Steam Train Causes Fires on the ECML (7/5)

[High Dyke]

Who pays for the lineside clear up operation for these irregular services? Is it money well spent?

Invariably Network Rail.

 

[HSTEd]

take it you are not a fan of steamers then?

I would love to know the reasoning behind your comment, as others have said, it isn't the railtour operator's fault the lineside fire happens, again, it is the lack of time, care and money put into taking care of lineside infrastructure and vegetation. If you look at old photos of some famous locations you will see a lack of trees and hedges, if you compare those old photos to now, there are trees everywhere. This only comes about due to a lack of either Money and time or just care for such matters.

also if you don't mind me asking, are you a regular commuter by train? only asking because this will help me to understand your perspective better.

In which case, we should just scrap all main line steam operations.
Either they pay the costs required to allow them to run without setting fire to everything or they should not be permitted to run.

We can't afford to go cutting back all this vegetation for a handful of steam operations, additionally there are the wildlife implications to consider (railway ground is now effectively one of the most extensive nature reserves we have).

 

[MCW]

In which case, we should just scrap all main line steam operations.
Either they pay the costs required to allow them to run without setting fire to everything or they should not be permitted to run.

We can't afford to go cutting back all this vegetation for a handful of steam operations, additionally there are the wildlife implications to consider (railway ground is now effectively one of the most extensive nature reserves we have).

I do agree that they should perhaps contribute towards upkeep costs and do more in that respect but your comment about 'scrap all main line Steam operations' is a tad harsh.

Keep in mind that part of the british tourism trade from other countries can rely on these main line excursions, eg. the orient express and stuff of that Ilk, seriously, you believe that we should ban all main line steam stuff just for the sake of not cutting or trimming vegetation and looking after it?

The implications spread beyond wildlife and operating costs, even though I highly rate wildlife as an important thing by a long mile.

 

[michael769]

Invariably Network Rail.

Don't the operators have to pay track access charges. Are they not enough to cover the costs?

 

[Arglwydd Golau]

In which case, we should just scrap all main line steam operations.
Either they pay the costs required to allow them to run without setting fire to everything or they should not be permitted to run.

We can't afford to go cutting back all this vegetation for a handful of steam operations, additionally there are the wildlife implications to consider (railway ground is now effectively one of the most extensive nature reserves we have).

If the lineside vegetation was cut back, would
it not mean that 'leaves on the line' etc did not occur and then money would not have to be spent on the RHTT trains in the autumn?

 

[High Dyke]

Don't the operators have to pay track access charges. Are they not enough to cover the costs?

Not always...though i may be proved wrong. NR have to pay for external fires (i.e. not caused by the railway); though i see in this instance West Coast Railways are disputing the blame - citing the amount of recent lineside fires that have taken place when no steam loco was operating.

If a fire on infrastructure is serious enough to affect the public side of the fence then the relevant TOC / Operator does get the blame. I recall the incident in 2011 when a number of fires occured due to a steam loco fault whilst it travelling south on the ECML. After damaging a conservatory / outbuilding near Doncaster it was put into Retford for examination; however it was allowed to continue, whereupon it started further fires. The loco was put in at Newark and recovered by road.

http://www.rail.co.uk/rail-news/2011/network-rail-unilaterally-bans-weekday-steam/

 

[yorksrob]

Perhaps they should restrict main line steam to any year forecast by the Met office to have a "barbecue summer".

 

[Bald Rick]

Don't the operators have to pay track access charges. Are they not enough to cover the costs?

No they are not. NR is funded to keep a certain strip width of the line side clear of vegetation, and that width is nowhere near fence to fence.

To put it into figures, fence to fence clearance of a typical line will be in the order of £10-20k per mile. And I guess that the track access charge for a typical mainline steam trip is one tenth of that.

Now fence to fence clearance does help with autumn 'issues' but doesn't remove the need for treatment trains. There are plenty of trees outside the fence, and leaves have a habit of blowing about in the wind.

 

[PhilipF]

Interesting this thread!

Reason being, we have just returned from a rail trip to Germany. Main reason to visit the famous model outfit at Hamburg, and another; the Harz tourist line. While riding this, I did remark to my wife about the risk of fires. Much of the line runs through pine forest. To my mind prone to catch light pretty easy.

Yet despite all motive power provided by steam engines - or "kettles" as you people prefer to term them I'd gather they had few problems with fires, else they'd not be running these trains.

BTW, when I was a kid, we lived close to the GWR outside Chippenham. Everything was steam in those days, and I do recall fires - remember seeing charred line fence posts.

Philip.

 

[Bevan Price]

Frequent small fires!
At least around Factory Lane/Skew Bridge embankment and cutting South of Preston.

