OK, restricted (by poor / non-existant maintenance).
Restricted, in what way?
OK, restricted (by poor / non-existant maintenance).
Remember that many of those thousands would be from the Valleys, whose railways are also in a sorry state.It has been suggested in local press that the Marches line could be closed until next Monday.How many buses do you need to transport the extra thousands heading for a rugby international?
I think that improvements could be made to infrastructure, not everywhere, and not overnight.
In areas where the track floods regularly, then it should be raised whenever possible. To do this throughout would be prohibitively costly, but a little at a time and starting with the most problematic locations might be reasonable.
All new bridges over vulnerable railways could have an extra meter of clearance, in order that the track can be later raised by that much.
New platforms could be a little higher, again the track can later be raised without altering the platform.
All new signaling and telecoms equipment in vulnerable areas should be raised on plinths, a concrete plinth a meter high is not expensive if done as part of other works.
When drains or culverts under the line are washed out, they should be replaced by larger or more numerous water passages, not like for like.
And all new electric trains should have a small diesel engine or a battery to permit of limited operation when the wires come down. Whilst for reasons expounded upon elsewhere, I don't much like the IETs, a great merit of the nominally electric units is the inclusion of a single engine for use in such circumstances.
The problem there is that dredging just shifts the problem downstream to the next pinch-point, which is often a village or town and where the economic and psychological damage is likely to be much greater. What is vital is to slow down the rate that water flows off fields and into watercourses, which in normal times is effective and I believe was this time around Pickering in Yorkshire, for example. The trouble really starts though, as @Llanigraham has noted, when the fields are so saturated that no amount of “soft” engineering will slow the flow.Of course, we could do what has been done for centuries prior and clear/dredge the streams and rivers. Farmers used to look after the streams on their land (I think they got grants to do it), but now the Environment Agency frowns on such activity. Not surprising that streams and rivers burst their banks when they're actively allowed to become blocked and clogged up.
That isn’t practicable for Network Rail. Tree planting has to be at landscape scale to make a difference, and ditch blocking is a project too wide in planning/implementation/outcomes for NR to get involved in.I am no fan of George Monbiot, but in one of his recent columns in The Guardian he said he had asked Network Rail why they did not pay neighbouring farmers to invest in tree planting and ditch blocking to do just that, and the response was that they were not allowed to.
(Whispers) Hyperloop.
TfW journey check says this: Some services on the Cardiff Valley Lines will be operating with 2 carriages instead of 4 due to the closure of the Treherbert line as several trains are trapped on the routeMy experiance today with the wonderful TfW, coming home from Cardiff Queen Street to Cogan I checked websites and everything looked OK. Got to QS and Barry Island trains cancelled. A Bridgend train was the next chance, that turned up as a 2 car, which as it was the first to central for about 25 minutes was absolutely rammed. As they knew that they would not be running services N of Pontypridd could they not get the services south of there to 4 car? Anyway got cancelled at Central due to an unsafe structure at Grangetown which I accept is beyond thir control.Will stick to the bus from now on, proper real time information, a seat and much more flexibility
Agreed. It was quite confusing following Ciara, as each TOC seemed to have its own rules as to when they would accept tickets on the following days. I could easily see someone getting caught out if following their local TOC's advice, and then getting into trouble when changing onto another TOC's service. At a very minimum, each TOC should warn that other TOCs may have different acceptance conditions.What it should be is a decent period before and after (at least two days), and it should be a national decision. People genuinely get stuck between a rock and a hard place when they have a long through Advance involving multiple TOCs or worse a set of split tickets.
So in essence what I would propose is that the rule should be that if any TOC declares "do not travel" for whatever reason, any ticket, of whatever type, that was purchased before that declaration and has validity on that TOC should gain Anytime validity during any period of say two days before and two days after for the entirety of the journey, and that should also apply to a sequence of contiguous splits other than them remaining routed via the split point.
Or the track might be there, but with nothing supporting it. Bridges are also a problem, where the abutments may be undercut by scouring.There isn't really an issue with trains staying on the track (unless it got very deep), the issue is (and I say this having almost run down a hidden cattle grid at the weekend which would have resulted in a nice snapped ankle) that you might not be able to see that the track is in fact not there any more.
Agreed. It was quite confusing following Ciara, as each TOC seemed to have its own rules as to when they would accept tickets on the following days. I could easily see someone getting caught out if following their local TOC's advice, and then getting into trouble when changing onto another TOC's service. At a very minimum, each TOC should warn that other TOCs may have different acceptance conditions.
See your point, but I don't think that is good enough as it imposes financial pressure on people to travel anyway. Even a refund isn't good enough as an Anytime for tomorrow may break the bank.
