90136

The works being undertaken were the only works going on at the location. The company were also the only ones working there. No time pressures or constraints. How the rail ended up being left is still subject to formal investigation. 
 

There is no excuse, there was plenty of time and the rail was left at the unloading point where the machine exited, so plenty of individuals to have noticed prior to walking off track, locking the gates and driving off, yet somehow failed to. As mentioned by Southernman46, the COSS & CC have potentially failed in their duties here and for what ever reason, failed to ensure a safe railway was handed back to the ES and subsequently the PICOP and Signaller. If this does indeed turnout to be the case, and there is nothing to suggest otherwise currently, footage available and viewed to date doesn’t highlight anything malicious or deliberate by outside parties, I for one hope they never step foot on the infrastructure again. This sheer incompetence and irresponsible behaviour is what caused fatal accidents in years gone by, this had the makings of a Potters Bar type derailment. It’s been said many a time previously, luck runs out, the railway is vast approaching the bottom of the barrel. Next time we won’t be so lucky. 

On a side note, the fence in the car park took a significant hit from a chunk of rail, enough to break several concrete post significantly, but the chainlink didn’t fail which is good. 

7 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

The person maki g the post did make the point that possession sites are getting longer and longer and thus harder to inspect before handback. 

 

Jamie

 

 

Poor excuse for those managing worksites to not get out of their vans and do a bit. Possessions maybe longer, worksites are not generally excessive to the point of being unable to walk the site. Add to that, a lot of works are static, no excuse really. 

8 hours ago, jamie92208 said:

From a post elsewhere on this site the object was an unrecovered piece of rail from the possession. 

 

Jamie

The object was indeed a piece of scrap rail. 

10 hours ago, Southernman46 said:

 

Re-assured by the info in 90136's post that the object wasn't in fact railway or NR related - changes the picture somewhat in terms of cause.

 

Not equipment related, no. Nor was it NR staff related. 

On 03/03/2024 at 19:28, 6990WitherslackHall said:

I think it's alright. The red and black parts are good but I think the grey is too light. Maybe if they changed it to a darker grey, it would look better.

 

I don't know why they repainted it from BR blue but there's probably a reason for it out there somewhere.

Brand awareness I’d imagine. 

On 03/03/2024 at 20:07, EmporiaSub said:

Whilst my sources tell me the heavy wheel wear is partly down to the nature of the track bed, being not quite the same as mainline standards. But then island folklore starts to take over after that…..

The track bed is shocking. The track is almost floating. I loathe doing walks over there. You can feel the bogies hunt as they go, definitely not going to help wheel wear. 

5 minutes ago, Oldddudders said:

Thanks for telling us as much ast you feel is wise. The report will make more interesting reading as a result. 

I am all for transparency. Despite it being constantly drummed into us and preached that we must be, we as an organisation rarely follow it! 

There is no doubt, we were lucky this wasn’t worse. Had the axle gone the other way, I would be 99% certain the leading carriage would have rode up, similar to Potters Bar. Had the full bogie come off, it’s possible the unit could have drifted towards the Up Slow and Platform, the con wouldn’t have stopped it, it’s not anchored to anything, add to that, at the point of derailment, the con was 10ft side. We are all thankful no one was hurt. It will all come out, but the RAIB and us are of the same understanding around the causes.

I need to be very careful with what I do and do not say, but having been on site since around 0800, I can confirm RAIB did not finish their investigation until nearly 1600.  Only then were the BRUFF team allowed to commence operations to get the axle back on track. 

Only the leading axle was derailed. 
The Con rail was displaced due to the wheel riding the sleeper ends, from the point of derailment to the point of impact with the ramp end of the Con, the unit was not drifting toward the Up Slow, it was following the curve. The initial displacement is a result of that initial impact. 
 

I cannot say what was hit, but I can say it wasn’t equipment, nor was it NR. 
 

Regarding recovery of the asset, there just isn’t the staff around to react anymore. Very few are on days, certainly not enough to cover what is needed. 

I would be up for several in Silverlink. Nice looking livery and wore by the units for a long time. Same for First Great Eastern.

2 hours ago, rob D2 said:

Having owned several of the original 47s, I’ve been put off the brand indefinitely , sadly .

I did see a lot of the mixed reviews about them which put me off, but having since purchased various 33’s, 58’s and 86’s, I have confidence. 

I’ve taken a punt on the Porterbrook 47 from Key Publishing, always liked the livery. Will be my first Heljan 47. Hoping it blends nicely with the Bachmann ones. 

Excellent choice, used to cab these regularly when based in Rugby. Always found them to be good riders. Fond memories including one spirited run through Kilsby Tunnel when the HNR’s were closed. The potential for Revolution from here is endless. Can’t wait for the order book to open, I’ll need a few. 

19 hours ago, Southwich said:

Next month or so all being well - we’re happy to accept suggestions in the meantime though! 

 

Kind regards,

 

Will

Any of the Fastline Trio and 56311- would

always see them for crew changes at Rugby. 
I remember being called out one evening to a rail head defect, reported by station staff. Got to site and immediately obvious, the last train had gunned it and wheel spun, 4x grooves followed by 6x grooves. Turned out it was 56311 running with a traction motor isolated. Had to be stopped in Northampton for its wheels to be assessed. Got a nice easy O/T shift out of it to replace the rail. 

