Trains where they shouldn't have been / weren't route cleared

[Peter Mugridge]

I believe there had been instances of electrics being routed towards the non-electrified Salisbury line.

Yes - and at least one ran far enough to go past the limit of the juice rail, but I cannot remember when that was.

 

[PaulLothian]

I wasn't aware of this method for stopping wrong-routed trains. Presumably if they were to be broken at some point there would be a horribly complex clean up and disposal process afterwards! I'm surprised they haven't been replaced by a less toxic alternative.

The reactions between aluminium and mercury are very spectacular! YouTube will give examples.

 

[Halish Railway]

Didn't it end up getting flashing yellows for this very reason?

It doesn’t on this cab ride - Go to 54:25

 

[Fawkes Cat]

When I started with BRIS&T in 1990 and in Reading's Western Tower, I was told of a time when something electric was routed up from the (electric) SR lines towards (diesel) platforms 9 or maybe 10 (old numbering). I was told that the driver realised the problem rather late, and did try accelerating to get enough momentum to make it there, but failed, blocking all of the GWML. There was a long pause and then a shunter trundled out...

It now occurs to me (maybe 30 years too late) that I've never heard this story from anyone else, so it's not impossible that it was a round of 'tease the newbie' and I was lucky not to be sent for a tin of striped paint or to ask the stores to give me a long weight.

 

[sw1ller]

I’ve seen a class 158 in the parcel bay at Chester every year since I started with the company. (Not cleared)

 

[philthetube]

An S8 got stabled in the sidings at Wembley North, which are not long enough, by resting it on the stops it was just able to clear the block joint and be signalled out.

 

[Mathieu]

Non RETB 156s have ended up at Helensburgh Upper a few times when accidentally put onto a WHL service. Eastfield rarely keeps Non-RETB but they can show up every now and then. Guess whoever was in charge of assigning units didn't realise this.

 

[DHB1950]

I remember some years ago when the down fast platform at Bedford (platform 4) had recently opened hearing of an EMU (presumably then a 319) being routed into Bedford on the non-electrified down fast. IIRC the driver managed to coast into the platform (good job it had been built at that time) and the passengers could detrain, but recovery took some time, with mainline services obviously having to be routed through platforms 1-3 (don’t think up fast is/was then reversible?).

 

[30907]

When I started with BRIS&T in 1990 and in Reading's Western Tower, I was told of a time when something electric was routed up from the (electric) SR lines towards (diesel) platforms 9 or maybe 10 (old numbering). I was told that the driver realised the problem rather late, and did try accelerating to get enough momentum to make it there, but failed, blocking all of the GWML. There was a long pause and then a shunter trundled out...

It now occurs to me (maybe 30 years too late) that I've never heard this story from anyone else, so it's not impossible that it was a round of 'tease the newbie' and I was lucky not to be sent for a tin of striped paint or to ask the stores to give me a long weight.

I think your suspicion is right - Reading Spur is nearly 1/2 mile long, on a rising gradient, and ISTR the junction is 20mph, so I can't imagine even 8-cars making it to the top, let alone across towards the Relief Lines. Good story though.

 

[big all]

we had a victoria driver with a mlv/419 unit perhaps late 80s who on leaving the mail sidings at redhill going up the switch siding decided to go to battery as they run out off power [lost the juice] and rather than thinking why they lost power accelerated north towards london up the switch siding which has no connection to the up line and requires a shunt to patform 3 and finished parked on the buffer at wiggie lane and part hitting the bridge

 

[Taunton]

I recall an issue of the Great Western journal which featured a list of loco numbers believed to have run on the Cardigan branch. One of the locos listed was a large prairie, yet the Oakwood Press book on the line says it had a 'yellow' colour weight restriction. As far as I know all the large prairies were 'blue' weight and thus too heavy. I suspect the GW journal was wrong and the loco in question didn't really visit Cardigan.

Digging this one up, but I did notice that in the end of GWR loco allocations at the end of 1947, Large Prairie 8107, the onetime 5116 rebuilt in the 1930s, was allocated to Cardigan. The only other loco there was 2018, a 19th century Pannier Tank.

 

[Deepgreen]

No idea if this is true, but a friend told me he once went on a loco-hauled rail tour that went from the mainline onto the Looe branch.

Was that an unauthorised move, though?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2020 ==

More recently, a 458 on a Reading-Waterloo service that got wrong routed at Wokingham onto the non-electrified Guildford line and the driver took it.

The fabled 769s may make this traction mode switch feasible soon!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 23 Sep 2020 ==

There have been several steam locos that have had parts (chimnies, safety valves or cylinder casings) bashed/shaved in recent years when operating on routes not cleared for that specific class. On my local (North Downs) line, a slight variation on that theme was at Shalford when an engineering wagon-borne digger arm struck and demolished the footbridge pier over the line. I think it was about two years before it was rebuilt, and the public footpath remained closed all that time!

 

[Rhydgaled]

Digging this one up, but I did notice that in the end of GWR loco allocations at the end of 1947, Large Prairie 8107, the onetime 5116 rebuilt in the 1930s, was allocated to Cardigan. The only other loco there was 2018, a 19th century Pannier Tank.

