Surely there now needs to be a serious discussion on lineside vegetation control?

[507 001]

Moderator note:
Split from

Incident at Talerddig, Wales - 21/10/2024

Two trains have collided at Talerddig, Wales. Both trains are reported to be Class 158s running in 2 car sets. (Source, Realtime trains) At this time this is a developing situation and not all details are out in the open. The trains involved are believed to be: 1S71 Machynlleth to Shrewsbury...

www.railforums.co.uk

Absolutely awful news that somebody has succumbed to their injuries.

If, as is looking likely, this incident was caused by poor adhesion, surely there now needs to be a serious discussion on lineside vegetation control?

 

[Chris M]

If, as is looking likely, this incident was caused by poor adhesion, surely there now needs to be a serious discussion on lineside vegetation control?

Given the same was said after the Salisbury incident, I wouldn't bet your life savings on it happening.

 

[Diedinium]

Absolutely awful news that somebody has succumbed to their injuries.

If, as is looking likely, this incident was caused by poor adhesion, surely there now needs to be a serious discussion on lineside vegetation control?

There should be a serious discussion on the nature of single track lines and the "rationalisation" that took place to create so many lines like this.

Ultimately if the Cambrian was a standard dual track railway this incident would've been avoided. In fact, redoubling the Cambrian to avoid as much single track as possible should be the response to this in an ideal world.

 

[5021]

There should be a serious discussion on the nature of single track lines and the "rationalisation" that took place to create so many lines like this.

Ultimately if the Cambrian was a standard dual track railway this incident would've been avoided. In fact, redoubling the Cambrian to avoid as much single track as possible should be the response to this in an ideal world.

The Cambrian line historically has always been mainly single track with loops, including Talerddig and Llanbrynmair, although all bridges were built to allow for doubling which only ever happened on a few fairly short sections. Most of one of them, Welshpool to south of Forden, was redoubled as part of the ETCS project, but wholesale (re)doubling would be at astronomical cost. One of the worst ever accidents on a single line was the head on crash between two passenger trains between Abermule and Newtown on the Cambrian in January 1921. That happened at a much higher speed and was caused by lapses in use of the single line token system. ETCS will no doubt be scrutinised this time; it's something of a relief if it proves to be not at fault, which is what much of the SPECULATION would suggest, but we must wait and see please!

 

[DelW]

There should be a serious discussion on the nature of single track lines and the "rationalisation" that took place to create so many lines like this.

Ultimately if the Cambrian was a standard dual track railway this incident would've been avoided. In fact, redoubling the Cambrian to avoid as much single track as possible should be the response to this in an ideal world.

The cost of doubling the always single track Cambrian lines would be hugely disproportionate to the risk reduction it would achieve.

How far west would you double - to Machynlleth, to Aberystwyth, to Pwllheli? There are passing loops all the way up the coast, and doubling that line would be even more costly if indeed it is even possible on the cliff sections.

You could save far more lives by spending all those billions of pounds more rationally.

 

[30907]

Moderator note:
Split from

Incident at Talerddig, Wales - 21/10/2024

Two trains have collided at Talerddig, Wales. Both trains are reported to be Class 158s running in 2 car sets. (Source, Realtime trains) At this time this is a developing situation and not all details are out in the open. The trains involved are believed to be: 1S71 Machynlleth to Shrewsbury...

www.railforums.co.uk

Absolutely awful news that somebody has succumbed to their injuries.

If, as is looking likely, this incident was caused by poor adhesion, surely there now needs to be a serious discussion on lineside vegetation control?

A look on Streetview suggests that any vegetation problem would be between the loop and Llanbrynmair rather than through the loop or approaching from Caersws.

There may therefore be other causes for low adhesion involved in this case.

EDIT - after watching the BBC news, I should add that the crash location, well beyond the loop, is now well wooded.

 

[bramling]

There should be a serious discussion on the nature of single track lines and the "rationalisation" that took place to create so many lines like this.

Ultimately if the Cambrian was a standard dual track railway this incident would've been avoided. In fact, redoubling the Cambrian to avoid as much single track as possible should be the response to this in an ideal world.

