60 mph on the SVR

[TheEdge]

Something I've just seen elsewhere (from a source with no real evidence) claiming that the SVR has special dispensation to run trains at 60mph in non passenger service.

While I know thew GCR has something like that (75?) is it true for the SVR?

 

[Chris125]

Indeed it is, not only was Met No1 tested at 50mph late last year but if i remember rightly the 175's were tested on the line at speed too.

Chris

 

[Trainfan344]

I think it's only between Kidderminster and Bewdley as there are no level crossings etc between those points.

 

[Class172]

I didn't realise this was the case - if a passenger service to Bewdley (by Chiltern) was ever sucessfully set up, would it be able to use this higher speed limit?

 

[Trainfan344]

No Idea, They would probably have to seek special dispensation as the current regulation only allows for non-passenger trains.

 

[edwin_m]

No Idea, They would probably have to seek special dispensation as the current regulation only allows for non-passenger trains.

They'd have to prepare a safety management system which demonstrates how safe operation would be achieved with passenger-carrying trains at the higher speed, and get it indpendently reviewed and approved.

The exact way they choose to do this is down to them. In this case they would probably decide to upgrade the route to Network Rail standards, removing all the exemptions that heritage railways currently enjoy. For example they could fit TPWS to those signals that would require it on the main line, and define a procedure to ban any locos without TPWS equipment from the higher-speed section at times when higher-speed operation was in force.

 

[David Goddard]

This is still a step in the right direction though. Tiny Acorns and all that..

 

[Chris125]

This is still a step in the right direction though. Tiny Acorns and all that..

I admire your positive thinking but being able to test at higher speeds realistically makes little difference to the viability of running passenger trains at those speeds - just look at the NYMR whose Whitby trains do not normally exceed 25mph, i believe to avoid more stringent safety measures.

Chris

 

[gwr4090]

I admire your positive thinking but being able to test at higher speeds realistically makes little difference to the viability of running passenger trains at those speeds - just look at the NYMR whose Whitby trains do not normally exceed 25mph, i believe to avoid more stringent safety measures.

Chris

NYMR trains between Whitby and Battersby may run at speeds up to 45mph, but this does not apply to the NYMR itself.

Several other heritage lines apart from the GCR and SVR have approval for test running at speeds up to 60mph when no passengers are present. For instance the WSR has had approval for faster running between Bishops Lydeard and Norton Fitzwarren for many years. This was used many years ago by EWS for crew training on Class 67 hauled postal trains with DVTs.

But I don't think there is any realistic possibility of running passenger trains at speeds over 25mph on heritage lines unless various safety measures are installed (TPWS, central locking etc etc). The WSR has recently installed AWS at distant signals throughout the line but this is not for faster running.

David

 

[DarloRich]

Why bother going to all the bother and expense of upgrading the line? Is there a pressing business need for the upgrade? Why bother giving away al of the expempitons heritage lines have?

If it aint broke dont fix it!

 

[ryan125hst]

But I don't think there is any realistic possibility of running passenger trains at speeds over 25mph on heritage lines unless various safety measures are installed (TPWS, central locking etc etc). The WSR has recently installed AWS at distant signals throughout the line but this is not for faster running.

But why though? Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't trains still running without Central Door Locking (CDL) around 10 to 15 years ago? And trains used to run at 100mph plus for many years without CDL. Likewise, TPWS is something that has only appeared since privatisation.

How come slam door trains with no locks have been fine since the age of steam and yet now they are unsafe? How come trains used to run at 100mph plus with no TPWS and it was safe, and yet now it isn't?

I appretiate the need for railways to be safe- we are, after all, talking about several hundred tons of metal with a few hundred passengers onboard so the risks are very high, but it's not as if we are going back to regulating trains with a policeman! The ways that hertiage railways signal their trains is the same way that it has been done for over 100 years, and a few National Rail lines in the UK still use the same methods today.

The only system that I would feel would be required to fitted is AWS as it was invented and installed during steam days.

Can someone explain to me why CDL expecially is such a problem these days? Could prominent warnings and disclaimers on doors and railway timetables be a solution:

DON'T attempt to open the door while this train is in motion. The railway CANNOT be help responsible for injury or death occuring if you fail to observe this notice".

I have been looking at hertiage railways online for the past week or so (thanks to the NYMR's 40th Anniversary Gala that I sadly couldn't attend ) This has been a question that I have been wanting to ask, so I'm glad the topic came up!

