Channel Tunnel Problem

[Vulcan]

I'm sure you indicated that someone, somewhere has posted a solution, if I've misunderstood your post then I apologise..

was 'Brunellian atmpospheric railway' not a suggestion I made a few posts back? It'd solve the problem!

 

[boing_uk]

To those in the industry I can only presume your frustration with some of the posters on this thread is the same as mine.

Im not in the rail industry, I am in the roads industry - highways to be precise - and the theme, if not the content, of some of the posts are of a similar vein to the comment, phone calls and press stories i've seen over the past couple of days with regards to snowfall and keeping roads clear.

"Why cant you xxx" "You have done xxx" "Ive not seen xxx" "Its only on green for xxx seconds".

On the face of it, to the unititiated, alot of things have simple solution. However the devil is in the detail of what you are legally allowed to do, what is safe to acheive and whether the cost to acheive it is reasonable - both monetary outlay and the benefits seen from the outlay will be.

The same is definitely true of the railways I have no doubt... with bigger devils for even smaller details, any of which if ignored could very well lead to fatalities and/or very costly damage to infrastructure and rolling stock.

I, for one, cannot even think of passing judgement on the whole affair, what actually went wrong, what happened in the tunnels or trains, nor what Eurostar and Eurotunnel have done about it, as the news reports do not have enough substance in them to be even called sterilised. Todays tabloid news would not/could not stomach even the remotest level of technical detail - leaves on the line and the wrong sort of snow are just some of the ways in which an event can be spun in to something incredulous and yet be real and serious problems for the railway.

For the armchair Fat Controllers who have posted so far in this thread on how Eurostar and Eurotunnel should get their act together, you simply cannot even possibly grasp the enormity nor indeed the gravity of the situation without the facts. All the information to hand is from news reports which, lets be honest, are designed to grab the attention of the reader/listener/viewer with grandiose stories and the resultant symptoms of a cause, without ever thinking of actually getting to grips with what actually caused the problems or even trying to rationalise and inform the reasons it went wrong.

I, for one, will be waiting for the RAIB report, if indeed there is one. As that will have ALL the facts and no hype.

 

[Micky Redmire]

In what respect?

Information all readily available, go figure!

Please tell me where, I am but an eager student worshiping at the alter of electric traction

BTW, for what it's worth, I would counter your earlier posting re: transformer sizes by referring you to Heysham 2 and Sizewell B, where I spent many happy(?) days/months/years
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Just watched ITV News where the comment was made by the Editor of RAIL magazine that the snow filters were either not good enough, not maintained or possibly not fitted.

I have a sneaky suspicion that it may well be as simple as the fact that the filters weren't actually there. Eurostar did claim to identify a problem quite quickly and would have their engineers making a modification over the last 24 hours - and I wonder if it is simple as fitting filters that they discovered weren't on there?

Snow fell earlier than normal, so I wonder if something held up the 'Winterisation' process or it simply wasn't done properly?

The truth will have to come out sooner or later though. Surely someone within engineering will be interviewed and spill the beans.

Ooof, that's potentially nasty. Another reason to quarantine the defective machines, if only to demonstrate that such accusations are scurrilous.

 

[captainbigun]

We're not talking power stations or forklifts or anything else, so lets keep to topic.

Well, you claim to understand the technology so I'm sure you can establish the rating of the transformer, guestimate the auxiliary requirements and then work out how much weight would be added by splitting into two. Add in the additional oil circuit, cooling, additional cables, busbars, a suitable place to add your pans (a Eurostar has one DC and one AC) and breakers. Work out where to house all said equipment. Then guestimate as to the internal changes that would be required including the software to manage all of the above.

And achieveing all of the above without altering the axle loadings or weight distribution. Oops I nearly forgot, also without altering the harmonic footprint or EMC.

Jolly good, I await your report.

Hopefully the men in white coats will be along to quarantine you soon. I'm not sure what's worse the thought of you or Al Qaeda near a nuclear reactor.