Jeff

Plus controlled lineside vegetation burning by track gangs where necessary. Was no need for leaf clearance and RHTT in the steam era,

 

[HSTEd]

Steam locomotives are far heavier than most of today's diesels.

Probably means they destroy leaf residue by simply running over it.
And with the relatively low tractive efforts per unit weight of the steam era... would anyone have noticed the reduction in traction?

 

[michael769]

would anyone have noticed the reduction in traction?

They would, when it stopped moving. Kettles are terrible in low adhesion.

The problem with steam is that the force is applied very unevenly making wheel slip much more likely than with diesel of electric traction.

 

[sheff1]

But back then residents along the line didn't kick up a fuss to the local council/MP/newspapers every time tree-felling took place!:roll:

But 'tree felling' rarely took place. The vegetation was cut back before anything much larger than a small bush appeared.

Interesting that Network Rail cut down all the trees around the Dore curve area a couple of years ago (because of leaf fall problems), despite delays caused by protests from the well heeled locals. But rather than keeping the vegetation trimmed back, which the residents would be unlikely to really notice, NR have just let it proliferate again ... cue more protests when the next 'big clear' is scheduled.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

They are storing up problems for the future - cutting down trees once they have become large needs skilled personnel, and expense, as well as damage to structures embankments! Having a train equipped with flails etc, and a a few guys with strimmers / brush cutters has in my opinion be cheaper in the long run.

 

[CockneySparrow]

it is hardly ridiculous that the network is not cleared of vegetation to the same levels. For day to day diesel and electric operation it simply isn't needed. To suggest that Network Rail spends large amounts of money on the resources to clear the banks just so a small number of kettles can run is ridiculous.

Broad as it is long, if they cleared vegetation better it would be longer before they needed to come round again

Its like trimming a bush if you only cut it back slightly it will be back to how it was within weeks, if you cut it right back it will take months to grow back

Does NR still run the weed killer trains anywhere now

 

[sheff1]

They are storing up problems for the future - cutting down trees once they have become large needs skilled personnel, and expense, as well as damage to structures embankments! Having a train equipped with flails etc, and a a few guys with strimmers / brush cutters has in my opinion be cheaper in the long run.

Indeed, but 'cheaper in the long run' is a somewhat alien concept on the modern railway.

 

[DarloRich]

Does NR still run the weed killer trains anywhere now

yes all over the country via the MPV's - they should be out an about now

 

[Bald Rick]

Indeed, but 'cheaper in the long run' is a somewhat alien concept on the modern railway.

Not quite right.

It was certainly an alien concept in the days of BR, under strict financial controls and a Government who thought railways were a historical legacy.

But now, whole life costing (to use it's proper name!) is pretty much a requirement of the submissions NR makes to the ORR in funding determinations.

Vegetation removal is, however, a tricky one. But in some places there are now trials going on with total fence to fence devegetation in year 1, followed by annual strimming thereafter to determine its cost effectiveness. Failry big trials in some locations (like 45 miles of route in one area).

 

[LE Greys]

They would, when it stopped moving. Kettles are terrible in low adhesion.

The problem with steam is that the force is applied very unevenly making wheel slip much more likely than with diesel of electric traction.

The aformentioned Bulleid Pacifics were particularly bad for this, resulting in (among other things) the Royal Wessex grinding to a halt on Bincombe Bank one autumn, and then beginning to slide backwards, which led to an emergency stop. However, almost all Pacifics had traction problems, 4-6-0s tended to be more sure-footed, the weight of the firebox being directly over the driving wheels helps a lot. Generally, steam-blast sanding gear was available, provided there was enough sand to use. I'm not so sure whether there were similar problems with braking, at least not with passenger stock, but with un-braked freight trains, it could be an absolute nightmare. Stop at the top of a bank to put the wagon hand-brakes on, then stop again at the bottom to take them off.

 

[BestWestern]

How the hell do NR manage to spend 10-20k per mile clearing vegetation? Do they use weedkiller made from gold dust?! This is why the system costs so much to run nowadays, the ludicrous and utterly crippling cost of doing even the most basic things.

Would it be completely stupid to suggest that somebody could develop a train similar in concept to the afore mentioned weedkillers, but which simply sprayed a fine mist of water at the bank and was operated where possible a short while before the steamer passed through? It would obviously require an operative to 'man' it in order to stop the spray when passing through platforms etc and in locations where it wasn't needed, and would incur some degree of significant cost, but in vulnerable areas during hot weather it just might be worth the precautionary expenditure!

 

[30909]

Not quite right.

It was certainly an alien concept in the days of BR, under strict financial controls and a Government who thought railways were a historical legacy.

But now, whole life costing (to use it's proper name!) is pretty much a requirement of the submissions NR makes to the ORR in funding determinations.

