Are detanators no longer used on preserved railways?

[Ploughman]

Not seen anything on this.

Saw an article the other day that said that the use of detonators on heritage lines had now been stopped.
As the risks of storage were now greater than the lack of using them.

Can anyone confirm?

 

[Tomnick]

Some heritage railways, maybe. We still use them on the GCR, including detonator placers at (and worked from) two of the boxes.

 

[John Webb]

I can't find any reference in Heritage Railway Association paperwork to detonators, certainly nothing in the past year or so.

 

[paul1609]

There is no outright ban but to use them you have to have very robust risk assesments in place as part of your safety management system which includes secure storage.
This was all kicked off by the theft of some detonators from a Network Rail depot in Essex where the end result was a teenager loosing the sight of an eye.
As a result the ORR reviewed the use of detonators and found on you tube a video of a Diesel Engine setting off probably a hundred detonators alongside a roadway open to the public (think kids on bikes). The video was on one of the premier heritage lines in Yorkshire.
This resulted in the Assistant inspector of Railways making a recommendation that the use of detonators on heritage railways was unnecessary unless there were exceptional circumstances. This position is endorsed by the Heritage Railway Association and the majority of heritage railways have withdrawn their use.
This situation came to a head around 3 to 4 years ago. I can go in to more detail if required. I was the K&ESRs rep at the meetings.

 

[tomatwark]

I would suspect that the GCR, is one of the few are allowed to, due to the line speed they can run at and also that they carry out training of railway staff.

 

[kje7812]

I haven't heard anything about the SVR getting rid of them either.

 

[Paul Hitchcock]

If you have ever been on board a locomotive which has set off a detonator (I was many years ago) you are likely to realise their hazards and query whether their use is in any way necessary on a restricted speed pleasure railway.

PH

 

[YorkshireBear]

If you have ever been on board a locomotive which has set off a detonator (I was many years ago) you are likely to realise their hazards and query whether their use is in any way necessary on a restricted speed pleasure railway.

PH

Some of the risks detonators mitigate are still relevant on 'pleasure railways' which must still be run to the same stringent safety standards.

Arguably a runaway is more likely on a heritage railway due to the vehicles involved (in fact several incidents over the years show this) so they are very safe way of marking the boundary to a worksite on steeply graded lines.

 

[Paul Hitchcock]

Some of the risks detonators mitigate are still relevant on 'pleasure railways' which must still be run to the same stringent safety standards.

Arguably a runaway is more likely on a heritage railway due to the vehicles involved (in fact several incidents over the years show this) so they are very safe way of marking the boundary to a worksite on steeply graded lines.

They do absolutely nothing to stop such runaways nor do they prevent miscalculations which bring about runaways in the first place. However they do make quite a spectacular "bang"!

PH

 

[Journeyman]

There's efforts being made within the rail industry as a whole to limit their use and, if at all possible, to get rid of them completely. Further to the incident mentioned up-thread about the boy losing an eye, there's been a number of serious incidents, including fatalities, to track workers who have only been on the track to place or remove detonators. The whole industry is rapidly coming to the conclusion that they're far more hassle than they're worth, given that much better options are now available.

 

[furnessvale]

There's efforts being made within the rail industry as a whole to limit their use and, if at all possible, to get rid of them completely. Further to the incident mentioned up-thread about the boy losing an eye, there's been a number of serious incidents, including fatalities, to track workers who have only been on the track to place or remove detonators. The whole industry is rapidly coming to the conclusion that they're far more hassle than they're worth, given that much better options are now available.

It is no accident that the fogsignalmen of old used to sit in a concrete hut with its opening facing away from the track. When exploding, the perforated disc inside can fly out sideways, inflicting a nasty injury on anyone in its path.

 

[168lover]

Chinnor and Princes Risborough Railway don't use them

 

[duffield]

...
The whole industry is rapidly coming to the conclusion that they're far more hassle than they're worth, given that much better options are now available.

Out of interest, what are the better options?

 

[ComUtoR]

Out of interest, what are the better options?

GSMR + REC (Railway Emergency Call)

 

[Journeyman]

Out of interest, what are the better options?

Basically it's far easier to communicate effectively between trains, control centres and signal boxes now, so you don't need to rely on drivers setting off explosives to know that they need to stop for a hazard ahead. It's much simpler to advise them in good time. Also track circuiting is now almost universal, so many of the incidents that call for detonator protection will be adequately dealt with by signalling anyway.

 

[Tomnick]

Meanwhile, back on heritage railways...?

 

[JonathanP]

As mentioned above, the SVR still uses them.

A few years ago our rulebook was conpletely reviewed and rewritten and some operational procedures were simplified or adapted to take account of the low speed operations and the availability of mobile communications, but the use of detonators was retained, so the 'powers that be' obviously consider them to have some use.

I take issue with the idea that 'pleasure railway' can afford to compromise on safety.
It is commonplace on the SVR to have two trains formed of a steam loco and 8 coaches which do not meet modern safety standards, approaching each other at a closing speed of 50mph, all without AWS, TPWS or a radio emergency stop capability. If anything I'd say there is a greater need for operational safety in this situation than on many parts of the mainline railway network.

 

[Paul Hitchcock]

As mentioned above, the SVR still uses them.

A few years ago our rulebook was conpletely reviewed and rewritten and some operational procedures were simplified or adapted to take account of the low speed operations and the availability of mobile communications, but the use of detonators was retained, so the 'powers that be' obviously consider them to have some use.

I take issue with the idea that 'pleasure railway' can afford to compromise on safety.
It is commonplace on the SVR to have two trains formed of a steam loco and 8 coaches which do not meet modern safety standards, approaching each other at a closing speed of 50mph, all without AWS, TPWS or a radio emergency stop capability. If anything I'd say there is a greater need for operational safety in this situation than on many parts of the mainline railway network.

