1A79 Class 43 powercar on fire 28/02/25

[Towers]

How on earth did they end up using an evacuation bridge for passengers to board a train…?

London Underground use similar bridges to evacuate stalled lifts in shafts with two lift cars, though these are much shorter as the cars are very close together normally.

That’s interesting! Presumably the lifts have additional doors facing the other car entirely for that purpose, then?!

 

[Dfatcontroller]

Also, just out of curiosity, what was the plan for isolating brakes and continuing and how would that sit within the rules? If the loco had defective parking brakes and isolated brakes, it would seem that you'd have an unbraked vehicle leading/trailing the train (delete as appropriate by movement direction), with no parking brake as a contingency - would you not have to bury the problem power car and provide assistance to proceed in such circumstances?

Due to the distance involved. Slow speed unbraked vehicle leading into the station. Followed by a similarly slow speed move into Dundee yard.
Due to time elapsed, the move was straight into the yard in the end.

 

[driverd]

Due to time elapsed, the move was straight into the yard in the end.

Interesting to know, thanks!

 

[Dfatcontroller]

Out of curiosity, was it a gradient consideration also or purely speed? And would this type of decision come from NR?

.

 

[Ken X]

That’s interesting! Presumably the lifts have additional doors facing the other car entirely for that purpose, then?!

The ones I dealt with had a simple single door which opened into the car aligning with a similar door in the other car. They blended into the decor and could only be opened using an engineers manual door release. As you can imagine there were several electrical and mechanical interlocks and an operating procedure which ran to more than a page of instructions, given you could be lots of floors above the ground.

 

[Deepgreen]

That is not Amtrak. Looks more like Metro-North.

Quite right - I was thinking of Amtrak as their trains pass through, while Metro-North call there. It's Rye station, BTW, and the walkways are used when engineering works close the platform roads. The principle remains the same, though.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Mar 2025 ==

Last minute platform change?

Cross-train evacuation was trialled by Inter-City back in the early 90s. The trial was described by Peter Kirton in his book Proceed With Caution. I’m surprised its use never became widespread.

No, planned engineering works - Rye, NY.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Mar 2025 ==

Condition of walkway was assessed and was the third best option for the passengers. The evac to another train was option 2.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Mar 2025 ==



Three hours into the problem was when evacuation became a reality.
0-60mins: fire brigade dealing with the fire.
61-120mins: Driver to isolate brakes and get on the move but ran into issues.
121-180mins: Fitter on site to assist and ran into further difficulties.
181-240mins: assist leaves Dundee and returns within this hour into Dundee station.

It was always "One more thing and the train can move" which always ran into further problems and wasn't as easy as envisaged. Therefore evac ordered.
When dealing with the problems - time passes by incredibly quickly!

Interesting to see the sequence of events, thanks. The key thing here seems to be the "issues" and "difficulties", which are unspecified. It contrasts rather with the incident where steam loco 'Britannia' failed at Chilworth a few years back on a circular tour from Victoria, with a catastrophic failure of the motion. In the pitch dark, the crew were able to dismantle the motion at the lineside and enable the train to move again (with the rear diesel) in a couple of hours. Perhaps the basic mechanical nature of the steam loco failure helped in that instance (and having a fitter travelling on the train!), but it was a heroic effort in the dark, and perhaps shows that even last-generation stock such as the HST can be tricky to deal with.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

Was it the leading or trailing power car?

Posts #1 and #5.

Maddening level of awkwardness, especially as simply typing “Leading” would have actually used less words

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 2 Mar 2025 ==

Indeed - too obvious! I'm staggered that SR don't/can't use train-to-train evacuation. What about incidents in tunnels, on bridges, etc., where it is often the obvious solution? The modern disintegrated railway continues to amaze. This is from Amtrak in New York - a slimmer version would suffice for emergencies.
View attachment 175533

Honestly you’d think it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to use something like this in practice - a safer, more secure one - to allow fast trains on paired by direction tracks to make occasional calls at smaller stations.