We can’t really say that rationalisation has played a part here, pretty much all the Cambrian has always been single track.

 

[stu227]

Almost Exactly a year ago I spent hours on a damaged 158 on that very line between Machynlleth and Welshpool when a train hit a tree branch that had come off one of the trees lineside. Definitely could do with better management, but the scale and cost of the task would be immense across the network.

 

[Parallel]

I did witness a train run past the precision stop board at Exmouth recently, it was quite clear the train was slipping when the brakes were applied as it came into the platform. It was operated by a class 158 arriving from Barnstaple. The precision stop board was also partly obscured by foliage. It came quite close to the buffers.

 

[BazingaTribe]

Next time someone jokes about leaves on the line I can show them this situation. (It's like how my cousin ragged my husband so much about cricketers stopping for rain -- until hubby showed him a picture of someone who got badly injured from slipping on wet grass while his local team were debating with people whether to come off in the drizzle. Then my cousin got the message.)

I've seen adverts on the Basingstoke to Reading line about removing trees from right beside the line and replanting them back behind where they will be a nuisance to the rails. There was also a serious grass fire alongside the railway just below Circuit Lane in mid-2022, so they may also want or need to look at flammable foliage. (However, the land adjoining the line is mostly farmland and pasture so I'm not sure how much could actually be done.) The importance of keeping vegetation cut back does not mean stripping it away completely -- rather, it means practicing good husbandry to maintain the line and the surrounding landscape.

(PS -- I remember the Salisbury incident. I can't believe it's been three years -- I travelled on down to Plymouth the day after for a regular event from Basingstoke and yeah, sitting in a stationary train for a bit is no fun, but what's even less fun is being hospitalized or suffering life-changing injuries.)

 

[Meole]

Pictures of steam trains climbing Talerddig bank reveal an open landscape far removed from the tree lined corridor that exists today, much of the line east of Newtown is similar, unfortunately the answer could be to drastically reduce services during the leaf fall in the interests of safety, the cost of vegetation control being prohibitive.

 

[physics34]

The railway seriously has to get to grip with vegetation. Bypass the 'agenda' to save the trees etc, and use some intelligence like we used to. There are plenty of other vast areas of trees in the UK.

Leaf mulch is lethal.

 

[87electric]

The railway seriously has to get to grip with vegetation. Bypass the 'agenda' to save the trees etc, and use some intelligence like we used to. There are plenty of other vast areas of trees in the UK.

Leaf mulch is lethal.

I’m sure many people on here have encountered people laughing when leaves on the line is included in an announcement concerning railways. It’s a science that can injure. No one laughs at water or ice on the roads.

 

[Lewisham2221]

I’m sure many people on here have encountered people laughing when leaves on the line is included in an announcement concerning railways. It’s a science that can injure. No one laughs at water or ice on the roads.

It's the wording that's the issue - "leaves on the line" conjures up images of nice dry, crispy leaves. Leaf mulch, or slippery rail conditions or similar would be a better terminology to use, but we are starting to stray off topic.

 

[CastlebarKeith]

I remember many years ago, in the days of steam, lineside fires caused by sparks from engines dealt with much overgrown lineside vegetation.
Leaves on the line are partly an unintended consequence of the end of steam on the main lines.

 

[devon_belle]

The previous "serious discussion" after the Salisbury Tunnel crash did lead to a renewed interest in cutting back foliage, and I've certainly noticed a number of locations where things seem to be more under control than before. But I agree that it didn't go far enough, and I hope that an outcome of the investigation into yesterday's incident will be more funding for vegetation control and railhead treatment trains.

I remember many years ago, in the days of steam, lineside fires caused by sparks from engines dealt with much overgrown lineside vegetation.
Leaves on the line are partly an unintended consequence of the end of steam on the main lines.

I think this is only part of the story. Besides the obvious, i.e. budget cuts, I can think of a couple of nuances to your recollection.

The chemicals used have changed. BR moved away from triazine herbicides in 1991 because levels of this chemical were found in drinking water supplies (source). This is probably more pertinent to permanent way instead of linside boundary fences and cuttings/embankments. Anecdotally, I've heard it suggested that these herbicides are much less effective and that has led to the rampant growth of Buddleia.

