Chiltern Railways train stuck for 5 hours

[infobleep]

Indeed. It would be interesting to hear some actual facts as to why it took as long as it did rather than the usual rush to judgment.

Well I hope Chiltern provides all the facts in due course.

 

[12LDA28C]

Well I hope Chiltern provides all the facts in due course.

I already provided the salient points in post #55

In this case, it sounds like this was merely a problem with the loco's engine, so there is absolutely no excuse for it to have taken 5 hours to drag the train out of the way.

See above.

 

[Horizon22]

On well-organised railways, it's the kind of thing that's absolutely possible. By British standards, of course, it's considered fast

I was on a train that had a 'one under' in Germany on a multi-track mainline. Despite some bureaucracy (including the police interviewing passengers), trains were passing the site within about an hour, and we were underway after 2 hours.

In this case, it sounds like this was merely a problem with the loco's engine, so there is absolutely no excuse for it to have taken 5 hours to drag the train out of the way.

2 hours for train movement after a fatality is also completely feasible and has been achieved multiple times in this country too.

Technical faults where a unit/loco has been declared a failure are often trickier to handle.

 

[infobleep]

As I understand it the evacuation took longer than expected due to a wheelchair passenger being on board the failed train, although it was still completed within three hours. Also the rescue loco was not permitted to depart Banbury until the evacuation was complete and all passengers were safely on the other train. Further issues were experienced gaining brake release once the assisting loco had been attached. Not sure who the expert commentators on this thread would like to blame for these particular issues...

What is the reason why a loco cannot depart Banbury until all the passengers are evacuated?

I already provided the salient points in post #55



See above.

Thanks. I have now read that. I hadn't caught up with all the posts before replying. I'm sure Chiltern will make that info available too, if they haven't already.

Hand signallers wouldn’t necessarily be required. There are things like wrong direction moves and emergency permissive working but these are also time consuming to implement given that you have one one signaller controlling long areas of track, and dozens or scores of trains. You don’t just start driving trains backwards without signalling protection at the drop of a hat.

Many years ago there would have been more signal boxes and signallers but those do come at a cost.

I remember some years ago when during some disruption on Thameslink services north of London they put in hand signallers. They weren't able to cope with the volume of trains running.

 

[12LDA28C]

What is the reason why a loco cannot depart Banbury until all the passengers are evacuated?

Not sure but I suspect that was a Network Rail decision and it would also depend on the scope/extent of the line block that was taken in order to carry out the evacuation.

 

[infobleep]

Not sure but I suspect that was a Network Rail decision and it would also depend on the scope/extent of the line block that was taken in order to carry out the evacuation.

Thanks. Is it entirely possible that if a rescue loco arrived, the evaluating train would be able to continue in the direction it is going?

 

[Horizon22]

Not sure but I suspect that was a Network Rail decision and it would also depend on the scope/extent of the line block that was taken in order to carry out the evacuation.

If there was a train-to-train evacuation, it would seem likely that both lines were blocked whilst this took place (one with the failed unit, one on the opposite line receiving passengers), so there would be no desire to risk the loco blocking passenger movements (if any) in the area which would have been able to pull into stations.

 

[12LDA28C]

Thanks. Is it entirely possible that if a rescue loco arrived, the evaluating train would be able to continue in the direction it is going?

Each individual situation is different but on Sunday the failed train was assisted from the front and continued south and the train onto which passengers were evacuated continued its journey north as booked.

 

[HSTEd]

You're not a fan of the proposal for Chiltern to take on the ex-TPE locos and stock then? What alternative would you suggest instead to replace the Mk3 stock which is life-expired?

Attach a small order for multiple units to the next order to be made and leave the loco-hauled stock in the past, where it belongs.
Given the other issues the Class 68 have with regards noise, it will almost certainly be cheaper in the long run.

The work on the supposed sound reduction mods, assuming they ever actually arrive, would probably cost a significant portion of the entire cost of just writing them off as a mistake.

 

[12LDA28C]

If there was a train-to-train evacuation, it would seem likely that both lines were blocked whilst this took place (one with the failed unit, one on the opposite line receiving passengers), so there would be no desire to risk the loco blocking passenger movements (if any) in the area which would have been able to pull into stations.

Well indeed clearly all lines were blocked at the location of the evacuation, I was thinking more how far that block extended north and south as Fenny Compton is some nine miles north of Banbury.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Attach a small order for multiple units to the next order to be made and leave the loco-hauled stock in the past, where it belongs.

Interestingly that's exactly what they did with the 172s...then they ended up in the West Midlands anyway!

