Could the Dartmouth Steam Railway provide locos to assist failed GWR services?

[Taunton]

Seems extraordinary to even think of using an IET as a rescue unit at Teignmouth. No surprise they all broke down in turn.

Could the Dartmouth Steam Railway not have been asked to send one of their locomotives up?

 

[DelW]

Seems extraordinary to even think of using an IET as a rescue unit at Teignmouth. No surprise they all broke down in turn.

Could the Dartmouth Steam Railway not have been asked to send one of their locomotives up?

46100 Royal Scot went along the sea wall twice today, apparently without the sea putting her fire out. (Saphos tour to Kingswear.)

 

[Essexman]

Would it not be a good idea to keep a 37 or similar with appropriate coupling adaptor at Exeter so it can rescue trains, or is that not technically possible? It might not seem economically viable but what was the cost of today's disruption?

 

[liamf656]

Seems extraordinary to even think of using an IET as a rescue unit at Teignmouth. No surprise they all broke down in turn.

Could the Dartmouth Steam Railway not have been asked to send one of their locomotives up?

I was under the impression that Hitachi won't let TOCs couple their units up to anything other than themselves, hence only other IETs being used as thunderbirds?

 

[Clarence Yard]

Seems extraordinary to even think of using an IET as a rescue unit at Teignmouth. No surprise they all broke down in turn.

Could the Dartmouth Steam Railway not have been asked to send one of their locomotives up?

No - their locos and their drivers are not passed for NR working and their locos aren’t exactly compatible!

An IET really needs another IET to assist in running conditions. You need brakes.

 

[43096]

Would it not be a good idea to keep a 37 or similar with appropriate coupling adaptor at Exeter so it can rescue trains, or is that not technically possible? It might not seem economically viable but what was the cost of today's disruption?

Easier for the railway just to collectively shrug its shoulders, give up and put a message out on Tw@tter saying “do not travel”.

 

[Taunton]

I suppose I should have finished with a

 

[Ashley Hill]

An IET really needs another IET to assist in running conditions. You need brakes.

They can be dragged with an adapter in hauled mode. 46100 (assuming its air braked) could have rescued the ailing IET. Now that would have been a photo!!

 

[mike57]

They can be dragged with an adapter in hauled mode. 46100 (assuming its air braked) could have rescued the ailing IET. Now that would have been a photo!!

I think the lack of forward thinking, and the "cant do that" attitude that seems to pervade everything to do with railways these days exposes problems which spread way beyond Dawlish disruption.

Consider the facts:

Yesterdays waves, whilst significant were not beyond that experienced several times during most winters, so if trains are not sealed against sea water from waves they will fail. Sometimes a rogue wave will occur that is much higher than the average, these cannot be forecast currently, which will catch out a unit sooner or later.

So ideally you have a solution which doesn't fail under conditions which are to be expected several times during most winters. However sea water and electrical systems really do not mix, so having a solution which is fully seawater proof probably isnt deliverable.

Given that failures are possible (likely even) a reliable method of recovery should be provided. So a locomotive which is sea water proof as a rescue locomotive is essential.

From an operational point of view surely some sort of adapter vehicle needs to be stationed nearby, that can be hauled by whatever is available, quite possibly a 'heritage' locomotive, even a steam driven one, or maybe a diesel mechanical shunter. this would be a low speed move. The main requirement being that the rescue loco doesn't fail when getting covered in seawater.

Failing to address this problem just seems like a cop out, we know it will happen, the logic behind using the same type of unit to rescue a failure in this situation just defies common sense, and will result in what happened yesterday, multiple failures.

This problem will repeat year after year. Divertng the route would be the best solution, but that will not happen, so contingency planning needs to allow for failures and a reliable recovery method. If the easiest solution is a hired in loco from the Dartmouth railway with a translator vehicle then make it happen.

 

[Vespa]

Easier for the railway just to collectively shrug its shoulders, give up and put a message out on Tw@tter saying “do not travel”.

And put in your delay repay claims in.

 

[Lucan]

However sea water and electrical systems really do not mix, so having a solution which is fully seawater proof probably isnt deliverable.

As a former ship's engineer, I can deny that.