Great Western Coffee Shop

1A93 1400 Penzance-London Paddington (13/09/2018) has failed and stood at Hele and Bradnich since 1710.  Units 802005 + 802010.  Hitachi staff on the way from Stoke Gifford, eta 1845..... ::)

1E68 1625 Plymouth-York Cancelled at Exeter St.Davids and formed 1E73 forward depart Exeter St.Davids at 1852 and ran wrong line (single line working) Cowley Bridge Junction to Tiverton Loops.
1E73 1725 Plymouth-Leeds Cancelled at Exeter St.Davids.
1A96 1657 Plymouth-London Paddington diverted via Yeovil.
1C89 London Paddington-Exeter St.Davids Cancelled at Taunton.

Oh dear. What an awkward place to sit down. I bet that if one of the pair is usable when uncoupled, it will be the rear one.

Some repeated info. Copied and pasted my post to a Facebook group.

2x 5 car IET sat down at Hele & Bradninch between Exeter St Davids and Tiverton Parkway. 1A93 1400 Penzance - Paddington. Train stopped around 1710. Stationary nearly two hours.

Total air loss in front set. Single line working in place. Staff on site looking at feasibility of moving passengers into rear set and taking them back to Exeter. They'll want to do that while there's still some daylight. Hitachi fitter (who apparently came from Ilminster - presumably on call at home) and BTP on site.

I think this is first major failure of an Class 80x train in passenger service.

...err.  Did you not read my post #943 on the previous page ::)

I did. Hence my quickly added first sentence. Not quick enough though.  ;)

I had extra info in my post. Here's a bit more.

Single Line Working has just started (as of 1904).

Tit for tat.  I posted about the single line working before you did ;D

Mutual ticket acceptance in place between CrossCountry and GWR.

Update at 1915:

"The train is a complete failure and a controlled evacuation is being implemented

There are 389 passengers on the train

The MOM has been relieved and will be appointed RIO

The Fire Brigade are being called to assist with ladders and lighting

An XC Voyager is at Exeter and will be used to take the striken passengers back to Exeter

Realistically, this process is going to take some to to action and implement"


Looks like it might be a side by side transfer of passengers with bridges between trains.

So thank goodness that ...

Even the rail industry, not known for its excellent customer service when it comes to operator specific tickets, would not go so far as to ching passengers for new tickets on their rescue train.

Well, probably not.  ;D

A pair of 802’s sat down in the Savernake area just over a week ago with a total loss of power. That was stranded for around 2 hours

1Z99 approaching failed train from behind...

Looks like evacuation to cess then. I guess they didn't want to suspend the single line working. Trains are already queued at Tiverton Loops.

Also 1C91 and 1C92 at a stand between Tiverton Parkway and Tiverton Loops, 1C24 waiting platform at Taunton according to OTT.

I would hazard a guess that they will stop all train movements whilst the evacuation is taking place.

1C24 platformed at Taunton, 1V64 waiting a platform and 1C93 arroaching at 20:49

1C91 on the move south, 1C92, 1V64 and 1C93 queued at Tiverton loops with 1C94 approaching at 21:20.

Evacuation to the XC Voyager in rear is under way as of 2105.

I guessed wrong about keeping SLW going. Down main line has been closed as 'position of safety'.

I think there will be some serious questions asked about the timescales of this incident. Four hours between coming to a stand and starting evacuation is not good.

It is fortunate that there hasn't been any (at least not reported internally) self evacuation. I hope the on train environment has contributed to keeping people on board. And I trust that staff have provided regular updates and made regular warning announcements of the dangers of self evacuation. That said, four hours is unacceptable.

Join the queue chaps!

(https://preview.ibb.co/jzY1vU/rps20180913_214958.jpg)

Another two trains, 1C94 and 1V66 out of shot near Tiverton Loops.

Two posts on my Facebook feed ...

... and the answers were a flood of YESes

... and the answers were a flood of NOs

What a shame ...

The DML is closed because the evacuation is taking place in to the 6 foot as the cess is unsuitable.

As I understand this situation, it is two 5 car IETs coupled together, so why can't one rescue the other then??

