Southern Rail send the 'wrong type of train'

[61653 HTAFC]

Similar in a way to the experience I had traveling from Machynlledd to Birmingham about 3 y ago.

Arriving at Shrewsbury in a Class 158 we were advised the train would terminate early and should change for Birmingham. An apparently identical Class 158 arrived on the Birmingham to Machynlledd working and everyone swapped trains.

When I queried this, I was told the unit we had just boarded was not ETCS equipped and therefore could not proceed onto the Cambrian.

No headlines that time.

The difference there is that (a) services cross at Salop so switching sets would be simple, (b) whilst still at Shrewsbury, there's no problem getting the unit back- it hasn't yet run beyond where it's supposed to. An equivalent would be if the non-ETCS unit had run through the Junction towards Welshpool and the driver only then realised "*****! No signalling!"

I'm guessing that was shortly after the introduction of ETCS, when not all ATWs had been fitted?

 

[Juniper Driver]

The changeover is performed whilst at a stand in the vicinity of a specific signal on the dual-electrified section of line at North Pole. At times this line is also used to turn back 455s which are actually booked to work as far as Shepherds Bush in the weekday peaks during the normal timetable (known as the "Shepherds Bush Shuttles" by crew). There are several minutes allowed on diagrams for the changeover. I believe you can theoretically do it on the move on 377s but I've only heard about it once, and have never experienced it, including a period of time when I worked on the WLL.

455's to Kensington you mean?.(from Clapham Jn)..I used to work these in the early to mid 90's before we lost the work.It was called the "Kenny Belle".Thumpers woked it beforhand but I was never trained on them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoFsqpIRQyk

Even called "The Kenny Belle" in the 60's...I partly recognise it.

 

[tsr]

455's to Kensington you mean?.(from Clapham Jn)..I used to work these in the early to mid 90's before we lost the work.It was called the "Kenny Belle".Thumpers woked it beforhand but I was never trained on them.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uoFsqpIRQyk

Even called "The Kenny Belle" in the 60's...I partly recognise it.

Not quite; that's a separate matter, as below. But under the current (normal, not emergency/revised) timetable, a couple of trains a day should terminate at Shepherds Bush, continue to North Pole Turnback, and return to Shepherds Bush or the depot. These are usually formed of 455s. These are what I was referring to.

There are, however also a couple of trains which only run between Clapham Junction and Kensington Olympia (and vice versa), presumably very similar to the type of services you once worked. One of these is formed of an ECS working from Selhurst Depot which is the "route retention" train via Brixton, formerly in passenger service as a parliamentary from Clapham High Street or similar.

A look at a generic date in the future on RTT will confirm this, eg.: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...2/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=SN

 

[edwin_m]

I heard an story (possibly embellished) that when Tyseley had a huge number of DMU cars of various different types, they managed to send out a 3+3 with all the motor cars in one half. Unfortunately the diagram was due to split during the day, and the driver of the second portion was rather nonplussed when trying to drive it away.

 

[LBSCR Times]

The service concerned was formed of a 377/2 and a 377/4.

 

[ComUtoR]

The service concerned was formed of a 377/2 and a 377/4.

Which has/has not got a pantograph ?

 

[LBSCR Times]

Which has/has not got a pantograph ?

Oops.... The 377/4 does not have one!
(Assuming again!!)

 

[PHILIPE]

The difference there is that (a) services cross at Salop so switching sets would be simple, (b) whilst still at Shrewsbury, there's no problem getting the unit back- it hasn't yet run beyond where it's supposed to. An equivalent would be if the non-ETCS unit had run through the Junction towards Welshpool and the driver only then realised "*****! No signalling!"

I'm guessing that was shortly after the introduction of ETCS, when not all ATWs had been fitted?

On several occasions recently a 158+150 Combo have appeared on a Birmingham to Aberystwyth recently, 150s no ERTMS or Traction knowledge for Cambrian. They have gone up on a train from Holyhead which services interchanges with the Cambrian. They have just changed the 2 trains over at Shrewsbury so the 150 went back to Birmingham again.