Additionally, is it not true that foliage management was for the purpose of avoiding lineside fires, rather than foliage management occurring by the fires? I believe I've seen pictures of controlled burns too, especially on embankments. The absense of steam trains meant the fire risk was reduced, which is why there was simply less need to cut back foliage, especially in the early years before things got really out of hand (for a combination of reasons).

Another factor is that tread brakes were still common after steam. These would help clean the wheel's traction surface, though obviously not entirely remove the risk. In the days of dirty oily steam and diesel locomotives, leaves were certainly not the only cause of poor adhesion. Nowadays tread-braked units are still susceptible, obviously, but it was probably not the departure of steam trains which led to the abandonment of vegetation management.

Remember, foliage was kept under pretty strict control even in predominantly electric regions.

 

[Palmerston]

They should try Monkey Puzzle trees. Grow fairly slowly, drop almost no leaves and are sufficiently spiky to put off trespassers.

 

[BazingaTribe]

They should try Monkey Puzzle trees. Grow fairly slowly, drop almost no leaves and are sufficiently spiky to put off trespassers.

Interestingly that was actually the species being used by whoever maintains our branch line. Would coniferous trees be good as well or would the needles simply be a fire hazard? Stalin ordered that birch forests be planted alongside railway tracks to shield infrastructure from casual view (birch grows very fast) but I'm guessing he didn't worry about the same sort of things and Soviet approaches to health and safety were legendarily bad.

It's also been a warmish, wet summer. It's no coincidence that my front garden is a mess and I'm finally getting it paved over, because what was a benign 'wilderness garden' a few years ago has mutated into a triffid farm. It might explain why it's happened this year as well.

 

[brad465]

Putting aside the costs of increased vegetation control, can we even find the workers, given unemployment is relatively low? Maybe in a recession we could introduce a load of "hedge-trimmers" to try and stimulate employment, but otherwise without some big technological fix the best options are more railhead treatment trains and rolling stock that's more resilient to leaf fall effects.

 

[Spartacus]

I’m sure many people on here have encountered people laughing when leaves on the line is included in an announcement concerning railways. It’s a science that can injure. No one laughs at water or ice on the roads.

Even wet crushed leaves on footpaths and roads can be a serious issue, many of us will have slipped on wet leaves at some point and it was only recently when I found I was unable to accelerate in my car after pulling out at a wooded junction on a damp day.

It's the wording that's the issue - "leaves on the line" conjures up images of nice dry, crispy leaves. Leaf mulch, or slippery rail conditions or similar would be a better terminology to use, but we are starting to stray off topic.

Generally I don't think the industry uses the 'eaves on the line' terminology much now, but it still persists in the wider media.

The railway seriously has to get to grip with vegetation. Bypass the 'agenda' to save the trees etc, and use some intelligence like we used to. There are plenty of other vast areas of trees in the UK.

Leaf mulch is lethal.

I don't know if it's changed recently, given how it was last time I was there I'd guess not, but historically it's not been a very leafy area. Leaves, by their nature, blow around a lot, some places with very little lineside foliage can still have quite serious problems with poor railhead conditions, so it's not as simple as cutting down all lineside trees. Many are often on private property anyway.

 

[DelW]

I remember many years ago, in the days of steam, lineside fires caused by sparks from engines dealt with much overgrown lineside vegetation.
Leaves on the line are partly an unintended consequence of the end of steam on the main lines.

In steam days it was routine for p/way gangs to "burn the banks", since controlled burning of dry grass and vegetation with supervision present was considered safer than the possible random fires caused by sparks from the loco exhaust. The railways collectively had a much larger workforce than now of course.

 

[Belperpete]

The BBC did a version of their London to Brighton in 2 minutes where they played the 1950s version side by side with the 1970s version - I believe it is available on playback (I recorded it). It is very instructive to watch this looking at the lineside vegetation. The difference is shocking. In the 1950s there is virtually no lineside shrubbery, and it is clear that cutting sides are well maintained and probably hand mown/scythed. By the 1970s it is a completely different picture, with the green tunnel effect already becoming evident. And we have had another half century of virtually uncontrolled lineside growth since then.

