Britannia motion failure 22/8/23

[DelW]

I can't see a mention on here, but various YouTube videos refer to 70000 Britannia having suffered a failure in the motion while working a circular evening railtour on Tuesday 22nd August. The loco was climbing the bank from Chilworth towards Gomshall at the time, so would have been working hard.

This video on YouTube:

covers the last few minutes and the sound of the failure.

A discussion on another video:

states that one of the cross-heads broke in two, with subsequent examination suggesting progressive development of an old crack, invisible under the paint.

It sounds like a major repair job, but hopefully the skills are out there now to make a replacement. The Brits were / are fine looking locos, so I'm hoping that she will be back out in service eventually.

 

[Ashley Hill]

covers the last few minutes and the sound of the failure

That’s sound’s expensive!

 

[12LDA28C]

Indeed. Caused serious delay to the train which fortunately had a 47 on the rear. An 0237 arrival back at Victoria, oops!

Apparently Mr Hosking was on board and made the buffet and bar free for those on board which no doubt softened the blow somewhat.

 

[Trainguy34]

Indeed. Caused serious delay to the train which fortunately had a 47 on the rear. An 0237 arrival back at Victoria, oops!

Apparently Mr Hosking was on board and made the buffet and bar free for those on board which no doubt softened the blow somewhat.

Ironically, the 47 on the Back (confirmed by my video of it doing the Kent Circular earlier that day) was D1935, aka Sir Roger Hosking MA so I guess he came to those people rescue in 2 ways then!

 

[12LDA28C]

Ironically, the 47 on the Back (confirmed by my video of it doing the Kent Circular earlier that day) was D1935, aka Sir Roger Hosking MA so I guess he came to those people rescue in 2 ways then!

It was Jeremy Hosking on board, not Roger as would be rather evident if you saw the nameplate on 47805 in its entirety 'Roger Hosking MA 1925-2013'.

 

[Trainguy34]

It was Jeremy Hosking on board, not Roger as would be rather evident if you saw the nameplate on 47805 in its entirety 'Roger Hosking MA 1925-2013'.

Oh. Well that was awkward then...

 

[AndrewE]

Ouch!
I hope they get the replacement forged then machined to shape, rather than just cutting it out of a bit of steel... I think quite a few recent failures (in the wider engineering world) have been down to the right material manufactured wrong...
A

 

[Harvester]

The ‘Brits’ have a bit of history with motion failures! The worst was the Settle accident in January 1960 when 70052 Firth of Tay lost slide bar nuts on the S&C, resulting in the loss of the right hand slide bars. The right hand piston rod, cross head and connecting rod (with one end still attached to the driving wheel) then came away from the loco travelling at 40mph, to pound into the ballast between the tracks with fatal consequences.

 

[cadder toad]

I think this is very concerning. In the 50's some broke slide bars. In one case the loco somehow somersaulted over the con-rod which was driven into the ballast. There were fatalities as another passing train was derailed. Do crossheads not have predictable loads simply from the cylinder pressure? The you tube discussion mentions paint hiding a crack. The Britannia design of crosshead has a bending load in it, unlike LMS/GWR designs.

 

[Trainguy34]

Any ideas came out on when it'll be back in Service, luckily I saw it earlier that day.

 

[AndrewE]

Any ideas came out on when it'll be back in Service, luckily I saw it earlier that day.

months - at least. Depends how quickly they get their failure investigation sorted, and whether they then get the confidence of their certification body and insurers...

 

[D Williams]

There will now be a very long and very thorough RAIB investigation. Don't expect it back in service for a day or two.

 

[Darandio]

There will now be a very long and very thorough RAIB investigation.

I doubt that.

 

[Cowley]

Oh dear that sounded really bad.

 

[cadder toad]

I think an identical design of crosshead is used on the 9F and BR Standard Class 5. It would make sense to examine the crossheads on these classes. I don't know if any are in use currently. It might be possible to view a potential failure at an earlier stage which might give a pointer to an explanation. Will a failure of this nature on a preserved steam loco be treated in the same way as the recent cracks found in the suspension of multiple unit trains?

 

[43096]

There will now be a very long and very thorough RAIB investigation. Don't expect it back in service for a day or two.

The criteria for RAIB notification are here: https://assets.publishing.service.g...175/RAIBN3_Quick_Guide_to_Notification_v3.pdf

Perhaps you can enlighten us under which provision this is notifiable?

 

[12LDA28C]

There will now be a very long and very thorough RAIB investigation. Don't expect it back in service for a day or two.

Really? I doubt RAIB would be interested. Rather longer than a day or two...

 

[DelW]

It was fortunate in one respect, that it happened on an unelectrified and relatively quiet section of the tour route. As it was, it seems to have wiped out the North Downs line service (Reading <> Gatwick) for the rest of the evening. But had it happened (say) across the junction at Woking, or around East Croydon, with third rail power having to be turned off to work on the engine, the delay consequences to normal services could have been horrendous.

 

[Teaboy1]

I recall Cromwell 70013 failed at/near Cleethorpes a few years ago with Piston Head nut becoming loose and nearly knocking covers off. Saved with diesel on back.
2 cylinder machines do tend to try shaking themselves loose and falling down !!

 

[edwin_m]

Really? I doubt RAIB would be interested.

If there was any safety implication then they might be, given the amount of focus on heritage operations in recent years. Does this sort of failure create a risk of bits of the motion becoming detached, or of track damage?

