Washout at Dawlish

[Miss Prism]

I wonder what might have happened with Storm Ciarán if the extensive post-2014 rebuild had not been done.

 

 

[woodenhead]

12 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

In his weekly staff address this week Mark Hopwood related that he was going to dig out the 2016 paperwork from Hitachi where they gave assurances the IET would be, in his words, 'seaworthy'. They're not.

A rowing boat is seaworthy in calm seas, I wouldn't take it out in a storm.

 

Lets hope Mark's definition of seaworthy accounted for a Ciaran type storm otherwise Hitachi are going to point to a line in the contract and go ha haaah that will be £1bn please to upgrade.

[rodent279]

35 minutes ago, Mike_Walker said:

In his weekly staff address this week Mark Hopwood related that he was going to dig out the 2016 paperwork from Hitachi where they gave assurances the IET would be, in his words, 'seaworthy'. They're not.

It'll be interesting to watch the endless legal dispute over what "seaworthy" means.

[PhilJ W]

22 minutes ago, Miss Prism said:

I wonder what might have happened with Storm Ciarán if the extensive post-2014 rebuild had not been done.

It wouldn't have been as strong as the storm that necessitated the rebuild in the first place. Also Dawlish faces south east  and is protected to some extent from Atlantic weather systems such as Ciaran.

[Miss Prism]

Good point - I failed to differentiate Ciarán's wind effects from its water effects.

 

[Oldddudders]

1 hour ago, Mike_Walker said:

In his weekly staff address this week Mark Hopwood related that he was going to dig out the 2016 paperwork from Hitachi where they gave assurances the IET would be, in his words, 'seaworthy'. They're not.

Do I recall that DfT contracts people were also involved in the spec, at least of some of the fleet in use? Muddy (sea)waters if so!

[KeithMacdonald]

On 24/10/2023 at 16:37, Dunsignalling said:

AIUI, much of the route is now underneath housing developments, with more disappearing every year, and the land would cost eye-watering sums to re-acquire if the plan were to be revived.

John 

 

Agreed, I made much the same observation when I posted that image.

 

Quote

The two main suggested routes from the north would have converged in Dawlish itself, near Stonelands Bridge. Back then it was open fields; Stonelands Farm is now Stonelands Park (residential housing), along with lots of infill housing all around in all directions, as Dawlish Town has kept expanding. The only direction it hasn't expanded is to the east, for obvious reasons.

 

 

Brown = tunnels

Cyan = cuttings

Dark blue = embankments

Violet = viaducts

[KeithMacdonald]

1 hour ago, rodent279 said:

It'll be interesting to watch the endless legal dispute over what "seaworthy" means.

 

"seaworthy"?
I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that dispute about the definition. Somewhere between "light showers of rain" (Hitachi) and "under sea water" (GWR).

 

Eee, when I were a lad, we had trips along that line in a Class 118 DMU with seawater coming through the windows and door frames, and the trains kept running.

Different times? (elf'n'safty etc)

[The Stationmaster]

1 hour ago, PhilJ W said:

It wouldn't have been as strong as the storm that necessitated the rebuild in the first place. Also Dawlish faces south east  and is protected to some extent from Atlantic weather systems such as Ciaran.

But it depends when it was filmed as the wind shifted considerably during the storm and at various stages it was blowing from the south east, the south, and the east but in the latter stages it settled round towards mainly west nor west and even for short while it was forecast to be almost due west.  Also when i checked the Met Office site it was blowing at Force 7, i.e. Near Gale,  from the south then forercast to go easterly at the same wind force.  Subsequently forecast to ease as it went round to the west nor' west.

 

One think that passes through my mind is how teh surface of the new concrete will stand up  against the shrapanel which is being brought up against by the waves.  Will the surface resist those impacts or will they gradually degrade it?

 

And what is coming under the railway bridge dies seem to have been mitigated by the recent works but obviously nothing short of a solid wall is ever going to stop that happening.

[The Stationmaster]

27 minutes ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

"seaworthy"?
I'd love to be a fly on the wall for that dispute about the definition. Somewhere between "light showers of rain" (Hitachi) and "under sea water" (GWR).

 

Eee, when I were a lad, we had trips along that line in a Class 118 DMU with seawater coming through the windows and door frames, and the trains kept running.

Different times? (elf'n'safty etc)

Not so much elf & safety as tougher trains designed by real railway engineers.

