It is only dangerous if abused
Precisely most systems are quite safe as long as they are respected and people don't take risks the railways would not be allowed to use them otherwise
It is only dangerous if abused
There are signs on the platforms at Newport station (and, for all I know, elsewhere on the newly electrified GWML) telling passengers not to make contact with the OHE. I can't remember the exact wording, but it includes things like selfie sticks, balloons, etc.
It would have to be a ridiculously long selfie stick for it to come anywhere near the OHLE. I think they typically don't extend beyond about 1 metre, so even if you held it above your head fully extended I can't imagine it being even slightly dangerous.
To be fair, the OHLE is a danger at level crossings too. High vehicles and high objects could touch it. That said, a ban on third rail seems fair enough, after all it’s an high voltage line running few cm above ground!
Isn’t the ORR fuss about selfie sticks etc contacting the pantograph horns, which are nearer than the wires?It would have to be a ridiculously long selfie stick for it to come anywhere near the OHLE. I think they typically don't extend beyond about 1 metre, so even if you held it above your head fully extended I can't imagine it being even slightly dangerous.
Are the horns live, and if they are, do they need to be?Isn’t the ORR fuss about selfie sticks etc contacting the pantograph horns, which are nearer than the wires?
I've never had to even think about my umbrella when travelling on the Southern Region (other than not leaving it in the luggage rack).
No, but the maintenance guys would have to think about it if you dropped it on the track (as many people do!)
San Francisco is cable-hauled so not really relevant here (it also has electric streetcars but they use conventional overhead line). I'm not aware of any tramway still using conduit for electric supply. The modern equivalent is the Alstom APS system I mentioned in my previous post, but I believe this is pretty expensive and with batteries becoming better and cheaper they will probably be the preferred choice if tramways need to be catenary-free for short distances.Plenty of both historic and modern systems used a conduit system embedded beneath the road surface, such as the streetcars in San Francisco. Such a system would be impractical for heavy-rail use and expensive to install on tramways today, but it does solve the problem of exposed electrical supply.
However there is the risk of dropping it between platform and a train where it could come into contact with a live shoe, as all the shoes are electrically connected so even those on the other side from the live rail are live. DLR has shields on the platform walls in the places where the shoes normally stop, presumably for this reason. It's probably less likely with a top-contact system and I don't believe it has ever happened, but it's theoretically possible.I've never had to even think about my umbrella when travelling on the Southern Region (other than not leaving it in the luggage rack).
San Francisco is cable-hauled so not really relevant here (it also has electric streetcars but they use conventional overhead line). I'm not aware of any tramway still using conduit for electric supply. The modern equivalent is the Alstom APS system I mentioned in my previous post, but I believe this is pretty expensive and with batteries becoming better and cheaper they will probably be the preferred choice if tramways need to be catenary-free for short distances.
However there is the risk of dropping it between platform and a train where it could come into contact with a live shoe, as all the shoes are electrically connected so even those on the other side from the live rail are live. DLR has shields on the platform walls in the places where the shoes normally stop, presumably for this reason. It's probably less likely with a top-contact system and I don't believe it has ever happened, but it's theoretically possible.
In which case I'm sure they would retrieve it at an appropriate time (i.e when the current was switched off) as they've been doing for the past hundred years.
Absolutely AM9 but I wasn't aware I was responding here to you personally. Your points on arcing are well made and yes, this wouldn't occur with 750V dcThe point of that post is that I was clarifying the distance that an arc might typically occur. The reason for the safe distance being in metres is to do wioth dynamic changes in the gap (e.g. wind, oscillation from pantograph pressures, etc.), and more relevant to this thread, intrusions into the safety zone. Clearly climbing onto a train roof qualifies for that but there are more subtle risks such as passengers ignoring rules about carrying long objects high above platforms or dangling things over bridges. In those events, the actual arcing zone can be penetrated causing an arc or even direct contact. 750V would need to be as good as touched (i.e. less than 1mm) but the nature of 3rd rail electrification is that such an event is much more likely.
Yes but non live designs being looked at.Are the horns live, and if they are, do they need to be?
Wet fishing line does conduct though...I've noticed warning messages to fishermen telling them not to fish underneath National Grid overhead power lines, even though they must be at least a 100 feet in the air.
Here's a Public Service Broadcast from the '80s.I've noticed warning messages to fishermen telling them not to fish underneath National Grid overhead power lines, even though they must be at least a 100 feet in the air.
I'd be amazed if that were necessary. I never heard it happen on LU while I worked there. I would think that the supply was powerful enough to burn the thing out and hardly notice it, even if the contact was excellent, which is highly unlikely. In any case, any damage to the rail would be a small dent, which the collector shoes would hardly be perturbed by.Retrieve what’s left of it, repair the track circuit which would have burnt out, and possibly have to replace both the running rail and con rail.
Class 73 on GatEx duty welded to track and 3rd rail near Battersea park (can't remember what the metallic debris was), 455 welded to track and 3rd rail at Guildford post retractioning, the Aluminum drink can at Gatwick ~2.75 years ago...I'd be amazed if that were necessary. I never heard it happen on LU while I worked there. I would think that the supply was powerful enough to burn the thing out and hardly notice it, even if the contact was excellent, which is highly unlikely. In any case, any damage to the rail would be a small dent, which the collector shoes would hardly be perturbed by.
I'd be amazed if that were necessary. I never heard it happen on LU while I worked there. I would think that the supply was powerful enough to burn the thing out and hardly notice it, even if the contact was excellent, which is highly unlikely. In any case, any damage to the rail would be a small dent, which the collector shoes would hardly be perturbed by.
Provided the pantograph is touching the contact wire, then yes, the pantograph horns are live in the UK. Insulated horns are used in Europe, and there's people looking at whether they could be used in the UK.Are the horns live, and if they are, do they need to be?
It would make sense. Not only from a passenger safety point of view, but it would also move live equipment 150mm or so further away in tight platform situations saving potential rebuilds.Provided the pantograph is touching the contact wire, then yes, the pantograph horns are live in the UK. Insulated horns are used in Europe, and there's people looking at whether they could be used in the UK.
I think in broad terms if any bare “other wires” apart from the contact or catenary are mounted on full size insulators they’ll be at 25 kV, otherwise if not they’ll be some sort of return or earthing conductor, tending towards 0 volts. But sometimes wires above station platforms carrying the supply voltage are insulated.Just out of curiosity, what sort of voltage is passing through the wires that sometimes hang on the back of the gantries and sometimes run over platforms? Not being "Dennis Expert" on overheads I'm never quite sure what function the line has, I assume some sort of return feed, and given I've seen them over the back of the platform I assume a safe voltage, but I do wonder if "safe" is a relative thing...
Two totally different schemes with very different cost drivers.As there has been no large third rail project for decades, it's probable there are no contemporary figures. However in the 1960s while the OLE of the southern half the WCML was costing around £200 million, Woking to Bournemouth was done for about £12 million.