Thameslink ‘Core’ major disruption (04/04)

[Nicholas Lewis]

Just did a write up on the pan-demotion that ensued in Black Friars Lane! That was at least £13,000 down the pan, smashing pantographs to bits ain't cheap, not to mention the fall out from the incident which must have been extremely costly.

Thameslink overextends itself

Excellent article. It should be emailed to ALL MPs on a station served by a Thameslink service and tell them to get onto the DfT about preventing this (it has enough issues it can't control so needs to prevent the ones in its control) as well as putting in place an adequate contingency plan when the core has issues. The railway can't hide behind suppressed covid demand anymore (although being a Monday it would have been lower than later days in the week) as one of the pictures in this article shows the amount of people that had to be evacuated from one of the stranded trains.

They put in Redhill to Horsham shuttles which worked well for the first two hours but then fell apart and didn't recover through to end of service. Hopefully the Bognor trains stopped additionally although that's hit and miss in my experience. I'd never risk waiting at Littlehaven during disruption.

Yes very poor when they have the crew from the 9R/9J's (4tph) that they couldn't even sustain a half hourly service. Mind you as you then had to go forward on a 4car 377 from/to Redhill why wasn't it running to E.Croydon or really London Bridge like they do at weekend for planned closures. The 9R/9J service group should default to a L.Bdge to Horsham all stations 2TPH in this situtaion.

 

[Horizon22]

Excellent article. It should be emailed to ALL MPs on a station served by a Thameslink service and tell them to get onto the DfT about preventing this (it has enough issues it can't control so needs to prevent the ones in its control) as well as putting in place an adequate contingency plan when the core has issues. The railway can't hide behind suppressed covid demand anymore (although being a Monday it would have been lower than later days in the week) as one of the pictures in this article shows the amount of people that had to be evacuated from one of the stranded trains.

Yes very poor when they have the crew from the 9R/9J's (4tph) that they couldn't even sustain a half hourly service. Mind you as you then had to go forward on a 4car 377 from/to Redhill why wasn't it running to E.Croydon or really London Bridge like they do at weekend for planned closures. The 9R/9J service group should default to a L.Bdge to Horsham all stations 2TPH in this situtaion.

As already mentioned there will be a contingency plan for a full blockage of the Core. The issue is primarily the capacity is severely reduced when instead of running through, you have to terminate due to platform availability. That means amending service patterns (quite severely) which might mean certain routes get removed entirely and run as shuttles or something else (e.g additional stops on Southern services).

There are other TL services using London Bridge too of course and 2tph solely for the 9R/9J might mean 0tph for the Rainham, Brighton, Gatwick service too. You have to “step up” the service to fit into the arrival into a suitable departure headcode at London Bridge, as otherwise the train would sit them for over an hour. As with any service disruption once it gets really bad, drivers are all over the network and getting them back into position is always a big challenge so it isn’t as simple as to say they “have the crew”. One benefit of running a shuttle is you can contain crew workings, but does require more changing for passengers and additional communications to explain this.

 

[choochoochoo]

Because that is not possible, you are either in AC mode or DC mode.

I know you can't be in both AC and DC but surely the software is smart enough to go 'Driver, you've got 2 sources of power input, what is going on ? are you sure you want to move the train in this configuration ?' or was the pan up with the VCB open in which case the train doesn't would only be seeing a DC input?

 

[Taunton]

I wonder if the contingency plan has been modified to take into account the temporary closure of the parallel Northern Line between London Bridge and Kings Cross St Pancras, both for passengers and for returning crew to base - and the additional load Thameslink is presently handling due to the closure.

 

[Horizon22]

I wonder if the contingency plan has been modified to take into account the temporary closure of the parallel Northern Line between London Bridge and Kings Cross St Pancras, both for passengers and for returning crew to base - and the additional load Thameslink is presently handling due to the closure.

Even if it had, the impact of a core closure wouldn't change any of the ability to run the same level of limited service from the north and south. The mainline railway capacity hasn't changed.

 

[Taunton]

Regular forum members are doubtless saying "I wonder when that Taunton bloke will be along again, to say surely such a key critical point should have a standby diesel loco in a siding at Blackfriars or Kentish Town, able to drag any breakdown out of the core in short order, like he needs to say about twice a year on average when it all goes wrong down there again".

So I will.

Incidentally, TfL nowe do exactly this at the nearby Blackwall road tunnel, breakdown truck sat there, instead of needing to be called, initially through peak hours, now all day I think.

 

[ComUtoR]

I know you can't be in both AC and DC but surely the software is smart enough to go 'Driver, you've got 2 sources of power input, what is going on ? are you sure you want to move the train in this configuration ?' or was the pan up with the VCB open in which case the train doesn't would only be seeing a DC input?

It doesn't matter if there was a dual voltage alarm, flashy lights inside the cab, sirens and signage on the track, or wires all the way to Elephant.

These incidents will still happen. The system didn't fail, the Human did.

