• 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!

Problems at Kemble

Status
Not open for further replies.

Loppylugs

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2020
Messages
467
Location
In the doghouse
Anyone know what the problem is at Kemble? 6C52 held for 40 minutes, disruption all afternoon and now a 1Z99 on it's way there from Gloucester.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

dhouk

Member
Joined
21 May 2013
Messages
6
Location
GW region
6J83 broken down - line blocked in the Swindon to Standish Jn direction only.

I'm unaware of the 6C52 in the region.

Services for South Wales and Cheltenham Spa services are diverting via Bristol Parkway (with reversal there) before heading up to Gloucester to continue the journey, adding about 35m to journey times.
 

Loppylugs

Member
Joined
26 Jul 2020
Messages
467
Location
In the doghouse
6J83 broken down - line blocked in the Swindon to Standish Jn direction only.

I'm unaware of the 6C52 in the region.

Services for South Wales and Cheltenham Spa services are diverting via Bristol Parkway (with reversal there) before heading up to Gloucester to continue the journey, adding about 35m to journey times.
Many thanks for the info. 6C52 was held at Minety Crossing from around 13-30 until 14-10.
 

68001

Member
Joined
9 Jan 2019
Messages
45
2 x1Z99 locos to assist 6J83
1Z99 bescott down side-kemble
1Z99 Gloucester yard-kemble
 

Jim

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
3,484
Location
Wick
Just coupling up now, delayed more as the failed train never put any detts down until prompted apparently!
 
Last edited:

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,930
Just coupling up now, delayed more as the failed train never put any detts down until prompted!
We don't put dets down as part of assistance protection any more, so on that basis the driver of the failed train was correct.
 

12LDA28C

Established Member
Joined
14 Oct 2022
Messages
5,058
Just coupling up now, delayed more as the failed train never put any detts down until prompted!

Who 'prompted' the driver to put dets down? It's no longer a Rule Book requirement, the driver and signaller should be aware.
 

Jim

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
3,484
Location
Wick
I must have overheard incorrectly then! Forgive me!
 

Signal_Box

Member
Joined
25 Dec 2021
Messages
739
Location
UK
We don't put dets down as part of assistance protection any more, so on that basis the driver of the failed train was correct.

Unless…….the Stroud Valley isn’t a very good place for GSMR reception in places, also sight lines aren’t good again in places so detonation protection might well of been required.
 

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,930
Unless…….the Stroud Valley isn’t a very good place for GSMR reception in places, also sight lines aren’t good again in places so detonation protection might well of been required.
We still don't put dets down, we just go to the place where we would've placed then prior to the Rule Book change.
 

Amlag

Member
Joined
8 Jul 2018
Messages
309
6J83 was a Tamper/ Track mtce machine , the fact that unusually TWO rescue locos were reqd could mean the failed machine had no operational brakes and was rescued in a through brake pipe situation.
nevertheless it caused much unwanted disruption to passenger services for several hours.
I trust a full investigation will be undertaken by NR with the operating/mtce Contractor responsible for the operation and maintenance of this track machine.
 

Signal_Box

Member
Joined
25 Dec 2021
Messages
739
Location
UK
We still don't put dets down, we just go to the place where we would've placed then prior to the Rule Book change.
Except….always an exception to the rule.

Personally I don’t agree with it, another cost/time saving cut to the rules to suit the performance driven railway.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==

6J83 was a Tamper/ Track mtce machine , the fact that unusually TWO rescue locos were reqd could mean the failed machine had no operational brakes and was rescued in a through brake pipe situation.
nevertheless it caused much unwanted disruption to passenger services for several hours.
I trust a full investigation will be undertaken by NR with the operating/mtce Contractor responsible for the operation and maintenance of this track machine.

Having read the log (which I won’t repeat, nor should anyone else) those who need to understand the whys and therefores Will do their job and establish the course of events and how those events can be hastened and learnt from in future.
 

Tomnick

Established Member
Joined
10 Jun 2005
Messages
5,930
Except….always an exception to the rule.

Personally I don’t agree with it, another cost/time saving cut to the rules to suit the performance driven railway.
There's no exceptions to this rule – assistance protection doesn't include dets! No, I'm not at all keen on it either.
 

Jim

Established Member
Joined
11 Jun 2005
Messages
3,484
Location
Wick
I must admit I don't keep up with the rulebook in full detail (my job role doesn't hold a requirement for it), so I've learnt something new there!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top