Great Western Coffee Shop

Just look at the tracks in most stations and you have your answer

Because the HSTs were designed and built in the 1970s when train toilets had dumped straight on the ground since forever. Bogs with retention tanks ("controlled emission toilets" in current jargon) are a relatively recent innovation, and it would be hugely expensive to retro-fit all of today's stock with them given their expected remaining service life. Rest assured the IEP will surely have them!

That's definitely true, but the size of SWT's 158 and 159 fleet is pretty modest compared to the number of vehicles FGW would have to retro-fit to find themselves in the same position. To the best of my knowledge only the 165, 166 and sleeper fleets have retention tanks. I can't see it being economic to fit tanks to the whole 15x, 14x and HST fleets any time soon, not to mention the necessary "facilities" - sorry! - at Landore/St Phillips Marsh/Old Oak etc etc.

As an aside, FGW have an ingenious trial underway on at least one vehicle (when I used it is was labelled and formed as a "coach B") in which the toilet flush button is rendered inactive whenever the central door locking is disengaged and remains so for 20 seconds after the doors are locked. This is indicated in the actual khazi by a blue light which is illuminated when you can't flush.

FGW have an ingenious trial underway on at least one vehicle ... in which the toilet flush button is rendered inactive whenever the central door locking is disengaged and remains so for 20 seconds after the doors are locked.

Flushing the lav at speed is less of an issue because the "effluent" gets caught up in the 125 mph slipstream and is mostly splattered over the running gear of the train itself rather than falling straight on the ground as happens when the train is stationary.

Doesn't sound like it'll be perfect, I admit, but has to be a big improvement on the current situation. Flushing the lav at speed is less of an issue because the "effluent" gets caught up in the 125 mph slipstream and is mostly splattered over the running gear of the train itself rather than falling straight on the ground as happens when the train is stationary.

I have first-hand experience of a "near miss" from an illiterate bog user - they flushed the loo when I was coupling a locomotive onto the train and their little offering (yes, it was solid  >:() missed me by inches. I don't suppose they expected to be bawled at by an angry shunter because they emerged from the khazi looking a little shell shocked.

I am sure there was some news report last year about the huge cost to NR to do with the cleaning of the line.

In my experience, just because the CDL is engaged doesn't necessarily mean the train is going to leave the platform within 20 seconds.  Indeed, even if the train does pull away fairly promptly, the rear (if you'll pardon the expression) carriages will probably still be opposite the platform, even if the front of the train is well beyond it?  ::)

What do folks think of the revolting mess underneath the SLE's and SLEP's at Paddington (that's the night sleepers)? There used to be brick channels that could be hosed down but now there's ballast covered by plastic sheeting. The net result is slowly evaporating pools of liquid, solidus, papier mache etc between the platforms, perfuming Brunel's masterpiece and appropriately introducing Heathrow Express customers to the Country where they have just landed. Stations are probably exempt from the Public Health Acts otherwise the Local Authority could close the lot down.

NR, FGW and all the King's horses could do better than this.

Emetically,

OTC

Let's get it clear, the sleeping cars have retention tanks, the Day Cars of the sleeper train DO NOT.

The class 159's were modified 158's (and modified before they ever entered service) and 159's have retention tanks, the 158 do not.

Let's get it clear, the sleeping cars have retention tanks, the Day Cars of the sleeper train DO NOT.

The class 159's were modified 158's (and modified before they ever entered service) and 159's have retention tanks, the 158 do not.

SWT's 158s have retention tanks. The refurbishment included fitting them.

Paul

While the discharge of toilets directly onto the tracks is potentially unpleasant,

For some reason the RMT chose to make an enormous song and dance about this whilst more or less ignoring all the other direct emission bogs whizzing around the network.

I read in a magazine recently that in the future HSTs might be fitted with an interlock so you couldn't flush them when the train was in a station.

Two problems I can see - it's something else to go wrong. Secondly if someone cannot flush it they are likely to walk away and leave it for the next person.

Train toilet flushing hits Brunel bridge workers

Workers repairing Brunel^s twin span bridge in Plymouth have called on train passengers to resist the call of nature as they pass over the historic structure.

