Mishap on GCR

[andyram]

As a working member of the G.C I have to say I am shocked and concerned by this incident. Coming relatively soon after the Ivatt 2 derailment it could have serious repercussions for the line. The fact that the loco was able to run for such a distance is a concern too. Thankfully no one appears to have been hurt, but two major incidents in such close proximity will do nothing for the reputation of the railway.

[roythebus]

Any form of mechanism that locked gears would be a recipe for another sort of disaster, especially if the loco failed somewhere and had to be towed. Can'r relese the parking brake? It'll never move sir!

[Titan]

The gears could be interlocked with a device that would not allow any attempt at movement (maybe like on an automatic gearbox)

 

Friend of mine had a car with an automatic gearbox.  One day someone decided to move his car without his permission. He needed a new gearbox. 

 

You can get big cables!

 

And how often do cables snap? I have had this happen to me, so no where near robust enough for railway use - as a side note pacers originally had cable operated brakes operated by a remote cylinder, but they were so problematic they were soon replaced with something more suitable for the railway.

 

Still think principles for a  1 1/2 ton car will work with a large number of intensively used (and occasionally abused) 100 ton plus locos ?

 

Of course if you want something heavy duty you could replace the cable with a chain,  I wonder why EE did not think of that? Oh wait hang on...

 

 

[Chameleon]

This incident reminds me of a very similar one in Edinburgh a good few years ago. Same type of loco (37) was uncoupled and left buffered up to the sleepers for the next shift to deal with. It was shut down but somebody forgot to apply the handbrake. Once the air had leaked off, the spring in the buffers gave it that little push to set it rolling. Didn't stop til it met an HST coming the other way between Craigentinny and Abbeyhill, badly injuring the driver.

Sounds awful like someone didn't apply the handbrake on the GC one.

[roythebus]

Cables have a tendency to stretch...chains have far les tendency to do so...

[Talltim]

I'm not suggesting that the ideas suggested would work, but the arguments against them are weak.

Your friend's car's automatic gearbox was destroyed when it was towed? That hasn't stopped millions of automatic cars being built

A push bike has cable operated brakes. Still think the principles for a 10kg bike will work with a 1 1/2 ton car?

While I understand that a 37s parking brake is more effective than a 40s, I would imagine that they use the same principles? I find it amazing that over 100 years into rail vehicle development a better solution hadn't been found. It's not like it's something that was waiting for a completely new technology such as microprocessors.

How does the parking brake on modern locos work?

Of course this is possibly just a side argument, we don't know yet whether the brakes had anything to do with the accident.

[The Stationmaster]

This incident reminds me of a very similar one in Edinburgh a good few years ago. Same type of loco (37) was uncoupled and left buffered up to the sleepers for the next shift to deal with. It was shut down but somebody forgot to apply the handbrake. Once the air had leaked off, the spring in the buffers gave it that little push to set it rolling. Didn't stop til it met an HST coming the other way between Craigentinny and Abbeyhill, badly injuring the driver.

Sounds awful like someone didn't apply the handbrake on the GC one.

Wait for the RAIB Report (or possibly an interim one) - I realise it might be a long time coming, as usual, and that it might contain some stuff of minimal interest but it ought at least to recount what happened and possibly why.  Until then all is speculation and we can advance at least three times as many theories regarding the cause as there are contributors to this thread, and all of them might be wrong.

[melmerby]

Re: automatic gearboxes: You cannot tow whilst in Park, but you can tow (carefully) whilst in neutral.

The park position on them is very effective.

 

How do the parking brakes on 40 tonne lorries work?

They are quite effective and at 1/3 weight of a diesel loco, not so remote weight wise.

 

Cables stretch - yes, but adjustment mechanisms can take up the slack.

 

The trouble with too may people on here is that they dismiss ideas out of hand without considering how they might be developed.

 

Keith

[Edwin_m]

All very well suggesting alternative means of applying brakes but we are talking old-tech with the 37 and nobody is going to retrofit them.  Most modern units (not sure about locos) have spring-applied parking brakes which come on automatically if the air pressure leaks off.  In some cases at least, it is possible to drag the unit with the brakes on without causing damage. 

[Titan]

I'm not suggesting that the ideas suggested would work, but the arguments against them are weak.

Your friend's car's automatic gearbox was destroyed when it was towed?

 

It was not towed, just pulled 6 feet. That wrecked the parking pawl and required gearbox replacement to fix.

 

That hasn't stopped millions of automatic cars being built

 

Because this system is perfectly adequate for car use, but not trains, thats why.

 

A push bike has cable operated brakes. Still think the principles for a 10kg bike will work with a 1 1/2 ton car?

 

They don't, that's why cars have hydraulic brakes for stopping. A bicycle does not have a parking brake.

 

While I understand that a 37s parking brake is more effective than a 40s, I would imagine that they use the same principles?

 

Don't know, but I guess it is like car hand brakes, some are better than others.

 

I find it amazing that over 100 years into rail vehicle development a better solution hadn't been found. It's not like it's something that was waiting for a completely new technology such as microprocessors.

How does the parking brake on modern locos work?

