As someone who is involved in TOC operations, it’s certainly been a busy week. So far today the following points failed between Reading and Paddington:
8178B - Southall East
8336 - Maidenhead East
8326 - Slough West
8296 - Dolphin Junction
8334 - Maidenhead East
8301 - Dolphin Junction
8335 - Maidenhead East
8027 - Royal Oak
Do you have any breakdown of the cause in each case? The control log should say if you have access.
When you say "points failed" this could be a multitude of things. Mechanical failure of the switch and linkages, failure of the electrical supply, failure of the control signals to get to the point motors or those bringing the sensors/detection signals back again etc etc.
Does an FMEA reveal any common factors, or is it all completely random?
As well as a programme to fix the faults in situ it sounds to me as though an offline programme to improve the reliability of points might pay dividends.
It's normally a mix of issues. Each set of points (e.g. two point ends/turn outs forming a crossover from one line to another) is independent from other points. However, from a signalling interlocking perspective, some are conditional on others.
But it's not completely random because there will likely be some common factors. At least in my experience elsewhere on Western.
Point reliability depends on many things being correct or done properly. The formation under the ballast has to be sound. The ballast needs to be in good condition. The sleepers and fittings (including chairs/housings/slide chairs/chair rollers, screws, nuts and bolts etc.) need to be kept in good order. If all this is good, the rails and crossings then have a good life (defined as expected lifetime) regardless of the traffic level. But otherwise the extra vertical movement or lateral movement and strain will cause cracks to form, breaks or extra wear.
Lateral movement and rail wear (on switch and stock rails) then affects either the facing point lock or the electrical detection (the point operating equipment, point machine, clamp lock, HPSS/HPSA). Resulting in the signalling to fail to detect that the point equipment has completed its movement (when the points are swung) or detection is lost during the passage of a train.
Then there are various signalling equipment failures. Some of which occur due to vibration (caused by voiding). Or which are completely unrelated to the condition of the track or to the frequency of the train service.
The common factors may include the state of the original installation. Equipment age / type / condition. The location (some places experience more weather related issues than others). The level, quality and frequency of the maintenance (or lack of). Access problems, both physical access, location of the access point, state of the route from this to the site of work and when / how long staff are allowed on the line(s) (line block / T3 worksite).
They weren’t all the same fault, mostly detection issues, yesterday they were having issues at Southcote Jn just past Reading.
The track defect at Acton West was a weird one, I was half expecting it to end up with a ESR as you really felt it at line speed in a 387 but has been deemed safe enough for normal running, been getting worse and worse
And this is the other problem. If a problem is left, it will continue to get worse. Then take a lot longer and require more work to bring back to a good standard. But, modernising maintenance (which was really cuts to maintenance by reducing the number of maintenance staff) was the solution, right?
With less staff, if multiple issues occur, they can only deal with what they can deal with. A small team or gang can't split up to attend two jobs for example. Worse, for some jobs, two teams may have to combine hence only dealing with one job...
And when you are "fire fighting", other planned maintenance may have to be postponed. Which may then in some instances cause problems at a later date.
And yes, this has all been discussed many times before. But we keep going around and repeating the mistakes of the past. Because maintenance is not "sexy" and is seen by some as an easy way to reduce the budget.