Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'UK Railway Discussion' started by Greenboy, 16 Jan 2020.
Incident appears to be at 45s.
I travelled on the 1100 St D to Paignton cl150 + 143 today and found,an hour after High tide, the waves and sea spray crashing over the line and trains was by no means exceptionally rough in my many years of traveling on this 'fragile' South Devon line.
Windows being damaged / broken does very occasionally happen due sand and shingle being conveyed in the waves.
However I wonder if the activities of Network Rail's Contractors who have been excavating, disturbing, loosening and moving around lots of beach material is now a contributory factor.
Today's 1052 Paignton/Paddington failure is at least the fourth or fifth IET failure /major service disruption incident due the effects of waves and salt water ingress on these new IETs; despite assurances from Hitachi that these new multiple unit trains could cope with waves and sea water.
Surely it can't be long before NR Operating Chiefs extend the ban, that applies to
XC Voyagers, to IETs operating between Exeter and N. Abbot when strong and gale force Southerly and SE winds coincide with times of high tides.
It may be wrong/irrelevant, but I have always thought the huge walls of windows on Pacers look more vulnerable to damage like this than with conventional stock.
I wouldn't be surprised if that Pacer is a write off - I feel for the passengers on that train though. I'm sure it's the first time I've heard a train window or 2 be smashed.
Not sure if it applied also to the class 143s as operated by GWR, but I seem to recall that class 142s were only fitted with single glazed triplex toughened glass as built. Even BR mk1 coaching stock from the 1950s/60s was fitted with Armourplate panes whether double or single glazed.
Eh? How is it going to be written off? Windows get broken all the time!
If they put some rock armour in the sea next to it, the line that would be fine, the waves aren't overtopping the wall, it's white water and spray.
You'd be very wrong, quite an easy fix, take smashed windows off and put new ones on!
Why was level 2 working not imposed ie everything runs over the Up Reversable?
For all your Dawlish Avoiding Line/reopen the Okehampton route needs...
Please wade through this thread. It’s almost as deep as the seawater in that 143.
Just a gentle reminder that this thread is to discuss the incident in question.
To discuss anything else, please create a new thread (if there isn't one already) or use an existing one (if there is), in the appropriate forum section please.
And to discuss ideas for the existing route, this thread can be used: https://www.railforums.co.uk/thread...enclose-the-line-in-a-concrete-tunnel.198536/
I hope the injuries are not serious.
Did this only happen to a 150/Pacer combo today then? I'd heard an IET was also pulled from service due to smashed windows?
I believe the IET simply failed in the waves.
1A80, an up IET train was disabled. And a second IET had to rescue it so no hope of single line working on the landward (up) side.
IEP undamaged cosmetically.
Just a few cuts, no passengers required hospital treatment; although when the emergency call came in in the office we did initially fear the worst.
The 143 was 143603
Indeed, all that will happen is it goes into depot and is reglazed.
No idea on the actual process but that’s all that will happen, it won’t get written off just for one broken window.
It’s a bit more than just new glazing and it’s more than one window. It needs complete new windows, including frames, hoppers etc.
That’s why I said I’m not sure on the actual process because while I’m aware of the reglazing, there are other aspects to pick up on which you’ve kindly shared.
My point is that I don’t believe this is a reason to withdrawn the damaged units.
Written off ? - because of some broken windows ?
Ordinarily, I’d agree. But as an end of life unit, that doesn’t necessarily follow.
Depends on what the ROSCO thinks though, don’t it?
If they think the DMU is worth repairing then they will but if the costs of repair are too expensive then they might scrap it?
Just panel over them....
People don't need windows these days do they!
a bit of OSB, like they do in housing?
The hoppers can be replaced with plain glass if necessary - most glass manufacturers could provide - given the unit isn't expected to last the year in service it wouldn't be the end of the world.
I expect it will re-enter traffic after some minor repairs.
because it is due to be retired anyway in the next 6 months
seriously though I doubt the cost of repairs would be authorised unless they are desperate for stock.
That is one pacer that definitely won't be becoming a community centre
Isn't the 143 in question, 143603, destined for preservation?
I had missed that! In that case just tip it over the sea wall and crack on.