EC Train vs. Deer yesterday near Peterborough (1.11.14)

[MichaelJP59]

Was on the 15.30 1S23 from London KX to Edinburgh, shortly after Peterborough an emergency stop was executed. The timeline unfolded thus:

16.20 (approx) struck a deer on line, train halted
16.25 guard on PA - says they will have to inspect the train will take about 20 minutes
16.45 guard - bad news, brake pipes damaged, total train failure. Calling for assistance
16.55 guard - states engineer will come down from Doncaster on rescue locomotive to attempt to repair damage
18.08 rescue loco arrives, can't fix it, says they will have to get the loco to the other (London) side of the train to tow it to Peterborough
18.55 train is now at the other end, guard says he is leaving the train to assist
19.55 finally moving
20.35 at Peterborough, boarding train to Bradford (extra stop at Retford)
20.45 depart Peterborough
21.34 arrive Retford 280 mins late

Just wondered if anyone could say:
Why did it take nearly two hours to get moving after the rescue loco arrived? Is it that involved to couple it up? Why did the loco have to change ends, couldn't it just push the train to Peterborough rather than pull?
Thanks for any insights.

Although it took so long, full marks to East Coast once we got to Peterborough, 3 northbound trains were waiting and clear instructions were given which one to board for each destination.

BTW was very glad we had paid the £15 upgrades to FC! SC by all accounts was collectively getting quite cross.

 

[westcoaster]

If the main res pipe (brake pipe) was unusable at the north end it would not have been able to push an unbraked train. It needed to be on the south end pulling and providing air to the whole train.

 

[Johnuk123]

Was on the 15.30 1S23 from London KX to Edinburgh, shortly after Peterborough an emergency stop was executed. The timeline unfolded thus:

16.20 (approx) struck a deer on line, train halted
16.25 guard on PA - says they will have to inspect the train will take about 20 minutes
16.45 guard - bad news, brake pipes damaged, total train failure. Calling for assistance
16.55 guard - states engineer will come down from Doncaster on rescue locomotive to attempt to repair damage
18.08 rescue loco arrives, can't fix it, says they will have to get the loco to the other (London) side of the train to tow it to Peterborough
18.55 train is now at the other end, guard says he is leaving the train to assist
19.55 finally moving
20.35 at Peterborough, boarding train to Bradford (extra stop at Retford)
20.45 depart Peterborough
21.34 arrive Retford 280 mins late

Just wondered if anyone could say:
Why did it take nearly two hours to get moving after the rescue loco arrived? Is it that involved to couple it up? Why did the loco have to change ends, couldn't it just push the train to Peterborough rather than pull?
Thanks for any insights.

Although it took so long, full marks to East Coast once we got to Peterborough, 3 northbound trains were waiting and clear instructions were given which one to board for each destination.

BTW was very glad we had paid the £15 upgrades to FC! SC by all accounts was collectively getting quite cross.

You've missed out the most important bit ie: How is the deer ?

 

[MichaelJP59]

You've missed out the most important bit ie: How is the deer ?

Shame about modern safety locks, we could have got out and gathered up some venison steaks
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

If the main res pipe (brake pipe) was unusable at the north end it would not have been able to push an unbraked train. It needed to be on the south end pulling and providing air to the whole train.

So the brakes on the train are air brakes, all in one circuit supplied from a single source? Surely there's some redundancy in the system? (I'm an aero engineer btw but don't know much about train systems)

 

[silverfoxcc]

I have had reports its was delicious

 

[carriageline]

You can't propel a train in those circumstances (be physically driven from a cab which isn't leading) so the loco had to be driven in the direction it was going. Plus it needed to be braked, and if the brake hose was that knackered at the front it wouldn't be able to join to the locos fose for starters.

And it might take a while to run the loco round, pending available cross overs, if it was bi directional or if a wrong direction move was needed

 

[class 9]

If the main res pipe (brake pipe) was unusable at the north end it would not have been able to push an unbraked train. It needed to be on the south end pulling and providing air to the whole train.

