Light Railway Orders and Speed restrictions

[Dolive22]

All this seems to assume that the locomotives will run as they did when made. Is that a safe assumption? They are decades old (except Tornado) and not as professionally maintained as they would have been in mainline service. No reflection on the people who maintain them, but they aren't professional technicians and fitters and chartered engineers with years of full time experience on that class and a fully equipped TMD at their disposal.

 

[Domeyhead]

I think we're probably going to go round in circles here. Have you any involvement in railway preservation at all?

You've not been given a list of engineering obsticles, as they can mostly be overcome. What's above is a list commercial difficulties, due to the sheer cost of implementing them.

You've not recognised that these costs will be in place every day. You can't just "up" the standard of your track, signaling, train protection systems, locos, etc. just for a gala weekend.

As for enthusiasts having higher disposable incomes, what makes you think that? What I do know is that "my" railway's retail team hardly bother with enthusiast lines, eg books, dvd's, etc, as they are slow turnover, low margin, and of no interest to most visitors.

The leading lines have been on the go for 40 years now. They've targeted the general public market for that time, and are still in business. That suggests that such a market is very durable. The enthusiast market is, however, notoriously fickle. There is also the danger of putting an expensive event on, and only attracting the lineside freeloader brigade.

i'll add one final technical point. Preserved lines will still for the most part too short to get a loco properly hot, and keep it that way. If you introduce hard, mainline style acceleration, you will absolutely kill boilers. Boiler overhauls are very, very expensive!

Well you've predetermined your outcome and now you've set out to justify it which is just the kind of right to left thinking that stifles initiative and discourages any form of innovation.
You have set out your argument as though I am I am trying to compel every preserved railway to run trains at higher speeds instead of making the case for a proper business analysis. Would a harder working weekend be right for a short line like the KWVR? Possibly not. Might it work on a longer line such as the GCR? definitely. Would it raise the possibility of a whole new experience on lines such as Medstead bank on the MHR? or Freshfield on the BLuebell? yes. You still can't get it into your head that catering for a new market does not mean jeopardising an existing market. I repeat, and I may tap your forehead with every sylllable to ensure it goes in - there.has.never.been.a.business.case.to investigate.this.properly.so.an enterprising.railway.should.do.one.
If a line was not a light railway prior to preservation then presumably its infrastructure permitted speeds up to (say) 45mph IN PLACES without too much difficulty. That's not excessive but it gives locomotives a chance to work harder then they would normally. It's something different.
You make the assumption that track and signalling are only maintained to a 25mph standard throughout. Do you have any evidence for this? I don't and I don't think you do either. So what are these higher infrastructure costs? If Blackmoor Vale was occasionally allowed to accelerate up to 40mph on Freshfield bank on enthusasts weekends I do not believe it would cost the P Way department any more money at all. because that is not where the extra costs lie. Do I suggest that a high speed needs to be maintained across an entire line, at all times through stations and across points? I don't believe I did.
What exactly does have to be upgraded, considering many locos well over 50 years old have no trouble at all running at far higher speeds on the mainline today? We don't know because it has not been investigated.
You say the enthusiast market is fickle - is that because the market might just be saturated with watching the same engines trundle at 25mph on every single service? Is your remedy to just do more of the same and hope they get less fickle because that's all they are going to get every time?
With your outlook no leisure site would ever change anything in case it somehow destroyed its existing market. THis wouldn't. Leisure is a business, and unless you keep offering something new or something different you will be left behind, as some preserved lines have learned to their cost.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I'm with E&W Lucas on this one.

There hasn't been a business case because it isn't worthwhile. As E&W Lucas said you cannot just up the standard of maintenance, track and signalling for one weekend a year. Hundreds of thousands of pounds would have to be spent on the signalling at least.

Inspection regimes on the track would have to be changed as well, and the standard of the track changes. If I may coin your phrase - I shall tap every sylablle into your head: it.will.cost.money.that.railways.do.not.have.at.the.moment.and.will.not.give.a.return.

In fact, it will cost more money. New boilers and such like do not come cheap.

 

[Tomnick]

The benefits of any changes to the 'paperwork' to allow higher speed passenger trains might only be seen on a handful of days each year, but surely any move to physically allow higher speed running (i.e. standard of track maintenance, signalling provision etc. - which seem to be the sticking points in the discussion) will have much wider benefits, most significantly the potential to attract commercial testing work - as the GCR has done - with the substantial revenue that comes with it. Once you've got that infrastructure in place, there's not quite so much cost involved in running the odd passenger service at higher speeds too.

