Using diesel locomotives to rescue stranded electric trains

[Dima]

This question is inspired by the nearby thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/evacuation-of-train-in-3rd-rail-area.244729/

That thread listed several cases when electric trains were stranded due to being unable to draw power because of ice for example. In this case various rescue methods were used, like dispatching de-icer trains or rescue trains to evacuate the passengers and in some cases the passenger had to wait for hours or even overnight to get moving.

What I haven’t seen in the cases discussed there is using diesel locomotives to pull the stranded trains. It seems that this should be easier than de-icing the power supply or evacuating people from trains so why does it look like that it’s not used? Is it because there are no spare locomotives available, is it because they are mostly used for freight to organisations difficulties make it harder to use them to rescue a passenger train, is it because if incompatibility of some systems?

For example, in Ukraine, where I am from, it’s a pretty common approach - if a train cannot move on its own, dispatch a locomotive. This has been happening a lot when the Hyundai intercity trains were introduced more than 10 years ago (see

)
and is especially commonplace now when the power can go down at any moment because of a missile strike.

 

[Boodiggy]

This question is inspired by the nearby thread https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/evacuation-of-train-in-3rd-rail-area.244729/

That thread listed several cases when electric trains were stranded due to being unable to draw power because of ice for example. In this case various rescue methods were used, like dispatching de-icer trains or rescue trains to evacuate the passengers and in some cases the passenger had to wait for hours or even overnight to get moving.

What I haven’t seen in the cases discussed there is using diesel locomotives to pull the stranded trains. It seems that this should be easier than de-icing the power supply or evacuating people from trains so why does it look like that it’s not used? Is it because there are no spare locomotives available, is it because they are mostly used for freight to organisations difficulties make it harder to use them to rescue a passenger train, is it because if incompatibility of some systems?

For example, in Ukraine, where I am from, it’s a pretty common approach - if a train cannot move on its own, dispatch a locomotive. This has been happening a lot when the Hyundai intercity trains were introduced more than 10 years ago (see

)
and is especially commonplace now when the power can go down at any moment because of a missile strike.

A big issue here is having a loco to rescue available with compatible couplers!

 

[Laurencew]

I have vivid memories as a child of being stopped a long time in my Grandfather's car at a level crossing at Lyminster on what is now the Coastaway Line near Littlehampton. Possibly 1963 as it was well below freezing and snowing. On getting out to investigate I saw approaching a class C1 0-6-0 steam loco (the ugly ones) hauling eight cars of 2-BIL EMUs at little more than walking pace, with sparks flying from every shoe. Oh to have a time machine and a decent camera!

 

[zwk500]

What I haven’t seen in the cases discussed there is using diesel locomotives to pull the stranded trains. It seems that this should be easier than de-icing the power supply or evacuating people from trains so why does it look like that it’s not used? Is it because there are no spare locomotives available, is it because they are mostly used for freight to organisations difficulties make it harder to use them to rescue a passenger train, is it because if incompatibility of some systems?

Partly it's down to the fragmented structure of the railway - TOCs like SE, GTR or SWR don't have more than a handful of diesel locos available, if at all (IIRC SE have 0, SWR and GTR have 1x 73 each). This means they'd need to hire in drivers and locos from FOCs, but they're generally not fitted with the Dellner couplers and multiple working controls needed to work passenger units with passengers remaining on board.

Part of it is also down to the sheer number of trains that'd need to be rescued in the London area, and the operational pain in the proverbial needed to constantly be shunting Locos around at, say, Waterloo. It's easier to run anti-icers the night before, and de-icers during the day to keep the electrics running. The UK is at least safe (for the moment) from imminent missile strikes.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

A big issue here is having a loco to rescue available with compatible couplers!

With modern technology etc it is a disgrace imho that all couplers should be compatible

 

[Falcon1200]

A big issue here is having a loco to rescue available with compatible couplers!

Plus finding a Driver with sufficient spare time to carry out the rescue, and route knowledge, the latter often an issue when an electric train is stranded on a line with little or no freight traffic.

