to visit are open although there are a few closed due to flooding.

Good to see the town open but our thoughts go to those who have been badly affected. I remember the floods back in 1968 when we lived South of Bristol and we had four feet of water in the house. First time I ever went in a pub as we had no power so our parents were allowed to take us into the pub for lunch.

 

Ian

[Fat Controller]

With regard to road/bridge closures during high wind, I would suggest that modern vehicles are probably more at risk due to high winds than those of twenty or more years ago. The ubiquitous 'tautliner' has almost entirely displaced the sheeted and roped flat-bed, so that empty, relatively light, trailers now present a greater side area to the wind. Similarily, coaches are much taller vehicles than those of a couple of decades back, and panel vans seem to almost always to be high-roofed. Even cars are taller, due to the ever-increasing numbers of 4X4s and 'people-movers'.  All these are more vulnerable to the effects of gusting than lower vehicles would have been.

[jamie92208]

We have particualr problems in Leeds.   Opposite the site of the proposed HS2 terminus is the tallest building in Yorkshire known as the dalek.  There ahve always been probelms with high winds around the base since it was built.   year a lorry was blown over and killed a pdestrian.  This week the road was closed to traffic and council wardens escorted pedestrians across the road.   Despite this at least two people were blown over and one ended up in hospital with a long gash in her skull that's needed plastic surgery.  The problem won't be easy to solve as it's a major road junction at what is effectively the northern exit from the M1 in Leeds.

 

Jamie

[roundhouse]

The Shard was supposedly designed to cut down on the wind effect that tall buildings create but it can be very windy round the station especially now that the train shed has gone, but fine once you get further away