 

[westcoaster]

I know you can't be in both AC and DC but surely the software is smart enough to go 'Driver, you've got 2 sources of power input, what is going on ? are you sure you want to move the train in this configuration ?' or was the pan up with the VCB open in which case the train doesn't would only be seeing a DC input?

Again it is not possible, I'll try and explain.
Going back to 319's these had a dowty dual voltage buzzer fitted, as suggested it used to buzz/humm(annoy) you. It gave an audible warning the train had detected 2 voltage inputs. Shoe fuses live at all times.
377's the shoes were raised so no need for a buzzer(didn't stop pan loss/damage). As you could only be in 1 voltage input.
387 the same.
On the 700 the train can only pick up one voltage AC or DC (like the Electrostar's the 700 isolates the shoes via a high speed circuit breaker when in AC mode).

A train exiting Smithfield's will be in DC as that is the only source of power in the sidings.

 

[Class2ldn]

I know you can't be in both AC and DC but surely the software is smart enough to go 'Driver, you've got 2 sources of power input, what is going on ? are you sure you want to move the train in this configuration ?' or was the pan up with the VCB open in which case the train doesn't would only be seeing a DC input?

Dont think you get it , the train doesn't know there is 3rd rail available, edit, westcoaster beat me to it lol

 

[SynthD]

A train exiting Smithfield's will be in DC as that is the only source of power in the sidings.

Does that mean the train left the sidings on DC, then raised the pantograph? Is that ever a correct move, perhaps for heading north?

 

[londontransit]

Does that mean the train left the sidings on DC, then raised the pantograph? Is that ever a correct move, perhaps for heading north?

It would be a correct move if it did happen. DC from Smithfield into City Thameslink then pans up and head north. The problem is the driver was going south where OHLE is totally non existent!

 

[philthetube]

Can the exit to the sidings have the same balise, or a cowbell that would be hit by a pantograph?

The sidings have four planned movements today, with none in the rest of the week and only one in other Mondays. Why?

would it not be possible to fit a circuit breaker above the tracks which a raised pantograph would hit, it could be set up to both cut power and flash lights/ sound klaxons or whatever close to the cab.

 

[Taunton]

would it not be possible to fit a circuit breaker above the tracks which a raised pantograph would hit, it could be set up to both cut power and flash lights/ sound klaxons or whatever close to the cab.

There are many things that are possible. Signals operated by a trip on the overhead wire were around for tramways 100 years ago, but one here between where the pan should be down and where it might strike something are somehow just forgotten.

 

[Western Sunset]

Fast lines between Harpenden and Leagrave appear to be currently closed. More Thameslink problems?

 

[Gerard92]

Fast lines between Harpenden and Leagrave appear to be currently closed. More Thameslink problems?

Nope. It’s to do with a broken down Class 180 EMR which is currently having wheel skates fitted for movement tonight. Once line block is given up Up fast will remain closed and down fast will reopen

 

[zwk500]

Regular forum members are doubtless saying "I wonder when that Taunton bloke will be along again, to say surely such a key critical point should have a standby diesel loco in a siding at Blackfriars or Kentish Town, able to drag any breakdown out of the core in short order, like he needs to say about twice a year on average when it all goes wrong down there again".

So I will.

No, a better solution for Thameslink would be to fit battery packs for emergency moves. They don't have to get far, just onto the next section of live wire. A loco wouldn't have helped here because the issue with moving the set was the position of the Pantograph and state of the OLE, not powering the motors. A diesel to rescue the other stranded trains would have only been able to rescue one at a time, and would have needed to run to a suitable place to detach and run round.

There are many things that are possible. Signals operated by a trip on the overhead wire were around for tramways 100 years ago, but one here between where the pan should be down and where it might strike something are somehow just forgotten.

It appears that here the problem is there is no OLE (or dead bridging material) over the scissors crossovers, so if a train moves from the northbound to southbound line there is a brief gap where the pan can spring up then strike the southbound line OLE Bar. Therefore an infrastructure solution may be to fit a non-conductive sheet of material that would keep the pan down and avoid damage, although if there is not enough distance between clearing the tunnel and the next obstruction before the ADD can kick in, all that may do is shift the problem around.

 

[dosxuk]

Is there any circumstances when a train should be allowed to start moving with the pantograph up while taking power from the third rail? This wouldn't affect on-the-move changeovers - only where the train is stopped and then moves off - such as you'd get in a station where changeover is required, or coming out of third rail only equipped sidings.

Alternatively, could the overhead be interlocked with the signalling, such that it is isolated when a southbound move is happening from City Thameslink, but could be live for southbound incoming stock from Farringdon (and then cutting out when the train has stopped in the station) and when routes are set towards Farringdon?

While it seems this is simply genuine human error, the number of times this has now occurred indicates that systematic help is probably needed.

