Sprinters - need to replace on safety grounds?

[DanNCL]

Following two autumn collisions in recent years with 15xs, one of them fatal, could we see an expedited push to replace the Sprinters on safety grounds?

I don’t wish to speculate as to the specifics of the accident in Wales until the investigation is complete. But it’s already clear that Sprinters have exceptionally bad performance in poor railhead conditions, and we’ve also seen twice now that the cabs on the 158s/159s offer absolutely zero protection to the driver even in a low speed impact.

So if Carmont was anything to go by, no doubt we’ll shortly find ASLEF calling for the removal of these trains from service on safety grounds. But I’m not really interested in what ASLEF’s opinion on the matter is, I’m more interested in whether people think there actually will be an expedited push to get on with replacing the Sprinters, or if this’ll be yet another thing that the railway/DFT keeps putting off.

 

[Bletchleyite]

These ones are going to be replaced soon with 197s anyway, and Northern are progressing a 15x replacement programme. No doubt the cabs provide more protection, but are 197s any better in low adhesion?

The other difference in this incident is that the drivers weren't killed nor seriously injured.

 

[bramling]

Following two autumn collisions in recent years with 15xs, one of them fatal, could we see an expedited push to replace the Sprinters on safety grounds?

I don’t wish to speculate as to the specifics of the accident in Wales until the investigation is complete. But it’s already clear that Sprinters have exceptionally bad performance in poor railhead conditions, and we’ve also seen twice now that the cabs on the 158s/159s offer absolutely zero protection to the driver even in a low speed impact.

So if Carmont was anything to go by, no doubt we’ll shortly find ASLEF calling for the removal of these trains from service on safety grounds. But I’m not really interested in what ASLEF’s opinion on the matter is, I’m more interested in whether people think there actually will be an expedited push to get on with replacing the Sprinters, or if this’ll be yet another thing that the railway/DFT keeps putting off.

I was going to say that there has never been a fatality in a Sprinter cab, but then remembered the St Helens accident in the 1980s involving a 150/2.

Against a context of the various fleets having covered many millions of miles, I wouldn’t say replacement is a priority.

 

[yorksrob]

Is it established that Sprinters perform particularly worse in low adhesion conditions than other unit types, as opposed to being in the wrong place at the wrong time ?

Even if that be the case, is it to a degree sufficient to justify wholesale withdrawal on the basis of safety alone ? Railway developments may have meant that more modern units have more safety features, but that doesn't mean that sprinters are inherently "unsafe".

 

[irish_rail]

As someone who drives a variety of train types , locos, IETs, and Sprinters, I can comfortably say that Sprinters are the worst in slippy season. The only station run through I've ever had have been with Sprinters. They just don't cope well with leaf fall, the 158s particularly. I'd argue there should be more urgency in replacing Sprinters than there is for replacing HSTs, as as a driver I certainly feel safer in the cab of the latter.

 

[mpellatt]

These ones are going to be replaced soon with 197s anyway, and Northern are progressing a 15x replacement programme. No doubt the cabs provide more protection, but are 197s any better in low adhesion?

The other difference in this incident is that the drivers weren't killed nor seriously injured.

If I read (and remember) the Fisherton report correctly, better communication over railhead conditions and management of human factors re: driver assumptions and driving style would have been sufficient to prevent the incident. Other mitigations could have helped too.

In other words, the causes were more operational than equipment related.

 

[Trainbike46]

As pointed out, a lot of sprinters are getting old, and at some operators their replacement is ongoing (e.g. TfW).

HSTs and 15x, as the oldest diesel passenger fleets still around, will likely need to get replaced with the last ones leaving in about 10 years, so it really is time to get serious about ordering new BEMUs.

tbh I suspect they won't get replaced any earlier on safety grounds, but that won't be around for much longer simply as most of the sprinters are getting old

 

[800001]

Following two autumn collisions in recent years with 15xs, one of them fatal, could we see an expedited push to replace the Sprinters on safety grounds?

I don’t wish to speculate as to the specifics of the accident in Wales until the investigation is complete. But it’s already clear that Sprinters have exceptionally bad performance in poor railhead conditions, and we’ve also seen twice now that the cabs on the 158s/159s offer absolutely zero protection to the driver even in a low speed impact.

So if Carmont was anything to go by, no doubt we’ll shortly find ASLEF calling for the removal of these trains from service on safety grounds. But I’m not really interested in what ASLEF’s opinion on the matter is, I’m more interested in whether people think there actually will be an expedited push to get on with replacing the Sprinters, or if this’ll be yet another thing that the railway/DFT keeps putting off.

As sad as it is, the fatality in this crash is due to a Heart Attack (according to internal messaging), which potentially would have still happened regardless of type of unit.

Putting it in context with the 15X units, since introduction, how many incidents/accidents have they been involved in? And how many fatalities have been caused by said incidents?