 

[12LDA28C]

Attach a small order for multiple units to the next order to be made and leave the loco-hauled stock in the past, where it belongs.
Given the other issues the Class 68 have with regards noise, it will almost certainly be cheaper in the long run.

The work on the supposed sound reduction mods, assuming they ever actually arrive, would probably cost a significant portion of the entire cost of just writing them off as a mistake.

So struggle on with the Mk3s for another 5 years or so until these new units arrive? Brilliant.

 

[birchesgreen]

2 hours isn't that bad, i was on that Desiro that broke down near Northampton earlier in the year and was stuck on it for about 2 hours that time until de-trained, and the unit was not moved for some time later on. Maybe we should get rid of EMUs because of that just like someone earlier suggested getting rid of loco hauled trains because of one incident.

 

[GardenRail]

Indeed. It would be interesting to hear some actual facts as to why it took as long as it did rather than the usual rush to judgment.

I don't know about facts of this matter, but it's very likely that anything in a convenient place to assist the dead locomotive was of the wrong colour (FOC).

We've had it before where a GBRF Freight has failed, but DB etc 'can't' (won't) help, so a GBRF loco has to traverse the country to come and assist.

Standing joke of the privatised railway. In these cases, Network Rail should call the shots, make the plans, and TELL whoever the FOC closest is, that they WILL be assisting.

It would also help if trains had universal couplings! (buffers, and chains)

 

[AlterEgo]

Indeed. It would be interesting to hear some actual facts as to why it took as long as it did rather than the usual rush to judgment.

The Rugby Thunderbird being axed will be a factor.

It is a total disgrace that a single point of failure - a locomotive - can ruin the service between the UK's two largest cities for five hours. The railway deserves all the pelters it can get for this, and then some. That is not a criticism of operational decisions or frontline staff but the kneejerk reaction of some posters to just smartarse back at criticism is really not on.

Why are we running a tiny subfleet of locomotives on this route? Why aren't we keeping rescue locos in the best positions? Why wasn't the rescue done sooner? How many people won't bother returning to the railway after this?

Some of these choices will be forced by politics or circumstance but to suggest we can't expect better is less than pathetic.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It would also help if trains had universal couplings! (buffers, and chains)

Emergency DMU to loco couplings are a thing, so unless it'd have destroyed the Voith transmission (would it?) then perhaps putting one of those in each DVT would make sense, then the nearest 16x could at least pull or push it to the next station. 153s certainly used to carry them (typically just on the floor in the cycle area with a sack over the top).

 

[najaB]

Some of these choices will be forced by politics or circumstance but to suggest we can't expect better is less than pathetic.

Of course we can expect better, but are you able to pay for it?

At the end of the day that's what it all comes down to: good, bad or indifferent the railway we've got is probably the best we're going to get with the money and structures that we have.

If you want improvements then either: more money or a new structure.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course we can expect better, but are you able to pay for it?

At the end of the day that's what it all comes down to: good, bad or indifferent the railway we've got is probably the best we're going to get with the money and structures that we have.

If you want improvements then either more money or a new structure.

I suspect a reshuffle that gave Chiltern more DMUs to bin the LHCS would save, not cost, money. Particularly now the 175s are spare and a load of TfW 15x are about to be too.

 

[AlterEgo]

Of course we can expect better, but are you able to pay for it?

This assumes that all the money allocated to the railway is being used in the very best way possible already.

In any case, asking me if I'm in a position to pay more money (taxes or farebox) isn't likely to illuminate the thread, because yes I am.

 

[najaB]

I suspect a reshuffle that gave Chiltern more DMUs to bin the LHCS would save, not cost, money. Particularly now the 175s are spare and a load of TfW 15x are about to be too.

But the current structure isn't set up to make that easy (ROSCOs, leases, etc.)

This assumes that all the money allocated to the railway is being used in the very best way possible already.

Again, that's structure.

In any case, asking me if I'm in a position to pay more money (taxes or farebox) isn't likely to illuminate the thread, because yes I am.

No, I meant all of it. Because if change has to be funded through fares or subsidies that is a whole other discussion as there are many who aren't in your position.

 

[GardenRail]

............................so unless it'd have destroyed the Voith transmission (would it?)

Not sure, I'm just a Signaller who gets frustrated when we have loco's, trains or what-ever a few miles away, but politics dictate that they don't have to help, hence my wrong livery comment.

 

[al78]

But never mind, nobody outside the industry knows anything or is allowed to have an opinion.

