Supaned

2 minutes ago, phil-b259 said:

 

 

That however would need the signalman to have looked at his point position indicators on the block shelf (like he was supposed to by the rules) though......

 

* The normal situation with point failures is to get trains to sit tight until a NR MOM has arrived to clip points in the correct position - not get drivers to do it.

which then leads back to my point about time pressures. 

10 minutes ago, 101 said:

 

Really?  If so I'm astounded by that.

 

Rulebook Module TW5 Passing a signal at Danger has exactly that wording. In the dark in certain traction types it may not be physically possible to see the position the points are facing.

2 minutes ago, LMS2968 said:

That's how it was in my day, too, admittedly as a guard in the mid-1970s. If the points couldn't be seen from the cab, the driver would (and did) aske me to go down on the ground and check, although I realise that the rules around doing this have since changed. 

 

This was the issue at Quorn on the GCR, 27/04/13. The initial error was the Bobby's in having failed to set up the route, but the driver's failure to check the route was the final ingredient.

Whilst I'm naturally inclined to defend drivers being one myself , one factor to consider here is the third rail and darkness here. There is potentially a far greater risk having a driver wandering around on the floor surrounded by live rails in the dark - yes , we are PTS trained and yes that is part of our duties to do such things , however not something I'd fancy myself.

Having read the report , one thing that does stand out to me , and this seems to be a factor in a lot of incidents I've read about , is that of time loss & performance , and the pressures on staff to reduce delays to a minimum.

Granted , passengers and freight customers expect a punctual railway , but they also expect a safe one , and it certainly seems to me in this particular case that the time pressures are one of the contributing factors to this incident.

I've said on many occasions that the delay attribution "industry within an industry" and the downwards pressure that stems from it onto those actually operating the railways having to explain for every percieved lost minute of time because there is a cost attached to that is in fact detrimental to safety , and this is a case in point.

Regarding commuting from Rugby and so on , sadly as housing prices have increased closer to and in London , people seem to have been forced to (or have chosen to) have moved further afield , and this combined with what up until recent times was a greatly improved and more frequent service has fed this demand. I live in Atherstone , which at one time had 6 trains a day up until not so long ago. Now , we have a near enough hourly semi-fast service to Euston taking 1h20 mins , and as house prices here are certainly reasonable , pre-COVID there was a large uptake in passengers commuting to London.

Footnote to this - altererd workings on a job I was on this morning - train was booked to arrive with 3 sets which split to form 3 separate trains. Actually arrived with 2 as the driver doing the prep had found a missing sanding pipe on one of the vehicles. Somewhat important , especially at this time of year.

I wonder if these CONservative Home zealots are in some way connected to that Peter Wilkinson character of the DfT? I remember him making some spurious claims about traincrew allegedly being entitled to some sort of break which had continued on since the days of steam. I'm certainly not aware of any such breaks - the only ones we get are a PNB (physical needs break ie to go to the toilet or eat) , or some diagrammed time away from the driving cab to comply with agreed limits on continuous working time , which to be honest is very much needed if you've done several hours of intensive work.

I don't know if you are already aware of this but the R&N publish their corporate newsletters online as pdf files . There's usually a few interesting pictures or snippets about the business which can give lots of ideas for traffic.

https://www.rbmnrr.com/happenings/2020/11/2/reading-amp-northern-establishes-new-rail-truck-transload-facility

https://www.rbmnrr.com/news

Scroll to the bottom of that page and the R&N newsletters are available to download.

I have been doing lots of research on the R&N with an idea to model part of the Humboldt Industrial park in West Hazleton. I keep dropping hints to Scaletrains and Athearn about some RBMN power, nothing as yet sadly.

The R&N flickr group also may be of interest:  

11 minutes ago, Wheatley said:

Drivers and depot staff still miss scotches, 'Not to be moved' boards and fuel/water hoses attached, so the human is not the only answer. If you can teach a door monitoring camera to tell the difference between a person and a wheelchair then you caan teach it to recognise a NTBM board. 

 

Having said that I wouldn't trust any politician to check his own flies never mind anything remotely technical. 

Central Rivers depot has an AVIS system , where all arriving trains pass through a device that effectively laser scans the underframe looking for defects and measuring brake pad wear etc - this presumably doing away with the staff that carried out the same tasks manually , so again the technology exists. Whether they want to pay for it is a different matter entirely.

Granted on some TOCs the prep is done by depot staff rather than main line drivers , and in that respect perhaps the article is getting at utilising those drivers more efficiently (and arguably reducing headcount and thus the wage bill).

But unless the rulebook is dramatically watered down , trains will still need inspecting and preparing for service - it may well be that the type of checks and the frequency of them change , but they still need to happen.

And unlike a car , a train driver can't really ignore some of the faults and warning lights , not least because it would contravene Health & Safety law ( defective AWS/TPWS) , or in some cases the train won't be able to move because the fault causes a brake application.

I think the key word from that quote posted is "Dipstick" - evidently it was written by one with minimal knowledge of how the industry works , which is the main reason that some of the issues it faces now exist.

I'd echo what others have said.

Have a think about what you want from the layout ie operations and switching (HO scale probably the best bet) or running long trains through a landscape (N gauge the better option given the space available).

Also take a look at what models are actually available in your chosen scale as otherwise , as has been stated , you'll end up disappointed and the project may well flounder. HO does have a broader selection of locomotives and car types , although N scale is catching up , but even then there are some things available in one scale and not the other which seem a little odd. Bear in mind that in both cases , manufacturers generally operate on a pre-order and batch production basis , so whilst they may have produced certain models in the past , obtaining them may not be that simple unless they do a re-run or you can find them on the secondhand market. The big class 1 railroads such as Union Pacific , BNSF etc are usually plentiful , but the regional and shortline stuff less so.

