Central locking for heritage trains

[paul1609]

Hastings Diesels (a much smaller organisation than West Coast) fitted their DEMU with central locking in 2007.

 

[Robert Ambler]

As others have said the gist of WCRC's Judicial Review is that it should not be a requirement for them to fit central door locking as their stock has secondary door locking by way of a manually operated bolt on each door and that is operated by a steward. I suspect they will be given an additional extension of time by ORR until that Judicial Review has been heard (especially as other operators have been given additional time to comply).
However I expect their case to fail and they will be required to fir central door locking. Their case is I think flawed in that they do not always have a steward to operate the door in every circumstance. On the Jacobite for example (which is a daily scheduled service and not an occasional charter) they do not usually have a steward on every door and passengers are instructed over the PA to operate the bolts themselves once the train has come to a complete stop in the station.

 

[paul1609]

True.

Incidentally, the Daily Telegraph report - although it is of course paywalled - is pretty much a direct word for word uncredited "lift" of most of the Steam Railway article... including word for word quotes from individuals...

Given that Steam Railway is part of the Bauer Media Group, the largest operator of Commercial Radio in the UK. I rather imagine the Telegraph has an arrangement for using their content or that the article is written by a freelance and sold to both Groups.

 

[zwk500]

Hastings Diesels (a much smaller organisation than West Coast) fitted their DEMU with central locking in 2007.

Being smaller does mean you have less trains to fit, even if the cost per train is slightly higher.

 

[Bill57p9]

On the Jacobite for example (which is a daily scheduled service and not an occasional charter) they do not usually have a steward on every door and passengers are instructed over the PA to operate the bolts themselves once the train has come to a complete stop in the station.

That usage only provides protection against the primary lock failing, rather than the door being opened whilst the train is moving. I am confident that use case isn’t the intention of the policy…

Is the current main line requirement not for stewards rather than passengers operate the hinged door, not just the secondary lock?

 

[43096]

It's never been particularly reliable and is prone to air leaks, dicky solenoids and these things are always more problematic on charter stock that often isn't used day in day out. If you have power problems to the coach for whatever reason you lose your CDL in addition.

It's useless for short platforms unless you have an upgraded version which is still very much reliant on someone being in the right place in the train and turning a key - but on trains without driver/guard comms you then lose access to the brake van and the ability to stop the train if need be - communication becomes reliant on radios, you can't just drop the brake.

SDO CDL exists (doors released forward or behind the release point), though, and is going to be much, much safer than a flimsy bolt on the door (which is what WCRC appear to have currently). If the guard is using an intermediate panel without driver/guard comms, then there is the PASSCOM.

The bodyside light system on them has always been very misleading and prone to generating mistakes, particularly compared to modern stock.

I much prefer a more modern electro magnet solution.

That's no different to CDL. It's a dumb system and has no idea whether the guard is releasing the doors correctly or not. Unless you have automatic selective door opening it's always going have human error as a factor.

At least with a steward they can look before they leap in terms of releasing their door locks and opening the doors.

If there is a steward at that door. From what has been posted on here, that may not always be the case, with passengers being allowed to release the bolt. That is way more unsafe than a CDL system.

The optimal solution would appear to be CDL plus a steward - WCRC's point is, I *think*, that if they have a train with stewards on each door which seems to work OK, why should they be required to pay to fit additional systems to their trains at their own expense?

I am surprised this is not covered by the network change process, which normally means fitting is centrally funded. If WCRC have tried to play a game and not engaged with that process then more fool them and they deserve to be the subject of enforcement action.

 

[JonathanH]

If there is a steward at that door. From what has been posted on here, that may not always be the case, with passengers being allowed to release the bolt. That is way more unsafe than a CDL system.

Indeed, the design of coaches and positioning of the toilets is rather unfortunate, given they open out into the area by the doors. Ideally, you would have a situation where passengers can get nowhere near the doors other than when they need to get on or off, with a gate across the door area while the train is in motion, but it is hampered by the need to access the toilet cubicles.

