Train GraphicClick on the map to explore geographics
 
I need help
FAQ
Emergency
About .
Travel & transport from BBC stories as at 11:55 28 Mar 2024
* Manhunt after stabbing in front of train passengers
- How do I renew my UK passport and what is the 10-year rule?
- Easter travel warning as millions set to hit roads
Read about the forum [here].
Register [here] - it's free.
What do I gain from registering? [here]
 02/06/24 - Summer Timetable starts
17/08/24 - Bus to Imber
27/09/25 - 200 years of passenger trains

On this day
28th Mar (1988)
Woman found murdered on Orpington to London train (*)

Train RunningCancelled
10:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
10:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare
10:41 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
11:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington
11:16 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
11:23 Weston-Super-Mare to London Paddington
11:30 London Paddington to Bristol Temple Meads
11:50 Cardiff Central to London Paddington
12:15 London Paddington to Cardiff Central
12:17 Westbury to Swindon
12:30 London Paddington to Weston-Super-Mare
13:00 Bristol Temple Meads to London Paddington
13:15 Swindon to Westbury
14:19 Westbury to Swindon
15:14 Swindon to Westbury
Short Run
06:00 London Paddington to Penzance
08:03 London Paddington to Penzance
10:35 London Paddington to Exeter St Davids
10:45 Bristol Temple Meads to Salisbury
10:55 Paignton to London Paddington
11:12 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads
11:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central
12:03 London Paddington to Penzance
12:12 Salisbury to Bristol Temple Meads
Delayed
07:10 Penzance to London Paddington
08:23 Portsmouth Harbour to Cardiff Central
08:35 Plymouth to London Paddington
08:48 London Paddington to Swansea
09:04 London Paddington to Plymouth
09:30 Weymouth to Gloucester
09:37 London Paddington to Paignton
09:51 Warminster to Gloucester
10:04 London Paddington to Penzance
13:03 London Paddington to Plymouth
PollsOpen and recent polls
Closed 2024-03-25 Easter Escape - to where?
Abbreviation pageAcronymns and abbreviations
Stn ComparatorStation Comparator
Rail newsNews Now - live rail news feed
Site Style 1 2 3 4
Next departures • Bristol Temple MeadsBath SpaChippenhamSwindonDidcot ParkwayReadingLondon PaddingtonMelksham
Exeter St DavidsTauntonWestburyTrowbridgeBristol ParkwayCardiff CentralOxfordCheltenham SpaBirmingham New Street
March 28, 2024, 12:01:04 *
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Forgotten your username or password? - get a reminder
Most recently liked subjects
[161] West Wiltshire Bus Changes April 2024
[91] would you like your own LIVE train station departure board?
[62] Return of the BRUTE?
[53] If not HS2 to Manchester, how will traffic be carried?
[49] Infrastructure problems in Thames Valley causing disruption el...
[38] Reversing Beeching - bring heritage and freight lines into the...
 
News: A forum for passengers ... with input from rail professionals welcomed too
 
   Home   Help Search Calendar Login Register  
Pages: [1]
  Print  
Author Topic: Severn Tunnel cancellations - trains unfit for tunnel use  (Read 2007 times)
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« on: October 27, 2018, 07:10:17 »

A series of these today

Quote
06:49 Worcester Shrub Hill to Cardiff Central due 09:23
06:49 Worcester Shrub Hill to Cardiff Central due 09:23 will be terminated at Bristol Parkway.
It will no longer call at Patchway, Severn Tunnel Junction, Newport (South Wales) and Cardiff Central.
This is due to a fault on this train.

Quote
09:50 Cardiff Central to Worcester Foregate Street due 12:17
09:50 Cardiff Central to Worcester Foregate Street due 12:17 will be started from Bristol Parkway.
It will no longer call at Cardiff Central, Newport (South Wales), Severn Tunnel Junction and Patchway.
This is due to a fault on this train.

So that will be a turbo with doors between the carriages not working ... the rather odd business that the Severn Tunnel is now regarded as an underwater railway and new train types are required to have doors that close between the carriages or they are considered unsafe.

Pity the people bussed up from Temple Meads to Parkway to then find that their onward train is cancelled. There will be some happy chappies today!
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1941


View Profile
« Reply #1 on: October 27, 2018, 07:44:31 »

So that will be a turbo with doors between the carriages not working ...

That's a new one on me.

