Which 47 are we talking about?
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Accident on NYMR, 21-9-21
- Thread starter 2HAP
- Start date
- Status
Which 47 are we talking about?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Ashley Hill
Established Member
Plus in pairs nose to nose negated the need for the secondman.
I agree with the report, a total lack of traction knowledge by anyone on the footplate being the immediate cause and not running nose first. Having driven 20s nose first you do need to appreciate the lack of sight on a RH curve (I mentioned this in my first post on this thread) and the need to trust your secondman. The fireman here acted about the speed but the driver did not brake hard enough when needed perhaps due to the total lack of experience on this class
When the heritage line I volunteer on hires diesels for our galas an owners rep with knowledge of the traction has always accompanied them. Usually they let our drivers drive under their supervision. Likewise we send a rep when our locos go on hire.
Long term hire is different though,usually a nominated driver(s) is passed on the loco by that railway. Perhaps that line has crews that sign 20s but unavailable that day.
I agree with the report, a total lack of traction knowledge by anyone on the footplate being the immediate cause and not running nose first. Having driven 20s nose first you do need to appreciate the lack of sight on a RH curve (I mentioned this in my first post on this thread) and the need to trust your secondman. The fireman here acted about the speed but the driver did not brake hard enough when needed perhaps due to the total lack of experience on this class
When the heritage line I volunteer on hires diesels for our galas an owners rep with knowledge of the traction has always accompanied them. Usually they let our drivers drive under their supervision. Likewise we send a rep when our locos go on hire.
Long term hire is different though,usually a nominated driver(s) is passed on the loco by that railway. Perhaps that line has crews that sign 20s but unavailable that day.
D6130
Established Member
I don't know about other regions, but class 20s continued to be operated singly - in either direction - on the Scottish Region until well into the 1980s, both on trip freight workings and occasionally on passenger or mixed trains, such as Fort William-Mallaig in Summer when no heating was required.
The 'West Coast driver" was actually employed full time with a FOC at the time and knew the road intimately. Don't go casting aspersions because someone might just shoot you down.
Yes but the point I was making that in normal day to day operations the driver is both traction competent and route competent ie both competencies in one head.
At galas you may have a driver who is route competent (but not traction competent) and a representative who is traction competent (but not route competent) ie two heads.
Those simple facts increase the risk of an error which could result in some form of incident.
2392
Member
Turned out to be a bit of a "Duff" don't worry I've got my hat and coat ready.............
Last edited:
DelW
Established Member
- Joined
- 15 Jan 2015
- Messages
- 6,024
D1661 / 47077. It's been ready to move since the summer, but the hauliers cannot get approval for the move by road. Movement by rail has been investigated, and AIUI it's currently hoped that it can be moved in January.
Ah ok. Thanks for that.
Robert Ambler
Member
- Joined
- 12 Feb 2019
- Messages
- 72
There is of course nothing wrong with the design of Class 20s (or steam locomotives or any other rail vehicle that has restricted visibility). It is something that would have been considered and addressed at the design stage. It has been the case with class 20s for nearly 65 years and has rarely caused an issue to my knowledge. If it was an issue then operating Class 20s with the nose leading would be prohibited which it is not.
This incident was caused by the inattention of the train crew with their lack of familiarity and competence on the traction being an additional factor. This was after all a shunt move where visibility is often limited (propelling etc) but which can still be done safely. As the report says the driver in such a move should be driving in a way that he can stop safely within his line of sight and clearly he was not.
This incident was caused by the inattention of the train crew with their lack of familiarity and competence on the traction being an additional factor. This was after all a shunt move where visibility is often limited (propelling etc) but which can still be done safely. As the report says the driver in such a move should be driving in a way that he can stop safely within his line of sight and clearly he was not.
Not obviously from the photos, and in any case it was well clear of the level crossing; as the 20 wasn't attaching to it there was no need to go that far.
Is it normal for a driver to just jump in a class of loco they haven’t been trained on? I know it wouldnt be permitted on the mainline, but once you’re passed out on steam, can you drive any loco? Likewise diesel? Did his experience with the 37 (as an EE product of roughly the same era) allow him to drive the 20 on the NYMR?
Thing is, you say jt wouldn't happen on the mainline but hasn't it been stated the 20 went to Whitby and back with this driver? Now I know I know just semantics but although Whitby is a branch line it is still a mainline in the context of Alexl92's meaning of Mainline I.e. Network Rail.
I’m not sure how other railways operate but on where I volunteer that’s a strict no no. A driver needs to know the ins and outs of that class, where isolations cocks are, how to safely operate it and such things like that before you’ve even stepped foot into the drivers seat, once you’re competent with that you’re then assessed on the route by the track inspector and then signed off. Each loco behaves differently.
All steam drivers are trained on our shunters like the 08’s and 09’s first.
John Bishop
Member
It does indeed say that the accident driver drove to Whitby and back to Grosmont with a Traction Inspector who was assisting him. The issue raised by the RAIB is that the Driver and TI had no record of competence of being permitted to drive the class 20 and the RAIB has quite rightly raised this issue as the train was driven on the national mainline network which is rather concerning.
Another issue of concern was that it was a fireman traveling in the cab that told the driver to slow down rather than the TI.
Hopefully the improvement notice has given NYMR a boot up the bum to get their house in order.
43096
On Moderation
- Joined
- 23 Nov 2015
- Messages
- 18,854
Given ORR’s current focus on heritage railways, I wouldn’t be surprised if the NYMR got a visit from the inspectors for a full audit.
Im not aware of the signalling arrangements at Grosmont but its possible that the 20 needs to be well clear of the crossing to clear the track circuit thus clearing the signalling and releasing any gate locks on the crossing itself.
Quite true, but the signals concerned, for departures towards Goathland, are only about 10m from the crossing gates.
Did he retain his primary employment following the incident do we know?
He was prosecuted and got a suspended sentence. Stated that he wouldn't drive again.
2015 Wootton Bassett rail incident - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
At the trial, both WCRC and Cox pleaded guilty. WCRC were fined £200,000 plus costs of £64,000. The fine imposed was half of the maximum that could have been imposed. This was decided by Judge Peter Blair QC after he took mitigating circumstances into account.Cox was sentenced to four months imprisonment, suspended for eighteen months. He was also ordered to do 80 hours unpaid work. Cox's counsel stated in court that "he would never drive trains again".
If you considered it as a basic risk assessment of a Whitby to Pickering journey the vast majority of the hazards are actually on the heritage railway rather than the "mainline" ie conflicting moves, severe gradients, signalling etc, the "mainline" has a theoretical increased max speed of 30mph but the train is usually restricted to 25mph due to the lack of central door locking.
Sorry just to say the trains on the branch are not restricted to 25mph. The only restrictions are on some of the bridges but apart from that they do line speed. Same applies going to Battersby.
Never mind that, the railway in question has form for 'cutting corners ' in training (I'm specifically thinking of the character involved in the now infamous Stafford light engine SPAD a few years ago.) I'd dearly love to know if any of the names mentioned to RAIB were coincidentally similar to any of those named in the Stafford incident? Bearing in mind the Moors won't let loco owners drive their own locos etc at galas this is a real puzzler.
Isn't the line speed 30 mph Grosmont to Whitby? It's only 6 m 23 chains between the stations with 7 crossings of the River Esk.
I would suggest you are the one casting aspersions at the moment.
Where is the evidence of the railway having form for 'cutting corners'?
Not heard the one about the SPAD at Stafford, traction knowledge and someone passing themselves for driving? You must be the only person who doesn't know the full details of it. The name of the person involved is also common knowledge.
- Status