Failed FCC train at City Thameslink 11/11

[stanley T]

I arrived at 18.15 and a failed Brighton train had already been stuck there for half an hour. 30 minutes later still there, gave up and went to London Bridge instead. They got it moving very slowly but it stalled and rolled back into the station from the steep incline to Blackfriars.

At least I wasn't stuck for ages on the trains backed up behind it.

Cause: failed unit? brakes jammed?

 

[Bald Rick]

Loss of power to the traction system. I don't think it rolled back though, as there was another one in City TL right behind which was used to (eventually) push it out as a 16 car special. The original train then detrained at Blackfriars before being hauled north to Cricklewood.

 

[YorkshireBear]

When they finish the project and only one type of train is running i really hope that they find a better way of sorting out broken down trains, just come behind and push it along surely!

 

[tsr]

There were indeed power problems towards the rear of the 319 with the fault. I believe it was stranded for roughly 90mins because, as implied above, it had insufficient power to climb the gradient. Naturally, this caused utter chaos.

All this was not helped by a broken rail causing a track circuit fault on the Up Fast (near the entry to the Up Quarry) in the vicinity of Earlswood, plus several other signalling problems south of the TL Core. As a result of the Earlswood broken rail, the 1619 Brighton-London Victoria was (like many other services) diverted onto the Up Main Line at Redhill, but it failed shortly afterwards - between Redhill & Merstham - at around 1651, causing congestion for a while to all Northbound services via Redhill.

All in all, as a gateline assistant at a BML station put it to me, "it's been a very bad day"...

 

[Bald Rick]

When they finish the project and only one type of train is running i really hope that they find a better way of sorting out broken down trains, just come behind and push it along surely!

That's exactly what happened tonight.

 

[stanley T]

That's exactly what happened tonight.

Yes, but they took far too long to do this. I could see the following train behind just beyond the end of the platform (frustrating for the passengers on it...). If the downside of City Thameslink is the steep hill to Blackfriars (1 in 30?) the upside is the very long platform which can accomodate two 8 car trains.

Imagine the chaos when it is 24 trains per hour! Will the wires be extended to Blackfriars? Some 25kV oomph up that hill would be very welcome. 319s don't seem to be very reliable, especially on third rail.

 

[swt_passenger]

...the upside is the very long platform which can accomodate two 8 car trains.

I'm sure it was only comparatively recently (within 2 or 3 years) that it was extended slightly at the north end to allow for 12 car operations, there's no way it is a 16 car platform.

Will the wires be extended to Blackfriars?

Definitely not. The OHLE is in its finished state.

Southbound AC > DC changeover will take place at Farringdon normally, the extension of the OHLE to City T/L is there as a reversionary facility to allow a train that fails to take DC power at Farringdon to run to City T/L and reverse on AC.

 

[W230]

If the downside of City Thameslink is the steep hill to Blackfriars (1 in 30?) the upside is the very long platform which can accomodate two 8 car trains.

As already stated by swt_passenger, it can't. None of the stations on TL can have more than one 12 car* in any platform.

*or an 8 car + 4 car on permissive platforms.

Imagine the chaos when it is 24 trains per hour! Will the wires be extended to Blackfriars? Some 25kV oomph up that hill would be very welcome. 319s don't seem to be very reliable, especially on third rail.

I do wonder what will happen when it becomes 24tph. In all honesty, probably the same as now - chaos! One problem is that although the lines through the core are signalled for bi-directional working, there are so many trains so close to each other that as soon as you get a problem you get the inevitable carnage. There are only five crossovers on the entire core section though I don't think any more would alleviate this problem as there would be nowhere for the reversing trains to go.

I believe (I will stand corrected happily) that in the peak, trains are diagrammed to leave Farringdon, City Thameslink & Blackfriars at the same time meaning if one suddenly gets stroppy in a tunnel section, following trains get held up immediately.

As for 319's, I would think they actually are pretty reliable. Think we were quoted ~60k miles per major failure. I would suspect they are much more reliable than 377's anyway...

 

[Taunton]

I would have hoped that after the fiasco at Kentish Town a while ago and the resulting censure in the RAIB report, the Thameslink management would have absolutely got to grips with instant-response breakdown procedures in the core section in the peak, rather than continuing to run round like headless chickens.

 

[Class377/5]

Doesn't help when failed train is over a set of points making it impossible to run bi-di.

 

[edwin_m]

Southbound AC > DC changeover will take place at Farringdon normally, the extension of the OHLE to City T/L is there as a reversionary facility to allow a train that fails to take DC power at Farringdon to run to City T/L and reverse on AC.

But I believe northbound changeover will take place at City T/L so that the train can go into Smithfield sidings if it doesn't work on AC.

