Surely there now needs to be a serious discussion on lineside vegetation control?

[Falcon1200]

I agree absolutely that better control of lineside vegetation is required, especially in regard to signal sighting and branches striking trains. But just that would take a huge effort, and lots of money, and even then would not begin to address the issues caused by trees outside the railway boundary. in wooded areas there must be a fair proportion of the 'leaves on the line' which do not belong to Network Rail!

 

[Shrop]

Having travelled from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth a few months ago, I'd have no hesitation in saying the lineside vegetation is the worst I've seen on the UK rail network. I've been on several routes where vegetation brushes the sides of trains and I've wondered about the paintwork, but on this route there were about 3 places where I wouldn't use the word "brush", it was certainly more of a clout or a thump, which made me think that even a dent in the bodywork might be possible, or marked scratching at least. I assumed the driver(s) would have reported it, the amount of growth must have been noticeable by drivers for several days at very least ...

 

[HSTEd]

If mass removal of these trees (including those beyond the railway boundary) was practical and affordable it would have been done years ago. After all it would avoid the expense of RHTT trains.

It seems that, if it is practical at all, it would be far more expensive than technical solutions to these problems.

 

[chuff chuff]

Having travelled from Shrewsbury to Aberystwyth a few months ago, I'd have no hesitation in saying the lineside vegetation is the worst I've seen on the UK rail network. I've been on several routes where vegetarian brushes the sides of trains and I've wondered about the paintwork, but on this route there were about 3 places where I wouldn't use the word "brush", it was certainly more of a clout or a thump, which made me think that even a dent in the bodywork might be possible, or marked scratching at least. I assumed the driver(s) would have reported it, the amount of growth must have been noticeable by drivers for several days at very least ...

I remember a couple of or so years ago talking to some of the staff on the royal scotsman on its first run of the season and commenting on how good it looked and asked if it had been repainted,no was the response just had a good polish.Saw it a couple of weeks later and it was back to the badly marked way it was from the lineside foliage.

 

[43096]

Additionally, there are potential problems with wildlife / environmental activists reacting to cutting back overgrowth from "wildlife / green corridors".

The ecomentalists need to be told where to go, then. The railway is a transport system - and issues with trees have the potential to kill people. There are plenty of locations for growing trees/biodiversity - the railway lineside is not one of them.

 

[BazingaTribe]

The important thing is probably that the railway is seen to be re-wilding other local areas or taking part in existing tree-planting schemes and not just completely dismissive of other community needs. It definitely helps to have a good relationship with constituents and stakeholders and be able to put forward a persuasive argument.

Being mindful of concerns isn't ecomentalism -- it's knowing that you have to relieve people's concerns in some way. PR helps get people with relevant understanding of the environment on board with cutting back vegetation to help balance out the impact of such measures. (Like in the NHS we have Patient Voice groups that provide perspective when we have to look at commissioning and budgeting and all the hard choices -- they make sure that the actual community we serve is represented. It's not a perfect analogy but, say we tried to cut schedules for our financial convenience and to ensure doctors don't work too long hours for their well-being, we need someone who had experience of the service from the patient point of view to put across their needs so the right decision is made.)

From the perspective of the 'woman on the Reading shuttle' (who prior to using the railway every day for ten years also scoffed at the 'leaves on the line' meme but very quickly absorbed why it was an issue; I almost wished I hadn't read this thread prior to travelling on Tuesday night as it was one of those overly slippery journeys you sometimes get where you don't feel right until you're safely on the platform at the other end) the Network Rail explanation was a useful and fairly cheap way of demonstrating what the railway was doing in return for their necessary work.

 

[Western Lord]

The ecomentalists need to be told where to go, then. The railway is a transport system - and issues with trees have the potential to kill people. There are plenty of locations for growing trees/biodiversity - the railway lineside is not one of them.

Almost any "then and now" photo will show that there has been a massive increase in trees and foliage over the past fifty years, even in towns. Trees are just big weeds.
Some years ago the frontage of the old Odeon in Kensington was listed (I believe it is still there although the rest was demolished). The trouble was/is that there's a couple of massive trees in front of it which means you cannot see it.

 

[Snow1964]

The ecomentalists need to be told where to go, then. The railway is a transport system - and issues with trees have the potential to kill people. There are plenty of locations for growing trees/biodiversity - the railway lineside is not one of them.

At the very least there should be absolutely no tree, no bushes, no overhanging within set distance (let's say a metre) of the structure gauge. And clearly this should include zones around signals and their sight lines.