 

[AndrewE]

If there was any safety implication then they might be, given the amount of focus on heritage operations in recent years. Does this sort of failure create a risk of bits of the motion becoming detached, or of track damage?

or the connecting rod pushing the loco over into the path of another train?

 

[cadder toad]

Looking at the RAIB link in post 16 above, would either of these two criteria apply and lead to notification? Was the line closed for six hours - if so then would not 1(7) apply? The outcome of the Settle accident was mentioned in post 8 above. Bearing that in mind why wouldn't criteria 1(9) apply with the incident of 22/08.

Schedule 1 - Notify Immediately by telephone and follow up on form RAIBN1
1(7) Accidents or incidents leading to the closure of a route for more than 6 hours. NB: incidents do not include weather related matters.
1(9) Accidents or incidents which could have led to deaths or serious injuries or 2m euros worth of damage to trains, infrastructure or environment, had the circumstances been slightly different.

 

[ac6000cw]

or the connecting rod pushing the loco over into the path of another train?

In the case of West Country loco 'Tangmere' 10 years ago, that could easily have happened if things had worked out differently - the 'small end' of the right-hand connecting rod came away from the crosshead and dropped down onto the conductor rail near Winchfield on the LSWR mainline. As the RAIB report said "If the small end of the connecting rod had landed on the ground while the train was still moving at an appreciable speed, it could have caused a potentially serious derailment". The train was doing 40mph at the time. In this case a castellated retaining nut came unscrewed after its retaining pin had failed and the gudgeon pin (which forms the pivot in the crosshead) slid out.

RAIB report on that accident in 2013 - https://assets.publishing.service.g...5274a428d000139/R132014_140616_Winchfield.pdf

 

[DunsBus]

It was fortunate in one respect, that it happened on an unelectrified and relatively quiet section of the tour route. As it was, it seems to have wiped out the North Downs line service (Reading <> Gatwick) for the rest of the evening. But had it happened (say) across the junction at Woking, or around East Croydon, with third rail power having to be turned off to work on the engine, the delay consequences to normal services could have been horrendous.

If you watch the end of that YouTube video you can hear the driver applying the brakes and shutting down the regulator just as it exits Chilworth - the first sign that something is badly wrong. There's then a "ting" followed by the actual failure itself.

 

[181]

If you watch the end of that YouTube video you can hear the driver applying the brakes and shutting down the regulator just as it exits Chilworth - the first sign that something is badly wrong. There's then a "ting" followed by the actual failure itself.

When is that exactly? I hear a brief pause in the exhaust note at abut 6:25, followed by what sounds like a return to normality until things go wrong at about 6:37.

 

[DunsBus]

When is that exactly? I hear a brief pause in the exhaust note at abut 6:25, followed by what sounds like a return to normality until things go wrong at about 6:37.

It's also at about 6:25. I showed the video to a friend, a mechanic by trade, who's into buses and trains, and it was him who mentioned that the dip is the driver shutting down the regulator. You can also hear the brakes being applied. The "ting", I'm assuming, is the crosshead failing.

 

[Deepgreen]

There will now be a very long and very thorough RAIB investigation. Don't expect it back in service for a day or two.

As it wasn't an accident in the sense of injuries, derailment or infringement of any railway operation rules, I very much doubt that there will be an RAIB investigation. However, the loco will almost certainly be out of use for a few months while replacement parts are made, fitted and tested. The second video in post 1 was mine, BTW.

When is that exactly? I hear a brief pause in the exhaust note at abut 6:25, followed by what sounds like a return to normality until things go wrong at about 6:37.

The 'pause' at 6:25 is just the loco passing under the road bridge, rather than shutting off - you can't easily shut off and re-open the regulator that quickly. The two loud bangs at 6:36 or so are the failure, followed by a sqeak of brakes. On the 1 in 100 climb the train would have been able to stop pretty quickly.

 

[edwin_m]

As it wasn't an accident in the sense of injuries, derailment or infringement of any railway operation rules, I very much doubt that there will be an RAIB investigation. However, the loco will almost certainly be out of use for a few months while replacement parts are made, fitted and tested. The second video in post 1 was mine, BTW.

RAIB can and does investigate events that didn't result in an accident but could have done if things were slightly different. The Wootton Bassett incident is an obvious example. They could choose to look into the maintenance and inspection practices that failed to detect whatever flaw led to this breakage.

 

[Deepgreen]

RAIB can and does investigate events that didn't result in an accident but could have done if things were slightly different. The Wootton Bassett incident is an obvious example. They could choose to look into the maintenance and inspection practices that failed to detect whatever flaw led to this breakage.

Wootton Bassett involved a signal contravention and the prospect of a collision. This didn't. They MIGHT choose to look at it but I very much doubt it.

 

[Dunfanaghy Rd]

Three things that came up during conversation on Sunday:
1. The cylinder relief valve was found later that night during a track inspection (I saw the photo), having been blown out of the cylinder cover, suggesting a more deep-seated problem;
2. The LSL head engineer called NR the following morning to say that he was going to Guildford to inspect the engine. Told that it was at Southall he said that it should have been in North Box Sidings, as he had only authorised it to be moved that far;
3. As a result of the return to Victoria behind the 47, the return to Southall was a propelling move with the cripple loco on the front.
If all this is true then I think RAIB really should cast an eye over it.
Pat