This is not a problem that is going to be cured overnight. It would probably take decades. And that assumes the money is there for this monumental task, that would be highly labour intensive. In the meantime, something needs to be done to assure trains can run safely in high leaf fall situations.

 

[Annetts key]

Network Rail is aware of the problems. It does have an internal organisation (called "Off Track" ) that is responsible for lineside vegetation control. The problem is that of a lack of budget - that is money.

Over the years government has insisted that Network Rail "control" it's maintenance budget. Unsurprisingly, reducing the amount of staff that carry out the vegetation management (the staff that do the cutting back) is a quick win with no immediate or noticeable downsides.

But every year the vegetation grows and the situation gets worse and worse.

After many, many years of a limited budget, it's hard for the maintenance organisation within Network Rail to justify a large increase in the budget for vegetation clearance. But some years ago, some senior local managers did agree that more needed to be done. But rather than employing more permanent staff, they brought in a contract company. They were working their way along the railway clearing vegetation back to three metres away from the track or to the boundary fence if it was nearer. Tall trees were also cut back or felled that were between the boundary fence and the track even if further than three metres from the track. I'm talking specifically about part of the Great Western route.

Even with this extra effort, it was not enough. Once trees and other vegetation gets going, it can grow amazingly quickly if the weather conditions are right.

If the vegetation is to be cleared and kept under control, the politicians in government need to ensure that Network Rail (or Great British Rail) have sufficient money and staff.

 

[BazingaTribe]

The BBC did a version of their London to Brighton in 2 minutes where they played the 1950s version side by side with the 1970s version - I believe it is available on playback (I recorded it). It is very instructive to watch this looking at the lineside vegetation. The difference is shocking. In the 1950s there is virtually no lineside shrubbery, and it is clear that cutting sides are well maintained and probably hand mown/scythed. By the 1970s it is a completely different picture, with the green tunnel effect already becoming evident. And we have had another half century of virtually uncontrolled lineside growth since then.

This is not a problem that is going to be cured overnight. It would probably take decades. And that assumes the money is there for this monumental task, that would be highly labour intensive. In the meantime, something needs to be done to assure trains can run safely in high leaf fall situations.

Given what was said upthread about steam tending to naturally burn off excess vegetation and/or present more of a direct fire hazard that was therefore kept more under control, I wonder if the shift to alternative fuels made them assume they didn't need to do that so much, right up until they found out about the 'leaves on the line' issue after letting it all grow back. We see an awful lot of situations where it wasn't known what was actually needed until there was carnage -- like the discovery of the trench effect in fire behaviour only after the horrific occurrence at Kings Cross.

I still remember the 80s as being a time when increasing capacity/commercial demand for services and aging infrastructure suddenly collided, with explosive results. As an administrator working in healthcare facilities and maintenance, and having been home from school sick on the day after Piper Alpha went up I am very mindful of the importance of filing paperwork in the proper places even if it's now done electronically rather than physically. (Thank God, because I turned down a job in medical equipment because of the mountains of physical paper were a blaze just waiting to happen and in any event as autistic I get overwhelmed by clutter very quickly.) It's no coincidence to me that most of our major transport disasters occured then and then got the full attention of legislators who might have ignored all the more gentle reminders that came before. Before Kings Cross smoking had already been banned on the Tube, but it had not been properly enforced before then and the built-up waste and grease combined with wooden escalators created the perfect storm. Same with leaves on the line -- the lag between when foliage began to grow back and the situation becoming obvious (and erroneously mocked) may be because it hadn't been part of previous risk assessments.

Also, I suppose, the situation runs counter to modern assumptions about the need to preserve habitat and greenery. There may be resistance from those who don't understand why it's a problem and thus messaging about it has to be thought through as well. That's why I liked the attempt to replant trees elsewhere to compensate for the loss of greenery beside the tracks, and the use of monkey puzzle as an environmentally sensitive response to simply stripping the line bare.

I'd trust Labour more to be honest to marry up these two competing issues and create a bit more civic pride in the landscape surrounding railways to suit all stakeholders.