 

[DarloRich]

But why though? Correct me if I am wrong, but weren't trains still running without Central Door Locking (CDL) around 10 to 15 years ago? And trains used to run at 100mph plus for many years without CDL. Likewise, TPWS is something that has only appeared since privatisation.

How come slam door trains with no locks have been fine since the age of steam and yet now they are unsafe? How come trains used to run at 100mph plus with no TPWS and it was safe, and yet now it isn't?

I appretiate the need for railways to be safe- we are, after all, talking about several hundred tons of metal with a few hundred passengers onboard so the risks are very high, but it's not as if we are going back to regulating trains with a policeman! The ways that hertiage railways signal their trains is the same way that it has been done for over 100 years, and a few National Rail lines in the UK still use the same methods today.

The only system that I would feel would be required to fitted is AWS as it was invented and installed during steam days.

Can someone explain to me why CDL expecially is such a problem these days? Could prominent warnings and disclaimers on doors and railway timetables be a solution:

DON'T attempt to open the door while this train is in motion. The railway CANNOT be help responsible for injury or death occuring if you fail to observe this notice".

I have been looking at hertiage railways online for the past week or so (thanks to the NYMR's 40th Anniversary Gala that I sadly couldn't attend ) This has been a question that I have been wanting to ask, so I'm glad the topic came up!

Whilst I am sure you are correct we have to acknowledge that the world has changed and the statutory requirements governing railway operations have tightened up substantially.

We do not live in the ideal world and to think we do is somewhat naive

 

[edwin_m]

Rightly or wrongly, a disclaimer is more and more likely to be challenged in court.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

DON'T attempt to open the door while this train is in motion. The railway CANNOT be help responsible for injury or death occuring if you fail to observe this notice".

It can be held to account though. Law, personal responsibility and the responsibility that companies have towards individuals have moved on, and mostly, I think we should be thankful for that. Companies should have to do whatever is reasonable to ensure individuals are not exposed to an unacceptable level of risk.

 

[Chris125]

NYMR trains between Whitby and Battersby may run at speeds up to 45mph, but this does not apply to the NYMR itself.

They may, but as far as i'm aware they do not normally exceed 25mph, presumably due to the extra requirements regarding door locking. I may be wrong or the situation could have changed, can anyone confirm?

Chris

 

[E&W Lucas]

They may, but as far as i'm aware they do not normally exceed 25mph, presumably due to the extra requirements regarding door locking. I may be wrong or the situation could have changed, can anyone confirm?

Chris

There is a requirement for extra stewarding on the trains, in order to run above 25 mph.

Grosmont - Whitby, the linespeed is a maximum of 30mph anyway. If there aren't enough staff available, just keep the speed to 25; it is still perfectly possible to run to time, and there is no real need to push the loco up to 30, if it is permissable.

CDL is a requirement, after many, many incidents of people falling from trains, or of accidents with idiots opening doors to board or alight from moving trains in stations.

 

[Chris125]

Thanks for the confirmation.

Chris

 

[ryan125hst]

Companies should have to do whatever is reasonable to ensure individuals are not exposed to an unacceptable level of risk.

Maybe heritage railways shoud fit platform edge doors so people can't fall of the platform, or insulate all the hot parts of a steam engine so they can't get burnt. :roll:

As I said, I appreciate the need for health and safety, particularly on the railways, but it has got to a stage where it is going to far (and that's everywhere, not just on the railways!).

Here's another argument. You can open car doors while on the motorway. While it is possible to do so, there is no requirement to lock the door. So, if I open the passenger side door while the car is on a motorway, can I sue the manufacturer claiming that they should have built the car to lock the door when the car is travelling over 25mph?

I don't see any difference between these cases. Trains used to travel at over 100mph without central door locking, but now even at 30mph it is a requirement to have them fitted. Despite this, it is still possible to open the doors of a car, lorry, and i'm sure even a bus or coach, at 60-70mph. It is surely the person's fault if they get hurt on both occassions.

Your thoughts?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Your thoughts?

Look up the definition of 'reasonable'?

 

[ryan125hst]

Look up the definition of 'reasonable'?

Point taken.

You could say that the door handles are on the outside and that warnings are positioned next to the door to remind people to open the door once the train has stopped. Surely that is reasonable?