If there is a total loss of air then it can't be moved

It has been proven that provided passengers are -

• Kept well informed of what is happening
  Are sitting and not standing and squashed in like sardines
  Basic needs are met, drinks perhaps some food
  

They may not be the happiest of people but they will remain on the train, the key is good communications

Attempts were seemingly made to use the rear set. However the entire train was declared a failure. I'd guess the rear set had some sort of systems failure after the loss of air, preventing it building up its own independent vacuum. Maybe a 'computer says no' scenario.

The story has now made the media.

https://www.devonlive.com/news/devon-news/passengers-evacuated-intercity-express-train-2002629

Plenty of factual errors in it but not good news for GWR and Hitachi.

I fancy Dan Panes might have a busy day tomorrow.

That option was suggested as one of the benefits of the down grade to DMU operation.
Did not help in this case though!
Lack of power in one unit should leave the other unit able to move the dead one, but in this case it is reported that one unit lost air, that would apply the brakes and prevent movement.

Passengers have now arrived back at a Exeter St Davids around six hours after the train ground to a halt.

Six hours.  ::) ::) ::)

The errant train has now been moved to the loop at the former Tiverton Junction. Up line reopened.

The same day the M5 was closed reportedly from 0830 to 1800 by a crash involving HGV's and private cars. 2 dead, 2 serious injuries, 4 in hospital.

Count your blessings,

OTC

Expected 03:00 ... at a first glance, I thought it was another two reports on the sleeper


Expected 02:25

Doesn’t fill you with confidence using these fancy ultra modern run by a computer trains. At least with an HST if one power car fails you still have the other in most situations.

Don't worry, I'm sure GWR have robust contingency plans in place to prevent passengers being stranded for hours in the event of a failure.......🤔

Well if they do it wasn't in operation last night...6 hours to get people off a broken down train. Wasn't exactly in the middle of the Highlands of Scotland was it.

I am not sure an HST with a similar fault would fare any better.  If it was a failure of the brake air system it would have affected the whole of an HST.

It finally arrived at 03:05.  Amazingly this is was not actually the latest ever arrival into Paddington for 1A35.  A few years back just before Christmas the service was delayed at various points along the route due to severe with before finally arriving at 0552.

I see 1M80 was also stuck at Exeter for over 3 hours before finally leaving at 0011 but seems to have been terminated at Bristol so not quite sure what anyone travelling through to Birmingham would have done.

Due credit to frontline GWR and XC staff.  They have managed to run a full service to/from the Southwest this morning (14/09/2018), albeit with some minor delays.

Hence I said most situations. Fully aware a failure with the brakes and no train is going anywhere.

GWR did at least provide hot food to passengers last night.

Reports that a large order of Domino's Pizza was delivered to Exeter St Davids.

Incident has made the main BBC News website. No official statement from GWR yet.

Here's the said article mentioned by bignosemac:
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-cornwall-45519014

Continues...

I posted this a few weeks ago under another topic...

There is a discussion to be had on what is a reasonable time for a failed train to be blocking a line before it is rescued. As I said above, there needs to be a plan, or if there is a plan maybe it needs revisiting.  Do NR and the TOC's think that it is acceptable and inevitable that a failed train (and I again qualify to exclude mechanical damage which may prevent movement) may block a running line for up to 3 hours? 

Maybe part of the problem is the diversity of rolling stock nowadays - long gone are the days when you could hang a Class 47 on to everything.   Maybe as I said above it's risk averse staff who are terrified of using their initiative.

I suggest a few desktop exercise would be good to explore the problems and opportunities around clearing failed trains on to-day's railway.

Although this incident was a loss of air which would have prevented a simple haul-away, I think my point still stands.

For me the issue is that a fault on one train stopped the other one from operating. A case of computer says NO and that's not acceptable. Too much reliance on computers to run a train. Great when it works, a pig when it can't be simply overridden at the scene to get passengers back on the move.

There's also the problem of transferring the pax in the failed unit to the other unit even if could be uncoupled and reversed....