The attitude that unless you are an authority in a subject you cannot have an opinion on it is widespread and IMO toxic at its worst. It smacks of bullying in an attempt to silence criticism of crapness, so those with the power/responsibility can avoid being called out and don't have to bother to make any effort or spend any money making improvements. It is no surprise the UK is fast gaining a reputation as a broken country.

 

[12LDA28C]

The Rugby Thunderbird being axed will be a factor.

It is a total disgrace that a single point of failure - a locomotive - can ruin the service between the UK's two largest cities for five hours. The railway deserves all the pelters it can get for this, and then some. That is not a criticism of operational decisions or frontline staff but the kneejerk reaction of some posters to just smartarse back at criticism is really not on.

Why are we running a tiny subfleet of locomotives on this route? Why aren't we keeping rescue locos in the best positions? Why wasn't the rescue done sooner? How many people won't bother returning to the railway after this?

Some of these choices will be forced by politics or circumstance but to suggest we can't expect better is less than pathetic.

The reason the rescue of the failed train took so long in this instance has been explained.

The attitude that unless you are an authority in a subject you cannot have an opinion on it is widespread and IMO toxic at its worst. It smacks of bullying in an attempt to silence criticism of crapness, so those with the power/responsibility can avoid being called out and don't have to bother to make any effort or spend any money making improvements. It is no surprise the UK is fast gaining a reputation as a broken country.

I'd suggest that believing the opinion of armchair experts who are not in possession of all the facts surrounding an incident are just as valid as those who know what happened and why is also toxic. Nobody is saying that a train blocking a main line for 5 hours is ideal, but train failures happen and staff have to deal with it as best they can. I would say this was an exceptional event with several unfortunate issues that combined to prolong the rescue of the failed train and delayed service recovery.

 

[TBSchenker]

Emergency DMU to loco couplings are a thing, so unless it'd have destroyed the Voith transmission (would it?) then perhaps putting one of those in each DVT would make sense, then the nearest 16x could at least pull or push it to the next station. 153s certainly used to carry them (typically just on the floor in the cycle area with a sack over the top).

Even if emergency couplings available, would a 16x even have the ability to pull or push it to clear the line?!

 

[LordFlashheart]

2 hours isn't that bad, i was on that Desiro that broke down near Northampton earlier in the year and was stuck on it for about 2 hours that time until de-trained, and the unit was not moved for some time later on. Maybe we should get rid of EMUs because of that just like someone earlier suggested getting rid of loco hauled trains because of one incident.

It was way more than 2 hours. Nearly 3 1/2 hours before the passengers who were rescued even got back to Leamington Spa, the next onward train got them to Marylebone over 5 hours late. I was travelling back from Birmingham (planned to be on cancelled 16:42) and was delayed 2 1/2 hours, but credit must also be given to the train crew of the 17:12 ex Birmingham who did keep everyone informed on what was going on.

I'm slightly puzzled as to why the failed train was dragged all the way to Marylebone, rather than being sat on the first naughty step out of the way. There's a Youtube clip of it creeping into Marylebone looking somewhat embarrassed

 

[12LDA28C]

I'm slightly puzzled as to why the failed train was dragged all the way to Marylebone, rather than being sat on the first naughty step out of the way. There's a Youtube clip of it creeping into Marylebone looking somewhat embarrassed

Maybe to get it to Wembley ASAP to be attended to by fitters? It's not like it would be holding anything up, running ECS.

 

[Falcon1200]

In these cases, Network Rail should call the shots, make the plans, and TELL whoever the FOC closest is, that they WILL be assisting.

Network Rail is responsible for clearing the line when a train fails, and I have purloined resources from other operators in such a situation, but it depends on not just having a loco available but also a Driver with the necessary route knowledge, and time to carry out the assistance; And the effect on other services, including those of the purloined-from company, has to be taken into account.

In this incident, bearing in mind that it occurred on a Sunday, were there actually any other resources available which could have cleared the line any more quickly?

 

[gazzaa2]

Reading through their social media on Sunday (Twitter/X) Chiltern's customer service leaves a lot to be desired.

 

[LordFlashheart]

Maybe to get it to Wembley ASAP to be attended to by fitters? It's not like it would be holding anything up, running ECS.

It went to all the way to Marylebone not Wembley. There was a football game at Wembley, seems a strange thing to stick it in the middle of that. But given Chilterns current seemingly endless capacity to inflict misery on their passengers perhaps one more strange decision makes little difference.

 

[Horizon22]

It went to all the way to Marylebone not Wembley. There was a football game at Wembley, seems a strange thing to stick it in the middle of that. But given Chilterns current seemingly endless capacity to inflict misery on their passengers perhaps one more strange decision makes little difference.

He means Wembley Depot (via Marylebone).