 

[swt_passenger]

But I believe northbound changeover will take place at City T/L so that the train can go into Smithfield sidings if it doesn't work on AC.

That's AIUI too. I didn't want to overcomplicate the explanation of why it didn't need to go further south. But of course Smithfield will only be available for 8 car trains, 12 cars that fail to changeover at City T/L will either have to run on to Farringdon on DC and reverse there, or reverse from the platform at City T/L. There's obviously a few permutations...

 

[Lee_Again]

And just wait until the GN joins the party. One blocked train in the core will effectively block 50% capacity at King's Cross.
Imagine York..."the x o'clock to Edinburgh is delayed by 50 mins due to a broken down train in the City Thameslink area".

 

[Tomnick]

And just wait until the GN joins the party. One blocked train in the core will effectively block 50% capacity at King's Cross.
Imagine York..."the x o'clock to Edinburgh is delayed by 50 mins due to a broken down train in the City Thameslink area".

I must admit, I'm struggling to imagine that specific situation! How could a long distance train out of KX be delayed so heavily by a failed suburban train on another route? Yes, I'd imagine it'd cause a few problems...but the effects wouldn't be that widespread and severe!

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes, but they took far too long to do this. I could see the following train behind just beyond the end of the platform (frustrating for the passengers on it...). If the downside of City Thameslink is the steep hill to Blackfriars (1 in 30?) the upside is the very long platform which can accomodate two 8 car trains.

Imagine the chaos when it is 24 trains per hour! Will the wires be extended to Blackfriars? Some 25kV oomph up that hill would be very welcome. 319s don't seem to be very reliable, especially on third rail.

Response guys got there pretty quickly, and tried to fix it without success. So the one behind had to be detrained (which takes time) then moved up to push the failure out. After coupling, the nature of the traction fault on the failed units meant that power couldn't be taken on the assisting units, so the traction motors then had to be isolated on the failure. Then it moved, presumably slowly. All this took about 90 min.

The stretch between City and Blackfriars remains as DC. Incidentally it has just about the highest current rating, and redundancy, of any part of the DC network, to cope with 30 x 12 car trains each way an hour, with some in reserve.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

But I believe northbound changeover will take place at City T/L so that the train can go into Smithfield sidings if it doesn't work on AC.

Revised changeovers start next month.

 

[swt_passenger]

I must admit, I'm struggling to imagine that specific situation! How could a long distance train out of KX be delayed so heavily by a failed suburban train on another route? Yes, I'd imagine it'd cause a few problems...but the effects wouldn't be that widespread and severe!

Me too - am equally puzzled.

Even if Thameslink services were blocked back at every signal back through the core, and through the canal tunnels and on the GN side up slow line, they shouldn't be affecting the down slow or the fasts surely?

 

[paul1609]

I must admit, I'm struggling to imagine that specific situation! How could a long distance train out of KX be delayed so heavily by a failed suburban train on another route? Yes, I'd imagine it'd cause a few problems...but the effects wouldn't be that widespread and severe!

I'd imagine that the main problem will be that Thameslink trains will have to have priority through the Welwyn double track section or they will miss their slot through the core. An East COAST service 10 minutes late is probably going to have the options of diversion via Hertford or terminating at Stevenage.

 

[swt_passenger]

I'd imagine that the main problem will be that Thameslink trains will have to have priority through the Welwyn double track section or they will miss their slot through the core. An East COAST service 10 minutes late is probably going to have the options of diversion via Hertford or terminating at Stevenage.

The prospective problem was being explained as trains heading out of Kings Cross though.

 

[Bald Rick]

I'd imagine that the main problem will be that Thameslink trains will have to have priority through the Welwyn double track section or they will miss their slot through the core. An East COAST service 10 minutes late is probably going to have the options of diversion via Hertford or terminating at Stevenage.

Eh? It will carry on to KX, but late.

 

[edwin_m]

Presumably if GN trains can't go down the Thameslink route they will just be dumped into any spare platform at Kings Cross, which could quite rapidly snarl up that terminus for other services.

 

[Bald Rick]

The plan has those that are rolling turning back at KX or in the canal tunnels. Those that aren't rolling don't start.

 

[Lee_Again]

King's Cross needs full unrestricted access to function at it's best. If the slows are blocked and everything funnels on to the fasts it will cause delays.

It doesn't take long for trains to get out of position and worse, crews. An hours delay by York is quite realistic.

I reguarly use East Coast from KX to Stevenage and a simple delay at the viaduct can add 10 to the journey and that is with an on time departure.

My solution, in simple terms, is to 6 track from the new junction up to Finsbury Park with the TL lines grade seperated all the way to Alexandra Palace. Then run them fast around the loop. This effectively grade seperates the entire service from the ECML all the way to Stevenage.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

I'm sure it was only comparatively recently (within 2 or 3 years) that it was extended slightly at the north end to allow for 12 car operations, there's no way it is a 16 car platform....