 

I think there are quite a variety these days, I think the HST's originally had a hydraulic operated version in the '70's, modern locos probably something else.

 

Of course this is possibly just a side argument, we don't know yet whether the brakes had anything to do with the accident.

 

We will have to wait, although one of the photos shows the handbrake in its fully released position...

[andyram]

Wait for the RAIB Report (or possibly an interim one) - I realise it might be a long time coming, as usual, and that it might contain some stuff of minimal interest but it ought at least to recount what happened and possibly why.  Until then all is speculation and we can advance at least three times as many theories regarding the cause as there are contributors to this thread, and all of them might be wrong.

I could not agree more!

[LMS2968]

Gentlemen, could I ask that you drop this speculation as it serves no purpose. I doubt that I'm the only one on here who also looks in at Nat Pres, although I don't do it very often. The thing I like about RMWeb is that the contributors are generally friendly to each other, which is not the case in what members of parliament refer to as the 'other place', and this despite that I am not a railway modeller (Hornby three-rail doesn't count!). Another problem with NP is the amount of speculation which follows any and every incident, with people putting forward their pet theories based on no evidence, knowledge or - often - experience, and virtually coming to blows with the proponents of differing theories. I stand to be corrected, but I cannot recall a single theory being correct once the evidence and the inquiry have been produced. Unfortunately, this topic is heading along the same road, which would be a great shame. The irony is that the topic has gone quiet on Nat Pres!

 

There are people who will hold a full inquiry and establish, from evidence, what happened, why it happened, and what needs to be done to prevent a repetition. Could we please leave it to the inquiry(ies) and cease the guesswork?

[Ian Hargrave]

Never in the field of armchair knowledge has so much spurious speculation been scattered by so many (Apologies to the late W.S.Churchill)

[phil-b259]

Gentlemen, could I ask that you drop this speculation as it serves no purpose.

Well said that man

 

Though all this talk of parking brakes has made me mildly curious* - how do the parking brakes on modern traction work - can any of our FOC members help? We have established BR diesels had a simple wheel linked to the brake shoes by a chain, but. How do they do it on the 66s, 67s, 68s and 70s?

 

There is also the follow on question about units of course as I imagine the technology has moved on there too.

 

*As a stand alone subject

[45125]

14xs had cable brakes when new, look how *rap they were!!!!!!!!!!.

[Oldddudders]

The 1963 Southern Region 4-CIG and 4-BIG stock had electric parking brakes. Presumably these were held by the units batteries when the juice went off. What I do recall is that from time to time these things would malfunction, which was typically announced by a continuous ring on the loudaphone buzzer. In order to release such a defective  brake, a handle was required to be turned 100 times, so we were told, which must have been jolly fun with that buzzing noise close by........

[Pacific231G]

Gentlemen, could I ask that you drop this speculation as it serves no purpose.

 

There are people who will hold a full inquiry and establish, from evidence, what happened, why it happened, and what needs to be done to prevent a repetition. Could we please leave it to the inquiry(ies) and cease the guesswork?

Speculating about the causes of an incident serves a purpose if it causes people involved with that activity to think about possible causes and how they might avoid them. Learning from other people's mistakes is valuable- it's why rail travel is so safe- but so is learning from the mistakes that you think other people might have made even if it turns out that they didn't.  I have the impression that quite a lot of peope here are involved in one way or another with full size railway operation so specualtion is not I hope of the idle variety. 

 

This oes lead me to a question. Are people involved in railway operation generally avid readers of accident reports and is there general sharing of accounts of near misses?

[roythebus]

Yes, I tend to read RAIB reports.

[The Stationmaster]

Speculating about the causes of an incident serves a purpose if it causes people involved with that activity to think about possible causes and how they might avoid them. Learning from other people's mistakes is valuable- it's why rail travel is so safe- but so is learning from the mistakes that you think other people might have made even if it turns out that they didn't.  I have the impression that quite a lot of peope here are involved in one way or another with full size railway operation so specualtion is not I hope of the idle variety. 

 

This oes lead me to a question. Are people involved in railway operation generally avid readers of accident reports and is there general sharing of accounts of near misses?

But the purpose of the inquiry (or inquiries) is to do exactly that - and in an informed,  methodical, and objective manner, thus etstablishing what took place, why it took place and - hopefully - recommending action which will avoid a repetition both on the Railway where it took place and more widely if there are wider lessons to be learned.

 

The Railway will, I trust, have held its own internal Inquiry and probably an external (i.e. RAIB) inquiry will follow on from that although we will not know the outcome for some time on past RAIB form.  However an RAIB Inquiry doesn't always happen in these circumstances so we might never know the full details of what took place and why although any lessons to be learned will no doubt circulate within the heritage/leisure railway industry.  In this latter connection the GCR is, I think, a member of the HRA and it has got a bit better at disseminating 'lessons learned' between its members although I still remain of the view that their practical application of such knowledge is not as good as it could be - but that is a another matter.