Freemo is also worth a look , and there are groups in the UK for both N and HO scale should you go down that path.

Don't know if anyone has seen these before , but these appear to be test shots / development models.

On 18/11/2020 at 23:41, 101 said:

 

Couldn't agree with you more - DAS sounds like something else that makes me feel even happier with my decision to take redundancy/early retirement!

DAS is certainly not compulsory on the TOC I work for. Personally I don't use it , relying on my own route knowledge instead - to coin a phrase , I'll take the DAS doorstep challenge and see whether I'm more efficient than a box. Sadly , some of the information suggested by DAS is incorrect ( linespeeds) - when I raised this with management the answer was that it was "only advisory" so wouldn't be changed - this is a concern to me as some drivers seem to use it like a sat-nav as a substitute for proper route knowledge. Probably the only useful functions are the timekeeping section where it shows how you are running compared to the WTT , and the miles and chains location - useful for when being cautioned or reporting things. I also suggested that DAS should have an "emergency" 9999 login so that if you don't use it but need a precise location in a hurry it goes directly to that screen. As that costs money to do , naturally it has never happened.

If I'm honest I've long argued that the Late Notices procedure is pointless in this day and age, and this incident to an extent underlines that - the notices are effectively out of date the moment they are printed , and in reality any TSRs or ESRs will have magnets and boards provided on the ground , or trains will be cautioned until such time as they are in place. I doubt there are many drivers that actually slow down if a restriction advertised in the WONs or late notices isn't actually there when they get to the location concerned and no magnets or boards are in place. 

Granted this incident seems to have resulted from a change in the speed , but my take on this would be to question how long the restriction has been in place - there are TSRs on routes I work over that may as well be permanent for the duration they have been imposed - if you're going over that route day in day out then it does become ingrained "there's a 50mph over Collywobble Junction".

I'd love to see this with an NBL type 2 in 1960s guise

Now that is really good , and seeing how not only are the Bemo ones hard to find , they are usually a ridiculous price when they do come up,

Good to note on the webcam the early morning mixed train with a Ge6/6 on it still running.

and why is there a Tmf Tractor at Filisur?

Don't Frateschi do an EMD G8?

Prototypical example here : Central Rivers depot.

To enter from the Birmingham end , trains are signalled onto the reception line by a main aspect with junction indicator to a fixed red signal, BD1. This has a position light fitted (and associated route indicator) and trains proceed onto the depot upon clearance of that position light.

To enter from the Derby end is the anomaly (and in fairness , very few trains run directly onto the depot this way).

From the Down line , trains are signalled onto the depot by main aspect with junction indication , however in this case the next "signal" is actually a Stop board.

To answer the OP's question , the "normal" method for trains to be signalled onto a depot is by shunting signal (either position light or semaphore sub arm/disc) , and in many cases the train will run towards a stop board where the driver will leave it in the hands of the fitters.

8 minutes ago, jools1959 said:

Registered my interest and I’ve heard from a friend who still working on the railways, he is under the impression that it will emerge from the paint shop in IC Swallow livery.

If that quote is true , that may give a clue as to to who is intending to use it, putting 2 and 2 together

That PWA van is very impressive too.

I've always liked Rob Chant's (Journal of Layout Design) plans when he has posted them on facebook groups , so thanks for the heads up about the website - lots of great ideas there

fantastic models and great use of 3d printing technology.

Have you considered doing cement tankers in 7mm? either the straight tank variant or the V shape ? I appreciate the latter is occasionally available elsewhere, but probably something very useful for 7mm modern modellers.

in their later years they were worked by HSTs to simplify the shunting arrangements - no requirement for running round or shunt releasing locos at Swansea, I'm pretty sure they ran into Virgin days, more than likely they were curtailed under Operation Princess.

Sorry to read that - I've had a lot of stuff from Model Junction over the years.

I think the staff issues and percieved attitudes stem from several factors.

There's still an element of BR and it's immediate successors "f@8k 'em" attitude amongst some members of staff (although I should point out that does not mean all ex BR staff and by the same token , staff employed in more recent times can be just as bad) - as they can't necessarily be removed from their postions, this issue will only go away over time - if they are assessed as competant in their particular roles they can't really be dismissed unless there are correct legal grounds, having a "bad" attitude not being one of them.

Industrial relations are a very contentious issue - ultimately the staff side want the most money for the least work , the management side want the most work for the least money , and in an ideal world compromises could be reached, but sadly this is rarely the case. Some TOCs have "sold" their more restrictive ex BR conditions , giving the employers more flexibility in terms of rostering , commitment to sunday working etc , the key thing being that these things were negotiated and not imposed , and ultimately it costs money to achieve , so if TOCs (and by extension the DfT) won't pay for those things , this is one of the reasons that some TOCs cannot run their timetabled sunday services , because drivers or guards still retain their old BR conditons where sundays are not mandatory to work and the staff member can simply state they are "not available" for duty. I think many staff are aware that we live in a 7 day society now , but as I said , they aren't going to freely give up such a condition , especiaily when you consider the situation on TOCs where sundays are either part of the working week or committed , where drivers will find it diffcult to get a day off on a sunday for an event such as a family gathering  (yes, the railways are indeed a public service , but the people operating them have lives and families outside of work too , which sometimes is overlooked). The DOO situation is equally complex , and as can be seen from above , removing guards will still not fix the issue of no traincrew if there are insufficient drivers or for example none want to work a certain sunday. The adversial approach to industrial relations is achieving nothing. Granted both sides of the debate need to be more realistic on some matters but both seem to be so entrenched it's hard to see a way forwards sometimes.

Obviously the Unions and staff are a popular target for the media (and those who clearly believe what they read from the media) , the reality is very different.