Then possibly should be minimum distance for main trunk of a tree (perhaps by grouping, eg a spruce tree which is straight and produces needles could be closer than wide big leave tree). I will leave it to others to define a margin as there is going to be conflict with views of eco warriors and environmentalists.

These days with battery gardening tools (I mean the professional ranges with big battery packs, and strong cutters, not the smaller ones), including those on poles so can cut 4-5m high whilst standing on ground, it really ought to be possible to cut down the close vegetation whilst standing at safe distance from live railway.

A team of 2 or 3 should be able to cover the basic clearance, that in the past would have needed 100 people with hand tools, scythes etc.

As examples of tools I mean, this is link to pole pruners and brush clearers (other makes are available)

Pole pruners

Cut high branches with STIHL pole pruners: With a comfortable carrying strap ✔ Lots of accessories ✔ ➤ Find out more!

www.stihl.co.uk

Grass trimmers, brushcutters & clearing saws | STIHL

STIHL quality at home and at work: Grass trimmers ✔ Brushcutters ✔ Clearing saws ✔ ➤ Find out more!

www.stihl.co.uk

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

If, as is looking likely, this incident was caused by poor adhesion, surely there now needs to be a serious discussion on lineside vegetation control?

We don't know the circumstances yet, but this incident followed a wild spell of weather which sent leaves and other debris whirling aloft for considerable distances.
I doubt if local vegetation control would have made any difference to what got deposited on the track.

 

[StoneRoad]

It's not just "native" deciduous broadleaved trees that can help produce the slippery railhead mulch.
Some species, like sycamore, produce large leaves and many seeds.
Certain types of conifer needles can also contribute, as some back roads around here show - and since it's not such a seasonal thing, but almost all year round with them [aside from Larch] ...

 

[Shrop]

We don't know the circumstances yet, but this incident followed a wild spell of weather which sent leaves and other debris whirling aloft for considerable distances.
I doubt if local vegetation control would have made any difference to what got deposited on the track.

Assuming that Climate Change is a reality, then this wild weather will be increasing in frequency. So if your comment is correct, then we're at increasing risk of further similar incidents at many places over the rail network. That would need serious thought ...

 

[Bald Rick]

These days with battery gardening tools (I mean the professional ranges with big battery packs, and strong cutters, not the smaller ones), including those on poles so can cut 4-5m high whilst standing on ground, it really ought to be possible to cut down the close vegetation whilst standing at safe distance from live railway.

The issue is not so much where the operatives stand. It’s where the stuff that is cut down could fall, and how much of it there is.

I watched a gang of about 20 people de vegging a cutting near me earlier this year. It took them all day, and even then they had to be selective. The amount of ‘product’ generated was enormous. Where they were it wasn’t practical to have a shredder unless it arrived on a train.

 

[Snow1964]

The issue is not so much where the operatives stand. It’s where the stuff that is cut down could fall, and how much of it there is.

I watched a gang of about 20 people de vegging a cutting near me earlier this year. It took them all day, and even then they had to be selective. The amount of ‘product’ generated was enormous. Where they were it wasn’t practical to have a shredder unless it arrived on a train.

Yes, where it has been allowed to get out of control there is a problem of big volume and where it lands during the first clearance, although shouldn't be as bad for repeat trimming.

Aren't multi purpose vehicles fitted with small cranes which could drop off shredders overnight, and pick it up and take to next site day following night after it has been used. Some of those shredders are mounted on small tracked units so can be moved (especially if clearing former sidings where ground is flat and away from running lines)

 

[HSTEd]

Employing large numbers of people is going to get extremely expensive rather quickly, especially on railway salaries.

Those 20 people that @Bald Rick saw in that cutting are going to have a total cost of employment, including management, training et al, well above £1m per year.
And that won't even cover all the ancillary and support staff required to keep them in the field and working.
You will need dozens of such teams working for years to make a dent in the current issues.

At that point technical mitigations for the leaf fall's impact on trains seem more affordable.

 

[Snow1964]

My hunch (without wanting to anticipate crash report) is that a 2 level approach might be the outcome.

Much more vegetation cut back in deep damp cuttings approaching junctions, and lower level of clearance on plain track.

 

[Bald Rick]

Yes, where it has been allowed to get out of control there is a problem of big volume and where it lands during the first clearance, although shouldn't be as bad for repeat trimming.

This was ‘repeat trimming’. They did it about 7 years ago.

Those 20 people that @Bald Rick saw in that cutting are going to have a total cost of employment, including management, training et al, well above £1m per year.

These were contractors.

My hunch (without wanting to anticipate crash report) is that a 2 level approach might be the outcome.

Much more vegetation cut back in deep damp cuttings approaching junctions, and lower level of clearance on plain track.

