today's class 87 bash

[yorkie]

Today a group of us from the forum met at euston and boarded the 1651 eus-bhm, everything was going well and progress was good until we braked heavily despite running under greens and there being no TSR, we then coasted ito the signal at bletchley where the driver got out of his cab and contacted Control.

Although we didn't know at that time, something had smashed into the windscreen, causing the train to proceed at a leisurely pace (no more than about 50mph) and switch to the Dn slow at ledburn jn, and terminated at Bletchley at aapprox 1800.

A rather unfortunate ending to our trip, as there was no point proceeding to birmingham (a following pendo picked up passengers from the 1651), so we got a photo of the train heading south and caught a 321 to Euston.

Was it worth going all that way for? Not really, but it was fun while it lasted - and I never thought i'd be back behind an 87 on the WCML again, and i'll definitely go again this summer - assuming it continues to run.

It was looking bleak last week as it was often substituted by a pendo due to various problems with the loco, stock and DVT, but this week it has - i'm told - run reliably all week, and at least today's problem was nothing to do with the train, it was just unfortunate that a pendo wasn't hit instead

 

[Techniquest]

Ahh...Now I'm worried that'll happen to me when I do it...

 

[Coxster]

it was just unfortunate that a pendo wasn't hit instead

Isn't the driver more likely to get hurt on a Pendo as it is all one window?

 

[TheSlash]

It was a pretty stupid comment, Yorkie.

 

[Met Driver]

Let's not go there.

Coxster - I would've thought a pendo would probably come off a bit better due to the streamlined profile and superior windscreen strength?
[EDIT]
Pics can be found here here if you fancy having a look.

 

[Coxster]

The driver was lucky that nothing went through the window as it was on the nearside!

 

[16CSVT2700]

It was a pretty stupid comment, Yorkie.

Agreed. A very stupid comment coming from someone who should in theory be setting an example to younger members!

I suppose you enjoy seeing trains like Voyagers and Pendos with smashed front windows, knowing full well that the driver could have been killed?

A touch selfish, I suppose.

 

[TicketMan]

Hmmm... what a f***ing idiot - and that is not just aimed at the 'person' throwing objects at trains...

 

[bunnahabhain]

leisurely pace (no more than about 50mph)

I wouldnt call 50mph a leisurely pace with a smashed windscreen, I'd call it quite excessive, with a smashed windscreen you have very poor visibility, and looking at the photograph which Seth has provided then ideally it should have ran at a speed of no greater than 10mph. Maybe 20-25mph with the driver hanging his head out the window to improve visibility, but 50mph certainly seems very excessive given the circumstances.

Still, I'm sure the driver used discretion and adhered to the modules in the rulebook applicable to this type of incident.

 

[Met Driver]

We were told by the train manager that we'd be doing no more than 40 which seemed reasonable considering the window only appeared to be shattered (based on my humble observations after stepping off at Bletchley). I quite agree 50 would've been rather excessive though.

 

[bunnahabhain]

Bah, you cant judge track that easily on CWR! You need nice 60 foot jointed rails to get an average speed of within 4mph. :P

(Get a watch, count how many joints you go over in 10 seconds and multiply it by 4)

 

[yorkie]

ok, it was 40 - I was close, I knew it was no more than 50 (as we did not slow down for a 50mph TSR).

as for 10mph that is health & safety mad and would have caused absolute chaos.

some people have had a severe sense of humour failure, and ticketman if you are insulting members of this forum then that is a breach of the rules..

 

[16CSVT2700]

some people have had a severe sense of humour failure,

I don't call that a joke.

 

[Tom]

I personally find it appalling that you have decided to "use" RailChat to "complain" rather than making a formal complaint which most people would do.

 

[yorkie]

I don't call that a joke.

Fine, if you want to take that comment seriously, that's your choice. But you know it was not meant seriously, so please don't pretend that it was.

 

[Met Driver]

I don't call that a joke.

Nobody else seems to think it's a joke either, and I can assure you that any member who finds such an incident funny has no place on this forum. I think it's clear yorkie's comment was made wholly tongue-in-cheek, and I also think some people have simply used it as an excuse to have a go at him.

 

[16CSVT2700]

I personally find it appalling that you have decided to "use" RailChat to "complain" rather than making a formal complaint which most people would do.

I posted it on there to see the reaction from proper railstaff. Plus also complaining on here probably wouldn't have done anything mainly cos it takes a whole load of bitching to actually make a difference

 

[Met Driver]

I personally find it appalling that you have decided to "use" RailChat to "complain" rather than making a formal complaint which most people would do.

Agreed. If you have an issue with any member of this forum regarding their actions on this forum, you'd be far better off contacting one of the admins. We're always happy to chat/try and resolve things.
[EDIT]

Plus also complaining on here probably wouldn't have done anything mainly cos it takes a whole load of bitching to actually make a difference

See above.

 

[yorkie]

Stop trying to say the incident was deemed "funny" by me (or anyone else), I was very ****ed off about it.

But I decided that I was not going to be miserable about it for ever, what's the point in always being miserable and moaning? The trip didn't go to plan, it happens. The circumstances were unfortunate for us, but life goes on.

 

[AlexS]

Making a joke of a fairly trivial occurence isn't something to be ridiculed and made a pariah over - i'm sure drivers who have had good locos, for example, removed from service with trivial faults will say 'I wish it was that bloody xxxxx instead! (insert bad loco number here!)'. Same as if you have an amusing incident that could still be a threat to safety, eg a guard forgetting to put a tail lamp on a train, doesn't mean you can't make a laugh out of it and take the **** out of the guard!

 

[bunnahabhain]

Same as if you have an amusing incident that could still be a threat to safety, eg a guard forgetting to put a tail lamp on a train, doesn't mean you can't make a laugh out of it and take the **** out of the guard!

You'd have to be a right numpty to leave the tail lamp behind...

 

[steve158]

i don't post on here much now but..

stop taking things so seriously and get off yorkie's case. i personally would like to see the 170s go up in smoke but that's another matter...

if you're going to argue with all and sundry 50149 you may as well stay on here.
there's been enough of that over the road the last 2 days.

 

[Guinness]

You'd have to be a right numpty to leave the tail lamp behind...

Didn't you do that one day?

Or was that the hose?

 

[bunnahabhain]

Erm......well, let's see now

First of all I took the electric cable down for a ride to No.19 points

Then I took one of the boards that catering hang on the side of the train down to Quorn where it fell off and gave one of the dining passengers quite a shock when it flew past his window.

Then I left without the tail lamp, realised just after I'd gave right away, and got the train stopped at the section signal, plonked a Bardic Lamp on, and have been the butt of some friendly jokes for a while now for it.

So you're in safe hands with me!