 

[randyrippley]

Surely preventing issues like this was one of the reasons for introducing TOPS back in the 1970's? Not exactly difficult to pick up a stock / route incompatibility through software. Presumably stock utilisation is programmed through the computer system prior to despatch? Surely the system should have flagged up an incompatibility?

 

[Surreytraveller]

I'd expect the driver to have to check his train before it leaves the depot. Although I'm sure having a pantograph might not be something you might be concerned about if you've been working the railway for a while

But the driver 'prepping' the train won't be aware of what the train will be doing all day.

 

[Ianno87]

I have a European example of this. We were travelling on a Frankfurt-Brussels ICE3 set, which had to get swapped at Köln Hauptbahnhof, as the set that had worked from Frankfurt was not equipped to work on the Belgian signalling system.

 

[Surreytraveller]

So if the 377/2 is leading, the driver won't be aware that the train is not compatible with overhead electrification.

 

[ComUtoR]

So if the 377/2 is leading, the driver won't be aware that the train is not compatible with overhead electrification.

On a 377 does the unit number come up on the Mitrac ?

 

[infobleep]

When I saw that today on our e-mails today it did give us the giggles. There is a reason why it happened, but cannot say.

Surprised Southern didn't try to weave in a comment on why DOO would be better. Lol.

Not great that it cussed problems and was cancelled, as they are only running 4 Southern services on weekdays from Clapham Junction to Watford Junction.

Still we are all human and liable to make mistakes. It happens.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[Chrisgr31]

Many years ago a train heading south ot of Hurst Green, was given the route to the left, heading down to Uckfield, and the driver took it.

This was rather unfortunate as it was an electric train. It didnt get far,. but far enough not to come back under its own power

 

[Juniper Driver]

Not quite; that's a separate matter, as below. But under the current (normal, not emergency/revised) timetable, a couple of trains a day should terminate at Shepherds Bush, continue to North Pole Turnback, and return to Shepherds Bush or the depot. These are usually formed of 455s. These are what I was referring to.

There are, however also a couple of trains which only run between Clapham Junction and Kensington Olympia (and vice versa), presumably very similar to the type of services you once worked. One of these is formed of an ECS working from Selhurst Depot which is the "route retention" train via Brixton, formerly in passenger service as a parliamentary from Clapham High Street or similar.

A look at a generic date in the future on RTT will confirm this, eg.: http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...2/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=all&order=wtt&toc=SN

Ah,thanks.

 

[bramling]

On several occasions recently a 158+150 Combo have appeared on a Birmingham to Aberystwyth recently, 150s no ERTMS or Traction knowledge for Cambrian. They have gone up on a train from Holyhead which services interchanges with the Cambrian. They have just changed the 2 trains over at Shrewsbury so the 150 went back to Birmingham again.

Would it be possible for a train to work 158+150+158 with ERTMS, or does the entire train have to be compatible with the system?

(I'm guessing the answer is it's not possible, but would be good to have a definitive answer!).

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Would it be possible for a train to work 158+150+158 with ERTMS, or does the entire train have to be compatible with the system?

(I'm guessing the answer is it's not possible, but would be good to have a definitive answer!).

Others will know for sure, but I'm pretty sure that would be permissible in theory, as the non-fitted cabs are "coccooned" (much like how Chiltern 172s can run towards Amersham if sandwiched by tripcock-fitted units). However it may cause problems if one of the 158s failed so ATW would probably want to avoid it.

 

[bnsf734]

I heard an story (possibly embellished) that when Tyseley had a huge number of DMU cars of various different types, they managed to send out a 3+3 with all the motor cars in one half. Unfortunately the diagram was due to split during the day, and the driver of the second portion was rather nonplussed when trying to drive it away.

I've not heard this one but there was a similar story of 2x3 car Haymarket DMU sets working to North Berwick (before wires..), the sets were split and 3 cars returned to Edinburgh. Another driver arrived to take the other set and when he came to start the engines he discovered the it was formed of 3 unpowered trailer cars....