 

[EM2]

Let`s examine the facts which we know of.
We have thousands of desperate passngers wanting to get from St Pancras to Paris, and in the other direction.
We have a newly built railway which has hardly any traffic on it.
We have a tunnel with loads of spare paths, it must have because half the traffic is off the road, or should that be off the rails.
If those in authority can`t sort something out, then something is very, very, very wrong.

Yes, we have a newly built railway, which has a unique signalling system that only two types of UK stock, Eurostars and Javelins can use and only a small number of drivers and crew passed to drive that route. One train fleet has already had a number of very high-profile failures and the other is a small fleet needed to cover existing diagrams. Add to that the staff and drivers who had worked a full day the day before and were due to the same the next day.

And yes, we have a tunnel with loads of spare paths and an overloaded system of shuttle transport trains which carry road transport, and a heavily loaded road system leading to that tunnel. At the other end of that tunnel is a road system that is being closed to roadfreight and coaches and only allowing private cars.

 

[Micky Redmire]

We're not talking power stations or forklifts or anything else, so lets keep to topic.

Well, you claim to understand the technology so I'm sure you can establish the rating of the transformer, guestimate the auxiliary requirements and then work out how much weight would be added by splitting into two. Add in the additional oil circuit, cooling, additional cables, busbars, a suitable place to add your pans (a Eurostar has one DC and one AC) and breakers. Work out where to house all said equipment. Then guestimate as to the internal changes that would be required including the software to manage all of the above.

And achieveing all of the above without altering the axle loadings or weight distribution. Oops I nearly forgot, also without altering the harmonic footprint or EMC.

Jolly good, I await your report.

Hopefully the men in white coats will be along to quarantine you soon. I'm not sure what's worse the thought of you or Al Qaeda near a nuclear reactor.

Actually, there's an easy VE solution here: retain one pantograph, but design traction motor protection to protect the traction motor, not life safety circuits. Feel free to critique, I'm positive you will.

BTW, I'm sure your white coat and Al Qaeda comment cannot possibly be your best shot ... is it? I might even respond in kind when you can achieve something worthy of response, but I won't "breathe too deeply" (and if that reported comment is correct then those responsible for this fiasco deserve a long jail sentence)

 

[91101]

Having finally managed to read the Network Rail control log for this incident, I will say this: do not believe all that you read in the press!

 

[Micky Redmire]

Having finally managed to read the Network Rail control log for this incident, I will say this: do not believe all that you read in the press!

Is it available to the public?

 

[91101]

Absolutely not!

 

[Micky Redmire]

Absolutely not!

Is there something to hide? I wonder if an FOI request might work, public organisation etc?

Edit: Oooh, FOI applies to Network Rail ... this could be interesting.

 

[captainbigun]

Actually, there's an easy VE solution here: retain one pantograph, but design traction motor protection to protect the traction motor, not life safety circuits. Feel free to critique, I'm positive you will.

BTW, I'm sure your white coat and Al Qaeda comment cannot possibly be your best shot ... is it? I might even respond in kind when you can achieve something worthy of response, but I won't "breathe too deeply" (and if that reported comment is correct then those responsible for this fiasco deserve a long jail sentence)

The inverter protection wouldn't necessarily keep the VCB open as has already been mentioned.

As for the jibe, yep, that's about all I can muster today. Frankly I'm a little bored. I'll await the actual verdict.

 

[91101]

Micky, it wouldnt work, because the details will come out in the inquiry.

I have been fortunate enough to see the contents, but bare in mind that Network Rail do not control what happens in the tunnel.

I am quite convinced by my initial assertion that a lack of communication, co-ordination and control between the three parties played the biggest part in the failings of that evening.

 

[Micky Redmire]

The inverter protection wouldn't necessarily keep the VCB open as has already been mentioned.

As for the jibe, yep, that's about all I can muster today. Frankly I'm a little bored. I'll await the actual verdict.

2 VCBs, one for traction circuit and one for auxiliary (which would include life safety). Alternative is 2 VCBs one for traction and aux (as current) and one for life safety. Life safety VCB is out during normal operation. Life safety lighting load could be low, life safety ventilation could cycled, all very achievable.
Jibe, what jibe?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Micky, it wouldnt work, because the details will come out in the inquiry.