 

[Vulcan]

What was wrong with mainline charters for going fast in old coaches? and If you want the pre-grouping thrill of going fast in a 4 wheeled coach, then go for a ride in a Pacer!

 

[Domeyhead]

What was wrong with mainline charters for going fast in old coaches? and If you want the pre-grouping thrill of going fast in a 4 wheeled coach, then go for a ride in a Pacer!

Charters are fine but they do not have the advantages of a dedicated weekend for several reasons - for instance If you are on it you can't see it, (apart from when it puffs away after you get off), whereas at a good heritage railway you can ride some and watch some - from several vantage points. too And Ralph I do not see why signalling has to be changed at all. THis has been raised two or three times now. For instance If CanPac got the all clear at Alton with 6 on and could get up to 40mph (rather than 25mph) before slowing for Four Marks - where do you have to change your signalling? Same for any other intermediate sections on any other lines. If you've got permission to go faster than 25mph you don't actually have to go faster on all sections all of the time. It's an option. And I am not at all convinced about this wear and tear issue on either track or train seeing as locos are better looked after now than they were in BR days and the occasional bit of second valve is not going to hurt them, nor the coaches. If track condition is an issue the answer is simple - don't do it. But there are some railways for whom the PWay challenge of 45mph would not be a problem at all.
It is also worth mentioning that negative comments here could have equally crushed other one week per year money spinners such as Thomas or Santa. Railways need to move forward, and offer new ideas. The prize will go to the first railway with the enterprise to conduct a feasibility study into this. "Our engines work harder" is a big attraction.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Overlaps perhaps?

 

[Vulcan]

The signalling has to change for higher speeds to allow for the increased braking distances. Ask anybody in the rail industry about it.

And if you want a railway which works its engines hard, go to the Ffestiniog or Welsh Highland. On the FR especially, when I had a cabride on Blanche it was going as fast as it would, pulling as much as was possible. It works harder now then it ever did at penrhyn quarries! Even on our 2' gauge railway, some of our diesels are working to their limit getting the train up the line, round the second bend. Also, go to the Rhomney Hyth and Dymchurch railway, the smaller scale makes them seem a lot faster, but they have all the grace and magnificence of a full size pacific!

 

[Tomnick]

Braking distances from the distant are an issue (but I believe our distants on the GCR are sited to provide adequate braking distance for 60mph, and I can't think that they'd be that far off on other lines), but I can't see that overlaps would be. On Absolute Block lines, the clearing point is (according to the Railway Group Standard at least, not sure yet how religiously that has to be applied - it's a long-standing principle however) 440yds from the home signal (200yds if the distant's a colour-light), extended if necessary but never shortened. There's no general requirement for overlaps within station limits if trains are brought under control at each signal in rear, as per the old Rule 39 (I think that's the number anyway - currently somewhere in Module TS1!).

 

[Spagnoletti]

And I am not at all convinced about this wear and tear issue on either track or train seeing as ...

The faster you run trains over a section of track the faster it wears out, surely?
eg: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hammer_blow
Drawing attention specifically to this sentence:
Speed also played a factor, since the forces tend to increase with the square of the wheel rotational speed.

On a slightly different tack, what's not been mentioned yet is that most heritage railways depend on the goodwill of many, many volunteer members of staff. The impact of a more intense regulatory environment needs to be considered. One of the attractive aspects of volunteering is that the amount of exams, competence tests etc that have to be negotiated is fairly minor. I would have thought that would necessarily change for p-way, s+t, signallers and footplate crew if you want to run faster trains.

 

[Tomnick]

I believe some of our footplate crews have gone through a small amount of additional assessment to work trains at greater than 35mph. I don't really see that additional assessment would be required for Signalmen though - surely the same (high) level of competency is required to operate trains safely at 25mph as at 125mph?

 

[E&W Lucas]

I believe some of our footplate crews have gone through a small amount of additional assessment to work trains at greater than 35mph. I don't really see that additional assessment would be required for Signalmen though - surely the same (high) level of competency is required to operate trains safely at 25mph as at 125mph?

Working on preserved railways does not equip you to work in a mainline environment. I went from the former to the latter, and I can assure you that the gulf is massive, even from one of the larger lines.