[SHMD]

Trains designed to do the job, with 30% over-engineering.

 

Instead of...

 

Trains designed to do the job plus lots and lots of extras bits, with 3% over-engineering.

 

 

Kev.

 

[keefer]

Or modern trains designed to have a lot of crucial electrical/electronic equipment mounted on the roof, even when the problem has been known about from previous modern trains.

Hitachi may argue as to the exact definition of 'seaworthy' but the problem is a simple and well-known one - can/will the trains still work when covered by seawater?

[Rivercider]

4 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

 

Agreed, I made much the same observation when I posted that image.

 

 

 

Brown = tunnels

Cyan = cuttings

Dark blue = embankments

Violet = viaducts

We have been house hunting in Dawlish and Teignmouth. One property we really liked (near Bridge House

the Railway Convalescent Home) would have been at the top of a cutting if that route was chosen!

 

cheers

[Peter Eaton]

On 22/10/2023 at 18:45, Ian Hargrave said:

XC have run into difficulties further north with flooding between Derby and Sheffield closing the line apart from the ECML problem. I think there have been some diversions over the Erewash Valley but in general Derbyshire is a mess

 

Hi, just catching up.

Erewash Valley on the Sunday was closed with Northern trains coming down as far as Alfreton. Plus this again Monday.

Sunday though interesting as the trains came into the station wrong line to platform 1.

Monday as increased service saw a reversal at Codnor Park Junction.

thanks, Peter

[Mallard60022]

5 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

But it depends when it was filmed as the wind shifted considerably during the storm and at various stages it was blowing from the south east, the south, and the east but in the latter stages it settled round towards mainly west nor west and even for short while it was forecast to be almost due west.  Also when i checked the Met Office site it was blowing at Force 7, i.e. Near Gale,  from the south then forercast to go easterly at the same wind force.  Subsequently forecast to ease as it went round to the west nor' west.

 

One think that passes through my mind is how teh surface of the new concrete will stand up  against the shrapanel which is being brought up against by the waves.  Will the surface resist those impacts or will they gradually degrade it?

 

And what is coming under the railway bridge dies seem to have been mitigated by the recent works but obviously nothing short of a solid wall is ever going to stop that happening.

I watched the Dawlish Cams from an hour before high tide and about an hour after high tide that morning. The Waves were pretty large with a large amount of water/spray reaching many feet above the Sea Wall. The Water was also full of Sand and Stones. Several Trains passing were fairly well drenched, but the few IETS I saw did not fail on the spot. 

As stated above, the new configuration dealt with the Waves to a degree but there was still a lot of water over the top of passing Trains. As far as I could see there was not any damage to the new Walling in the Station area anyway. It certainly wasn't 'choppy' but probably less wind, so maybe not quite as dangerous this time?

The infrastructure is probably solid. Some of the passing Trains are not!

By two hours after HT there was no over Rails/Trains wash at all. Pity that GWRs main fleet are IETs. The Local Bog Carts and X Country Units seemed fine.

Phil

[Dunsignalling]

8 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

I watched the Dawlish Cams from an hour before high tide and about an hour after high tide that morning. The Waves were pretty large with a large amount of water/spray reaching many feet above the Sea Wall. The Water was also full of Sand and Stones. Several Trains passing were fairly well drenched, but the few IETS I saw did not fail on the spot. 

As stated above, the new configuration dealt with the Waves to a degree but there was still a lot of water over the top of passing Trains. As far as I could see there was not any damage to the new Walling in the Station area anyway. It certainly wasn't 'choppy' but probably less wind, so maybe not quite as dangerous this time?

The infrastructure is probably solid. Some of the passing Trains are not!

By two hours after HT there was no over Rails/Trains wash at all. Pity that GWRs main fleet are IETs. The Local Bog Carts and X Country Units seemed fine.

Phil

The waves and the wind were coming from more-or-less opposite directions, and that might have mitigated any sea damage on this occasion, the wind possibly reducing the amount of salt water hitting the trains.

 

That said, it was still pretty hairy. A bit further East, at Sidmouth, a wave effortlessly transferred a parked car from the esplanade to the beach. 

 

John

[MidlandRed]

15 minutes ago, Mallard60022 said:

I watched the Dawlish Cams from an hour before high tide and about an hour after high tide that morning. The Waves were pretty large with a large amount of water/spray reaching many feet above the Sea Wall. The Water was also full of Sand and Stones. Several Trains passing were fairly well drenched, but the few IETS I saw did not fail on the spot. 