 

[455driver]

Back then people were responsible for their own safety*.
Now everyone else (especially somebody/a company with money) is responsible for every idiot that decides to frequent their establishment.

Times change and people get thicker!

* It was called "common sense", now no longer common unfortunately.

 

[Wikipedia]

and i'm sure even a bus or coach, at 60-70mph.

Most bus and coach doors are interlocked with the handbrake so that you can't open the door in motion.

 

[Myklebust]

Food for thought , how about a Line from Moor st to Bridgnorth via Kidderminster, not much problem in the construction at kidderminster, but what are the requirements for such an undertaking.

 

[edwin_m]

Food for thought , how about a Line from Moor st to Bridgnorth via Kidderminster, not much problem in the construction at kidderminster, but what are the requirements for such an undertaking.

I've looked into this on a different heritage railway. It's technically possible but the railway would have to accept various changes in its equipment and operating regime, and lose some of the exemptions from standards that they currently enjoy. For example TPWS would have to be fitted to main line standards and any non-TPWS locos and would be prevented from running during the times any main line train was on the route. Hence, for example, there would probably be no through train services on heritage operating days which would probably include most weekends.

If things like that were not done then visiting trains might be able to run at the 25mph limit of the heritage railway, as visiting railtours do now on some lines. But 25mph would probably be too slow if looking for a transport link rather than a historic experience (as well as being off topic for this discussion!).

 

[Myklebust]

Pity , as i think it would be ruled out by the fact that the line from moor st to kidderminster is abusy line and in use every day, also S V R is in operation every day. Ah well then it seems that they will have to try and extend from Bridgnorth onwards.

 

[jamieP]

They may, but as far as i'm aware they do not normally exceed 25mph, presumably due to the extra requirements regarding door locking. I may be wrong or the situation could have changed, can anyone confirm?

Chris

35 to Whitby I thought and regularly do 45 to Battersby.

 

[Welshman]

Please pardon these thoughts rather late in this thread, but I've only just discovered it.

If Heritage Railways wish to apply for dispensation to run empty trains above 25mph, for test purposes, etc, then so be it. It is presumably extra revenue for the railway.

But why bother going to the expense of increasing the speed of passenger-carrying trains?

It may just be me, but I travel on Heritage Railways to savour the sights, sounds and smells of the old-fashioned railway, and that is best done trundling along about 20mph. It's also an ideal way of viewing the birdlife and animal life in the fields and hedges - you don't frighten it off at that speed as you would tearing through at 60mph!

On a Heritage Railway, the travelling is just as important as the getting there. If I wanted to get from say, Loughborough to Leicester North quickly, I'd get in the car and drive off down the A6. I don't ride the GCR, or any other Heritage Railway, to get there quickly, but rather to enjoy every minute of it.

 

[edwin_m]

35 to Whitby I thought and regularly do 45 to Battersby.

Various charter sets including Mk1 stock without central door locking run at much greater speeds on the main line. Each operator's Safety Management System will explain how they justify derogations from the relevant standards, typically in this case including forming non-Mk1 or non-passenger vehicles at each end of the rake, stewarding the doors and selling only as many tickets as there are seats.

The NYMR will have gone through a similar process but the result may be different as they run at much lower speeds and the chance of encountering another train is pretty remote.

 

[Myklebust]

Personally I can't see the point in wanting to run Heritage trains at 60mph on short distances such as S V R. unless they were, as has been said thinking of connecting main line trains up to the Heritage line.Still seems a bit pointless to me unless I am missing something, but thats always possible

 

[broadgage]

For a strictly heritage railway, on which people travel only for interest, enjoyment or nostalgia, I see little need for speeds in excess of the current 25MPH limit.

However several heritage lines are considering running services, perhaps with modern stock, that are primarily aimed at simply getting from A to B.
In such cases a higher speed would be desireable if it can be achieved safely and affordably.
On the WSR, a maximum of 25MPH and stopping at every station is fine for those who wish to enjoy the view, watch the wildlife and observe railways as they used to be.
For those wanting to travel on a through train from the national network to Minehead, a higher speed limited stop service would seem preferable.

Perhaps there is a case for allowing modern(ish) stock with better brakes, lower track forces, and power operated doors, to work at say 40MPH on heritage lines.
If a heavy steam loco with limited sighting, and slam door stock is safe at 25MPH, I would expect a 158 or similar to be no less safe at 40MPH.