Wonder if this incident will make a future episode of Paddington 24/7, 6 hours was ample time to get a camera crew to the site of the incident by road but no doubt the program makers were not informed of the unfolding comedy by whoever.

Yes, but no harder than transferring to a voyager as was eventually done.

Does anyone know when the failed train (by then devoid of passengers) was eventually moved?

Another story with basic details wrong.  The 12:57 from Penzance is a unit which goes as far as Newton Abbot.   The train in question was the 14:00 from Penzance.

Edit: BBC Article has now been corrected.

Not long after midnight, to finally move it according to reports elsewhere.
Don't know what was done to the wretched thing to make it move, physical isolation of the brakes ? or some software update to release the brakes ?

Simply isolating or mending the air leak, would probably NOT suffice since even in the unit without the leak, "computer says no"

Is there no way on these new super dooper plastic trains of releasing the brakes, the carriages have to be shunted at some times in their lives if only at their births and their funerals.

I recall many times when in my youth I saw the fireman of a steam train walk the length of the carriages pulling a string cord on carriages because a steam locos vacuum was different to a diesel locos vacuum. Even later when air braked stock was common it was not uncommon to see coaches being shunted and there was no operating brake on the coaches the braking power being the shunting locomotive itself, mind you shunting speeds were usually no more than single figures.

In yesterdays incident it wouldn't have taken long to establish that there was a total loss of air so evacuation should have been commenced earlier, a rescue loco summoned to the site and connected to the failed train then manually release the brakes on the delinquent train and move it to Tiverton Loop at 5mph.

No it seems to me that today if anything fails you first try this, when this fails you try that, when that fails you try something else and when something else fails you continue on an on through a list until you get to an end point which says something like "SCRAP IT".

When in employment we had fire drills, when the fire alarm went off you got out, you didn't wait till you smelt smoke, you didn't wait till the sprinklers went off, you didn't wait till you saw fire. YOU GOT OUT AS SOON AS YOU HEARD THE FIRE ALARM.

The railway industry still have a lesson or two to learn.

There must be some way of releasing the brakes, probably by physical intervention at each brake. AFAIK this is done when the new units are delivered. With the brakes isolated, nothing prevents the train running unhindered to its destruction.
It is therefore vital that the dead DMU be coupled to an engine or other vehicles with sufficient brake force to prevent any such accident. In most cases, suitably braked vehicles would be required at each end.

Safer to stay on the train than evacuate is the rule of thumb.

Also Hitachi own the equipment, they would need to give permission....probably spent too long trying to sort it remotely, I reckon

Don't want to come over as pedantic but the 1257 ex Penzance is worked by the short HSTGi set

But these IETs are driven by computer so if the computer says "No" that's it

..usually.

I believe the fault was fixed and it set off to Stoke Gifford on its own power shortly after midnight.

Not if I were on a train on fire.

Nor with failed air conditioning on a crush loaded train with sealed windows. In hot weather conditions can rapidly become dangerous.

I would imagine that is pretty close to the truth.  Procedures for dealing with problems on the new trains will need to be fine tuned over time as confidence of staff (both maintenance and frontline) grows, but as we discussed with the Lewisham incident, IMHO control offices need to manage the situation better and start the preparations for a full evacuation earlier, so when other efforts fail they can start an evacuation much quicker.

An hour to get the fitter to the site, at a guess he would quickly conclude an evacuation is necessary once they discover it’s a split air pipe, however, it is a new train so they won’t know them like the back of their hands and it may take a little longer.  You also need to know the number of passengers onboard and their travel requirements.  This is easier to ascertain when they are still onboard rather than roaming around outside.  Once this information has been obtained you can then make plans for onward travel or accomodation. 
During this time plans will be made to move or evacuate the train as well as keeping other trains moving and staffed.  You also need to get staff to the train to aid in the evacuation.  This was quickly organised, I heard that staff living locally were contacted to ask if they would assist.
You need the fire service to commence a train evacuation.  Response time, over an hour as it’s not deemed an emergency. 
Evacuation of the train takes the longest, took over 2 hours to do last night. 
In any major event like this, events will be reviewed the next day.  There were things that went well, there were things that could have been done better. Lessons will be learnt
 
So for the brakes on trains, you can release the brakes manually so that all vehicles are unbraked.  There’s probably an emergency coupler onboard to allow an IET to couple to a locomotive too. The problem is, one locomotive would not have the braking capability to stop 10 unbraked IET’s vehicles.  Also, the RSSB will not allow this number of vehicles to be moved unbraked.  If the coupling was to fail in whatever way you would be left with 10 runaway vehicles, for obvious reasons, that probably won’t end well!  It’s either fix or evacuate.