Contract workers from scaffolding and painting specialists Taziker Industrial working below the bridge deck are having to dodge sudden toilet flush bursts onto the tracks.

Project manager Peter Cook said: ^We haven^t had a direct hit but there have been several near misses.

^Usually this would not be a problem, but the older trains are running on a wooden bridge deck, which doesn^t protect from toilet waste.^

First Great Western confirmed that some of its older rolling stock still dumped toilet waste on the tracks and it had asked passengers to refrain from using the toilets as they passed over the historic bridge.

One passenger told the Enquirer: ^The guard made a special announcement on the train^s tannoy as we came up to the Tamar River valley.

^I thought he was going to tell us we were about to pass over the iconic bridge, but instead he asked passengers to avoid using the toilets.^

^I suppose it^s a polite way of saying please mind the crap.^

TI won the ^10m job to restore the 1859 steel bridge between Devon and Cornwall last June.

In all, over 100t of new steelwork will be added, 205 original Brunel cross girders will be repaired, 40 diagonal bracings will be strengthened, and 1,800 individual steelwork repairs will be completed.

Up to 50,000 bolts have been purpose-designed to look like the existing rivets.

TI workers will also apply 35,000l of paint in four coats: a zinc primer, a strike coat all around the rivets and edges to build up the minimum thickness, a glass flake epoxy intermediate layer, and finally a Goose Grey polyurethane finish coat to match the original colour of the bridge.

The system is similar to that used on the Forth Bridge, but with a bit more elasticity because this bridge has more movement.

First Great Western confirmed that some of its older rolling stock still dumped toilet waste on the tracks and it had asked passengers to refrain from using the toilets as they passed over the historic bridge.

Also can anyone confirm if and when trains have to tank their waste by?

I boarded the 1207 Bristol Parkway to Swansea service this past Wednesday and because of the delay due to problems in the Severn Tunnel I managed to down two cans of Carlsberg before we'd actually set off. Consequently I needed to avail myself of the <ahem> facilities as we trundled to Filton Abbey Wood.

Noticed this sign in the toilet:

(http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt68/bignosemac/hsttoilet.jpg)

Is this a new thing or have I just not been observant in the past when micturating onboard HSTs?

Train companies must stop dumping human waste from toilets on railway tracks, a transport minister has said.

Lady Kramer branded the practice "utterly disgusting" and called on the industry to take action.

The RMT rail union is also demanding action, saying it is a potential health hazard for track workers.

The train companies said carriages without toilet tanks were being phased out and it was not an issue raised by passengers or workers.

Modern trains are fitted with toilet tanks, which are pumped out at the depot when they become full.

'Terrible'

But older rolling stock, which is still running on many of Britain's busiest routes, still discharges sewage directly on to the track.

Former Conservative minister Baroness Wilcox raised the issue as the House of Lords debated the 20th anniversary of rail privatisation.

"I am very sorry to see that still we have raw sewage going out on to the lines," she told peers.

"It is a terrible thing to see after all these years since November 5, 1993 that we should still be doing that."

She asked Lady Kramer: "Before we rush forward to HS2, which I am looking forward to enormously, I would like to urge you to think about the men working on the lines and working in the stations who are having to deal with this excrement."

The Lib Dem minister replied: "The comments you make totally resonate. This is just utterly disgusting and I think it does speak to the fact that customer service has not always been at the centre of railways because customers I think are very concerned about this issue."

She said InterCity 125 trains would be replaced from 2017 by new models which would solve the problem.

'Protective clothing'

But she added: "It is a tougher issue on the local diesel trains which are gradually going out of service and we could indeed use some help from the industry in trying to tackle that problem."

The RMT rail union claims parts of the rail network, such as stretches of the the East Coast Mainline, are "like an open sewer" and it was a frequent source of complaints from workers.

RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said: "It really is a shocking indictment on the state of our railways 20 years after privatisation, and with hundreds of millions of pounds a year being creamed off in private profits, that raw sewage is still being dumped on the tracks up and down the UK.

"Not only is it a filthy way of disposing of effluent, but it also poses real health risks and dangers for RMT members out there working on the tracks.