The way to do it is as per HS1. Mow it every year or two. Of course 1) you have to get everything out the way first snd 2) it helps when the maximum cutting slope angle is 20degrees and the fence line is a long way back from the tracks.

 

[ChrisC]

The way to do it is as per HS1. Mow it every year or two. Of course 1) you have to get everything out the way first snd 2) it helps when the maximum cutting slope angle is 20degrees and the fence line is a long way back from the tracks.

That’s definitely the way to do it, but as you correctly say that can’t be done if everything isn’t clear and out of the way first. It’s good that this has been the way with HS1 right from the beginning and that no trees, bushes, shrubs etc have been allowed to get established.

If you look back at old railway photographs from 50+ years ago, most of the embankments and cuttings were then clear of vegetation. Within the boundary fences down each side of the track was just grass which was sometimes maintained by controlled burning. Also within that boundary fence were the lineside telegraph poles carrying the wires. I suppose keeping the poles and wires in good condition was another reason why vegetation was not allowed grow. These well maintained grassy embankments and cuttings also provided the right conditions for wild flowers to grow. The railway banks in some parts of the country were yellow with primroses and cowslips in spring. There was also a much better view of the countryside from the train.

The big problem now is that all of these trees and bushes are too large and well established to easily clear. Over the years their large roots have embedded into the banks and removing these roots could now even cause instability. I’m not sure that cutting the trees and bushes back regularly is always a good idea. Could doing this have the same results as pruning in your garden. It could actually result in stronger and even more prolific growth.

 

[HSTEd]

It was a lot easier to keep vegetation under control when you had large supplies of very cheap labour. That is not the world we live in any more, unfortunately.

 

[MarkyT]

There is work by RSSB supporting MTB systems for 'assured stopping' in an emergency and they note a Rail Industry Standard has been created for application of the technology in the UK. You need to be registered to read more.

Adhesion

Low adhesion between train wheels and the rail can be a safety risk. It disrupts journeys and costs the rail industry and wider society millions each year.

www.rssb.co.uk

Magnetic Track Brakes (MTBs)​

01/06/2018
Magnetic Track Brakes are used widely in mainland Europe and on GB tramways. The GB mainline is missing a trick and it’s time to do something about it.

Magnetic Track Brakes (MTBs) are a form of brake that is mounted on the vehicle bogie frame between the wheels. When the MTB is lowered to contact the rail, a magnetic clamping force generates friction between the MTB and the rail which contributes to train deceleration. MTBs are considered to have a beneficial effect at low adhesion sites, since their deployment is believed to help remove leaf film from the railhead, which provides improved rail head conditions for following trains.
Used extensively in mainland Europe and on GB tramways, our research shows that MTBs are generally compatible with GB mainline rail infrastructure, provided they are used only when other brakes are not fully effective, and they are not used repeatedly in the same location. The work demonstrates the positive economic case for fitting MTBs to new rolling stock and asserts that the adoption of this braking technology will contribute to assured stopping capability, leading to a reduction in SPADs and station overruns together with improved performance and capacity.
Image below is of a magnetic track brake arrangement and operation

This work has informed the creation of Rail Industry Standard RIS-2710-RST Magnetic Track Brakes, which was published in March 2018 and sets out compatibility requirements for the use of MTBs on mainline rail, and gives operators a way forward to introduce MTBs on new rolling stock.
Following the research and publication of the standard, RSSB is committed to supporting accelerated progress for the adoption of this technology on the GB railway. The R&D programme is ready to offer its knowledge and experience, together with seed funding to cover monitoring equipment and a part of the one-off safety and compatibility assessment cost, for early adopters that are prepared to share the lessons learnt and the in-service data that will be gathered with industry.

 

[Llanigraham]

Yes, where it has been allowed to get out of control there is a problem of big volume and where it lands during the first clearance, although shouldn't be as bad for repeat trimming.

Aren't multi purpose vehicles fitted with small cranes which could drop off shredders overnight, and pick it up and take to next site day following night after it has been used. Some of those shredders are mounted on small tracked units so can be moved (especially if clearing former sidings where ground is flat and away from running lines)

Something like that was used in a patch of woodland near Penstrowed White Bridge between Newtown and Caersws, but leaves the problem of what to do with all the shreddings.

What no-one seems to be taking into account, and is certainly relevant to the Talerddig situation is the distance leaves are blown from trees, especially where the line is contained in a narrow ravine that funnels winds. How far away are people proposing to fell trees? I know that leaves there can be blown over a long distance.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

I’m sure many people on here have encountered people laughing when leaves on the line is included in an announcement concerning railways. It’s a science that can injure. No one laughs at water or ice on the roads.