 

[yorkie]

If anyone would like to submit any post of a speculative nature, please post in the appropriate forum section, thanks

Some posts have been moved to:

Could mainline heritage operators commission new rolling stock?

Moderator note: split from https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/central-locking-for-heritage-trains.249436/ Are any operators considering commissioning new carriages? There are various projects out there returning various steam and diesel locos from extinction, at vast expense. Is nobody...

www.railforums.co.uk

 

[12LDA28C]

Indeed, the design of coaches and positioning of the toilets is rather unfortunate, given they open out into the area by the doors. Ideally, you would have a situation where passengers can get nowhere near the doors other than when they need to get on or off, with a gate across the door area while the train is in motion, but it is hampered by the need to access the toilet cubicles.

Really? And then when someone wants to go to the buffet but can't get through the train because the gate is closed? Might as well have passengers sat in a cage to keep them safe.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Really? And then when someone wants to go to the buffet but can't get through the train because the gate is closed? Might as well have passengers sat in a cage to keep them safe.

Notably in north America it's quite normal to have a barrier across the doors so you can't get within a foot or two of them, but you can still pass through, if you see what I mean.

 

[JonathanH]

Notably in north America it's quite normal to have a barrier across the doors so you can't get within a foot or two of them, but you can still pass through, if you see what I mean.

Yes, this is what I had in mind. Taking it a step further, you could actually have a situation where between saloons, there is effectively a curtain across the access to the doors so that it just feels like a corridor.

 

[Bill57p9]

Reading another thread has reminded me: Chiltern fitted CDL to their bubble cars. Whilst I appreciate there are differences between a bubble car and mk 1 door, it offers an existing approved solution for vacuum braked stock.

 

[paul1609]

Reading another thread has reminded me: Chiltern fitted CDL to their bubble cars. Whilst I appreciate there are differences between a bubble car and mk 1 door, it offers an existing approved solution for vacuum braked stock.

Not really it was an electromagnetic system powered off the alternator of the DMU engine. A power source which doesn't exist on the older MK1 and Mk2 coaches.

 

[12LDA28C]

Yes, this is what I had in mind. Taking it a step further, you could actually have a situation where between saloons, there is effectively a curtain across the access to the doors so that it just feels like a corridor.

Which would appear to also prevent access to the toilets which is less than ideal. Also it's not unusual for air con on Mk 2s / 3s to fail meaning the only method of ventilation is to lower the droplight windows on the carriage-end doors and fix the vestibule doors open. I witnessed this being done on a railtour just a few weeks ago.

 

[JonathanH]

Which would appear to also prevent access to the toilets which is less than ideal.

Not on a Mark 1 TSO but agree it isn't quite so easy on some other stock.

 

[12C]

I struggle to see what the specific issue is with the secondary bolt arrangement as it is now for heritage stock, providing it is managed properly and made clear that passengers are not to operate them, with sufficient stewards provided to do this. I suggested on the Jacobite thread a simple hinged cover could be fitted over the bolt if needs be preventing passenger access.

Why exactly is power operated CDL any safer than a manual method? All modern rolling stock has an emergency release for the CDL. Any idiot could, if they wanted to, pull a door release on any type of traction which would not only unlock the door but in most cases, open it in motion. All they have is signage clearly stating the release devices are for emergency use only and anyone misusing them will be fined, which could also be applied to the secondary door bolts.

 

[43096]

I struggle to see what the specific issue is with the secondary bolt arrangement as it is now for heritage stock, providing it is managed properly and made clear that passengers are not to operate them, with sufficient stewards provided to do this. I suggested on the Jacobite thread a simple hinged cover could be fitted over the bolt if needs be preventing passenger access.

Why exactly is power operated CDL any safer than a manual method? All modern rolling stock has an emergency release for the CDL. Any idiot could, if they wanted to, pull a door release on any type of traction which would not only unlock the door but in most cases, open it in motion. All they have is signage clearly stating the release devices are for emergency use only and anyone misusing them will be fined, which could also be applied to the secondary door bolts.