Show me an HST (High Speed Train) with a door between carriages, the internal carriage doors on an HST gives access to the end vestibule but there is no door across the corridor connection. Even the Mk1 and Mk 2 coaches had a door at the corridor connection which was locked if it was the first or last carriage on a loco-hauled set with of course a blanking corridor panel placed on the outer ends of the set. Even then in the latter days of loco hauled stock I have travelled on services without these blanking panels, I know because I was able to look out of the small windows in the door to see the track disappearing into the distance although I never established if there was any way the door was secured on the outside. Could have been problematic if anyone mischievous enough was let loose on a loco hauled stock set with a BR1 key.
Logged
bobm
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 9809



View Profile
« Reply #2 on: October 27, 2018, 08:10:41 »

It is all to do with "grandfather rights".   Turbos are new to the route and therefore - despite much pressing from GWR (Great Western Railway) - do not have the same dispensation as HSTs (High Speed Train).

For the same reason I assume an IET (Intercity Express Train) wouldn't be allowed through if one of its internal doors developed a fault.
Logged
CMRail
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 400


View Profile
« Reply #3 on: October 27, 2018, 09:51:30 »

So how come Class 700, 707s etc are allowed through tunnels?
Logged
grahame
Administrator
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 40690



View Profile WWW Email
« Reply #4 on: October 27, 2018, 10:04:42 »

So how come Class 700, 707s etc are allowed through tunnels?

I believe it's to do with the tunnel being an undersea tunnel.
Logged

Coffee Shop Admin, Acting Chair of Melksham Rail User Group, Option 24/7 Melksham Rep
martyjon
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 1941


View Profile
« Reply #5 on: October 27, 2018, 10:28:40 »

It is all to do with "grandfather rights".   Turbos are new to the route and therefore - despite much pressing from GWR (Great Western Railway) - do not have the same dispensation as HSTs (High Speed Train).
For the same reason I assume an IET (Intercity Express Train) wouldn't be allowed through if one of its internal doors developed a fault.

Does IEP (Intercity Express Program / Project.) diagrams have "connecting door examining time" to ensure all carriage connecting doors are operational before the services are despatched from either Bristol Parkway or Newport, I think not.

What a stupid restriction to be made particularly as Turbos are not new to the route. Many years ago Turbos were regular visitors to Cardiff for wheel turning on the Canton wheel lathe but then I suppose you could say that the restriction won't apply to an ECS (Empty Coaching Stock) working.
Logged
SandTEngineer
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 3485


View Profile
« Reply #6 on: October 27, 2018, 17:13:50 »

I wonder if anybody could make a 'Freedom of Information' request to see the output of the risk assessment that came up with that mitigation?  Trains aren't 'sealed units' are they? Roll Eyes Tongue
Logged
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7155


View Profile
« Reply #7 on: October 27, 2018, 17:38:17 »

I thought the reason for needing to close off gangways was so the train could be split there, in case only one part can be removed initially with passengers on board. The sectional appendix does have stuff about that, including the requirement that passengers may only be moved to the recoverable part via gangways, not outside. Which all sounds mildly sensible, until you apply it to turbos.

The SA I was looking at (June 2017) said class 165/6 were simply not allowed down that hole, in which case their approval must be part of the clearance programme for the cascade. But could you really split a 166 inside the tunnel? And why would you? Are trains of more than one unit banned -  that seems like a more realistic restriction?
Logged
paul7575
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 5316


View Profile
« Reply #8 on: October 27, 2018, 18:28:40 »

I thought the reason for needing to close off gangways was so the train could be split there, in case only one part can be removed initially with passengers on board. The sectional appendix does have stuff about that, including the requirement that passengers may only be moved to the recoverable part via gangways, not outside. Which all sounds mildly sensible, until you apply it to turbos.

The SA I was looking at (June 2017) said class 165/6 were simply not allowed down that hole, in which case their approval must be part of the clearance programme for the cascade. But could you really split a 166 inside the tunnel? And why would you? Are trains of more than one unit banned -  that seems like a more realistic restriction?
A discussion in wnxx forum a few months ago reckoned the restriction was to do with correct operation of the 165/166 interior gangway doors.  Fire resistance maybe if evacuating to an adjacent carriage?

Paul
Logged
CMRail
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 400


View Profile
« Reply #9 on: October 27, 2018, 19:14:15 »

I thought the reason for needing to close off gangways was so the train could be split there, in case only one part can be removed initially with passengers on board. The sectional appendix does have stuff about that, including the requirement that passengers may only be moved to the recoverable part via gangways, not outside. Which all sounds mildly sensible, until you apply it to turbos.