 

[Falcon1200]

This is going a bit off topic, but sometimes “Control” looses the plot and makes rash or strange decisions. But the worst thing is sometimes they take far too long to make a decision.

Have you worked in Control yourself, as a matter of interest?

 

[Watershed]

Have you worked in Control yourself, as a matter of interest?

Yawn... You don't need to have worked in Control to observe that something hasn't been done optimally. Obviously hindsight is 50/50 but the railway needs to get out of the "wasn't invented here" establishment mindset.

 

[43096]

Quite right - I was thinking of Amtrak as their trains pass through, while Metro-North call there. It's Rye station, BTW, and the walkways are used when engineering works close the platform roads. The principle remains the same, though.

Variation on a theme, again on the North East Corridor but in NJT territory. Wagons used to extend platforms out when a line is blocked.

 

[Annetts key]

Have you worked in Control yourself, as a matter of interest?

Only visited.
I have however been on the operating floor of a large PSB during various events. And been on the ground at various major train stopping failures. And been on trains (as a passenger, not while on duty) that have been affected by various events. Some of which have affected tens or even hundreds of services.

Don't get me wrong, I am well aware that it's not an easy job. I'm just saying that sometimes they don't always make the best decisions. Other times, they can be very helpful. Especially when all the companies actually cooperate.

I'm no longer in the industry. But I believe that it would help if there was better communications (I mean, people actually talking to one another to gain information before coming to a decision). And staff from control (both NWR and TOC staff) seeing what it looks like from on the ground, not just from their control room. Similarly, it would help for at least some "on the ground" team leaders to see what it's like on a PSB operating floor and what it's like in a control room. I also would like some drivers, guards/senior conductors/train managers etc. to also see "the other side" of things as well.

I use the term control room, but I know some are open plan so it's a large room not just controls room.

The point is, when something goes wrong, when something breaks, the railway needs to work as a team. Until an engineer can update control after getting "eyes on", questions such as "how long will it take" and "can it be done" are guess work.

I know some work on improving the system has already taken place. That was clear from reading the control daily log for the area where I worked.
Control, the relevant head of maintenance or IMDU or equivalent, maybe a TOC representative and others would have a conference call to discuss one or more possible plans of action. And updates would be logged throughout the time period of the event/incident.

 

[Purple Train]

Maddening level of awkwardness, especially as simply typing “Leading” would have actually used less words

Even more maddening level of awkwardness: it's fewer, not less

Interesting to see the sequence of events, thanks. The key thing here seems to be the "issues" and "difficulties", which are unspecified. It contrasts rather with the incident where steam loco 'Britannia' failed at Chilworth a few years back on a circular tour from Victoria, with a catastrophic failure of the motion. In the pitch dark, the crew were able to dismantle the motion at the lineside and enable the train to move again (with the rear diesel) in a couple of hours. Perhaps the basic mechanical nature of the steam loco failure helped in that instance (and having a fitter travelling on the train!), but it was a heroic effort in the dark, and perhaps shows that even last-generation stock such as the HST can be tricky to deal with.

'Twas ever thus. Several issues with modern stock, particularly in delivery, have been put down to "software issues", and, in many cases, these have permeated into their early months of service, seemingly requiring fourteen fitters with laptops to talk to the computer. These have contrasted unfavourably with older stock, but their tricky little underfloor engines and limited space have contrasted unfavourably with the engineering of a "proper" loco like a 43. Then, of course, the difficulty of dealing with the "issues" and "difficulties", as you say, contrasts with the ability to rescue Britannia simply by taking it apart with a toolbox in the dark. No doubt having to use a toolbox to fix a steam locomotive caused them to be compared unfavourably to a horse, which does not require a toolbox. And so on back to the invention of the wheel.