The only acceptable answer is that if any TOC on the journey calls "do not travel" or requests travel to be delayed is that all TOCs on that journey (ticket or set of tickets) are mandated to accept that declaration.
Absolutely. I'd like that to be extended beyond "do not travel" times too. If an operator specific ticket cannot be used due to that operator not running (either no service at all or a single cancelled train), that ticket should automatically become valid on any operator's service. It would remove the ticket acceptance lottery at a single strike.
I’m not suggesting they do it themselves, but if they could pay farmers and other landowners to do the work, or work in conjunction with other agencies, then it could be done on a large scale. It is highly likely in any case that the post-brexit support system for agriculture will provide payments for this sort of thing, so additional support from NR could push farmers who were wavering to do it.That isn’t practicable for Network Rail. Tree planting has to be at landscape scale to make a difference, and ditch blocking is a project too wide in planning/implementation/outcomes for NR to get involved in.
I was under the impression that was already the case, when a TOC is not running a service at all. Other TOCs are obliged to provide assistance.Absolutely. I'd like that to be extended beyond "do not travel" times too. If an operator specific ticket cannot be used due to that operator not running (either no service at all or a single cancelled train), that ticket should automatically become valid on any operator's service. It would remove the ticket acceptance lottery at a single strike.
The problem is that although most TOCs were accepting tickets on the following days, some were saying you had to travel at the same time as originally booked, while others were saying only after 0930.See your point, but I don't think that is good enough as it imposes financial pressure on people to travel anyway. Even a refund isn't good enough as an Anytime for tomorrow may break the bank.
The only acceptable answer is that if any TOC on the journey calls "do not travel" or requests travel to be delayed is that all TOCs on that journey (ticket or set of tickets) are mandated to accept that declaration.
That isn’t practicable for Network Rail. Tree planting has to be at landscape scale to make a difference, and ditch blocking is a project too wide in planning/implementation/outcomes for NR to get involved in.
The problem is that although most TOCs were accepting tickets on the following days, some were saying you had to travel at the same time as originally booked, while others were saying only after 0930.
I was under the impression that was already the case, when a TOC is not running a service at all. Other TOCs are obliged to provide assistance.
There seem to be occasions when LNER are reluctant to help out Hull Trains.I was under the impression that was already the case, when a TOC is not running a service at all. Other TOCs are obliged to provide assistance.
Drainage only works if there is somewhere down hill for the water to go. It Can get very expensive, very quickly.
There seem to be occasions when LNER are reluctant to help out Hull Trains.
Yes, and I'm saying that isn't acceptable. In particular the most likely need for someone unable to travel Sunday evening is in fact to travel first thing Monday, and that should be allowed.
TfW journey check says this: Some services on the Cardiff Valley Lines will be operating with 2 carriages instead of 4 due to the closure of the Treherbert line as several trains are trapped on the route
The problem there is that dredging just shifts the problem downstream to the next pinch-point, which is often a village or town and where the economic and psychological damage is likely to be much greater. What is vital is to slow down the rate that water flows off fields and into watercourses, which in normal times is effective and I believe was this time around Pickering in Yorkshire, for example. The trouble really starts though, as @Llanigraham has noted, when the fields are so saturated that no amount of “soft” engineering will slow the flow.
I am no fan of George Monbiot, but in one of his recent columns in The Guardian he said he had asked Network Rail why they did not pay neighbouring farmers to invest in tree planting and ditch blocking to do just that, and the response was that they were not allowed to.
Floods are always going to happen, no matter how much we try to fight them. What the railways need to do is to plan more robust contingencies, and make it clearer to passengers as soon as these are evoked. Obvious things like all-TOC acceptance should be standard when weather / flood alerts go into place, and where possible alternative transport automatically arranged. Of course the latter will depend on availability locally, but the issue of RRBs is covered in depth in its own thread. And where it might not be possible to offer any services, the message should be made clear so that even the most die-hard know-it-alls can be in no doubt, i.e. "Do not travel, we cannot guarantee that you will be able to start or complete your journey. The alternative arrangements are....."
I agree especially the "we cannot guaranteee you can complete or start your journey" - I did see some TOCS use this messaging - however this message has varied impact dependent on where you are.
During Ciara on the Sunday I saw a surprising amount of people making metro trips in London. Longer distance passenger numbers were significantly down on the other hand. I think it's difficult to reach the "turn-up-and-go" market in major cities who normally have a regular service, even on Sundays.
A further issue is the fact that people watch terrestrial tv less and less, and therefore don't ever see a weather forecast. The forecasts were accurate for both of the recent named storms, but if you only watch Netflix, Amazon, Sky Sports etc you won't ever see a human being spelling out the dangers ahead. An app on your phone, if you bother to look at even that, doesn't convey the seriousness of what is coming.