As stated above, the new configuration dealt with the Waves to a degree but there was still a lot of water over the top of passing Trains. As far as I could see there was not any damage to the new Walling in the Station area anyway. It certainly wasn't 'choppy' but probably less wind, so maybe not quite as dangerous this time?

The infrastructure is probably solid. Some of the passing Trains are not!

By two hours after HT there was no over Rails/Trains wash at all. Pity that GWRs main fleet are IETs. The Local Bog Carts and X Country Units seemed fine.

Phil

I also watched the cams during the same period - the San Remo cam showed the area towards Exeter and at times the waves deposited sufficient water to create pools across the tracks but it soon drained. I thought the volume of ballast around the sleepers on the up, between the rails looked somewhat depleted - whether that was caused by the regular drenching over a period of about 4 hrs I don’t know.

 

However @The Stationmaster is correct. At high tide (around 8 pm the previous day), the wave spray picked up by the south easterly was extraordinary - occasionally actually splashing the camera. Several local trains (150s and 165s) got a severe spraying from waves crashing across the up end of the Dawlish platforms. IETs broke down at Exeter and Newton Abbott. In terms of the station, yesterday morning, one large waves resulted in sea water pouring off the down end of the down platform. 
 

I suspect had the civil engineering works not been carried out there would have been serious consequences and flooding around the most exposed areas (station, subway etc). 

Edited November 3, 2023 by MidlandRed

[Gwiwer]

8 hours ago, Miss Prism said:

I wonder what might have happened with Storm Ciarán if the extensive post-2014 rebuild had not been done.

 

 

Fair question but Storm Babet (aimed straight at the sea-wall) would have done more damage. Which Ciaràn might then have made worse given the lack of time to effect repairs in between 

[Gwiwer]

8 hours ago, Mike_Walker said:

In his weekly staff address this week Mark Hopwood related that he was going to dig out the 2016 paperwork from Hitachi where they gave assurances the IET would be, in his words, 'seaworthy'. They're not.

“Seaworthy” is a term established in law so far as I am aware. 
 

Trains are not seaworthy. Most ships are. 
 

The 8xx-series trains were, if I remember correctly, said to be “Dawlish-proof”. 
 

If it comes to challenging contracts then this term would need to be defined. Surely no-one expects that rail vehicles will be “seaworthy” in the context of being fit for purpose on the oceans? 

[Mike_Walker]

Hey guys, relax.  When Mark said "seaworthy" it was with tongue in cheek and was a reflection of his frustration at the trains not doing what was claimed.

[KeithMacdonald]

Here's what "Seaworthy" means in Sidmouth.

Look! The lights are still working!

 

 

[Mallard60022]

9 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Here's what "Seaworthy" means in Sidmouth.

Look! The lights are still working!

 

 

 

9 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Here's what "Seaworthy" means in Sidmouth.

Look! The lights are still working!

 

 

Car wash...no waxing thanks.

Beep beep.

[The Stationmaster]

17 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Here's what "Seaworthy" means in Sidmouth.

Look! The lights are still working!

 

 

Looks like it had been left in the area where it says 'No Parking'  - it's all yellow box markings.  So probably down to 'Driver Error' (aka stupidity).

 

[Ramblin Rich]

Unfortunately the older sea wall towards Langstone Rock has suffered damage and the walkway is closed north of Coastguards Footbridge. Pictures show the coping stones lifted off the top of the wall / edge of the path.

Similarly closed north of Sprey Point Point.  Facebook lonk:

https://m.facebook.com/story.php?story_fbid=pfbid0DhS8qf3XLhNhTS7yPNPKA9FugNRbxKPM3HgNmpAL2GTpMt9G4HRZGtix6z2oTVy8l&id=100057845071374&sfnsn=scwspmo

Even given Mike Stationmaster's comment on sea and wind direction,  its surprising this happened now and not during storm Babet - although that may well have started the process.

Edited November 4, 2023 by Ramblin Rich
link

[PhilJ W]

23 hours ago, KeithMacdonald said:

Here's what "Seaworthy" means in Sidmouth.

Look! The lights are still working!

 

 

 

6 hours ago, The Stationmaster said:

Looks like it had been left in the area where it says 'No Parking'  - it's all yellow box markings.  So probably down to 'Driver Error' (aka stupidity).

 

I wonder what he (or she) told the insurance company.