"It should be stopped and the train companies should be the ones who pay the price for upgrading the trains and employing staff to empty the tanks."

The Rail Delivery Group, which represents the train companies and Network Rail, said the issue did not come up in a bi-annual national passenger survey and "it is not raised as an issue by staff".

A spokesperson said: "The majority of rail carriages that have toilets are fitted with tanks and the number of older carriages which are not will fall further in the next few years as new InterCity trains are introduced.

"The industry is always listening to customers and has spent millions of pounds on installing and improving passenger toilet facilities.

"Train companies and Network Rail also take their duty of care towards staff very seriously and ensure that depot and trackside teams are given the right training, equipment and protective clothing for their roles."

RMT General Secretary Bob Crow said: "It really is a shocking indictment on the state of our railways 20 years after privatisation, and with hundreds of millions of pounds a year being creamed off in private profits, that raw sewage is still being dumped on the tracks up and down the UK.

How many loos doies an IEP have for 600+?

I have mixed views on all this...

Having trains with retention tanks to hold the toilet waste is one thing... But making sure the TOC empties them is quite another.

I believe that Class 357 (c2c) and Class 377 (Southern/FCC/Southeastern) units close the toilets once the tank reaches 75% Capacity... Which is considerably less than ideal if one had a full bladder and would like to add to that remaining 25% space...

Turbos actually have a gauge fitted below the toilet on the outside of the carriage to indicate how full the toilet waste tank is. One light means 50% full, two lights mean 80% full. Although it is so low down and covered in dust/dirt seeing it in practice is difficult! With the fitment of a universal toilet as part of the Turbo refurbishment, I expect we'll see a similar feature introduced where the door locks itself.

The taps and the hand-dryers in them just seem to be generally quite poor too. The tap is only ever giving out a light spray of water at best and the hand-dryers are very feeble, it would take you an age to actually dry your hands using them. Could do with the hand-towels fitted to most of the FGW fleet.

Cambridge rail worker's health fears over excrement spray

Rail workers are being sprayed by human urine and faeces from passing trains, putting their health at risk.

A Network Rail worker said staff were "genuinely concerned" about excrement, urine and sanitary towels on the tracks.

Network Rail accepted that train toilets which emptied on the track were "outdated and unpleasant" for track workers.

Greater Anglia said it was hoping to phase out toilets which dump waste.

The man who works across the East Anglia region said: "A train would be coming and we'd stand back the recommended distance.

"It's not unusual to feel a spray, a kind of mist in the air. That's bad enough, but then you walk back to where you've been working on the tracks there's [faeces] everywhere."

'Effort needed'

Passenger waste is discharged from trains not fitted with retention tanks.

The majority of trains running through Cambridge station are operated by Greater Anglia, First Capital Connect and CrossCountry.

More than half of Greater Anglia's trains in the Cambridge area do not have retention tanks. The other two operators' trains do not discharge on to the track.

"We'd like to see them replaced or modified, but this requires effort from across the industry and funding," said a Network Rail spokesman.

The Department for Transport said the government recognised "this is a very unpleasant experience for railway workers and the public" and was "working closely" with Greater Anglia on a fleet upgrade.

What's interesting is that I've read in Today's Railways UK (Jan 2014 issue) that the Greater Anglia Class 321s currently being refurbished at the behest of the Eversholt leasing company keep one of their non-retention toilets, while the new universal access toilet has a retention tank. The purpose of the refurbishment is to keep the units running for a further 15 years.  This seems to be a long phase out.

Sewage dumped on tracks by trains is a 'health risk'

Train companies have been accused of putting passengers' health at risk by dumping toilet waste on the tracks at some of London's mainline stations.

Modern trains are fitted with toilet tanks, which are pumped out at the depot when they become full, but older rolling stock does not have such a facility.

Unions say it is a health risk and companies should fit older trains with the tanks. The firms say the number of trains where this happens is decreasing.

BBC London's Transport Correspondent Tom Edwards spoke to Bob Crow, from the Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers' Union, and Seb Gordon, from the Rail Delivery Group.