 

[ComUtoR]

It appears that here the problem is there is no OLE (or dead bridging material) over the scissors crossovers,

This is not the problem. The Driver raising the pan was the problem.

if there is not enough distance between clearing the tunnel and the next obstruction before the ADD can kick in, all that may do is shift the problem around.

Which is what already happens. So again, not a solution. Just shifting it to the station instead.

 

[ChiefPlanner]

In any case - diesels traditionally not allowed in the core - due to limited clearances and needing a full isolation and earthing. When they were - it was only 33 and 31's , none of which can be described as handy these days.

In any case - the crippled unit could not be moved until the wrecked pan was either secured or partly removed. A technical job to say the very least.

 

[choochoochoo]

Again it is not possible, I'll try and explain.
Going back to 319's these had a dowty dual voltage buzzer fitted, as suggested it used to buzz/humm(annoy) you. It gave an audible warning the train had detected 2 voltage inputs. Shoe fuses live at all times.
377's the shoes were raised so no need for a buzzer(didn't stop pan loss/damage). As you could only be in 1 voltage input.
387 the same.
On the 700 the train can only pick up one voltage AC or DC (like the Electrostar's the 700 isolates the shoes via a high speed circuit breaker when in AC mode).

A train exiting Smithfield's will be in DC as that is the only source of power in the sidings.

Ok thanks, that clears it up.

 

[43066]

Regular forum members are doubtless saying "I wonder when that Taunton bloke will be along again, to say surely such a key critical point should have a standby diesel loco in a siding at Blackfriars or Kentish Town, able to drag any breakdown out of the core in short order, like he needs to say about twice a year on average when it all goes wrong down there again".

So I will.

I suspect the answer remains exactly the same as what you’ve been told before. It would be a poor use of resources to have a loco on station and crewed 24/7, given that the majority of train failures in the core will result in a simple detrainment of passengers and the affected 700 moving of its own accord, or else being assisted by the one in advance/in rear. Very often a thunderbird would be unable to get to the casualty train due to other trains in the way.

It’s also by no means clear that a thunderbird would have been of any assistance in this particular incident given the OLE issues. So overall it would be a very expensive measure with a very limited range of circumstances in which it would be of any benefit whatsoever.

The most useful contingency in the event of a serious failure in the core, as was adopted yesterday, is to stop pumping trains into it and make alternative arrangements.

 

[Horizon22]

There's a lot of discussion here about what was essentially a driver error. What needs to be brought in is more robust process to prevent this from happening again, by improving non-technical skills and signage for this particular move as opposed to an expensive infrastructure or stock modification.

 

[ComUtoR]

Ok thanks, that clears it up.

Click the power tab on the HMI and you will see what is essentially a circuit diagram.

 

[PeterY]

In any case - diesels traditionally not allowed in the core - due to limited clearances and needing a full isolation and earthing. When they were - it was only 33 and 31's , none of which can be described as handy these days.

In any case - the crippled unit could not be moved until the wrecked pan was either secured or partly removed. A technical job to say the very least.

So I assume, it's another 700 that drags another failed 700 out of the core.

Just out of pure interest, what goes into the core for engineering works?

 

[ChiefPlanner]

So I assume, it's another 700 that drags another failed 700 out of the core.

Just out of pure interest, what goes into the core for engineering works?

The 700's can , in theory rescue another dud one - with great care. At least there are no other coupler types to worry about.

In terms of "engineering trains" - I suspect the likes of on track machines and so on - unlikely to see "traditional" old school types of ballast wagons etc .....Baldrick may know. Last saw some 33's enroute one weekend about 15 years + ago.

 

[Supercoss]

Locomotive wise only class 73 permitted between Kentish Town and Farringdon due to gauge restriction (height) and class 31 and 33/2 in addition to 73 permitted Blackfriars / city Thameslink to Farringdon .
The overhead line is required to be switched off ( but not earthed ) prior to a locomotive passing through , again due to height restriction .
On track machines, GP Tramms ,grinders etc also cleared for engineering hours .

 

[skyhigh]

The 700's can , in theory rescue another dud one - with great care. At least there are no other coupler types to worry about.

Wasn't part of the concept of a 700 that they are essentially two units permanently coupled with no intermediate cab, so they had a greater ability to self-rescue than traditional units?

 

[43066]

The overhead line is required to be switched off ( but not earthed ) prior to a locomotive passing through , again due to height restriction .

I was told the height restriction issue was also why Networkers were permanently banned from Smithfield sidings a few years ago.

 

[Supercoss]

As 700s can't run in multiple and drivers are not trained to couple or uncouple them ( as not required in ' normal' operation ) a driver manager or fitter is required to attend.
A "push out" has been done a few times with unit mechanically coupled but not electrically ( electrical connection latched back) and ' rescue ' air pipe connected.

 

[swt_passenger]

I was told the height restriction issue was also why Networkers were permanently banned from Smithfield sidings a few years ago.

2011. We had a number of discussions about it at that time, I eventually found a NR document that definitely included that explicit reasoning. 375s were excluded at the same time.