Exactly. It does not need to be all at once. High risk locations first and a 10 year programme.

 

[MarkyT]

It was a lot easier to keep vegetation under control when you had large supplies of very cheap labour. That is not the world we live in any more, unfortunately.

Increasing atmospheric CO2 has also accelerated vegetation growth. There's no doubt about this theory. Many horticulturists pipe the gas into their greenhouses for greater productivity. Faster growth isn't particularly beneficial in nature though, possibly exhausting soil nutrients and water more quickly as well as producing more leaves near railways to interfere with adhesion and obscure signals and signs.

 

[HSTEd]

There is work by RSSB supporting MTB systems for 'assured stopping' in an emergency and they note a Rail Industry Standard has been created for application of the technology in the UK. You need to be registered to read more.

Adhesion

Low adhesion between train wheels and the rail can be a safety risk. It disrupts journeys and costs the rail industry and wider society millions each year.

www.rssb.co.uk

This work (or at least previous studies by RSSB) suggests that fitting all new train fleets with track brakes would cost only ~£10.8m per year on an ongoing basis.

I can't see you getting much vegetation clearance for anything like that.

Considering the bulk of the diesel fleet is approaching obsolesence, I think this is likely the most economic solution to this problem.

 

[BrianW]

Not so much discussion is needed- more decision, budget, planning and expenditure!

IIUC, Network Rail is informed by well researched and thought through good, and less good, practice- what actually works, and works best. It's the cutting back of agreed budgets that is creating problems, and has been well documented, eg in relation to the incident at Salisbury tunnel approach. Landslips, as at Stonehaven, Baildon and many other locations are also well understood and their solutions marginalised. As recognised by government with the NHS, prevention is the better option.

 

[Annetts key]

If you look back at old railway photographs from 50+ years ago, most of the embankments and cuttings were then clear of vegetation. Within the boundary fences down each side of the track was just grass which was sometimes maintained by controlled burning.

You don't even need to go back 50+ years. Although not completely clear, the situation was much, much better back in say 1988. Even little used sidings and surrounding area were kept generally clear back then.

People here are saying that labour was cheaper then. That's true and it's good that workers get paid at least the minimum wage now. But we have far better tools now. Hence it's often quicker and easier to clear some areas, especially where there are no large trees. And one gang can clear rather a lot of route over 12 months.

Where large trees are cut down, it is possible to kill the stump to prevent regrowth.

 

[HSTEd]

You don't even need to go back 50+ years. Although not completely clear, the situation was much, much better back in say 1988. Even little used sidings and surrounding area were kept generally clear back then.

People here are saying that labour was cheaper then. That's true and it's good that workers get paid at least the minimum wage now. But we have far better tools now. Hence it's often quicker and easier to clear some areas, especially where there are no large trees. And one gang can clear rather a lot of route over 12 months.

Railway adjacent salaries are far greater than the minimum wage.

No matter how good the tools are, clearance will necessarily involve major increases in labour committed and costs.
If Network rail had the money to do this, they would have done it already.

There is something like ~16,000km of route in the system. Maintaining it anything like as clear as it was in the steam era will require the work of hundreds or (more likely) thousands of additional staff, especially with our warmer/wetter modern climate.
This is such an expense than technical mitigations for the braking issues are almost certainly cheaper.

 

[Bald Rick]

That is not the world we live in any more, unfortunately.

I think I’d rather live in a world where people get a decent wage, than not.

 

[HSTEd]

I think I’d rather live in a world where people get a decent wage, than not.

Well yes, so would I
But I suppose it is easy to fixate on the costs such advancement have imposed than on the benefits

 

[aar0]

my front garden is a mess and I'm finally getting it paved over

Please don’t - awful for biodiversity and flooding. Likely not allowed under your local planning regs - not that these are enforced.

 

[Shrop]

Perhaps this is yet another victim of how modern society likes to run a business, which is as follows ...
1. Take a system that is working (in this case where lineside vegetation is largely under control)
2. Appoint people on well paid jobs to find a way to improve efficiency, cut costs and make more profit
3. Spend (a lot of) money on making sure that situations resulting from cost cutting can be defended both legally and by using clever words when questioned
4. Fail to make it condition of employing those necessary to cover point 3, that they must actually and regularly use the services that they are making more "efficient"
5. Become so embroiled in defending the well paid jobs that are improving profits etc, that the original objectives (such as keeping lineside vegetation clear in a manner that actually works) become lost.

This is a criticism of most modern businesses, (NHS, schools, local authorities etc etc) it is not confined to railways. Or am I just too cynical?