I started a thread about this incident on an IET Facebook group. There was a reply there from the Network Rail Incident Controller.

detrained, I hope!

Vac braked trains worked in an entirely different way to air brakes.  Each Vac cylinder effectively had its own "Vacuum Reservoir" if the Vacuum in the res was harder than the loco trying to release the brakes then some air need to be let into the res, which was done cylinder by cylinder hence the train would not be without automatic brakes
 
Also there is a difference between shuntin empty stock and stock with passangers on board; it is a cardinal sin to operate a passanger train with out automatic brakes; it would be a very brave decision to release the brakes on a passanger train that has deffective brakes, you might not get the brakes back on (Armagh rail disater 12 June 1889)

Does anyone know if the fitter being 90 minutes away was due to the whole ludicrous staff situation (where it is Hitatchi's staff who have to look after the trains, not GWR's)?
If it was a HST instead would a fitter been able to get there sooner (e.g. from Exeter)?

No point sending a GWR fitter from Exeter. They won’t know anything about the train.

Hitachi have numerous fitters in the region, including travelling fitters, the nearest available fitter would have been sent. Luck has a part to play in it, another day and a Hitachi fitter may have been travelling on the train.  Don’t forget, Hitachi can dial into the train even from Japan and diagnose faults.

I wasn't really just talking about Exeter. It was more a question of: has the change to Hiatchi staff looking after / fixing the trains (as opposed to GWR staff which is the case for the HST's) meant that staff who can fix issues will now take longer to get to incidents compared to similar GWR staff for HST's? 90 minutes away seems to be quite a distance away (especially when that is 90 minutes AFTER initial fault finding, so what, closer to 2 hours at least before someone even arrives on site, let alone does anything useful).

There’s Hitachi maintenance staff in Bristol, Laira and possibly Long Rock.  There’s also travelling Hitachi fitters for the South West based at Exeter, Plymouth, Truro and Penzance so for minor issues it shouldn’t take any longer.
The nearest maintenance facility is obviously Bristol, so any fault requiring specialist tools may have to come from Bristol.

Having been out with traveling fitters in BR days in the 70's on the then new HST; which failed on a regular bases; there is only so many tools you can carry and as for spares  ;D  The units might have some common parts that are known to give problems.  Even if they travel to the failed train by car / van again there is only so much they can bring with them even with info provided by the data link the fault may be beyond the possibility of a lineside repair

Failed on a regular basis?  Surely not?  I can find no such threads on internet forums of the day!   ;)

It was pre fax days …………….. messages were sent by telex ……………….  ;D

Funny - I thought the facsimile machine was older than any kind of telex, or indeed than the telephone!

I recall seeing machines at the Daily Mail offices on High Holborn in the 1960s on a school trip, sending and receiving pictures between their offices.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirephoto#/media/File:Belinograph_BEP-2V_-_MfK_Bern.jpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wirephoto#/media/File:Belinograph_BEP-2V_-_MfK_Bern.jpg)

Well I can remember the telegram and the telegraph boys/young me who delivered the telegrams on a 250cc BSA motor cycle, now don't get me started on another subject or I'll have to consider starting a new thread, Telegrams and how they were delivered.

Worth remembering that such a long delay due to brake failure is not unique to IETs. The sainted HSTs aren't beyond sitting down and stranding passengers for hours.

http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=12752.0

I agree, hence my limited criticism of this particular incident. Trains old or new DO breakdown, and anything new is more liable to breakdowns initially.
Hitachi will presumably act to improve reliability, they have a strong financial incentive to so do.