I feel sure that there was an instance here at Nuneaton several years ago when an electric loco was routed out of the up sidings (when they existed) on to an unelectrified track. The pantograph ran out of wire and raised to its full extent only to be destroyed when it hit the Leicester Road overbridge.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

There was a trackside device mentioned in another thread that triggers the lowering of the pantograph, could such a device be added to every track where the OLE ends to prevent pantographs being damaged or destroyed (don't know what onboard modifications might be needed)?

 

[PHILIPE]

Would it be possible for a train to work 158+150+158 with ERTMS, or does the entire train have to be compatible with the system?

(I'm guessing the answer is it's not possible, but would be good to have a definitive answer!).

It would be possible with ERTMS but not possible due to lack of traction knowledge and would be a waste of a carriage in the dire position ATW are in re stock availability.

 

[QueensCurve]

I'm guessing that was shortly after the introduction of ETCS, when not all ATWs had been fitted?

Late 2012.

 

[DarloRich]

I would be happy for Southern to send me any type of train - we haven't seen one for months!

 

[edwin_m]

There was a trackside device mentioned in another thread that triggers the lowering of the pantograph, could such a device be added to every track where the OLE ends to prevent pantographs being damaged or destroyed (don't know what onboard modifications might be needed)?

The standard provision on Network Rail is the APC magnet, which closes and re-opens the circuit breaker but leaves the pantograph up.

Someone did mention that ERTMS has the capability to signal the train to lower the pan, but I'm not sure if that's a standard feature or a country-specific add-on that wouldn't be available in other countries (like the TASS functions in the UK).

 

[mr_jarhead]

Love the stock picture of a diesel train in the article.

Oh the irony.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The standard provision on Network Rail is the APC magnet, which closes and re-opens the circuit breaker but leaves the pantograph up.

Someone did mention that ERTMS has the capability to signal the train to lower the pan, but I'm not sure if that's a standard feature or a country-specific add-on that wouldn't be available in other countries (like the TASS functions in the UK).

Can ADDs be activated remotely?

 

[edwin_m]

Can ADDs be activated remotely?

I doubt it, as the one described above sounds like it relies on an air valve being opened when the pan moves too high. An electrical circuit is probably a bad idea on something that is live at 25kV!

However it would be reasonably straightforward to build an interface into the ERTMS to operate a relay and do the equivalent of pressing the "pan down" button.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

I doubt it, as the one described above sounds like it relies on an air valve being opened when the pan moves too high. An electrical circuit is probably a bad idea on something that is live at 25kV!

However it would be reasonably straightforward to build an interface into the ERTMS to operate a relay and do the equivalent of pressing the "pan down" button.

Could the catenary at the end be curved up so that it raises the pan high enough to trigger the ADD?

 

[philthetube]

I once did a duty, (engineering works) from Rickmansworth on the Met which involved picking up a train on the platform and taking it up to Chalfont to operate the Chesham shuttle.

The driver bringing it out of the depot did not know what the train would be doing and when picking up the A stock on I never saw the back end as Ricky has a curved platform.

I ran empty to Chesham, changed ends and discovered I had an eight car train which I was supposed to take into a four car platform at Chalfont. (there was nothing on an A stock, or most underground trains to indicate train length). At that time in the morning, and because the first two trips were empty north and passenger south it was possible to run the service using the southbound main platform until the train could be swapped over.

This was all swept under the carpet, and now, about ten years later I don't suppose anyone cares.

In another more famous case A 13 car train came out of Morden depot, consisting of a 95 stock train coupled to a 59 stock train, it was noticed by the shunters as it went past their cabin. It was never discovered how the two came to be attached. There is, (was), no obligation for the driver to walk to the back of the train when preparing it.

 

[rmt4ever]

Wasn't there once a NLL 313 that tried to get to Turnham Green, and numerous times D78s trying to get to South Acton