I used the expression "Pleasure Railway" because, personally I think "heritage" can be a touch pretentious. Nowhere is there any suggestion actual or implied about compromising on safety. There is no reason why "radio emergency stop capability" should not be universal.

PH

 

[Tomnick]

There is no reason why "radio emergency stop capability" should not be universal

The lack of a sufficiently robust and reliable yet affordable communications system, for starters.

 

[headshot119]

Basically it's far easier to communicate effectively between trains, control centres and signal boxes now, so you don't need to rely on drivers setting off explosives to know that they need to stop for a hazard ahead. It's much simpler to advise them in good time. Also track circuiting is now almost universal, so many of the incidents that call for detonator protection will be adequately dealt with by signalling anyway.

Track circuiting is now almost universal!?

Except for large portions of the country worked by AB, Tokens, RETB and other none continuously track circuited systems.

 

[Paul Hitchcock]

The evident nostalgia in some quarters for primitive "safety" devices which in fact present hazards to the user is a bit concerning. Satisfactory radio systems are in use on preserved railways.

PH

 

[trebor79]

Indeed. Ravenglass and Eskdale has been using radio to "signal" the line for decades.

 

[AndrewE]

The evident nostalgia in some quarters for primitive ... devices which in fact present hazards to the user is a bit concerning.
PH

I think steam engines would come into that category!
I agree that dets probably introduce more risk than they are going to mitigate though.

 

[paul1609]

As mentioned above, the SVR still uses them.

A few years ago our rulebook was conpletely reviewed and rewritten and some operational procedures were simplified or adapted to take account of the low speed operations and the availability of mobile communications, but the use of detonators was retained, so the 'powers that be' obviously consider them to have some use.

I take issue with the idea that 'pleasure railway' can afford to compromise on safety.
It is commonplace on the SVR to have two trains formed of a steam loco and 8 coaches which do not meet modern safety standards, approaching each other at a closing speed of 50mph, all without AWS, TPWS or a radio emergency stop capability. If anything I'd say there is a greater need for operational safety in this situation than on many parts of the mainline railway network.

Difficult to see how detonators mitigate against the lack of AWS or TPWS. On most heritage lines that were represented during the discussions they were used to protect against collision with stationary obstructions or Emergency Speed limits. My line has a rule that a 10 mph speed restriction applies to entering a section that is obstructed. We replaced detonators with high intensity led lights. On tests in mist at night we could see them at a range of over half a mile even around curves as the light was reflected off lineside vegetation and furniture.

 

[Intermodal]

Meanwhile, back on heritage railways...?

I would question the need for detonators at all on lines with speeds not exceeding 25mph. Just pop a bloke with a red flag there, or a stop board.

 

[FOCTOC]

Basically it's far easier to communicate effectively between trains, control centres and signal boxes now, so you don't need to rely on drivers setting off explosives to know that they need to stop for a hazard ahead. It's much simpler to advise them in good time. Also track circuiting is now almost universal, so many of the incidents that call for detonator protection will be adequately dealt with by signalling anyway.

Ever heard of axle counters? You seem to think you know more about how the modern railway works than you actually do, having read two of your replies on here. How does a GSMR set provide reliable protection for a T3 possession for instance? I would also argue the case that GSMR is nowhere near 100% reliable even when working normally.

 

[DanDaDriver]

Ever heard of axle counters? You seem to think you know more about how the modern railway works than you actually do, having read two of your replies on here. How does a GSMR set provide reliable protection for a T3 possession for instance? I would also argue the case that GSMR is nowhere near 100% reliable even when working normally.

Agree with the bit about axle counters making TCOC’s useless, but if something bad enough for me to need to be doing emergency protection has occurred, how likely am I to be able to get 1 1/4 miles before something ploughs into me anyway?

 

[FOCTOC]

Agree with the bit about axle counters making TCOC’s useless, but if something bad enough for me to need to be doing emergency protection has occurred, how likely am I to be able to get 1 1/4 miles before something ploughs into me anyway?

Thats why you are obliged to carry a red flag/lamp fella. I'd rather not go for a long walk with a handfull of bangers to be honest, but until something better and foolproof comes along they'll remain a fixture in all driving cabs. Whats been suggested above is they have been usurped by something superior, which is frankly utter garbage and misleading.

 

[paul1609]

Thats why you are obliged to carry a red flag/lamp fella. I'd rather not go for a long walk with a handfull of bangers to be honest, but until something better and foolproof comes along they'll remain a fixture in all driving cabs. Whats been suggested above is they have been usurped by something superior, which is frankly utter garbage and misleading.

It was a surprisingly emotive subject on heritage railways as well. When i took the news back to my line I was accused of basically having made it all up!
Having attended the meeting with the ORR, I can assure you they told the HRA that it was their policy that bangers be phased out on the national network as soon as possible. One of the issues for heritage lines was with stock that passed from heritage lines on to the national network and where there was parallel working (NYMR, Swanage and Spa Valley were mentioned)

 

[FOCTOC]

It was a surprisingly emotive subject on heritage railways as well. When i took the news back to my line I was accused of basically having made it all up!
Having attended the meeting with the ORR, I can assure you they told the HRA that it was their policy that bangers be phased out on the national network as soon as possible. One of the issues for heritage lines was with stock that passed from heritage lines on to the national network and where there was parallel working (NYMR, Swanage and Spa Valley were mentioned)

I dont deny they said they wanted to phase them out ASAP - as I said who wouldnt given a better option. However until therea a better option, railway fog signals will remain a feature of the national network. I'd like ro be a multi millionaire, that doesnt mean I'll suddenly become one on Monday morning because I said I wanted to.