I feel that the response to both this recent IET failure, and to the earlier HST failure, could have been better. A poor response is however not the fault of the train, old or new.

My criticism of the IETs is more general, and may be summarised as being a general downgrade from a proper inter-city train to a regional DMU.

Shows little has changed in between these two failures.

From a driver on uk.rail.....

Seem to remember something similar with a 180 versus a pigeon on the Cotswold line some years back. The 180 lost all air.

But was the pigeon alright ?

No specialist tools needed, one thing that was very much against getting assistance to the train in a shorter timescale was the day long closure of the M5, no matter what contingency plans you have in place - within reason- can take into account exceptional occurrences like that.

Might I suggest that there might be some corporate relief at Hitachi and GWR that this train didn't simply break down, and that the incident was caused by an external factor, with low probability.

Not that I am saying that if they can, steps should be taken to investigate and mitigate a recurrence.

I find that hard to believe, I can’t see how an object would be able to access any of the pipes under the nose of the train.  Considering the delay cost runs into a 5 figure sum, one wonders wether Hitachi are trying to wriggle out of it.

I am aware of at least one case in which a modern EMU was disabled after striking a goose, the impact of which broke an air connection.

So yes it is possible. If such incidents recur regularly then that suggests a need to make the relevant parts of the air system more impact resistant or easier to isolate.
If it was a very rare event, then (goose)shit happens!

               A pertinant question I was asked whther it was a design fault, air pipe not protected or bad luck.

My answer was a bit of both. Trains hit or are  hit by objects, animal or mineral, quite often so should the brake pipe have been shielded? However, was it just bad luck that this object hit the brake pipe hard enough to break it?

The train computer should be able to identify where on the journey this happened. A sweep of the track at that point should help to see if there was anything amiss.

A leak of that severity would probably deplete the supply very quickly.  Also of course there will be damage that should be quite easily determined as to whether it was component failure or a foreign object.  That said the waters are always muddied a little by all parties involved desperately trying to prove they weren’t at fault!

That's our joined up 'Britain's rail companies working together' for you.  ::)

An update from NewsBiscuit (http://www.newsbiscuit.com/2018/09/17/new-high-speed-train-found-to-be-incompatible-with-pace-of-life-in-devon/):

In amongst the slightly patronising humour, a statement of fact....

Trains break down? Send ‘em back.

I cant speak for Devon, but here in Somersetshire we move with the times.
On the Minehead branch line was recently demonstrated a new type of train, this appears to have no locomotive nor any fireman, but proceeds under the direction of only a driver. It does however make an odd noise and may frighten horses.

Does it have just the one member of rail staff then?   Is there no guard, no train manager, no conductor and no buffet car attendant?  If not, who closes the doors when the passengers leave them open?   Who serves the teas and coffees, or is there now a vending machine on the train?

Whatever next!  ;D ;D

Only a driver is required to move the train, but a guard is on board to check tickets and close the doors.
Also two staff in the buffet which offers a pleasing choice.

Never believe everything you read - I'm afraid it was the Daily Mirror.   In clearing out old stuff today came across a picture from that visit ... scanned it on something much more modern

(http://www.wellho.net/pix/firstfax.jpg)

What a brilliant photograph that is, Grahame.  Just look at the faces of the children etched with intrigue as to how it all happens.  Bet our modern keyboard warriors wouldn't be a bit interested in what happens when they press a key these days. ;)

There is truth in that, for sure. In the olden days, if it wasn't trespass, sabotage or terrorism, it was British Rail's fault. That comforting knowledge didn't make the trains run any better, but did deny career opportunities to many lawyers.

I've been looking for the report of an Adelante being disabled by a pigeon. I think that it's in one of the CLPG magazines, but from about 10 years ago. On an Adelante, the coupling connections are very exposed and it's not surprising that a pigeon could hit an inconvenient place.  But on an IET, they're hidden behind the nose. Was this an armour-piercing pigeon perhaps?

Who's saying this IET delay was caused by a pigeon?

I am aware of a pigeon being disabled by an Adelante.