The main res (coloured yellow) and the brake pipe(coloured red) are 2 different things.
If it was just the main res pipe damaged the train could go forward single piped, it must have been the brake pipe on the leading vehicle that was damaged.

 

[edwin_m]

So the brakes on the train are air brakes, all in one circuit supplied from a single source? Surely there's some redundancy in the system? (I'm an aero engineer btw but don't know much about train systems)

There is safety redundancy in the sense that if the pressure is lost in the train pipe the brakes will apply automatically. However, for this reason, it is essential that the train pipe is connected right through the train so that the brakes are applied if the train divides.

I think HSTs have duplicate train and reservoir pipes within the formation, but not sure about other types of stock.

The flexible pipe is also removeable and the fitter could have brought a spare, but this wouldn't help if the damage was to the fixed fitting it attaches to.

 

[rebmcr]

So the brakes on the train are air brakes, all in one circuit supplied from a single source? Surely there's some redundancy in the system? (I'm an aero engineer btw but don't know much about train systems)

It's specifically designed to not be redundant, and to require the brakes to actively be held open — guaranteeing automatic braking should there be any conceivable failure (other than a simultaneous failure of every brake pad on every bogie in the train).

 

[noddingdonkey]

Presumably the 91 was sufficiently broken that they couldn't run it round to pull the set back to Peterborough rather than waiting for the Thunderbird?

 

[racyrich]

Does all this mean then that the solution was to isolate the last (previously, the leading) vehicle's brakes, so the train effectively becomes part-fitted?
How do you keep the brakes off on that last vehicle? Is there a manual way to open the brakes?

 

[colchesterken]

Wouldnt happen on Thomas the tank. or Chuggington, lots of friends would come to help out

There should have been a thunderbird closer than Doncaster, in BR days there would have been lots of spare locos around Peterborough

 

[FQ]

Poor Deer!

I am guessing the rescue loco was the Donny thunderbird.

 

[MichaelJP59]

I see about the brakes now. It's a bit like the undercarriage on some aircraft, which require positive hydraulic pressure to keep them up, so they fail safe down.

What type of loco is the Thunderbird?

Also, I noticed we broke down on a section of the line which allowed other northbound trains to bypass us. I wonder if we had totally blocked the down line would we have been rescued more quickly?

 

[Taunton]

The various TOCs (including freight) have really lost the plot when it comes to rescuing broken down services. Time after time we are hearing of four to six hour (or more) durations to get things going.

Most notable are the number that happen outside 9 to 5 Monday to Friday, when anyone with any semblance of authority or experience is apparently gone. This one - weekend. Great Western huge delay at Pewsey last year - weekend. Kentish Town fiasco - evening.

Sorry to harp on in my usual way but in the early 1960s if there was serious trouble out on the line the Taunton shedmaster prided himself on getting a Hall off shed to assist within FIVE minutes, just a few minutes more if they needed the crane and tool vans.

Having the brake pipes disabled by striking an object is by no means unknown, there is surely a procedure for this. What happened to the locomotive that used to be stationed at Peterborough to handle such situations.

 

[FQ]

What type of loco is the Thunderbird?

Usually an EWS 67.

 

[Aictos]

What happened to the locomotive that used to be stationed at Peterborough to handle such situations.

The Class 67 Thunderbird that used to be seen at Peterborough was I believe the Kings Cross one as there are only 4 to cover the ECML based at Kings Cross, Doncaster, Newcastle and Edinburgh.

Poor Deer!

I am guessing the rescue loco was the Donny thunderbird.

It certainly was the Doncaster Thunderbird.

 

[MichaelJP59]

That's a real surprise to me, only 4 locos to cover the full length of the ECML, no wonder a train failure is now an event dreaded by both passengers and train crews, as a 4 hour delay ruins most people's day.

On a less serious note, perhaps the management could consider this simple engineering solution, considered compulsory on the plains of the Old West:

 

[455driver]

The main res (coloured yellow) and the brake pipe(coloured red) are 2 different things.
If it was just the main res pipe damaged the train could go forward single piped, it must have been the brake pipe on the leading vehicle that was damaged.