 

We also have to recognise the possible legal situation in an incident such as this where potentially a number of owners, and an operator, were involved and we need to understand that information regarding various contributory factors could have possible consequences when it comes to claims for damage or on insurance.  Thus it may well be the case that things - even when established by inquiry - have to remain outside the public view until the legal situation is resolved as any admission of responsibility etc could have financial consequences.

 

There is also the wider implication of possible HMRI involvement following such an incident, especially in view of a past GCR's incident - which again might have possible commercial or legal consequences which could be prejudiced by comments in the public arena.  In view of the ORR's concern about operational safety in the heritage/leisure sector it is difficult to say what the wider implications of this incident might or might not be - that would simply be a further area for pointless conjecture.

[Talltim]

There is also the wider implication of possible HMRI involvement following such an incident, especially in view of a past GCR's incident - which again might have possible commercial or legal consequences which could be prejudiced by comments in the public arena

Are you talking about people who are directly involved (in this case with the GC) or randoms on the internet?

[The Stationmaster]

Are you talking about people who are directly involved (in this case with the GC) or randoms on the internet?

Either or both.  You'd be surprised how things get reported after someone totally unconnected has seen them happen or seen something about them on the 'net.

[jamie92208]

But the purpose of the inquiry (or inquiries) is to do exactly that - and in an informed,  methodical, and objective manner, thus etstablishing what took place, why it took place and - hopefully - recommending action which will avoid a repetition both on the Railway where it took place and more widely if there are wider lessons to be learned.

 

The Railway will, I trust, have held its own internal Inquiry and probably an external (i.e. RAIB) inquiry will follow on from that although we will not know the outcome for some time on past RAIB form.  However an RAIB Inquiry doesn't always happen in these circumstances so we might never know the full details of what took place and why although any lessons to be learned will no doubt circulate within the heritage/leisure railway industry.  In this latter connection the GCR is, I think, a member of the HRA and it has got a bit better at disseminating 'lessons learned' between its members although I still remain of the view that their practical application of such knowledge is not as good as it could be - but that is a another matter.

 

We also have to recognise the possible legal situation in an incident such as this where potentially a number of owners, and an operator, were involved and we need to understand that information regarding various contributory factors could have possible consequences when it comes to claims for damage or on insurance.  Thus it may well be the case that things - even when established by inquiry - have to remain outside the public view until the legal situation is resolved as any admission of responsibility etc could have financial consequences.

 

There is also the wider implication of possible HMRI involvement following such an incident, especially in view of a past GCR's incident - which again might have possible commercial or legal consequences which could be prejudiced by comments in the public arena.  In view of the ORR's concern about operational safety in the heritage/leisure sector it is difficult to say what the wider implications of this incident might or might not be - that would simply be a further area for pointless conjecture.

Having recently been involved in an incident that required an internal or " industry report to the RAIB, I can state that these are not published and will not be made public.  I think that this has come about because wehn they were certain parties tried to use them to further legal proceedings.   As a result the RAIB have stopped publishing them.  This means that things do not get disseminated where there is no formal RAIB report so the other channels, such as the HRA are vital.

 

Jamie

[phil-b259]

Having recently been involved in an incident that required an internal or " industry report to the RAIB, I can state that these are not published and will not be made public.  I think that this has come about because wehn they were certain parties tried to use them to further legal proceedings.   As a result the RAIB have stopped publishing them.  This means that things do not get disseminated where there is no formal RAIB report so the other channels, such as the HRA are vital.

 

Jamie

 

So once again the legal profession screw things up for the rest of us. I thought the whole point of the RAIB was to simply investigate issues and make recommendations - not apportion blame. If they are being constrained in this by lawyers then its the legal people that need to be dealt with rather than pandered to by shoving everything behind closed doors.

[jamie92208]

So once again the legal profession screw things up for the rest of us. I thought the whole point of the RAIB was to simply investigate issues and make recommendations - not apportion blame. If they are being constrained in this by lawyers then its the legal people that need to be dealt with rather than pandered to by shoving everything behind closed doors.

I'm not privy to all the ins and outs but as I understand it the 'Industry report' is a way of getting information from the operators under the same no blame culture that a formal RAIB investigation would achieve but with les resources.    Unfortunately I believe that when one was published someone tried to use the information.  In the case I ws involved in it seems that one of the draft copies that was circualted to someone involved may have been leaked. 

 

Jamie

[avonside1563]

Class 73s do the same must be a southern thing....they were into there nin-fangled devices.......should only buzz whilst power is applied, when you power off the buzzing stops.

quite useful really as most preserved railways don't use hand brakes...we are told not too at the GWR as there is too much risk of them being left on as most locomotive types there is no warning, and what you end up with is either a burnt out traction motor or 50 pence piece shaped wheels! And also 99% of the loco's at todd yard are locked so if you need to shunt it you cant gain access.

I hope that it is not the case that most preserved railway don't use handbrakes, they are an essential part of safety to prevent exactly the sort of incident that this thread referred to. If the vehicles are locked then surely a safer way to deal with the problem is to ensure that the keys are available should a shunt require moving said vehicles, otherwise put them somewhere where they don't need to be moved. The GCR isn't the only heritage line to have a mainline diesel runaway and if handbrakes aren't correctly applied then I doubt they will be the last.