There is of course the flip side in terms of safety - all the modern software and gadgets are supposed to make sure nothing goes wrong e.g. catches fire (unless it's a 2000s Alstom DMU). So the question is what safety trade-offs are acceptable to avoid issues with computers and software?

 

[notverydeep]

That’s interesting! Presumably the lifts have additional doors facing the other car entirely for that purpose, then?!

Yes, they do. They are often quite unobtrusive and appear at first glance to be part of the lift wall. If I remember, I'll get a photo of one next time I'm up 'in town'...

 

[pokemonsuper9]

Honestly you’d think it wouldn’t be such a bad idea to use something like this in practice - a safer, more secure one - to allow fast trains on paired by direction tracks to make occasional calls at smaller stations.

Are there many cases where that would be desirable for the TOC and can't already be done by just crossing to the slow lines?

 

[bahnause]

Have you worked in Control yourself, as a matter of interest?

What is this legendary ‘Control’ all about? Is this part of a TOC or National Rail? Is there coordination between TOC and NR? What technical and regulatory competences are there? Doesn't it make more sense to make decisions locally?

We reorganised our system a few years ago. As a train driver, I do have to inform the helpdesk, which can provide support with troubleshooting if necessary (of course not in the event of a fire or other incidents, which are dealt with using the memory items), but after 10 minutes at the latest, only the signaller and the train driver coordinate with each other. This is also the time when the rescue train is dispatched. All other calls are terminated until the further procedure has been clarified and capacities for communication with other parties are available again. Then things such as personnel planning, further deployment of rolling stock etc. can be arranged.

 

[Annetts key]

What is this legendary ‘Control’ all about? Is this part of a TOC or National Rail? Is there coordination between TOC and NR? What technical and regulatory competences are there? Doesn't it make more sense to make decisions locally?

There are in fact, multiple "controls".

Each Network Rail region has at least one. The passenger TOCs also each have their own control. Sometimes in the same building or room as the Network Rail control.

Each freight company has their own control.

Within each Network Rail region, there is the operations control. They are responsible for dealing with any operational or infrastructure problems that affect the running of trains on their area of control. They also issue instructions to the signallers. But there is also a Network Rail "fault control" or "infrastructure control". This takes calls/reports from callers. Then deals with getting technicians and engineers to attend failures that affect the infrastructure. So for example, if there is a broken rail, they contact the on-call P.Way engineer. For signalling faults, including point failures, the on duty S&T team are contacted. Etc.

And yes, they are all suppose to coordinate with each other.

 

[Towers]

Yes, they do. They are often quite unobtrusive and appear at first glance to be part of the lift wall. If I remember, I'll get a photo of one next time I'm up 'in town'...

That is very cool!

 

[Annetts key]

Posted a second copy of my earlier post by mistake.

 

[Falcon1200]

Yawn... You don't need to have worked in Control to observe that something hasn't been done optimally. Obviously hindsight is 50/50 but the railway needs to get out of the "wasn't invented here" establishment mindset.

I disagree, understanding how Control works, and the pressure staff are under, makes a difference. It is all too easy to criticise without having full knowledge of the facts, as has been well shown on this very thread.

And staff from control (both NWR and TOC staff) seeing what it looks like from on the ground, not just from their control room. Similarly, it would help for at least some "on the ground" team leaders to see what it's like on a PSB operating floor and what it's like in a control room. I also would like some drivers, guards/senior conductors/train managers etc. to also see "the other side" of things as well.

With which I fully agree!

 

[eman_resu]

Variation on a theme, again on the North East Corridor but in NJT territory. Wagons used to extend platforms out when a line is blocked.
View attachment 175610

Out of interest - Is there anything put in place that stops people trying to walk out between the wagons and falling off the platform?

 

[43096]

Out of interest - Is there anything put in place that stops people trying to walk out between the wagons and falling off the platform?

No, there’s nothing extra to stop that. It’s exactly as you see it there.

 

[Meerkat]

Then an unbraked crispy powercar would be left in situ. Necessitating further recovery and the line closed even longer.
Your ideal world sounds like more faff than letting those who dealt with the issue deal with the issue!