It's been a while since I was last there, but 12 should easily have fitted into City. The actual platform structure is very long, but the official platform length definitely isn't enough for 16.

....Southbound AC > DC changeover will take place at Farringdon normally, the extension of the OHLE to City T/L is there as a reversionary facility to allow a train that fails to take DC power at Farringdon to run to City T/L and reverse on AC.

From my knowledge of City (which is a little dated), you could only do that with an 8-car, but if you kept Snow Hill Tunnel clear there is a another possible move, I wonder if they have signalled it?

But I believe northbound changeover will take place at City T/L so that the train can go into Smithfield sidings if it doesn't work on AC.

Only 8 car trains can fit in Smithfield Sidings IIRC, but City would be better for returning south if needed. It was possible, when I was last down there, to go south from Farringdon onto the southbound line previously if needed (there was a scheduled move), but it wouldn't be as quick.

 

[Class377/5]

The platform at City is 12 cars long. You might be able to get 13 in at best.

The crossover in City is gone, replaced with one north of the station allowing 8 or 12 cars to reverse on the AC back to Farringdon from the southbound platform at City.

One Road in Smithfield is cleared for a 10 car 376 (it's in the sectional appendix) but Smithfield can only be accessed now from the northbound platform at City. Any services coming out southbound run wrong Road through City and use the crossover at the south end of the station.

As for the Kings Cross blockage, you can reverse in the Canal Tunnels as it was built with ability to turn 12 cars around without messing up either Kings Cross or St Pancras.

If the problem is that bad Welwyn is being affected you'd already be turning trains around so there isn't the problem that people think.

 

[jopsuk]

With a massive budget and permission to bulldoze...

St Pancras TL should have been built 4 platform, with both down platforms having access to the GN & MML and both Up accessed from the GN & MML.

The ECML/GN should be 6-track to Welwyn, with a pair of tracks for a metro-intensity service to Welwyn from Moorgate, a pair for Thameslink services (replacing all current beyond Welwyn stopping and semi-fast services), which should run fast Finsbury park-Welwyn, and a pair for ECML and GN fasts. 4 tracks to Hertford too, again Metro to Moorgate with the other tracks for TL...

North of Welwyn, a second, cosmetic copy, viaduct.

 

[YorkshireBear]

Wewlyn viaduct should have been chucked into Thameslink :P

 

[jon0844]

I agree that St Pancras Thameslink should have had four platforms. I really do fear for the chaos once the station starts to see trains that go in totally different directions coming through, so people waiting for a later train will be standing in the way of those wanting an earlier train.

Even if people decide to wait upstairs and only go down a few minutes before their train, as soon as there's disruption then it's all going to get very messy in the peaks.

I know there are some variations southbound already, but this is nothing to what it could end up being like once the timetables are decided.

 

[ushawk]

I agree that St Pancras Thameslink should have had four platforms. I really do fear for the chaos once the station starts to see trains that go in totally different directions coming through, so people waiting for a later train will be standing in the way of those wanting an earlier train.

Even if people decide to wait upstairs and only go down a few minutes before their train, as soon as there's disruption then it's all going to get very messy in the peaks.

I know there are some variations southbound already, but this is nothing to what it could end up being like once the timetables are decided.

Would it be much different to how it is like at Clapham Jct or in fact most major "through" stations with lots of trains using the same platform but going to different destinations ?

As long as people follow the info, then it shouldnt go wrong, besides - if something goes tits up, then the GN services would be terminated at Finsbury Park or diverted to Kings Cross, maybe terminated somewhere else.

 

[Class377/5]

Not to mention many destinations will be accessible by changing trains. Heading south most will find alternative train by changing at Croydon.

Many of the additional people using Thameslink, especially the initial few years, will be diverting from other means so will automatically fall back on the alternative route hen things go wrong. For the newer complex journeys south to Sussex your going to have many more trains and a lot of them 12 cars designed to carry lots of people.

Long term say after 2035 the numbers in disruption may be getting on for station capacity but also point that that the ATO will handle far more than 24tph in disruption alongside with trains purpose built to allow heavy loadings. The class 700's aren't designed for 2018 traffic anyway but future. On a side note Blackfriars station was design to accommodate passengers until the 2070's on loadings during design phase. May reach that soon but all major stations do, look at Euston and London Bridge for examples of this.

 

[Tetchytyke]

I know there are some variations southbound already, but this is nothing to what it could end up being like once the timetables are decided.

The peaks are already pretty varied, with trains to Brighton, trains both ways round the Sutton loop and the SouthEastern services to Sevenoaks and Rochester.

It's like this already at many of the through stations in London, e.g. Waterloo East, so I don't see that it would be too much of an issue.