 

[bramling]

If I read (and remember) the Fisherton report correctly, better communication over railhead conditions and management of human factors re: driver assumptions and driving style would have been sufficient to prevent the incident. Other mitigations could have helped too.

In other words, the causes were more operational than equipment related.

I’m still of the view that the driver at Salisbury had a lapse of concentration, which the railhead conditions made it impossible for him to recover from. It makes little sense to be concerned about encountering poor adhesion, so then make a conscious decision to defer braking until *later*, which was what is claimed to have happened.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 22 Oct 2024 ==

As sad as it is, the fatality in this crash is due to a Heart Attack (according to internal messaging), which potentially would have still happened regardless of type of unit.

Putting it in context with the 15X units, since introduction, how many incidents/accidents have they been involved in? And how many fatalities have been caused by said incidents?

There have been a fair few incidents over the years, as one would expect from a family of trains which have covered very many miles.

A fatality occurred St Helens Central in the 1980s when a 150/2 derailed and hit a bridge.

There was also a fatality involving a guard near Ais Gill in the 1990s, which involved a 156. I don’t believe that fatality arose from loss of survival space though, IIRC he was thrown out of an open door as a consequence of the impact.

 

[mpellatt]

As pointed out, a lot of sprinters are getting old, and at some operators their replacement is ongoing (e.g. TfW).

HSTs and 15x, as the oldest diesel passenger fleets still around, will likely need to get replaced with the last ones leaving in about 10 years, so it really is time to get serious about ordering new BEMUs.

tbh I suspect they won't get replaced any earlier on safety grounds, but that won't be around for much longer simply as most of the sprinters are getting old

There's going to be "news" about the 158/159 replacement on the West of England Main Line at the forthcoming Salisbury Exeter Rail User Group annual meeting.
I'm not holding my breath.

 

[Snow1964]

There's going to be "news" about the 158/159 replacement on the West of England Main Line at the forthcoming Salisbury Exeter Rail User Group annual meeting.
I'm not holding my breath.

And there is a meeting tonight where Graham Ellis (described as director of Travelwatch Southwest, and officer of Melksham rail development group) is due to make a presentation. It's at Quaker House, Whiteheads Lane, Bradford on Avon, BA15 1JU at 7pm

But if any news is forthcoming about what is replacing the aging (34 year old) 158s, 159s & 165s in Wiltshire is not yet known.

 

[DanNCL]

These ones are going to be replaced soon with 197s anyway, and Northern are progressing a 15x replacement programme.

True but there are still plenty of Sprinters around where there’s either no replacement at all lined up (EMR) or only a very vague idea on a drawing board (GWR and ScotRail).

Also not inconceivable that these ones could have found themselves as extra capacity somewhere else after TFW are done with them rather than simply becoming scrap metal.

As someone who drives a variety of train types , locos, IETs, and Sprinters, I can comfortably say that Sprinters are the worst in slippy season. The only station run through I've ever had have been with Sprinters. They just don't cope well with leaf fall, the 158s particularly. I'd argue there should be more urgency in replacing Sprinters than there is for replacing HSTs, as as a driver I certainly feel safer in the cab of the latter.

As a passenger I’ve only ever noticed wheelslip on Sprinters too - not suggesting it doesn’t happen on other stock but when it has it’s never been noticeable to me as a passenger.

As pointed out, a lot of sprinters are getting old, and at some operators their replacement is ongoing (e.g. TfW).

HSTs and 15x, as the oldest diesel passenger fleets still around, will likely need to get replaced with the last ones leaving in about 10 years, so it really is time to get serious about ordering new BEMUs.

tbh I suspect they won't get replaced any earlier on safety grounds, but that won't be around for much longer simply as most of the sprinters are getting old

My own view, considering that they’re already old and both HSTs and Sprinters have shown themselves not to withstand crashes very well, a deadline of 1st Jan 2030 should be set to get rid of them. 6 years should be long enough to draw up a tender, award a contract, build and introduce new fleets.

As sad as it is, the fatality in this crash is due to a Heart Attack (according to internal messaging), which potentially would have still happened regardless of type of unit.

Putting it in context with the 15X units, since introduction, how many incidents/accidents have they been involved in? And how many fatalities have been caused by said incidents?

I’m aware they’ve ran for the most part without incident for a very long time, but the unfortunate reality is that two of the three most major accidents in the 2020s have involved 158 and that shouldn’t be overlooked, nor should the fact that they’re not up to modern crashworthiness standards, as has been highlighted in those two accidents.

Not suggesting they’re an unsafe train but I think it’s clear that when compared to the majority of the other stock on the network they score poorly in that regard.

 

[JonathanH]

As a passenger I’ve only ever noticed wheelslip on Sprinters too - not suggesting it doesn’t happen on other stock but when it has it’s never been noticeable to me as a passenger.

Wheelslip also happens on Turbos.

 

[Harpo]

Quicker approach - Anyone know of a passenger unit that never slips?

