Trains without retention tanks spray human effluent over railway trackside workers

[whole diary]

[John R]

Swindon's not great either. If the experiment is rolled out to the rest of the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) stock this would eliminate the problem here (except the bay), also Chippenham (almost, before Graham corrects me), and several other stations would see a significant reduction at some if not all of their patforms.

I don't know how much it will cost, but presumably there's a trade off in how long the stock will continue in use.  Given the HSTs have just been refurbed it might still be viable.

[Mookiemoo]

Extrapolating my predicament from earlier in the week...........

What would be the etiquette for someone with the Alex Fergusons still attached as the train comes to a halt at Pad

Leave the toilet dirty?  Flush?  Be even more embarassed and have to explain to the TM^‡(resolve) and have him lock it out of use?

Just wondered - it must have happened at some point

[smokey]

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^▸ (South West Trains)'s 158s have retention tanks. The refurbishment included fitting them.

Paul

I noticed that the other day that a SWT class 158 had retetion tanks, I also became aware the other day at Leeds that when retention tank are full they overflow onto the tracks. Ok it appered to just be liquid but it's still foul liquid.

[Bob_Blakey]

A verbatim extract from Hansard 14/02:

Mr Jenkin: To ask the Secretary of State for
Transport what estimate his Department has made of
the volume of sewage discharged onto railway tracks in
the latest period for which figures are available.

While the discharge of toilets directly onto the tracks is potentially unpleasant, I can't help thinking that our elected representatives should really be applying themselves to resolving some of the more fundamental problems currently blighting our railways.

(NB. The SoS's answer was 'no idea - ask ATOC^» (Association of Train Operating Companies See - here)')

[JayMac]

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

Extremely unpleasant if you are a track-worker standing in the cess when a discharging toilet on a HST^▸ (High Speed Train) goes by, particularly if on the outside of a curve.

I remember reading somewhere about a photter who'd also been subject to a short sharp shower of sh1t whilst standing next to an occupation crossing gate on a max speed section of the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line), again on the outside of a curve. I think it happened to him more than once. I think I'd've learnt after the first shower not to stand so close to the line when a HST was approaching!

[inspector_blakey]

The principal issue on the ECML^▸ (East Coast Main Line) I believe was with mark IV trains, and not HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train). Ironically, despite having controlled emission toilets, these were (still are...?) emitting a fine spray of effluent when the tanks were full as they entered certain superelevated curves. GNER^▸ (Great North Eastern Railways)/NXEC^▸ (National Express East Coast) (forget who it was at the time) promised that they would improve facilities for discharging the tanks at depots to alleviate the problem.

For some reason the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) 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. In fact HST lavs don't generally discharge much laterally at speed, it tends to end up in the four-foot or end up stuck to the underframe of the vehicle. This can of course make life unpleasant for shunting and depot staff but it's a different problem from it forming an aerosol and spraying around the lineside.

[JayMac]

Here we are. From the BBC^» (British Broadcasting Corporation - home page) and RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) back in 2006:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/5249982.stm

http://www.rmtbristol.org.uk/2006/08/rmt_demands_action_to_end_spra_1.html

And you're right, blakey - Bob Crow is also spouting effluent!

[Tim]

For some reason the RMT^▸ (National Union of Rail, Maritime & Transport Workers) 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.

AFAIUI, the RMT made a fuss about the Mark IV toilets because they produced more of a problem with aerosolised effluent rather than other toilets which generally dump their load straight onto the track. 

I think that the problem arrose after the Mk VI refurb which placed a controlled emmissions toilet orginally designed for staff use only at the disposal of the public.  The extra load meant that the toilet couldn't cope without regular emptying (and GNER^▸ (Great North Eastern Railways) went back on a promise to install emptying points at their depots to allow this to happen).  The key difference was that toilets designed to dump onto the track do so fairly safely, whereas overflowing CET^▸ (Controlled Emission Toilet) which are not designed to dump onto the track do it as a dangerous fine mist.

I used to work in an HIV lab and received training on how do handle the virus safely.  These bugs (and similar things like Hepatitus) are farily safe if you are sensible about gloves and hand washing etc.  But I has told that the think you absolutely didn;t want to do was breath in an aerosol containing virus (elborate precaution were taken ert centrifuges and thinsg like that that might produce a viral mist. 

I don;t usually take the RMTs side, but personally, I would strike over this isue.  GNER were lucky IMHO^▸ (in my humble opinion) to not get done under H&S^▸ (Health and Safety) law over this. 

[Hal]

Is it really necessary to evacuate the contents of HST^▸ (High Speed Train) toilets in between the platforms at Paddington?
There were some very unpleasant sights down there when I passed through yesterday...
Could the sluicing work not be carried out somewhere else?

[JayMac]

HST^▸ (High Speed Train) toilets are not fitted with retention tanks. Any unpleasant sights are there because passengers have not heeded the sign in the cubicle to not flush the toilet when the train is in a station.

[bobm]

I read in a magazine recently that in the future HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) 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.

[ChrisB]

That already happens.......

[inspector_blakey]

I read in a magazine recently that in the future HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) 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.

There was a "flush inhibit modification" trialled by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) a while ago. When the secondary locking for the external doors was unlocked (as in a station) and for a brief time delay after the doors were locked to allow the train to pull clear, the flush was inactivated.

I assume it wasn't that successful because I only ever travelled on one set that had it fitted and have not seen any evidence of the modification being "rolled out".

[JayMac]

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:



Is this a new thing or have I just not been observant in the past when micturating onboard HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train)?

[EBrown]

Intercity 125s flush on to the track don't they? NR^» (Network Rail - home page) tried to charge TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) a few years ago for damage it causes and cleaning costs.