I have been fortunate enough to see the contents, but bare in mind that Network Rail do not control what happens in the tunnel.

I am quite convinced by my initial assertion that a lack of communication, co-ordination and control between the three parties played the biggest part in the failings of that evening.

Yes, that's the usual reason why FOI is refused in this type of scenario .. unless I get the request in quickly

"lack of c, c and c ... between the three parties" IME, typical of this type of incident. I suspect that the design more than catered for the climate conditions inside and outside the tunnel.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

was 'Brunellian atmpospheric railway' not a suggestion I made a few posts back? It'd solve the problem!

No! Deltics and gas masks please!

 

[Vulcan]

No! Deltics and gas masks please!

Yeah but they still have electrics to go wrong, whereas the atmospheric railway has nothing. Doesn't even need interior lighting in the train if the tunnel is lit. Attach the Deltic at Folkstone to bring it to St Pancras!

 

[jon0844]

Is there any reason that Eurostar cannot put more people on a train? Is it because of the chance of having to split the train in an emergency?

I say this because I bet some people would prefer to stand for 2 hours than spend a day or two at St Pancras/Gare De Nord.

Also, why didn't Eurostar offer some people the chance to give up their seat for some more spending money and a hotel in Paris/London? It's all well and good doing a first come, first served basis - but people who have tickets for tomorrow now get caught up when there might be many people who would happily stay another day or two here or there - if suitably 'rewarded'.

 

[Justin Smith]

Yes, we have a newly built railway, which has a unique signalling system that only two types of UK stock, Eurostars and Javelins can use and only a small number of drivers and crew passed to drive that route. One train fleet has already had a number of very high-profile failures and the other is a small fleet needed to cover existing diagrams. Add to that the staff and drivers who had worked a full day the day before and were due to the same the next day.

And yes, we have a tunnel with loads of spare paths and an overloaded system of shuttle transport trains which carry road transport, and a heavily loaded road system leading to that tunnel. At the other end of that tunnel is a road system that is being closed to roadfreight and coaches and only allowing private cars.

So it seems these days we have a railway in which there is but one way to separate a feline from its fur.
Progress ?
I think not.

 

[O L Leigh]

Once again, thanks for taking the time to type your posting ... and please don't spoil my perception by telling me it was a copy and paste!

You're welcome. And no, it wasn't a copy and paste.

The weak point in both the current arrangements and your own suggested alternatives is that the power supply has to come into the train somewhere. The current arrangement of a single pan and VCB, and a transformer to supply all the train's needs works perfectly well under normal circumstances to the extent that the penalties in terms of weight and operational costs of having to carry a second pan, VCB and transformer would be prohibitive for the number of times when such a degree of redundancy would be required.

As it is, the Eurostar is effectively two EMU's working in multiple rather than a single train, with duplicate power and traction equipment at each end. The idea is that if one half-set fails the other can still pull/push it out. For a Eurostar to be declared a total failure suggests that each half-set must have suffered the same or a similar catastrophic failure. So in effect we're not talking about 5 failed sets but 10 or more separate failures (no report has been made on whether or not there were any partial failures where just one of the two half-sets failed).

But this is all by the by. The point I'm making is that each Eurostar set already has a certain degree of redundancy built-in. I am given to understand that each Eurostar half-set can supply power for on-train services to it's partner should the other fail to do so. However, it cannot supply power for the traction equipment of it's partner as the Channel Tunnel safety rules do not permit a high voltage "bus".

Those sets that were plunged into darkness would appear to have suffered a far more fundamental failure. Again I will just remind you that I am not familiar with the Eurostar sets, but on the older traction I drive this sort of thing would be a good sign that the back-up auxilliaries had tripped.

