XC HST Split - Lawrence Hill (Bristol) - 31/10/16

[Crossover]

If I was driving my train and found out half of it was no longer attached then I wouldn't be best pleased.

So presumably you'd be even less happy to find 8/9ths of the train was missing then :P
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Looks like the move of the errant powercar went OK this evening
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O40723/2016/11/01/advanced

 

[DaveNewcastle]

I would tell it to buck-EYE up it's ideas....

Surely some serious discussion about team work would be appropriate.
You know the sort of themes :-
- a train is more than the sum of its parts;
- we can only do this if we all pull together;
- together we travel, divided we, er, . . . . get shunted around Bristol a few times.

 

[michael74]

Looks like the move of the errant powercar went OK this evening
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O40723/2016/11/01/advanced

Would like to have seen it do 168 mph

 

[roversfan2001]

Looks like the move of the errant powercar went OK this evening
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/O40723/2016/11/01/advanced

Would like to have seen it do 168 mph

Maybe that's how it divided, it was doing 168 while the rest of the train did 125.

 

[pdeaves]

Will the coupling be missing as a result of being ripped off or from having possibly been removed for closer examination?

Ripped off. I believe it was picked up from the 'four foot'.

 

[AndyPJG]

Just made it onto BBC News Bristol this evening.

CrossCountry train 'splits in two' near Bristol Temple Meads
4 hours ago
A train carrying more than 200 passengers "split in two" shortly after departing from a station, it has emerged.
The CrossCountry service was leaving Bristol Temple Meads when the front car separated from the rest of the carriages, the operator said.
It reportedly came to rest 14ft (4m) away.
A CrossCountry spokesman said 209 people were taken off the train, which was moved back into the station.
He said Monday's 13:30 service to Glasgow was travelling at "low speed" and the "onboard safety systems stopped the train immediately".
"At this stage there is nothing to suggest a similar problem is likely to occur on any other train of this type," he said.
An investigation has been launched.

 

[Michael.Y]

And as is traditional for media reports about the railways, uses a picture of the wrong type of train.

 

[ainsworth74]

Meh they got a relevant station and the right company that's close enough for me!

 

[Michael.Y]

Meh they got a relevant station and the right company that's close enough for me!

And the right platform. But the wrong destination.

 

[philthetube]

BBC radio 2 news in the early hours of today announced that two trains had divided

 

[D365]

Unpowered coaches don't just shunt themselves

As each coach gets joined on, they'd do a pull away test, they'd be using probably an 08 or 09 shunter

Aside from the fact that not every depot has a shunter, and it would be very time consuming to uncouple and couple it from each coach; what would be providing the resistive force to enable this "pull-away test"?

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Aside from the fact that not every depot has a shunter, and it would be very time consuming to uncouple and couple it from each coach; what would be providing the resistive force to enable this "pull-away test"?

You do realise that HSTs have a power car at each end?

 

[D365]

You do realise that HSTs have a power car at each end?

Not if you're changing up a formation as you describe. I'm fairly sure that this "pull-away test" is required only for multiple units with autocouplers. It isn't necessary or practical for buck-eye couplings.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Not if you're changing up a formation as you describe. I'm fairly sure that this "pull-away test" is required only for multiple units with autocouplers. It isn't necessary or practical for buck-eye couplings.

Pull-away test is always needed:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jVk0AZ2kKL8

 

[Class172]

how long are the diversions for XC via kiddy as I live next to cradley station and was rather shocked and surprised to see XC trains going through

See here - http://www.londonmidland.com/your-journey/improvement-works/

 

[43096]

Not if you're changing up a formation as you describe. I'm fairly sure that this "pull-away test" is required only for multiple units with autocouplers. It isn't necessary or practical for buck-eye couplings.

How do you work that out? What's the difference in knowing if buckeyes have coupled correctly or if a Tightlock has coupled correctly?

 

[PHILIPE]

See here - http://www.londonmidland.com/your-journey/improvement-works/

I've already replied in Post #26. Still better than no reply at all

 

[jamieP]

Not if you're changing up a formation as you describe. I'm fairly sure that this "pull-away test" is required only for multiple units with autocouplers. It isn't necessary or practical for buck-eye couplings.

If your changing formations you would have some sort of loco attached to the coach. Pull away test is most certainly needed with buck-eyes as they dont always go together first time.

Watch from 3.42 you will see
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A-5siMxaf3o

Am interested tho why you think it isn't practical?

 

[BestWestern]

Presumably, regarding this pull test malarkey, you would physically attach the locomotive with the coaches still with brakes applied (either through zero air pressure or, in the case of half an HST, with the cocks closed and the brakes applied in the normal manner from the remaining power car), pull the loco away and confirm that the coupling holds fast? After which you'd connect pipes and carry out the brake test before commencing movements?

As an aside, what's the score with a loco hauling this HST consist; isolate the E70 in the remaining power car and operate the train brakes from the shunter? I assume an 08 is kitted out for that?

 

[D365]

Am interested tho why you think it isn't practical?

I thought that SpacePhoenix was suggesting it should be done every time a coupling is made, which surely requires the locomotive to be shunted around a bit..

 

[rebmcr]

I thought that SpacePhoenix was suggesting it should be done every time a coupling is made, which surely requires the locomotive to be shunted around a bit..

Semi-fixed rakes make that infrequent enough that it's OK.

 

[jamieP]

I thought that SpacePhoenix was suggesting it should be done every time a coupling is made, which surely requires the locomotive to be shunted around a bit..

Everytime a coach or loco is attached using a buck-eye a pull away test should be carried out. Makes no differnce if the coach concerned is 3 or 4 coaches down a set being attached to another set of coaches or coach.

 

[Class172]

I've already replied in Post #26. Still better than no reply at all

It would appear that when browsing the forum last night, my browser refused to acknowledge the existence of any later posts, so I was oblivious to the fact you had already answered!

 

[tsr]

Everytime a coach or loco is attached using a buck-eye a pull away test should be carried out. Makes no differnce if the coach concerned is 3 or 4 coaches down a set being attached to another set of coaches or coach.

Correct. I don't have much to do with buck-eyes at all where I work, but I've just double-checked the assistance & coupling manuals and they agree.

 

[D1009]

Ripped off. I believe it was picked up from the 'four foot'.

I've heard of HSTs becoming divided before, but I've never heard of a buckeye coupling dropping off completely. Presumably there was something wrong with the way the power car's coupling was attached to the vehicle?

 

[tim_lathe]

This is a very serious failure and requires some sort of investigation. A tightlock should be able to hold 800 tons.

From my massive library of technical documents, I could not find any UK specs on them, but I have found a US spec, the link follows. Very interesting as to the level of inspection applied to such devices, and also of a lot of interest to those of a general technical disposition who wish to know whats actually inside one.

www.apta.com/resources/standards/Documents/APTA-PR-M-RP-002-98.pdf

 

[43096]

This is a very serious failure and requires some sort of investigation. A tightlock should be able to hold 800 tons.

As already stated, the cause of the failure is known, a National Incident notification was issued and fleet-wide check instituted to find any other affected vehicles.

Move along please, nothing to see here...

 

[QueensCurve]

As already stated, the cause of the failure is known, a National Incident notification was issued and fleet-wide check instituted to find any other affected vehicles.

Move along please, nothing to see here...

Any photon of sunshine for the mushrooms?

 

[bnm]

Any photon of sunshine for the mushrooms?

Eh? What on earth does that mean?

 

[Elecman]

Eh? What on earth does that mean?

He is asking 43096 to elucidate to the forum what the known cause of the coupling failure was since it is apparently known to him.