Sounds like the railway more interested in its own convenience than the stress of the passengers stuck on the train for four hours.
Why would the knackered power car be more of an issue broken on its own than with a train attached?

However the given reason that it was four hours of ‘almost there’ is relatively reasonable but if they aren’t sure after an hour they should be lining up the rescue quicker.

 

[fgwrich]

Sounds like the railway more interested in its own convenience than the stress of the passengers stuck on the train for four hours.
Why would the knackered power car be more of an issue broken on its own than with a train attached?

However the given reason that it was four hours of ‘almost there’ is relatively reasonable but if they aren’t sure after an hour they should be lining up the rescue quicker.

I mean, for starters and from a safety point of view I wouldn’t really want to be leaving an 70 ton unbraked power car on a steep gradient facing (a still open) Dundee station.

 

[scotraildriver]

Sounds like the railway more interested in its own convenience than the stress of the passengers stuck on the train for four hours.
Why would the knackered power car be more of an issue broken on its own than with a train attached?

However the given reason that it was four hours of ‘almost there’ is relatively reasonable but if they aren’t sure after an hour they should be lining up the rescue quicker.

So how would you then remove said power car if the rest of the train was elsewhere assuming it hadn't rolled away meantime?

 

[Meerkat]

So how would you then remove said power car if the rest of the train was elsewhere assuming it hadn't rolled away meantime?

however dead trains are recovered. Thats the railways problem, not the passengers stuck on the train who should be the priority.
If there is a risk that a knackered train can roll away surely they carry scotches in the emergency cupboard?

 

[Ashley Hill]

If there is a risk that a knackered train can roll away surely they carry scotches in the emergency cupboard?

Yes there are scotches and power cars also have manual handbrake applied by turning the spoked wheels on the bogies.

 

[scotraildriver]

however dead trains are recovered. Thats the railways problem, not the passengers stuck on the train who should be the priority.
If there is a risk that a knackered train can roll away surely they carry scotches in the emergency cupboard?

Whilst it was unfortunate that the seized parking brake prevented the train being moved more quickly, by keeping the train complete and moving it as a whole allowed all lines to fully reopen after 4 hours, thus inconveniencing less passengers overall. Had the power car been detached the rest of the train would have to return to Fife, where none of the passengers were going, and would have likely delay them even more than they already were as the line would have remained shut indefinitely until the power car could be removed. That would require other power cars coming from Haymarket to recover it, (there may not have been any available) a driver having to be found (potentially none available), a set stuck somewhere with only 1 power car attached, all of which would have taken way longer than the 4 hours it took to end the incident and have all lines reopened. It could have potentially taken days and thousands more passengers would have been incovenenced than just the ones on the train. There's always a much bigger picture to consider.

 

[InvHst]

Whilst it was unfortunate that the seized parking brake prevented the train being moved more quickly, by keeping the train complete and moving it as a whole allowed all lines to fully reopen after 4 hours, thus inconveniencing less passengers overall. Had the power car been detached the rest of the train would have to return to Fife, where none of the passengers were going, and would have likely delay them even more than they already were as the line would have remained shut indefinitely until the power car could be removed. That would require other power cars coming from Haymarket to recover it, (there may not have been any available) a driver having to be found (potentially none available), a set stuck somewhere with only 1 power car attached, all of which would have taken way longer than the 4 hours it took to end the incident and have all lines reopened. It could have potentially taken days and thousands more passengers would have been incovenenced than just the ones on the train. There's always a much bigger picture to consider.

And that hits the nail on the head definitely the correct decision regarding the incident.

 

[Falcon1200]

Thats the railways problem, not the passengers stuck on the train who should be the priority.

What about the passengers on all the other trains which would have been delayed while Single Line Working was in operation until whenever the defective power car could eventually be removed? And where would the resources come from to remove that power car, and how long would that take?