Vegetation removal is, however, a tricky one. But in some places there are now trials going on with total fence to fence devegetation in year 1, followed by annual strimming thereafter to determine its cost effectiveness. Failry big trials in some locations (like 45 miles of route in one area).

Line-side “vegetation” proliferation throughout the UK can only have been caused by lack of annual/regular maintenance.
As has been noted prior to 1968 “The end of Steam” there was a system and resource directed at this area of the infrastructure, and not just in the exclusively steam locations as demonstrated by photographs of “Southern Electric” areas where steam was, by 1967 in two divisions, occasional and on a few freight and engineering trains.
Those of you with an interest in the environment will of course noticed that most of the vegetation that is present is no longer grass and brushwood but semi mature deciduous trees 30 to 50 years old, mostly of species who’s seeds are wind born eg Ash and Sycamore with Oak, Chestnut, Birch, Hazel, Hornbeam etc mostly nearer the fence line where the seeds are distributed by wildlife. The wildlife have colonised these “green lanes” because of the trees not adapted to their presence.
It is also not a valid argument that trees stabilise embankments they demonstrably do not. As they mature their root structure disturbs the generally shallow soil, the leverage of the canopy and wind and water together with the activities of burrowing wildlife bring both embankment stability and tree fall issues to Network Rail.
The problem is, as some have said, that without major expenditure over several years to return the line-side to “like it was in my day” would be a massive challenge but to then maintain it with modern equipment on a 3 – 5 year cycle would be cost effective for all concerned.
I note too, that where “catch-up” clearance has taken place, much of the felled timber has been corded up and left stacked at the line-side with, I assume, the expectation it will rot down and, all the brushwood and prunings shredded and returned to the line-side I expect as a growth preventative mulch. Meanwhile as this material dries it too becomes a fire hazard whereas if it was all removed there is a significant biomass energy supply that could offset the costs of the initial operation.
End of Magnum Opus!

 

[Bald Rick]

How the hell do NR manage to spend 10-20k per mile clearing vegetation? Do they use weedkiller made from gold dust?! This is why the system costs so much to run nowadays, the ludicrous and utterly crippling cost of doing even the most basic things.
!

This isn't weeds. It is trees. Get a quote for a tree surgeon to take down a 20 foot tree in your garden. Including disposal. Then mention you have another 200 like it. And he has to do it on Sunday mornings or over night. Then tell him his staff have to be trained in trackside safety, and various other competences. And that there is only one place he can get access to the railway and he has to transport all 200 trees there when cut down. And he has to leaflet drop any neighbours weeks in advance.

If the bill is less than £10k you have the contract!

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Large trees can cause a fair amount of ground movement. This is partly due to the water they drink. In a dry spell they can cause the ground to sink, as the sub/ soil dries out.
Don't plant them close to your house!

 

[michael769]

Large trees can cause a fair amount of ground movement. This is partly due to the water they drink. In a dry spell they can cause the ground to sink, as the sub/ soil dries out.
Don't plant them close to your house!

Removing existing trees can have the opposite effect - causing the ground to swell (aka ground heave)!

Large scale tree removal often requires additional ground stabilization.

 

[HSTEd]

Structures will large numbers of trees on them are now at equilibrium with the trees in place.

Attempting to remove them will lead to all sorts of problems.

 

[Cliveblackpool]

Structures will large numbers of trees on them are now at equilibrium with the trees in place.

Attempting to remove them will lead to all sorts of problems.

Correct! Best not to let them grow in the first place.
Existing trees, depending on size or variety, most trees if they are chopped down will regrow from the stumps. Bit like coppicing, then give them a biannual trim. Sycamore, ash etc are not a problem! I believe beech for example is an exception.

 

[sheff1]

This isn't weeds. It is trees. Get a quote for a tree surgeon to take down a 20 foot tree in your garden. Including disposal. Then mention you have another 200 like it. And he has to do it on Sunday mornings or over night. Then tell him his staff have to be trained in trackside safety, and various other competences. And that there is only one place he can get access to the railway and he has to transport all 200 trees there when cut down. And he has to leaflet drop any neighbours weeks in advance.

If the bill is less than £10k you have the contract!

Which is why BR took the approach of preventing trees growing to any size in the first place.

 

[Bald Rick]

Which is why BR took the approach of preventing trees growing to any size in the first place.

Having been out this afternoon, in part doing veg surveys, there are an awful lot of trees that are well over 19 years old....

 

[DarloRich]

Having been out this afternoon, in part doing veg surveys, there are an awful lot of trees that are well over 19 years old....

sssssssssssssssssssssshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh dont tell the experts anything other than NR are to blame for everything

 

[sheff1]

Having been out this afternoon, in part doing veg surveys, there are an awful lot of trees that are well over 19 years old....

I am sure there are. You have already given the reason in an earlier post although the word 'later' was missing.