Power operated CDL is a lot safer because it is under central control by the guard/train manager rather by individual stewards (often) in a pair of vestibules. CDL can also be enhanced with selective door operation for greater safety. As we have seen with the ORR inspection, having individual stewards managing (or not) door release is fraught with risk - they all need training, competence management and supervision.

CDL is also inherently safer because it is a more robust installation than some Travis Perkins bolts screwed into the door.

 

[Alanko]

Power operated CDL is a lot safer because it is under central control by the guard/train manager rather by individual stewards (often) in a pair of vestibules. CDL can also be enhanced with selective door operation for greater safety. As we have seen with the ORR inspection, having individual stewards managing (or not) door release is fraught with risk - they all need training, competence management and supervision.

CDL is also inherently safer because it is a more robust installation than some Travis Perkins bolts screwed into the door.

How do you power a CDL system in Mk1s on something like the Jacobite? Would a dedicated generator coach be a potential solution? I've seen some discussion around using the dynamo on a Mk1, but seemingly these are idiosyncratic at best.

 

[12C]

Power operated CDL is a lot safer because it is under central control by the guard/train manager rather by individual stewards (often) in a pair of vestibules. CDL can also be enhanced with selective door operation for greater safety. As we have seen with the ORR inspection, having individual stewards managing (or not) door release is fraught with risk - they all need training, competence management and supervision.

CDL is also inherently safer because it is a more robust installation than some Travis Perkins bolts screwed into the door.

Surely if staff can be properly trained and their competence monitored though, the system can be operated safely. It seems the focus of the ORR attention on West Coast isn’t so much the door bolts themselves, but the way they are operated e.g. telling passengers to open them.

If managed properly, it could be argued that manual releases on each door could be safer, as staff could physically check each door was platformed before unlocking, whereas with CDL the guard is releasing from one position, on potentially a long train where there is always a possibility of misjudging which doors are fully platformed.

Old style air operated CDL on, for example, air con mk2 stock isn’t totally fail safe either. If the loco fails on the main line or is shut down, as soon as the train starts losing air the CDL quickly starts unlocking. This can happen on the main line or wrong side on a station. There would be no risk of this with manual locks.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Surely if staff can be properly trained and their competence monitored though, the system can be operated safely. It seems the focus of the ORR attention on West Coast isn’t so much the door bolts themselves, but the way they are operated e.g. telling passengers to open them.

If managed properly, it could be argued that manual releases on each door could be safer, as staff could physically check each door was platformed before unlocking, whereas with CDL the guard is releasing from one position, on potentially a long train where there is always a possibility of misjudging which doors are fully platformed.

Old style air operated CDL on, for example, air con mk2 stock isn’t totally fail safe either. If the loco fails on the main line or is shut down, as soon as the train starts losing air the CDL quickly starts unlocking. This can happen on the main line or wrong side on a station. There would be no risk of this with manual locks.

Indeed - a few years ago I personally witnessed a failure of the CDL on an HST (at 125mph no less) which turned out to be disconnected jumper leads between two of the intermediate coaches. Its rather unnerving to be stood in a vestibule on a F&S peak service out of London and suddenly hear the bolts retract at linespeed!

 

[12C]

Indeed - a few years ago I personally witnessed a failure of the CDL on an HST (at 125mph no less) which turned out to be disconnected jumper leads between two of the intermediate coaches. Its rather unnerving to be stood in a vestibule on a F&S peak service out of London and suddenly hear the bolts retract at linespeed!

I witnessed it myself on the Cumbrian coast loco hauled set, 37 shut down on the approach to Preston. Came to a halt with live running lines all around us, within 10 minutes all the door bolts had released with “Door unlocked” lights on in the vestibules!

 

[LowLevel]

Power operated CDL is a lot safer because it is under central control by the guard/train manager rather by individual stewards (often) in a pair of vestibules. CDL can also be enhanced with selective door operation for greater safety. As we have seen with the ORR inspection, having individual stewards managing (or not) door release is fraught with risk - they all need training, competence management and supervision.