 

[Bletchleyite]

My own view, considering that they’re already old and both HSTs and Sprinters have shown themselves not to withstand crashes very well

Didn't it withstand the crash very well? It looks pretty intact to me. Nothing is going to do well from a head-on collision, the energy has to go somewhere and the only place it can go is crumpling of the body.

 

[Trainbike46]

The important question is, does it crumple in a place where there aren't any people?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wheelslip also happens on Turbos.

Happens on everything to some extent. It's more noticeable on Sprinters than say a modern EMU because when it happens the engine drops to idle before running back up and trying again.

Only time I recall seeing a significant slide was a Class 507/508 overshooting (very leafy) Aughton Park one winter morning when I was a kid. Being the 1990s they just opened the doors anyway with one completely off the platform.

 

[westcoaster]

Quicker approach - Anyone know of a passenger unit that never slips?

All units will slide somewhat, if there is contaminated rails and wheels then there is no grip.
Of all the trains I've driven 700's are very good in leaf fall. The mixture of braking systems rheostatic, regen, disk and tread all help you stop. A good wsp system and sanders (that work in all braking positions) also help.

 

[Bletchleyite]

All units will slide somewhat, if there is contaminated rails and wheels then there is no grip.
Of all the trains I've driven 700's are very good in leaf fall. The mixture of braking systems rheostatic, regen, disk and tread all help you stop. A good wsp system and sanders (that work in all braking positions) also help.

I suspect it also probably helps having 32/48 axles instead of 8, far more scrubbing of the railhead if the unit does slide.

 

[yorksrob]

My own view, considering that they’re already old and both HSTs and Sprinters have shown themselves not to withstand crashes very well, a deadline of 1st Jan 2030 should be set to get rid of them. 6 years should be long enough to draw up a tender, award a contract, build and introduce new fleets.

All fine and dandy untill six years time when said government hasn't started procuring anything because it couldn't find a budget and trains have to be withdrawn without adequate replacement. Us passengers are then left with crowded short formed trains.

Arbitrary deadlines turn out bad for passengers in my experience.

 

[The Chimaera]

Would it be wrong of me to point out that if the damn lineside trees were cut down there wouldn’t be much of a problem in the first place?

 

[DanNCL]

All fine and dandy untill six years time when said government hasn't started procuring anything because it couldn't find a budget and trains have to be withdrawn without adequate replacement. Us passengers are then left with crowded short formed trains.

Arbitrary deadlines turn out bad for passengers in my experience.

I guess this is in relation to the PRM deadline which was a different matter.
The Mark 1 EMU removal deadline, which iirc was a little bit flexible(?), was more what I had in mind here.

 

[Recessio]

Is there a difference in safety and or crashworthiness between the 158/159s and the other Sprinters?

 

[HSTEd]

This is where I chime in and suggest that a solution to significantly mitigate the contamination issue is available - magnetic track brakes.
The RSSB did a study on this a while back (T1099) although I don't think the business case was particularly positive.

The brakes don't work perfectly on leaf film but they do generate brakeforce and they do scrub some of the contamination off (three brakes apparently takes the rail back to something like clean, with incremental improvement with each pass)

 

[Annetts key]

If improved sanding equipment is fitted to these classes of trains, I would say there is insufficient reasons to withdraw on safety grounds.

 

[Donny Dave]

I've not read all the comments, but of those I have read, the post by @irish_rail stood out the most to me. If the 15x family is the worst for adhesion in poor railhead conditions, is there a way to modify the bogies and suspension as a stop gap measure to improve this? I don't mean for this to be a life extension program, but something to bring them up to be comparable to other units while a replacement program processes.

 

[AlastairFraser]

If improved sanding equipment is fitted to these classes of trains, I would say there is insufficient reasons to withdraw on safety grounds.

Agreed. How much would this cost?

 

[Russel]

Would it be wrong of me to point out that if the damn lineside trees were cut down there wouldn’t be much of a problem in the first place?

I'm surprised you're the only person to suggest this, in this thread...

It seems the obvious solution!

 

[AlastairFraser]

I'm surprised you're the only person to suggest this, in this thread...

It seems the obvious solution!

Even if you cut down all lineside trees (a huge job!), then that wouldn't have stopped the leaves blowing on to the track last Monday. The winds were incredibly strong, and these storms will be a part of normal life going forward. We need to look at retrofitting all units currently on the network with very strong anti-wheelslip sanding systems, and potentially running the railhead treatment train (RHTT) more often. If the RHTT is not able to run, we must consider cancelling trains on some lines in future as a precaution.

 

[43096]

Even if you cut down all lineside trees (a huge job!), then that wouldn't have stopped the leaves blowing on to the track last Monday. The winds were incredibly strong, and these storms will be a part of normal life going forward. We need to look at retrofitting all units currently on the network with very strong anti-wheelslip sanding systems, and potentially running the railhead treatment train (RHTT) more often. If the RHTT is not able to run, we must consider cancelling trains on some lines in future as a precaution.

Or just shut the railway during October and November as it is too unsafe.