Really!
So what are you going to do to release the brakes because the main res governer won't let them release!
Please post your evidence that it is possible to isolate the main res and get the train moving because (as a driver trying to be polite) that sounds like absolute tosh to me!

 

[91104]

That's a real surprise to me, only 4 locos to cover the full length of the ECML, no wonder a train failure is now an event dreaded by both passengers and train crews, as a 4 hour delay ruins most people's day.

I don't think 4 Thunderbirds to cover the ECML is unreasonable. I sign the Kings Cross Thunderbird and can generally reach any breakdown within an hour on our patch which is generally considered to be Kings Cross-Stoke Tunnel especially as the 67s can run light engine at 100mph as opposed to the maximum of 75mph for other light engines.
its generally the coupling up and the brake continuity test that take time and waiting for control and the signallers to make a decision as to where the stricken train is being taken to.

 

[carriageline]

And plus, the multiple units can rescue each other easily enough. It's only really the loco hauled they worry about I take it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Aictos]

And plus, the multiple units can rescue each other easily enough. It's only really the loco hauled they worry about I take it?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Not really, I remember a isolation of the overheads being taken at Kings Cross a few years ago and the stranded FCC trains having to be dragged to Ferme Park by the Thunderbird not forgetting of course that infamous video on the Internet which has 4 Class 66s hauling something like a 16 coach FCC service.

Not forgetting about 2 or 3 years ago, a FCC operated 365 needed rescuing near Stilton Fen due to it being declared a failure, think the Thunderbird again had to come with a emergency coupling to rescue it, my point being is the Thunderbird can and does rescue any train that requires assistance in it's area of control, it's not just restricted to assisting East Coast services.

I think it depends on what's available at the time in the area

 

[Tomnick]

That's a real surprise to me, only 4 locos to cover the full length of the ECML, no wonder a train failure is now an event dreaded by both passengers and train crews, as a 4 hour delay ruins most people's day.

Four dedicated (?) locos is a luxury, compared to the most of the rest of the network where it's often a case of dumping a convenient train in a loop somewhere and commandeering the loco to provide assistance! The last one I dealt with (indirectly, in this case) would've required the driver of the failed train to be taxiied 60 miles or so to prep a stabled loco and drive it to provide assistance himself, if he hadn't got the loco going again at the last minute. That was a freight train, and the same situation is unlikely to arise with a passenger train, but it does highlight the difficulties in sourcing assistance at times.

Looking back at the 'timeline' of events, only an hour or so of the four hour total was taken up by the assisting loco actually travelling to the location of the failed train - yes, you could easily have halved that if one was available at Peterborough, but that wouldn't have made a huge difference to the overall delay. It's important to balance the costs of having a standby loco, fully manned, standing idle every 50 miles against the benefits of doing so - considering the relative infrequency with which they're actually required to provide assistance. Who's going to pay for them?

It's far easier to assist a unit with another (compatible) unit, if possible - obviously not the case if the traction current's off - and that's what usually happens, in my experience. Equally, I don't suppose that the 67s would be much use in extracting a heavy freight train that's expired somewhere inconvenient, so you're back to waiting for something suitable to be located.

Finally, I doubt that you'd have been rescued more quickly if you'd been stopping the job entirely. Indeed, that might have delayed things further, as trapped trains might have prevented the assisting loco reaching the rear of the failed train - it can take time to get them shifted, especially if there's more than one trapped and (in accordance with Sod's Law) at least one of them is a long freight train!

 

[alexl92]

Not really, I remember a isolation of the overheads being taken at Kings Cross a few years ago and the stranded FCC trains having to be dragged to Ferme Park by the Thunderbird not forgetting of course that infamous video on the Internet which has 4 Class 66s hauling something like a 16 coach FCC service.

I've not seen that vid? Where can it be found, please?

 

[Suraggu]

Actually DBS are required to provide 5 class 67's to EC for thunderbird duties, usually their is two at Doncaster but in reality the fifth can be either at KGX/BN, DON, NCL or EDB/EC.