The SA I was looking at (June 2017) said class 165/6 were simply not allowed down that hole, in which case their approval must be part of the clearance programme for the cascade. But could you really split a 166 inside the tunnel? And why would you? Are trains of more than one unit banned -  that seems like a more realistic restriction?

That’s why there’s short forms - they split in the severn tunnel  Cheesy
Logged
Trowres
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 749


View Profile
« Reply #10 on: October 28, 2018, 01:02:41 »

Is https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/standards/GIGN7619%20Iss%201.pdf relevant to this issue? - length of tunnel (>5km) seems to be the key determinant of more stringent regulations  being activated.
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #11 on: October 28, 2018, 18:09:07 »

This talk of a submarine railway – what has changed? There's always been a lot of water down there, has more been found? Something leaking?
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
stuving
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 7155


View Profile
« Reply #12 on: October 28, 2018, 19:49:37 »

This talk of a submarine railway – what has changed? There's always been a lot of water down there, has more been found? Something leaking?

I suspect submarinity may not be the issue, so much as the distance with no escape routes (which itself may be due to the lack of dry land above it). If the thinking behind the TSI has been adopted, whether the TSI has or not, that brings the idea of a minimum time that the train can run with a fire declared.

The idea (which may well have been present in the past less formally) is that it is almost always more dangerous to life to be on a train on fire stopped in a tunnel than to travel on it with the fire and then stop in the open. To make that work, it has to be possible to move away from a fire within the train, and retreat behind a fire partition with a long enough rated resistance. The TSI says they must be no more than 28 m apart, so at the gangways is an obvious place though not the only possibility.

The running time requirement for tunnels over 5 km in length (without safe evacuation areas) is 15 minutes, and that implies a lot of care routing the control cables and brake pipes and protecting them from the main fire sources - the engines and their auxiliaries. Multiple separate engines are obviously good for this, but I wonder how well turbos score on these other factors. The Severn Tunnel, by the way, is 7 km long.

In any case, once I'd found out where the current Sectional Appendix is hiding, it says class 165/6 are still not allowed through the Severn Tunnel at all!
« Last Edit: October 28, 2018, 20:07:12 by stuving » Logged
phile
Hero Member
*****
Posts: 1382

Language spoken Welsh as well as English


View Profile Email
« Reply #13 on: October 28, 2018, 20:19:20 »

This talk of a submarine railway – what has changed? There's always been a lot of water down there, has more been found? Something leaking?

I suspect submarinity may not be the issue, so much as the distance with no escape routes (which itself may be due to the lack of dry land above it). If the thinking behind the TSI has been adopted, whether the TSI has or not, that brings the idea of a minimum time that the train can run with a fire declared.

The idea (which may well have been present in the past less formally) is that it is almost always more dangerous to life to be on a train on fire stopped in a tunnel than to travel on it with the fire and then stop in the open. To make that work, it has to be possible to move away from a fire within the train, and retreat behind a fire partition with a long enough rated resistance. The TSI says they must be no more than 28 m apart, so at the gangways is an obvious place though not the only possibility.

The running time requirement for tunnels over 5 km in length (without safe evacuation areas) is 15 minutes, and that implies a lot of care routing the control cables and brake pipes and protecting them from the main fire sources - the engines and their auxiliaries. Multiple separate engines are obviously good for this, but I wonder how well turbos score on these other factors. The Severn Tunnel, by the way, is 7 km long.

In any case, once I'd found out where the current Sectional Appendix is hiding, it says class 165/6 are still not allowed through the Severn Tunnel at all!

The ones that have been running through the tunnel day in and day out for a year now.    One of the banned ones recently escaped through and when it was realised, it was on it's way back. !!!
Logged
Bmblbzzz
Transport Scholar
Hero Member
******
Posts: 4256


View Profile
« Reply #14 on: October 28, 2018, 21:23:46 »

Okay. And yet after the 1996 Channel Tunnel fire, their policy changed from having the train drive through the tunnel, to stopping where it was and evacuating. But then they have the service tunnel for this.
Logged

Waiting at Pilning for the midnight sleeper to Prague.
Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

 
Pages: [1]
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by MySQL Powered by PHP Powered by SMF 1.1.2 | SMF © 2006-2007, Simple Machines LLC Valid XHTML 1.0! Valid CSS!
This forum is provided by customers of Great Western Railway (formerly First Great Western), and the views expressed are those of the individual posters concerned. Visit www.gwr.com for the official Great Western Railway website. Please contact the administrators of this site if you feel that the content provided by one of our posters contravenes our posting rules (email link to report). Forum hosted by Well House Consultants

Jump to top of pageJump to Forum Home Page