Dartford Carriage siding appears non-electrified

[brad465]

On recent instances of passing through the Dartford area, it appears the 3rd (out of 5) sidings has no third rail.

Given Dartford and the rest of the Metro area uses third rail to operate, does anyone know why this is? The rails appear rusty to suggest no recent use, possibly due to no third rail.

Given siding space is a premium on the SE network at the moment, I think it is unacceptable if it can't be used, even if it is only one.
(Photos to follow when device allows)

 

[ComUtoR]

2 road Dartford Sidings is locked out of use.

 

[brad465]

Here are the photos I managed to take earlier, showing the nearest siding with a third rail and signs of recent use, and the next one along the opposite effectively.

2 road Dartford Sidings is locked out of use.

Do you know why and how long this has been the case?

 

[ComUtoR]

how long this has been the case?

At least a couple of years to my knowledge. There are ongoing issues.

 

[bionic]

I can't remember the reason now, it was either to do with the juice rail or the walking route. The walking route to 1 road involved crossing 2 road and with a train on 2 road, 1 road became inaccessible on foot so there was some instruction about that before they took the road out of use. At least a couple of years ago now, as Comutor says.

 

[david737]

It is to do with the walking route, its so that staff don't have to walk alongside a live conductor rail. If you look at the photos you can see the walkways either side of no 2 siding and as brad465 said its unacceptable considering there is a shortage of siding space for SE Trains.

 

[bassmike]

Why not put guard boards on the C R ?

 

[aleggatta]

Why not put guard boards on the C R ?

Con rail kick boards, although quite safe (some even have risers on them to protect from higher 'intrusions' into the con rail area) have largely been deemed unacceptable in tight working areas as this appears to be. I think it all kicked off after the fatality at St Leonards when they made a large scale re-assessment of all the third rail stabling areas.

 

[brad465]

According to this video of a drivers eye view run down to Sidcup and back to London, the turnback siding here appears to have 3rd rail (with guard boards) on the same side as the walkway (from 31:00), unless I've not seen it properly or, in the 2 years since that video was made, they've moved the 3rd rail to the other side (where theoretically it could always have been).

Looking at the siding in question if there was a way to make walking safe at the Dartford end, the 3rd rail could be placed on the far side of the back half of the siding, away from the central walkway for the 4th siding.

 

[ComUtoR]

The turnback at Sidcup is rarely used (if ever) to berth units. The walking route for the sidings is the right hand side as the unit enters the sidings. That side has no conductor rail.

In Dartford Sidings you always have to walk next to the live rail.

 

[bionic]

The position of the TRTS plunger in Sidcup siding and means of climbing down between units on the ballast (in a very narrow ten foot) has always struck me as ludicrously dangerous due to proximity of passing down trains.

It's interesting that the health and safety risks on the walking routes and in the depots and sidings was never addressed until after that guy was killed at St Leonard's West Marina and there was another dangerous occurrence at Gillingham. You have to question what the hell the H&S reps and managers inspecting these locations were playing at for years. I guess people just accepted it as the way it's always been. Its good to see siding safety being taken seriously now, but it's a shame someone had to die to get it sorted.

 

[brad465]

It's interesting that the health and safety risks on the walking routes and in the depots and sidings was never addressed until after that guy was killed at St Leonard's West Marina and there was another dangerous occurrence at Gillingham. You have to question what the hell the H&S reps and managers inspecting these locations were playing at for years. I guess people just accepted it as the way it's always been. Its good to see siding safety being taken seriously now, but it's a shame someone had to die to get it sorted.

Presumably had the issue been addressed a lot earlier the Dartford sidings might have a different configuration to the current setup, given the siding that can't be used.

Also does anyone know what the capacity of that siding (and its neighbour of the same length) is? Given they're considerably longer than the outside two shorter ones they look like they're able to hold more than 12 cars

 

[ComUtoR]

16 coaches (kinda)

 

[brad465]

16 coaches (kinda)

That was my initial thinking, which, in an area of the country struggling for storage space, is a lot (4 x 465s of course)

 

[brad465]

Having been past the sidings again recently, I thought of an idea for fixing the issue of safe walking down the sides:
Leave siding 4 (nearest to running lines) as it is, along with its path. Put the 3rd rail back on the 3rd line on the other side to the path and remove the path for siding 2, moving the 3rd rail from siding 2 to the other side next to siding 3's. All that's left is to put a shared path for sidings 1 and 2 down the middle of them, taking the current path at the back out and putting 3rd rail for that siding in its place.

If this all makes sense and I've thought it through correctly, all sidings are electrified again and the footpaths don't conflict with 3rd rail.

 

[ComUtoR]

Having been past the sidings again recently, I thought of an idea for fixing the issue of safe walking down the sides:

Which still won't resolve the issue of accessing a train on 1 road

Leave siding 4 (nearest to running lines) as it is, along with its path.

Siding 1

 

[brad465]

Which still won't resolve the issue of accessing a train on 1 road

I'm confused, in short my suggestion is two access paths, one each down the middle of two road pairs, with third rails for the 1st and 4th roads on the outside of the yard and 2 and 3 together in the middle.
By the way, the reason I think of siding 1 as the 4th is because of the 5th one on the other side of the running lines, thinking 1-5 is a sensible numbering system, if that makes sense.

 

[ComUtoR]

I'm confused,

Ignore the juice for a second. When you park a train on 2 road you block access to 1 road. SE Drivers had to climb through a train to access 1 road. This caused some rather embarrassing incidents.

By the way, the reason I think of siding 1 as the 4th is because of the 5th one on the other side of the running lines, thinking 1-5 is a sensible numbering system, if that makes sense.

The other siding is a different sidings and they are independent of each other. It would be confusing and misleading to link them or number them as a whole. Other than being separate sidings, the numbering system is the closest road to the running line is numbered the lowest. Having a universal numbering system makes life very easy.

Where the other side only has the single road it would be confusing to which gets numbered 1. Your system also numbers right to left. Which, to me, doesn't feel logical.

Hope that helps.

 

[bionic]

I'm confused, in short my suggestion is two access paths, one each down the middle of two road pairs, with third rails for the 1st and 4th roads on the outside of the yard and 2 and 3 together in the middle.
By the way, the reason I think of siding 1 as the 4th is because of the 5th one on the other side of the running lines, thinking 1-5 is a sensible numbering system, if that makes sense.

Yes, but as Comutor points out... regardless of where the juice rail is, you can't physically access or exit 1 road safely on foot if there is a train on 2 road. There are limited clearances, whichever way you look at it (eg: not enough room to safely walk along or access either side of a train in 1 road due to proximity of siding 2 and the up North Kent line). That's why they took it out.

What was considered safe years ago is not necessarily considered safe today - and when you consider SE's record on staff safety in sidings it can only be for the best that old, unsafe working practices have been stopped.