 

[MichaelJP59]

Four dedicated (?) locos is a luxury, compared to the most of the rest of the network where it's often a case of dumping a convenient train in a loop somewhere and commandeering the loco to provide assistance! The last one I dealt with (indirectly, in this case) would've required the driver of the failed train to be taxiied 60 miles or so to prep a stabled loco and drive it to provide assistance himself, if he hadn't got the loco going again at the last minute. That was a freight train, and the same situation is unlikely to arise with a passenger train, but it does highlight the difficulties in sourcing assistance at times.

Looking back at the 'timeline' of events, only an hour or so of the four hour total was taken up by the assisting loco actually travelling to the location of the failed train - yes, you could easily have halved that if one was available at Peterborough, but that wouldn't have made a huge difference to the overall delay. It's important to balance the costs of having a standby loco, fully manned, standing idle every 50 miles against the benefits of doing so - considering the relative infrequency with which they're actually required to provide assistance. Who's going to pay for them?

It's far easier to assist a unit with another (compatible) unit, if possible - obviously not the case if the traction current's off - and that's what usually happens, in my experience. Equally, I don't suppose that the 67s would be much use in extracting a heavy freight train that's expired somewhere inconvenient, so you're back to waiting for something suitable to be located.

Finally, I doubt that you'd have been rescued more quickly if you'd been stopping the job entirely. Indeed, that might have delayed things further, as trapped trains might have prevented the assisting loco reaching the rear of the failed train - it can take time to get them shifted, especially if there's more than one trapped and (in accordance with Sod's Law) at least one of them is a long freight train!

That's true, at least the Thunderbird could get around to the other end even if it did take an hour to do so.

Anyone have any idea how often this happens? I guess striking an animal is quite common but for that to disable the train?

 

[jopsuk]

why is the south end thunderbird stationed at the end of the line, rather than Peterborough (or maybe Hitchin?) Is it down to staff depot facilities?

 

[91104]

why is the south end thunderbird stationed at the end of the line, rather than Peterborough (or maybe Hitchin?) Is it down to staff depot facilities?

Because Kings Cross is where the drivers are where the drivers sign on so to have it based at Hitchin or Peterborough would mean drivers booking on at Kings Cross then travelling passenger to man the Thunderbird then travelling back passenger at the end of the shift which would make the shifts unproductive as currently the Kings Cross Thunderbird is covered by 2 drivers throughout the day 05.50-15.00 and 14.38 to 23.45 so both shifts over 9 hours.
Like I said on an earlier post there was a plan to put a Thunderbird at Peterborough and open a train crew depot there but was quietly dropped when they realised it would cost money.

 

[Taunton]

Of course, in olden days there were not explicit standby locomotives sat thrumming away in the bay with dedicated crews (apart from maybe when the Royal Train was due), maybe for months without being required, there was just sufficient flexibility overall that things could be pulled together pretty much on the spur of the moment as required, recognising that each incident is different, using a spare crew or stepping everyone up by one, which you can't do if you have subcontracted the whole thing out to another operator with no other crews around. It's curious how the wonderful new efficient world turns out to be less efficient than before.

If we really do have formal shifts for the crew as stated, what happens with a failure reported up the line at 13.00? Does dispatch of the loco have to wait until the second shift comes on duty?

 

[Suraggu]

Of course, in olden days there were not explicit standby locomotives sat thrumming away in the bay with dedicated crews (apart from maybe when the Royal Train was due), maybe for months without being required, there was just sufficient flexibility overall that things could be pulled together pretty much on the spur of the moment as required, recognising that each incident is different, using a spare crew or stepping everyone up by one, which you can't do if you have subcontracted the whole thing out to another operator with no other crews around. It's curious how the wonderful new efficient world turns out to be less efficient than before.

If we really do have formal shifts for the crew as stated, what happens with a failure reported up the line at 13.00? Does dispatch of the loco have to wait until the second shift comes on duty?

In times of disruption the crews are brilliant and always help to work longer if needed.