Blue lights if anyone does want to try and spot one of them lit beneath the grime!  Personally I can't wait for the new toilets to be fitted as the current ones fitted during the refresh continue to not be fit for purpose - running out of water or blocking far to quickly and easily.

Train boss on flush menace: 'You learn to close your mouth'

Network Rail’s boss has experienced the horror of the train flush menace first-hand.

Mark Carne, chief executive of the Swindon-based organisation, told the Guardian: “You quickly learn to turn your back and close your mouth when you’re trackside and a train is passing. As I know first-hand.”

His comments came as rail firms prepare for a ban on trains flushing their toilets directly onto the tracks.

By the end of the decade, all rail franchise holders must operate trains with retention tanks. Rather than emptying their pans onto the tracks, as often happens now, trains will have to hold onto this waste water until it can be emptied at rail depots.

Network Rail’s Mark Carne spoke to the Guardian at Swindon station. “It’s disgusting,” he said of the evidence of a recently flushed toilet trip visible on the tracks. “I’ve been out there with the track workers and you see it coming, like a plume of steam. It’s totally unacceptable and I’m pleased we’ve got government agreement.”

A Network Rail spokesperson added that the improvements were possible following track improvement work: “As part of our Railway Upgrade Plan we have improved infrastructure across the route which allows new trains to run which do not dispose of waste onto the track like some of the older fleet,” he said. “Further planned route modernisation means fewer and fewer trains which dispose of waste onto the track will run on the railway.”

The RMT union has campaigned for an end to the practice of flushing toilets directly onto the tracks – which it says leaves its members “sprayed with human sewage”.

A spokesman said: “We want to see a firm schedule that forces the train operating companies to stop this foul and disgusting practice, which leaves our members out on the railways regularly sprayed with human sewage. We’re not interested in half-hearted pledges. We want cast-iron guarantees.”

Great Western Railway said that their new high-speed trains boast toilets with retention tanks. The new trains will start replacing the old Intercity fleet on the London to Bristol line from the end of this year.

My Confession:

Sometime about 50 years ago I happened to be on a train with a schoolmate, which, unusually had toilets on it, and, having seen the hole in the floor type pan that it was, we put one end of the toilet roll down the pan just as we were arriving at Selhurst, to see what would happen, we were delighted to find that, once the train moved on, the track had a continuous strip of toilet paper from one end of the platform to the other.
I have matured a little since then.

Spoiler for disgusting content - apologies!

I watched this episode last night and was surprised/disgusted that apparently the trains dont have a holding tank for human waste (is it just HSTs?) so if you use the facilities in the station it just empties on to the track.  Is this correct?  But why is there no smell?  The waste is cleaned up only every 3 months in the station, but what happens on the tracks outside - it must be left to decompose naturally?

Apologies again, but hard to belive my understanding is correct!

Spoiler for disgusting content - apologies!

I watched this episode last night and was surprised/disgusted that apparently the trains dont have a holding tank for human waste (is it just HSTs?) so if you use the facilities in the station it just empties on to the track.  Is this correct?  But why is there no smell?  The waste is cleaned up only every 3 months in the station, but what happens on the tracks outside - it must be left to decompose naturally?

Apologies again, but hard to belive my understanding is correct!

It's also why the area between/around the tracks is known as "the cess" (short for cesspit!).

All correct. But new trains are now fitted with retention tanks. Anything that roughly pre-dates privatisation will likely just discharge onto the tracks.

Believe me, it is not particularly pleasant working near this and it is a rare issue I wholeheartedly agree with the RMT over!

Bangers and mash according to the Railtrack lady  :D

Another thing that struck me, which I raised earlier in the thread, was that everything dressed in orange seemed to move around at a sloooow shuffle, no urgency on display. They really could do with upping the enthusiasm levels a little, at least for the cameras...

I was also shocked that those longitudinal timbers were allowed to get into such poor condition - it's really not difficult to inspect them.

...I don't think the name is short for cesspit. I've never seen any "bangers and mash" in a cess.

After the cab has passed it would be very reasonable to try and have a short conversation before you were able to resume work.