CDL is also inherently safer because it is a more robust installation than some Travis Perkins bolts screwed into the door.

My experience of working long sets to sometimes curved or cluttered platforms is that judging the release of the CDL on a 200+ metre long train is more prone to error than telling your stewards to look before undoing a bolt, provided your stewards are disciplined. Window bars have however made that more difficult for them.

 

[Bill57p9]

Surely if staff can be properly trained and their competence monitored though, the system can be operated safely. It seems the focus of the ORR attention on West Coast isn’t so much the door bolts themselves, but the way they are operated e.g. telling passengers to open them.

There are two different but linked on going issues between ORR & WCRC:

ORR mandated CDL on the mainline from this Spring (I forget the exact date). WCRC (along with a few other small operations) have not complied and have been granted a derogation to continue operating with stewards for a few more months. WCRC are challenging the CDL requirement rather than planning to comply.

ORR issued a prohibition notice specifically against the Jacobite as the operation was failing to follow the WCRC steward operated secondary door lock method statement.

This doesn't strike me as the smartest move whilst arguing that CDL isn't necessary. I do hope all remaining non-CDL operations can keep their noses clean.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jul 2023 ==

Out of interest, can anyone confirm what NYMR are doing currently about secondary door locks?

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

There are two different but linked on going issues between ORR & WCRC:

ORR mandated CDL on the mainline from this Spring (I forget the exact date). WCRC (along with a few other small operations) have not complied and have been granted a derogation to continue operating with stewards for a few more months. WCRC are challenging the CDL requirement rather than planning to comply.

ORR issued a prohibition notice specifically against the Jacobite as the operation was failing to follow the WCRC steward operated secondary door lock method statement.

This doesn't strike me as the smartest move whilst arguing that CDL isn't necessary. I do hope all remaining non-CDL operations can keep their noses clean.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 30 Jul 2023 ==

Out of interest, can anyone confirm what NYMR are doing currently about secondary door locks?

Without knowing for certain, I would imagine that the NYMR is doing nothing, because isn’t the CDL requirement exempted from operations at 25mph or less? (It occurs to me that in the short term the Jacobite could probably be retimed for this speed without too much difficulty, although it might jeopardise the connection off the northbound sleeper at Fort William in order to maintain the cross at Glenfinnan.)

 

[unslet]

According to the latest "Moors Line",the NYMR has achieved Regulation 4 and 5 exemptions for a further 5 years on Mk 1 rolling stock. The article suggests that there is no immediate need to fit CDL but acknowledges it could well be needed in the not too distant future.

 

[Bill57p9]

Thanks.

 

[paul1609]

Without knowing for certain, I would imagine that the NYMR is doing nothing, because isn’t the CDL requirement exempted from operations at 25mph or less? (It occurs to me that in the short term the Jacobite could probably be retimed for this speed without too much difficulty, although it might jeopardise the connection off the northbound sleeper at Fort William in order to maintain the cross at Glenfinnan.)

I have a feeling that reducing the Jacobite speed to 25 mph would not reduce the risk sufficiently to allow the ORR to grant a further exemption. The NYMR operation is on a 5 mile stretch of the network on an originally double track line with single train operation so the risk is much lower than the Jacobite. Bear in mind that the NYMR recently gave up their previous rights to operate from Grosmont to Battersby Junction.

 

[MotCO]

How much is WCRC spending in legal fees trying to get further derogations v the cost of fitting CDL?

 

[paul1609]

How much is WCRC spending in legal fees trying to get further derogations v the cost of fitting CDL?

It's nowhere near that simple. Fitting CDL to the existing rolling stock can't be carried out in the short term and its by no means certain you could make a long term financial case for it. I would suggest that the economics of the Jacobite are no where near as lucrative as some people imagine. This could well be the end of the Jacobite as we know it.

 

[MotCO]

It's nowhere near that simple. Fitting CDL to the existing rolling stock can't be carried out in the short term and its by no means certain you could make a long term financial case for it

Bit of wire, a few magnets and a switch, and the job's a good'un !!