 

[Bikeman78]

Putting aside the costs of increased vegetation control, can we even find the workers, given unemployment is relatively low? Maybe in a recession we could introduce a load of "hedge-trimmers" to try and stimulate employment, but otherwise without some big technological fix the best options are more railhead treatment trains and rolling stock that's more resilient to leaf fall effects.

It's a classic case of if I were going there, I wouldn't start from here. I can't see a solution to the Buddleia problem. There are millions of them, even in the centre of London, each producing millions of seeds every year. Whatever weedkiller they are using doesn't touch them.

There has been talk in Modern Railways about double variable rate sanders. Apparently they massively improve the performance of brakes on damp or leafy rails. Why is the uptake so slow? Aside from the safety benefit, it would reduce the need for tyre turning and enable better performance during the autumn.

 

[Annetts key]

Vegetation actually causes a number of problems, not just rail head contamination. And some of the railway unions have been warning the railway management for many, many years.

Vegetation is so bad in some areas, as it grows in spring and summer, it obscures signals. It restricts the sighting distances. Both for train drivers and staff that work on or near the line. So the driver can't see the signal from the required minimum distance, can't see staff working ahead and they can't see the approach of trains.

It also limits the p!aces of safety where staff can move to when a train approaches. Or means that staff cannot walk along the side of the line (in railway terminology, walk along the cess). So they then can't walk to the site of work without the line being closed to traffic.

The out of control vegetation also damages structures, infrastructure and equipment.

 

[StoneRoad]

Just my two-penn'orth ...
Vegetation management - yes, the railway as a whole needs to get a grip.
But that will cost both in terms of materials / equipment and staffing levels.
However, NR can only work directly on the land they own, and quite a lot of the problems are actually trees growing the other side of that boundary. Negotiating with neighbours to fell / control their trees could be problematical when those trees act as a sound barrier.
Additionally, there are potential problems with wildlife / environmental activists reacting to cutting back overgrowth from "wildlife / green corridors".

 

[Annetts key]

The landowners next to the railway may be a problem. However, many do agree for the work to be done if the railway pays for the work. The biggest issue is finding out who the land owner is and finding the person who can give permission. Keep in mind that often vehicle access is only possible via the private land.

In terms of wildlife, it's the presence of any of the legally protected species that causes issues. No work can be done if for example there is a nest of a protected species in a tree.

Only last year on one main line, trains were subject to a speed restriction because work to remove a low hanging branch could not be done due a protected species.

Campaigners don't often cause issues in the countryside areas, so for most route mileage, this is not an issue. In urban areas, yes the railway has to be more careful.

 

[HSTEd]

If, as is looking likely, this incident was caused by poor adhesion, surely there now needs to be a serious discussion on lineside vegetation control?

Well we can certainly have a discussion about the ability of trains to brake under leaf-contaminated rail conditions.

One solution to this problem is a long term programme of vegetation control, but that comes with significant financial and public relations costs.
Other mitigations are available, for example the deployment of magnetic track brakes for emergency braking.

Track brakes don't work perfectly in contaminated conditions but they do (according to the RSSB) produce substantial brakeforce in even these conditions, as well as scrubbing the rail for following axles.
And they don't commit the railway to a neverending war on all foliage near the railway.

 

[Spartacus]

The BBC did a version of their London to Brighton in 2 minutes where they played the 1950s version side by side with the 1970s version - I believe it is available on playback (I recorded it). It is very instructive to watch this looking at the lineside vegetation. The difference is shocking. In the 1950s there is virtually no lineside shrubbery, and it is clear that cutting sides are well maintained and probably hand mown/scythed. By the 1970s it is a completely different picture, with the green tunnel effect already becoming evident. And we have had another half century of virtually uncontrolled lineside growth since then.

Given there's a similar situation on riverbanks (in private and public hands like lineside vegetation) I can't help wonder if the majority of people having open fires didn't help a lot, when any decent bit of woody material might be cut by those on low incomes to go on the fire. I can certainly remember one of my grandads talking about doing that as a child to save a bit of money on coal, using the old pram he was probably pushed around in to collect any wood found or cut. That of course ended quite quickly with the switch to gas and electric fires.