Isn't there a 'sell-by' date for those trains without retention tanks to have them fitted? sometime in 2020? So all stock in use after this date will * all* have retention tanks. Hence those (and only those currently) going to Scotrail (and being shortened) are being converted as part of the shortening process (which is why the work has needed to be started)

I guess GWR need to do those short HSTs they are keeping for Devon & Cornwall too at some stage.

I can assure you being sprayed at 125mph with atomised S&P whilst standing trackside is not one of the most of pleasant experiences I have endured in my long railway career....... :P :-\

Surely someone can think of a way to get certain politicians to stand trackside in an appropriate location...

Now for the how. AAUI, there is only one winding in an autotransformer

AAUI the deadline for retention toilets is the last day of 2020.

I can assure you being sprayed at 125mph with atomised S&P whilst standing trackside is not one of the most of pleasant experiences I have endured in my long railway career....... :P :-\

Pedant alert!

I think we should restrict ourselves to the term 'retention tank(s)'; a 'retention toilet' is surely just another name for a bucket and on a train this would quite rapidly become very messy!

The only reason the toilets block far too easily is because passengers flush all manners if things down them!

Pedant alert!

I think we should restrict ourselves to the term 'retention tank(s)'; a 'retention toilet' is surely just another name for a bucket and on a train this would quite rapidly become very messy!

I think I have heard them called Controlled Emission Toilets (CET).

Reading rail depot building 'will treat train toilet waste'

People fear they will endure the smell of sewage from a rail depot extraction plant "100 yards" from their homes.

Residents in Cardiff Road, Reading, claim a new building on the site will extract sewage from train toilets.

Reading Borough Council has queried whether Network Rail, which has not commented on the building's use, had permission to construct it.

Rail bosses, issued with a noise abatement notice on the site, say the building is within "permitted rights".

Great Western Railway (GWR) and Network Rail directors face prosecution if they fail to comply with the legal noise abatement notice, issued last week, within six months.

Jonathan Dart, chairman of the Bell Tower Community Association, said residents found out about the sewage extraction use after the noise complaints were made.

'Caught by surprise'

When asked what the latest concerns of neighbours were, Mr Dart added: "It's going to be smell and noise.

"We are not sure actually once they have treated this waste, how they are going to get it out."

Deputy council leader Tony Page said the local authority was "caught some what by surprise" by the effluent treatment development.

Great Western Railway bosses said buildings on railway land fell under "permitted development rights".

A Network Rail spokesperson added the train operator was "not in a position to comment" while it considered its "legal options" over the effluent extraction plant.

GWR previously said new electric trains being introduced will reduce noise levels.

Is this just the regular stuff like you or I might flush down a loo, or is it mixed with chemical toilet fluid? If it's the latter, and they are (as indeed they are) intending to dispose of it in bulk, then I suppose it might be reasonable to ask them to treat it before putting it in the sewer.

If they now propose to treat (which at least suggests reuse) some train waste water, could that just be this grey water recycling? That would presumably save sewerage charges, in only minimally. But in that case it should net them more brownie points from RBC than half-bricks from the neighbours, so their shtumness is puzzling.

BBC South tonight had a piece where they showed a building a-building which supposedly was not in the submitted plans, and was well to the east of the depot proper. The railway is all on an embankment, with a road beside it inside the retaining wall, but on the Google earth pictures you can see a rectangular extension to the upper level that wasn't on the 2010 plans. It's roughly level with the bollards in Cardiff Road, and I think this building must be there (you can see an outline of one from above).

This is close to the "east CET plant room" on the plans (which is there), and apparently NR have said it is for processing the CET waste, and built under permitted rights. Since then they have clammed up and are talking to their learned friends.

The rectangular extension to the embankment itself (in the location you describe) certainly is on the DMU depot plans from the original applications.   It just doesn't have anything shown built on it back then.   

I wouldn't say this recent new building being discussed and the original east CET plant room are 'close' however,  I reckon they are about 300m apart.   Perhaps it is additional capacity for more and longer trains.

Paul

I think the issue for planning is this: if you say "we don't need your permission to do this, but to show what nice friendly neighbours we''l be we'll tell you anyway" - and then you do something not just different but bigger - people get suspicious and annoyed.