The condition of locos is mentioned above. In many cases it is vastly inferior today, to when they were on BR. Do not be fooled by a pretty paint job. Certain heritage lines have repeated problems with visiting locos, basically dropping to bits as soon as they go off first valve for the first time since the 1960's! They've been done well enough to chuff about at 25 on a flat railway, and that's about it.

In all honesty, this is probably not the best forum on which to have this discussion. There only seem to be a couple of people who actually work in preservation contributing. there are a number of sites dealing with preservation in general, or specific railways. Try floating your theories on them; I suspect that you will get the same reaction that you have from me.

 

[Tomnick]

It's not my theory, I'm just defending a couple of parts of it . I also never claimed that there was no difference between the happy world of preservation and a mainline environment - I'm just arguing that, in this highly-regulated world, Signalmen should already be thoroughly assessed to ensure that they're competent to do the job, and I don't really see how any further competency is required to apply the same Rules and Regs in the same signalboxes, but with slightly shorter section times!

 

[DJ_K666]

What was wrong with mainline charters for going fast in old coaches? and If you want the pre-grouping thrill of going fast in a 4 wheeled coach, then go for a ride in a Pacer!

Got to admit I have been on a Pacer that was doing 75 up the York - Scarborough line. it was quite...ahem...lively shall we say?

 

[E&W Lucas]

It's not my theory, I'm just defending a couple of parts of it . I also never claimed that there was no difference between the happy world of preservation and a mainline environment - I'm just arguing that, in this highly-regulated world, Signalmen should already be thoroughly assessed to ensure that they're competent to do the job, and I don't really see how any further competency is required to apply the same Rules and Regs in the same signalboxes, but with slightly shorter section times!

Preserved railway signalmen do not spend a couple of months solid in the classroom learning the rule book & signalling regs. They learn the bits needed for a single line light railway; they do not need, or get, the full picture.

I'm not saying that there aren't a lot of great blokes doing a really professional job on heritage railways,but there is a limit to what you can learn in that environment.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

There is, but remember that preserved railways run to the same standards and legislation as the mainline.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And no, E&W Lucas - they spend more than a couple of months learning them in their spare time!

 

[Tomnick]

And what is the difference - as far as the Signalman is concerned - between a single line light railway and the same single line railway running traffic under the same operating procedures but at a slightly higher speed? I maintain that if you're not competent to work a box with traffic at 40mph, you're not competent to work it at 25mph either.

 

[royaloak]

Tomnick, what is your involvement on the railway, do you have any stats to back up your statements, or are you just an armchair pundit?
perhaps if we had a little more knowledge about you it would give your statements a little more substance!

 

[Old Timer]

The speed of trains has no impact upon how a Signalman operates a signalbox, except of course where train regulation is necessary.

In my opinion, there is no need for any additional "competency" or training for increased speeds on preserved lines. The signalling regulations insofar as these situations are concerned have no bearing on linespeed, neither does linespeed have a bearing on how they are applied.

 

[Tomnick]

royaloak - I'm an armchair pundit as far as the 'big' railway is concerned, but I'm a Signalman on the GCR, and more recently the Signalling Instructor also. So the issue of competency of Signalmen is a little close to home .

 

[E&W Lucas]

royaloak - I'm an armchair pundit as far as the 'big' railway is concerned, but I'm a Signalman on the GCR, and more recently the Signalling Instructor also. So the issue of competency of Signalmen is a little close to home .

No one is saying that you're not competent to work on a heritage line.

What I'm getting at is that the mainline signaller, working in his first job in an old, lever frame box, is being developed for bigger things in the future, and his initial training reflects this. Preserved railways do not go into the full extent of the rule book, etc.

Think also as to how your level of proficiency would increase if you were able to perform the work day in, day out.

Finally, does the GCR work to the safety critical communication protocols that are now mandatory on NR?

 

[royaloak]

Tomnick, after reading back through your posts I may have taken them wrong, I got the impression you were having a go at signalmen which is obviously not the case bearing in mind your last post so please accept my apologies, now who was it !

oh please don't mention SC communication, its got bloody ridiculous.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

No one is saying that you're not competent to work on a heritage line.

What I'm getting at is that the mainline signaller, working in his first job in an old, lever frame box, is being developed for bigger things in the future, and his initial training reflects this. Preserved railways do not go into the full extent of the rule book, etc.