When the auxilliaries trip out you are left with a totally dead train. All the back-up power for the emergency lights, radios and all the control circuits are dead and, if you cannot reset them, you are a dead duck. Everything else that you can try in order to get the train moving assumes that you have power for control, and that means auxilliaries. It also means that you have no way of getting power down from the overheads for any of the on-train systems. It can also make assistance from another train tricky as this is the sort of fault that has the potential to be transferred to the assisting train, and when that happens you're in for all sorts of fun and games.

As for the speculation about whether or not the snow screens had been fitted, I can't believe that they weren't. Even if Eurostar were running to a schedule that wouldn't have seen the last set "winterised" until later in the month, everyone knew that snow was forecast in plenty of time. The work could have been carried out seperately from the exam to make sure that all sets had their screens fitted prior to the forecast snow arriving. However, I will just say that all talk on this matter is currently boundless speculation. We just don't yet know what was or wasn't done by Eurostar and we won't until the investigations are complete.

**EDIT**

Just an additional point about allowing another train into the tunnel when one set had already failed. This is not unusual practice, as one Eurostar set can assist another when it fails.

O L Leigh

 

[EM2]

So it seems these days we have a railway in which there is but one way to separate a feline from its fur.
Progress ?
I think not.

No. What we have is one particular line which at the moment is unique in this country. And as such, it demands a unique approach.
Here's an analogy. A few people in this country own electric cars. And there are a few public places where they can plug them in to charge them.
What if there was a failure of all the charging points in the UK? Would you suggest they fill them up with diesel or petrol? After all, that's what 99.5% of all other drivers do.

 

[jon0844]

I know it is just speculation re. the snow screens - but it does seem odd for so many sets to have failed, especially after your very good point about each train effectively being two.

With LED technology as it is now, I would say that future trains should be built with separate emergency lighting that is self-contained (but charged by mains power). LED lighting would be able to remain on for many, many hours (potentially many days) and would have at least solved ONE of the problems - complete darkness.

Obviously ventilation was another issue, but surely there's quite a lot of air in the tunnel (they're huge aren't they?) so, again, this could be addressed somehow.

I am no expert either; these are just uneducated opinions and suggestions.

 

[O L Leigh]

Each of the half-sets that make up a Eurostar train will have been subject to precisely the same conditions. Therefore if one half-set was going to ingest snow it's a racing certainty that the other half-set will be doing likewise. Is it really so odd then that both half-sets fail with the same or similar faults...?

Good points about emergency lighting technology. Perhaps that will be something the investigation picks up on. Ventilation would be harder to achieve, though.

O L Leigh

 

[jon0844]

Out of interest, when will these trains likely be replaced? They went into service in 1994, so they're still pretty young, but I am still interested to know.

 

[A60K]

They are just about to go through a half-life refurbishment programme, design work being done now AIUI with the first completed train ready in around 18-24 months. This should be a much more thorough job in the passenger saloons than the 2004-6 programme, which was more of a refresh. I'm not sure what technical changes are planned, but I would expect the sets to continue in service until around 2025-30. LED lighting would be ideal and pretty simple to install during this programme.

However, I think whether Class 373 stock will still run all of Eurostar's services in the medium to long term is doubtful - if Eurostar services are to run through to Amsterdam, Cologne or other places then I wouldn't be surprised to see some new stock brought in, rather than modify the current stock further to run with Dutch and German signalling and power supply. If this happens then there may well be a place for some of the Class 373 sets on the TGV network in France - the NoL sets already cover part of the Paris-Lille domestic service.

All conjecture, but I wouldn't be too surprised if there are two or three types of stock using the tunnel by 2015, given that DB have already shown an interest in Frankfurt-Cologne-London services. With the coming change in the structure of the Eurostar company I would even speculate that perhaps DB would take a shareholding and might even buy SNCB out of the Eurostar operation and take over responsibility for London-Brussels/Amsterdam/Cologne services, leaving SNCF as the other shareholder in Eurostar. SNCB doesn't seem terribly interested in international/night services these days, so perhaps they would be happy to withdraw from Eurostar operations.

 

[Old Timer]

As I am sure people already know, there are some very specific International safety regulations that any train operating through the Channel Tunnel must comply with.

