Freight Train Unable to Enter Sidings

[Chrisgr31]

South Eastern tweeted yesterday https://twitter.com/Se_Railway/status/992914074299183104

Hastings bound trains are being delayed at #Robertsbridge because of a freight train being unable to enter the sidings between Robertsbridge and Battle. A member of staff is on the way to allow the freight train to enter the sidings

that trains were being held up as a freight train was unable to enter sidings and a member of staff was on the way to enable it to do so.

So what member of staff would be required? Guessing it was some form of programming foul up as you'd have thought someone would have an idea when a freight train would need to enter sidings?

 

[ComUtoR]

Shunter

 

[Mag_seven]

South Eastern tweeted yesterday https://twitter.com/Se_Railway/status/992914074299183104 that trains were being held up as a freight train was unable to enter sidings and a member of staff was on the way to enable it to do so.

So what member of staff would be required? Guessing it was some form of programming foul up as you'd have thought someone would have an idea when a freight train would need to enter sidings?

Possibly someone required to operate a Ground Frame (i.e. manually operate a set of points at the entrance to the sidings)

 

[GB]

A lot of places across the network require a release or acceptance button/switch to be given to enable the signaller to signal the train in. Usually the job of ground staff but if they are delayed or not been rostered that will cause such issues.

 

[daikilo]

... or simply a set of gates with a padlock.

 

[LAX54]

Ground Staff needed could have been 'missed' on a roster, had an accident en route, taken ill unable to attend.......

 

[tsr]

In the end the ground staff had to be resourced from Tonbridge. This caused delays of up to an hour for passenger trains. It's lucky there were staff that close (and spare) at that time of day, too.

It keeps happening at the Crawley Aggregates yard as well - with alarming regularity, though not normally with such severe delays.

 

[GB]

The original shunter in this case was contracted out to a third party who never actually turned up.

 

[edwin_m]

Wasn't there anywhere the train could have continued on to to get it off the main line if it couldn't get into the siding? I seem to remember hearing of at least one working instruction where the signaller had to phone a particular siding to make sure there was someone present, before the train serving the siding set out towards it.

 

[Tomnick]

Wasn't there anywhere the train could have continued on to to get it off the main line if it couldn't get into the siding? I seem to remember hearing of at least one working instruction where the signaller had to phone a particular siding to make sure there was someone present, before the train serving the siding set out towards it.

In this case, the driver possibly wouldn’t have signed the route beyond there.

It’s certainly not unknown for to be an instruction, even if unwritten, requiring the signalman to check before letting the train pass the last regulating point. We used to do it (I’m sure they still do!) at Langham for trains towards Ward’s sidings at Ketton - in that case, the train could continue to Peterborough if necessary, because that’s the way they go out anyway. I’m sure it wouldn’t be the first time! It’d be a pain because it’d have to run round there and go back to at least Melton but probably Leicester to run round again before having a second attempt.

A slight variation, but on the Down, Melton (or Oakham on Sundays!) had to check that the reception line at Mountsorrel was clear before running anything needing to go in there. I’m sure the same applies between Derby and Saltley (as was) for trains for Kingsbury passing Elford loop.

 

[Joe Paxton]

In the end the ground staff had to be resourced from Tonbridge. This caused delays of up to an hour for passenger trains. It's lucky there were staff that close (and spare) at that time of day, too.

It keeps happening at the Crawley Aggregates yard as well - with alarming regularity, though not normally with such severe delays.

I guess that could be the basis for one argument in favour of an integrated train/track railway.

 

[jdxn]

I guess that could be the basis for one argument in favour of an integrated train/track railway.

No - not at all! What has that got to do with it? Even if it was all 'New British Rail' the shunter could have been ill/not rostered/delayed. It's about the operational issues that allow a train to be sent past the last loop (point of no return) without knowing it can be accepted.

 

[Chrisgr31]

Thanks for the answers

 

[trainmania100]

Looks like this must have been mountfield British gypsums?

 

[edwin_m]

No - not at all! What has that got to do with it? Even if it was all 'New British Rail' the shunter could have been ill/not rostered/delayed. It's about the operational issues that allow a train to be sent past the last loop (point of no return) without knowing it can be accepted.

Indeed. The example I mentioned would have been back in BR days.

 

[GB]

Wasn't there anywhere the train could have continued on to to get it off the main line if it couldn't get into the siding? I seem to remember hearing of at least one working instruction where the signaller had to phone a particular siding to make sure there was someone present, before the train serving the siding set out towards it.

This instruction exists where possible. I know services for Harlow Mill are either held in the down goods loop at Harlow Mill (or back at Broxbourne) or up services held at Bishop Stortford untill the shunter confirms his presence with the signaller.

With the train in question, it was indeed the Gypsum service and once on the move there is no where feasible to hold it.

 

[greatkingrat]

If you had to, you could hold the train at Tunbridge Wells as both platforms are bi-directional.