 

[66701GBRF]

With modern technology etc it is a disgrace imho that all couplers should be compatible

Couplers on freight locos are purposely designed to work with decades old freight stock. Except for locos that have been specifically converted you can’t really expect them to work with newer passenger trains. Even if you could mechanically couple them you likely wouldn’t be able to control the brake as most freight locos are pneumatic based rather than electrical.

 

[Supercoss]

It's do able with adaptor couplers that are kept around the network but type of loco used requires careful selection

 

[Dima]

A big issue here is having a loco to rescue available with compatible couplers!

Can the couplers be changed on the fly?

As far as I am aware, in Ukraine a train crossing the western border would have its couplers replaced together with the buggies while the passengers are inside. But probably there has not been demand for such thing in the UK.

Part of it is also down to the sheer number of trains that'd need to be rescued in the London area, and the operational pain in the proverbial needed to constantly be shunting Locos around at, say, Waterloo.

It’s not like you need to rescue every single train on the network - only the ones that are unable to move neither forward or back to the nearest station. In case of icing or a fault on a train this number shouldn’t be that big.

Even if you could mechanically couple them you likely wouldn’t be able to control the brake as most freight locos are pneumatic based rather than electrical.

Don’t EMUs have pneumatic brakes as well? The Underground train surely do, so I would be surprised if mainline trains didn’t have them too. In case of a power failure on a train how would it be spotted?

And if an EMU needs to be transported between depots over a non-electrified route (or with a different electrification type), how would it happen?

 

[66701GBRF]

Sorry I should have been a bit clearer. Yes EMUs (or whatever train) have airbrakes. But its how those brakes are controlled that is different. It's my understanding that EMUs and the like control the airbrakes by electrical signals where as freight locos is done through air pipes and valves etc. That's why passenger stock is usually hauled with translator vehicles that effectively translates the braking input from the loco into something the train can understand...or hauled unbraked....at least that is how I understand things.

 

[Boodiggy]

Can the couplers be changed on the fly?

As far as I am aware, in Ukraine a train crossing the western border would have its couplers replaced together with the buggies while the passengers are inside. But probably there has not been demand for such thing in the UK.



It’s not like you need to rescue every single train on the network - only the ones that are unable to move neither forward or back to the nearest station. In case of icing or a fault on a train this number shouldn’t be that big.



Don’t EMUs have pneumatic brakes as well? The Underground train surely do, so I would be surprised if mainline trains didn’t have them too. In case of a power failure on a train how would it be spotted?

And if an EMU needs to be transported between depots over a non-electrified route (or with a different electrification type), how would it happen?

It is possible as Supercross has said above, using adapters but you need to make sure someone has the emergency adapter - because it will probably not be the loco / driver drafter in to perform the rescue.
With modern stock when it becomes stranded (not trapped) the systems such as lights, door interlocking and toilets do not last for long. There is a lot of work the industry needs to do around this.

 

[Bletchleyite]

A big issue here is having a loco to rescue available with compatible couplers!

Multiple units generally carry compatible emergency couplers, or if not there'll be one at a depot. It'll be a combination of fewer diesels out there and the inability to provide power to the train to safely operate doors and lighting etc (if you're at war basic health and safety considerations become less important), the latter meaning you couldn't do it with passengers other than a short distance to a safe evacuation point if the train had failed somewhere an evacuation was unsafe.

It does happen occasionally.

 

[Boodiggy]

Multiple units generally carry compatible emergency couplers, or if not there'll be one at a depot. It'll be a combination of fewer diesels out there and the inability to provide power to the train to safely operate doors and lighting etc (if you're at war basic health and safety considerations become less important), the latter meaning you couldn't do it with passengers other than a short distance to a safe evacuation point if the train had failed somewhere an evacuation was unsafe.

It does

Yes I know what needs to happen I deal with it regularly.
Some units that are not rescued very often can prove to be a challenge.
Look at the recent 319 at Euston…

 

[Lucan]

I saw approaching a class C1 0-6-0 steam loco (the ugly ones)

Did you mean a Q1? Actually, I rather like them

 

[Meerkat]

If is possible as Supercross has said above, using adapters but you need to make sure someone has the emergency adapter - because it will probably not be the loco / driver drafter in to perform the rescue.
With modern stock when it becomes stranded (not trapped) the systems such as lights, door interlocking and toilets do not last for long. There is a lot of work the industry needs to do around this.