Any of these below would be good, as you can tell I like the early privatisation era. 
 

56003 Loadhaul
56004 Blue

56011EWS

56057 EW&S

56099 T Rail

56109 Unbranded Loadhaul

56111 Loadhaul

56115 EWS

56123 T Rail

56135 Unbranded Railfrieght

48 minutes ago, PieGuyRob said:

I mentioned a class 58 along with a couple of others in the more model ideas thread. I put off buying a second hand Hornby 60081, to wait for Cavalex to announce their version. I'm glad I did now.

Knew I’d seen it somewhere. Glad to see there is a following. Always liked the 58’s, spent many a shift in them. 

On 20/01/2024 at 16:17, rob D2 said:

I think you are overlooking the fact , I believe they are still paying leases for 66s . The 60s cost nothing, inherited from BR. So would you rather have an asset costing , say, £25k a month ( absolute guess , I have no idea on train lease costs ) working , or let it rot and still pay that much .

I don’t think that’s “ bean counters “ gone mad, I think it’s common sense .

I was under the impression that DB opted to buy the 66’s & 67’s at the end of their initial lease period (15years I think), so they wouldn’t have been paying lease charges for some years now. 66’s are a good general purpose machine, the 60’s more specialised for traffic types. That said, back when I was based in the midlands, we would always request a 60 over 66 on Autohopper duties. 
 

Anyhow, just put in an order for 60081, I had been resisting but finally gave it! If it is anything like the 56’s we are in for a fantastic model. I know it’s been mentioned previously, but I’d love to see these guys take on a 58, though it would be mighty expensive as I have built up a full fleet over the years! 
 

My set arrived at just after 0800 this morning. Not bad given I got the deliver email yesterday. Amazing set, can’t wait for the NSE ones to arrive. 
So, how long till you announce the E and F ? 😉

Rails of Sheffield DRS Class 33 twin set. 
I brought it new from Rails and ran it and it’s sat boxed unused since. A waste of a good set and I already have 025 in Dutch. 
Open to sensible offers, looking for around £240 mark. Postage at my cost.

5 minutes ago, McC said:

 

I am a proud Irishman but with 3 irish team members and 12 british it’s probably unfair to label us the emerald team ;) 

A fair point 😉

53 minutes ago, shunny said:

What's crazy is if I had pointed this out on a Hornby or Heljan model everyone would have agreed and said how bad it looks even though there samples are just as put together at this stage as everyone else's but because I've pointed it out on an accurascale it seems to be an sin to point it out. They seem to welcome feedback so I gave them my thoughts especially as panel is different and doesn't go to all the way to body sides like other models so is more noticeable.

I can understand your perspective and had this of been The Emerald teams first loco, I’d be sharing my thoughts also, however, having seen the quality of their products to date, and knowing how actively engaged they are with not only this forum but also from their customer support, I think it’s fair to say they will get it right. The post acknowledges there are fit and finish issues, we know they will be addressed. Other manufacturers have form for not accepting criticism or critique and push pushing product out the door errors and all. 

On 17/02/2024 at 09:11, black and decker boy said:

 

huge delays getting 701s into service

SWR’s rolling stock problem has resulted in 455’s running regularly to Reading. 

69005 at Virginia Water yesterday with 6Y48 to Hoo. Still find it weird hearing a 66, but seeing a 56! Nice and weathered too.

21 hours ago, phil-b259 said:

 

If you thought it was bad back then - let me tell you its many many times worse now.

 

But as the bean counters in Whitehall keep telling us the railway costs the taxpayers too much so cuts, cuts and more cuts to staff are essential to deliver tax cuts.... ahem, I mean 'value for the taxpayer'....

I have to agree.
PPF and Modernising Maintenance are the politically correct terms they would have us believe. 
You only have to look at Western Route recently and the report off the back of a certain Junction on the ECML. 

The industry is heading down a path it really shouldn’t and as much as I hope and pray I am wrong, it’s not going to be long before something catastrophic happens. Luck only last so long. 
 

9 hours ago, Southernman46 said:

The top surface of the block matches this position and ISTR green is for a "installed design" of the track (i.e. a renewal) and red blocks represent measured position during the annual / 3 yearly gauging survey carried out by the Maintainer

The only point that I can add to this, is on the WCML during my time and post ATG implementation, all lines cleared for Tilt were Green blocked irrespective. We had the Emsat’s that were always running about and we had to maintain geometry much more stringently. Any line not cleared for Tilt would be Red block at first survey post renewal. 
How I miss the nuances of the WCML. 

2 hours ago, Southernman46 said:

Yesssss - just about 🤞 judging by the seat of my pants on a daily basis (used to look after 200+ track miles - so I have a nose for these things).

Actually (whilst living there) watching Class 70's with a fully laden container trains pass over that S&C at linespeed was toe-curling 😬

Let’s just say, it’s better now than it has been in recent years. Myself and another senior, now retired track engineer were requested to aid the local team a few years back following some ‘incidents’ and a broken breather! The lack of understanding was worrying. I have to admit, being trackside and observing the S&C under load is always interesting. Currently ring fenced for renewal but we shall see.