Thanks for looking; was 8107 a 'blue' engine like the 61xx large Prairies, or was the 81xx class lighter? I'm surprised Cardigan had loco allocations in GWR days, I thought it was always a subshed of either Neyland or Whitland (depending on the date) and thus locos stabled at Cardigan shed overnight would show as allocated to the parent shed. Also, there are some claims that the engine shed at Cardigan couldn't be accessed by even the 45xx locos that were frequently used in BR days so that the first train off Cardigan each morning was always hauled by a Pannier.

 

[Deepgreen]

5 October 2016. The train was passed for the route but the traction wasn't! 378230 at Kensington Olympia after its still-raised panto had hit the bridge. The orange men were busy!

 

[Taunton]

Thanks for looking; was 8107 a 'blue' engine like the 61xx large Prairies, or was the 81xx class lighter? I'm surprised Cardigan had loco allocations in GWR days, I thought it was always a subshed of either Neyland or Whitland (depending on the date) and thus locos stabled at Cardigan shed overnight would show as allocated to the parent shed. Also, there are some claims that the engine shed at Cardigan couldn't be accessed by even the 45xx locos that were frequently used in BR days so that the first train off Cardigan each morning was always hauled by a Pannier.

Actually the 81xx were even more powerful than the 61xx. The latter were built for London suburban traffic with a larger, higher pressure boiler than the 51xx, and in the late 1930s Collett played about with a few of the older large Prairies, rebuilt 10 of the normal 51xx with these big boilers and wheels a bit smaller, as the 81xx, and another 5 similar but with even smaller wheels as the 3100 class, more than a little confusing as some of these locos had earlier been numbered in this series as well. The 81xx were intended for suburban type work, the 3100 for banking, and on paper these latter had the same tractive effort as a Castle. Somehow neither worked out, they were scattered around the system and were among the earliest Large Prairie withdrawals.

We got about four of the 61xx at Taunton in the 1960s when they were displaced in London by dmus, they were absolute favourites on either Minehead locals or banking up Wellington bank for their power, and were in superb mechanical condition. The opposite in all respects was true of several 82xxx Standards that came at the same time from South Wales, disliked by all crews and left at the back of the shed whenever possible.

Regarding subsheds, that was really an LMS/BR concept that gave the familiar BR-era 81A etc codes to a "main" shed", and gave smaller sheds in their area the same number. The GWR did it differently, and just allocated locos where they were based, even where just a senior driver was in charge of the paperwork stuff like the coal records. I think a BR full shed had to have a management grade shedmaster (shed foreman in GWR-speak). At Taunton Mr James (I think he was) in final steam days was still called "foreman" to the end by everyone; he was the only person who came to work at the shed in a suit.

 

[john prytherch]

The Redhill incident in the thread above, has reminded me of the incident at Dovey Junction, circa 1964, in the early days of DMUs on the Cambrian, (when steam was also still about). One evening, after dark, an up DMU from the Pwllheli line arrived at Dovey Junction. The usual token exchange took place, the signalman receiving that from Aberdovey and handing the driver one for the section to Machynlleth. But he had not yet set up the route. In a classic "buzz buzz and away" departure the driver started, without checking the signal. The points lay set to a long siding on the up side (sometimes used for stabling stock in summer I think) and the driver accelerated away on this siding, not realising he was not on the main running line! The DMU demolished the stop block and its front vehicle ended up, minus bogies, on the boggy ground. I don't think there were any serious injuries but it must have been quite a shock to those on the train.

The DMU was a Park Royal one which ended up in preservation on the West Somerset, but which, the internet informs me, has since been scrapped.

An item in either British Railways Illustrated or Railway Bylines, I cannot recall which, sometime since 2010, and which I have no longer got, featured pictures of the DMU and of the recovery operation, which I think involved two steam locomotives.

 

[rower40]

Initially not all roads on the western approaches to Edinburgh Waverley were wired leading to a Class 86 on a cross country service (towards Haymarket and onwards to Carstairs) being routed onto one of them. This was not long after electric services started at Edinburgh Waverley so I guess about 1990ish.

Some software to stop this kind of thing was asked for when ARS was first put in at Waverley (about 2000 or 2001), because the only wired tunnels were W and Z. The middle lines X and Y could only access the bay platforms, and they were all diesel-only back then.

It ONCE caught a wrongly-timetabled/diagrammed train, and because the train was non-ARS, the signaller could route it.

1E15 (if memory serves) was an Aberdeen to Kings Cross working, diagrammed for an HST. It was timetabled to enter platform 11 via line X. But on this particular weekend, there was a possession at Wakefield Westgate, so the Leeds service had to use all GNER's available HSTs. So the Aberdeen service was diverted to start from Glasgow Central, and run as a Mk4. But the Timetable Planners failed to change its schedule between Haymarket and Waverley, so it was timetabled to use line X.

Then we get a call on the Monday morning - "ARS didn't run 1E15" - and we looked into the incident, and replied "Yes, probably for the best."