Think also as to how your level of proficiency would increase if you were able to perform the work day in, day out.

Finally, does the GCR work to the safety critical communication protocols that are now mandatory on NR?

Heritage railways do, but not to the extent of NR. We don't repeat everything back, yet we always come to a clear understanding.

 

[Old Timer]

Heritage railways do, but not to the extent of NR. We don't repeat everything back, yet we always come to a clear understanding.

Unfortunately the mental attitude these days is that a robotic repeating back of a message demonstrates and understanding, which is clearly a nonesense to all but those who have been blinkered by such thinking.

What they do not comprehend is that repeating back does not if itself demonstrate an understanding of the underlying message. Were that to be the case we would still not be having incidents where poor communication was an issue.

Having a more formal protocol is fine but simply extending the blanket repeating back of instructions has now lost much of its purpose when people are required to repeat back extraneous information.

Example :

1A04 sooc at RY183

Signalman : Rugby PSB (panel xx) Signaller (smith) speaking

Driver : Hello Rugby PSB (panel xx) Signaller (smith) this is the Driver of One Alpha zero four speaking to you from signal Romeo Yankee one eight three.

Signalman : Hello Driver of One Alpha zero four speaking from signal Romeo Yankee one eight three. I have a track circuit failure and I will require you to pass signal at Danger Romeo Yankee one eight three when I have given you the necessary instructions. Please repeat this message back to me.

Driver : You have a track circuit failure and you will require you to pass signal at Danger Romeo Yankee one eight three when you have given me the necessary instructions.

Signalman : Driver of One Alpha zero four speaking from signal Romeo Yankee one eight three, when I authorise you, you may pass signal Romeo Yankee one eight three at Danger, proceed at caution and obey all following signals. Please repeat this back to me.

Driver : When you authorise me, I may pass signal Romeo Yankee one eight three at Danger, proceed at caution and obey all following signals.

Signalman : Driver of One Alpha zero four speaking from signal Romeo Yankee one eight three, you may pass signal Romeo Yankee one eight three at danger,proceed at caution and obey all following signals.

Driver : I may pass signal Romeo Yankee one eight three at Danger, proceed at caution and obey all following signals.

Signalman : That is correct Driver


Now contrast this with what would have happened 20 years ago

Signalman : Rugby PSB

Driver : Hello signalman. Driver 1A04 at your RY183 signal.

Signalman : OK, I have a track circuit failkure ahead, pass RY183 signal at Danger, proceed at caution and obey all following signals.

Driver : Pass RY183 signal at Danger proceed at caution and obey all following signals, OK mate.

Signalman : Yes that is correct Driver

Driver : Righto, mate.

Now a couple of points.

1) If 1A04 is stopped out of course at RY 183 signal and the spt rings rings, there is a better thasn evens chance that it is the driver of 1A04. The same cannot be said of a telephone call received on the normal telephone

2) If the Driver is speaking from and identifies the signal which matches where 1A04 is then it has been established without doubt which train is involved, which signal is involved, and where the train is.

3) Because the spt goes directly to the PSB controlling the signal, there is an absolutely minute chance that it will go anywhere else, and in any case the track circuit/signal number and train reporting number will not match up. The same cannot be said of a telephone call to a signalbox on a mobile or other dial out phone. There is already a case of a Driver having contacted a signalbox which had the relevant signal id letters, except it was the wrong signalbox

4) The safety critical part of any telephone conversation as above is the part concerning the passing of the signal at danger, and no other. All other information is extraneous and nowadays in many cases completely irrelevant. Pass RY183 signal at Danger, proceed at caution and obey all following signals is the only part that is safety critical need be repeated.

The fact that someone will inevitably question the wording of the first scenario will demonstrate without question just how out of control the whole situation is.

 

[E&W Lucas]

oh please don't mention SC communication, its got bloody ridiculous.

Too right it has, and I agree with the subsequent posts. I've unintentionally opened a can of worms; it wasn't the best example for the point I was trying to make, ie doing the same job within a tighter framework.

What is a pleasure is working with an old time, retired BR, signalman in a heritage environment. Someone who grew up with lever frame boxes, etc.

 

[Tomnick]

royaloak - no worries, and certainly no need to apologise! I can see that my posts might have been a bit ambiguous without knowing my background, but I didn't want to stifle the discussion.