This rules out the ad-hoc use of NS/DB/SNCB/SNCF high speed stock.

 

[A60K]

Indeed the current regulations do - the IGC set them down before the tunnel opened, and they basically describe a Eurostar Class 373 train. Even the longest of SNCF TGV sets only has 10 passenger cars I think, meaning it wouldn't meet the length requirement - and there are plenty more requirements.

The German FT reported last week that DB had been 'sucessful' in getting the regulations changed, although what exactly this entails and how the changes were agreed is unclear. From reports it appears that the requirement that trains should be able to split themselves to jettison a power car is not going to be applied to future stock.

If DB is going to run services, then most likely it will be with some of the ICE3 stock that is currently on order for delivery 2011-13 - perhaps modifying some of the usual short sets to become a semi-permanently coupled pair with normal carriages in the middle allowing passengers to walk through. They would obviously need permission to operate with distributed power equipment throughout the train rather than power cars as with Class 373.

The other requirements I think will be either relatively easy to meet with new stock or will be revised in the light of experience operating the tunnel over the last 15 years.

One question I have: St Pancras International has colour light signals - are these to Network Rail or SNCF spec, and if NR would AWS or TPWS be required?

 

[Justin Smith]

No. What we have is one particular line which at the moment is unique in this country. And as such, it demands a unique approach.
Here's an analogy. A few people in this country own electric cars. And there are a few public places where they can plug them in to charge them.
What if there was a failure of all the charging points in the UK? Would you suggest they fill them up with diesel or petrol? After all, that's what 99.5% of all other drivers do.

I have to say that`s a poor analogy, because all the charging points would not fail at the same time, because of the built in flexibility of the National Grid.
Built in flexibility is just what we haven`t got here, or indeed any flexibility, built in or otherwise

When British Rail was in charge and owned/operated all the trains and infrastructure, would this have happened ? And if it did, would they still be telling people they can`t travel 3 or 4 days later ?

I travel by train quite a bit and stand up for the railways whenever I can against uninformed views from the anti rail brigade, but this whole situation is an absolute balls up from start to finish. There are no excuses whatsoever for what happened and in particular the pathetic response to it by Eurostar. My wife and I couldn`t believe it watching on the TV as all the passengers dragged their suitcases in sub zero temperatures to the ferry terminals to stand in huge Qs. At the very least Eurostar should have organised transfer busses and arranged purchase of the ferry tickets.
I`m at a loss to understand anyone trying to defend it.
I`m pretty angry about it just imagining how I`d feel as one of the passengers.
If I actually was one I`d have probably gone into orbit by now.

 

[gordonthemoron]

I wait with bated breath for my Brussels-London E* trip on Thursday.

Fingers crossed (or thumbs squeezed as we say in Germany)

 

[A60K]

Hopefully Brussels to London won't be too bad - you probably know that load factors are not great on the Brussels service, and I imagine there won't be such a backlog as on Paris services. Good luck!

 

[krus_aragon]

Just an additional point about allowing another train into the tunnel when one set had already failed. This is not unusual practice, as one Eurostar set can assist another when it fails.

A very good point, which leads to my main concern about the situation: is it usual practice or even advisable to let the fourth and fifth trains into the tunnel knowing that the first one is dead? I don't know what timescales were in control learning when each set failed, or what normal timings/spacings are, but was very surprised to learn there were five sets sat in the tunnel.

 

[gordonthemoron]

I was under the impression that E* sets enter the tunnel singly or in pairs, with at least 30 mins before the next one. How on earth did they get five sets in? And what happened to the car shuttles?

 

[jon0844]

How exactly is St Pancras going to accommodate trains from other operators to more destinations? Will they be able to stable trains outside the station? Generally, boarding time is longer for international services - so you can't just bring a train in, chuck passengers on it and then take the train out.

I can't wait to be able to go to other places. As airline charges will continue to rise in the coming years (by then, Ryanair will have to charge for even more things to keep their headline figures down and appear cheap - they'll probably weigh passengers) the trains will have a real cost advantage over flying even for longer distances.