E&W Lucas - fair points, but we (and others, I'm sure) still cover all sections of the rule book in sufficient detail. Of course, our chaps are never going to be as experienced as someone who does the job day in, day out, but bring out the degraded working and the 'unusual' sections of the rulebook, and everything's going to be relatively crawling around anyway.

Again I don't know about others, but we don't seem to be going down the exact NR route as far as SC comms are concerned. It's professional, but - for the reasons already discussed! - not quite as silly (right word?) as things are on the 'big railway'.

Finally, we've got a few ex-BR (and current NR) Signalmen working on the GC. You're right - a pleasure to work with, and an invaluable source of knowledge and experience.

 

[Domeyhead]

Tomnick, what is your involvement on the railway, do you have any stats to back up your statements, or are you just an armchair pundit?
perhaps if we had a little more knowledge about you it would give your statements a little more substance!

I mentioned earlier in the thread that one of the problems of the railway in all its forms - (and yes I do mean problems) - is that it has been engineering led, and that is perfectly illustrated by disparaging remarks alluding to "armchair pundits". This clearly means if you aren't at the operational coalface in some form you are not qualified - or at least less qualified - to discuss business or market strategy than those in the front line. The surprising thing to some here is that actually the opposite is true, and it is true in every large and complex enterprise. Preserved railways are not an exception to that rule except that traditionally railway strategy has always been overly and unhealthily dominated by operational considerations. Every operational problem is being put up as a showstopper - a barrier to inhibit further exploration of new opportunities. Innovative ideas are seen as a threat, not as an opportunity. If I suggest a forward thinking enterprising railway should conduct a business case to determine the market and the opportunity there should be an enthusiastic desire to see the outcome. I find it hard to believe that someone (Ralph) can without any irony say something like "we should not perform a business case because it will not show any benefit". Ralph, mate you don't know. Nobody does, yet. Many arguments put up here are spurious, and some almost suggest a fear of any kind of change, as though any new idea could bring devastation to the heritage railway movement.
I am proposing harder running as way of revitalising what has in some cases become a tired and jaded formula. I'll give you just one parallel - Vintage cars. Beautiful things. You can see them at the National Motor museum at any time, lined, up, polished, and even see old racing cars started and driven round the gorunds. But then somebody came up with the Goodwood festival of Speed, to let the old girls go through their paces - and show people what they could do, and it is the most spectacularly successful new event for years - it has created a massive and lucrative new market and a new generation of enthusiasts, and it has boosted the whole sector, not competed with it.
Think on. Not many people go to preserved lines just to watch the signalling, and your only alternative if you want to tap into new revenue streams is to accept more novelty events like Thomas, Ivor, Santa and the rest. Why on earth are you so against exploring a better more natural alternative?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I find it hard to believe that someone (Ralph) can without any irony say something like "we should not perform a business case because it will not show any benefit". Ralph, mate you don't know. Nobody does, yet.

Right then, you give it a go and do some market research (you are the consultant) and see the amounts of money we can make.

 

[E&W Lucas]

I mentioned earlier in the thread that one of the problems of the railway in all its forms - (and yes I do mean problems) - is that it has been engineering led, and that is perfectly illustrated by disparaging remarks alluding to "armchair pundits". This clearly means if you aren't at the operational coalface in some form you are not qualified - or at least less qualified - to discuss business or market strategy than those in the front line.

Yet again, you show a lack of understanding of what actually goes on behind the scenes of a heritage railway.

The one I work for is not run by a bunch of overall clad enginemen & fitters, but by professional managers, the majority of whom do not have an operational railway background. These guys have serious experience, and the jobs they now hold are way beneath the level that they have worked at previously.

PLC board made up of highly qulaified & experienced professionals, with from memory, one railwayman on it. Charity board, a broader cross section as it's elected, but again, mostly people with a serious level of responsibility in the real world.

 

[Spagnoletti]

Why on earth are you so against exploring a better more natural alternative?

You make it sound like a hair product.
I'm not, honest! I think it would be absolutely fantastic to see preserved machines run past 25mph, I just think that the cost of maintaining vehicles & infrastructure to the required standard, and delivering this with a largely volunteer workforce, exceeds any increase in revenue.

I look forward to a costed rebuttal of the above with anticipation, in the meantime I'll be spending my Saturdays fighting the rust worms.