Having bigger batteries, which can supply hotel power for longer and limp the train over dead spots or into the nearest station, would seem the obvious solution.
No idea how big and heavy a battery that means.

 

[Dima]

and the inability to provide power to the train to safely operate doors and lighting

Can a the train’s lights, doors, air con etc be powered from the coupled locomotive? Are there any fundamental problems with that?

The Caledonian express have power on board - can it work the same way with EMUs?

 

[zwk500]

Can a the train’s lights, doors, air con etc be powered from the coupled locomotive? Are there any fundamental problems with that?

The Caledonian express have power on board - can it work the same way with EMUs?

In theory it's possible but it would depend on the train and loco's computer control systems. 99% of the time they aren't going to be compatible unless they are specifically designed to be so. You would also need the power and data connections to pass the signals through.

 

[Craig1122]

Having bigger batteries, which can supply hotel power for longer and limp the train over dead spots or into the nearest station, would seem the obvious solution.
No idea how big and heavy a battery that means.

South Eastern have invited expressions of interest for fleet replacement, this is one of the options they are considering:

https://www.railjournal.com/fleet/s...he new fleet must be,up to 70 additional cars.

"Bidders must also provide options for supplying the new trains with traction batteries for operation in depots and sidings, on the main line during power failures and on non-electrified routes for a distance of up to 32km."

Note that it's only an option they're exploring as subject to cost benefit analysis.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Having bigger batteries, which can supply hotel power for longer and limp the train over dead spots or into the nearest station, would seem the obvious solution.
No idea how big and heavy a battery that means.

Agreed, with lithium batteries being increasingly available in automotive circles it makes sense for all EMUs to have a battery allowing a train to be safely moved to the next station at low speed for a safer, quicker and more convenient evacuation in the event of e.g. the wires being down. However sometimes the failure would prevent the traction motors working.

It makes even more sense when you consider the health and safety benefits of being able to have wholly unelectrified depots. I seem to recall that while only a few Merseyrail 777s will have enough battery to extend onto unwired lines, all of them will have a smaller shunt battery allowing a safer depot without fizzy trip hazards all over the place.

 

[12LDA28C]

This literally happened the other day (Sunday 12th March) with a WCRC Class 47 locomotive coming to the rescue of a Class 91/DVT rake at York after problems with the OHLE. The train was 'dragged' under the wires to Doncaster where the diesel was removed at the train continued on its way.

This is quite a rare occurrence however, in this day and age when rescue / standby locos are not readily available and there is no 'standard' coupling across all types of rolling stock.

 

[zwk500]

Agreed, with lithium batteries being increasingly available in automotive circles it makes sense for all EMUs to have a battery allowing a train to be safely moved to the next station at low speed for a safer, quicker and more convenient evacuation in the event of e.g. the wires being down. However sometimes the failure would prevent the traction motors working.

It would be a rare failure to take out the motors completely. Especially as something like a dewirement obviously strands multiple trains on top of the actual problem train. In those situations having a 'limp home' mode to get trains platformed/into powered sections would be very helpful in keeping the overall service flowing.

It makes even more sense when you consider the health and safety benefits of being able to have wholly unelectrified depots. I seem to recall that while only a few Merseyrail 777s will have enough battery to extend onto unwired lines, all of them will have a smaller shunt battery allowing a safer depot without fizzy trip hazards all over the place.

Yes, for 3rd rail areas in particular but also being able to move a train onto a non-OLE track for a roof inspection would be helpful

 

[43066]

Agreed, with lithium batteries being increasingly available in automotive circles it makes sense for all EMUs to have a battery allowing a train to be safely moved to the next station at low speed for a safer, quicker and more convenient evacuation in the event of e.g. the wires being down. However sometimes the failure would prevent the traction motors working.

Their weight, and the expense of maintaining and periodically replacing said batteries will count against this, of course. As they get smaller and lighter that will improve over time

It makes even more sense when you consider the health and safety benefits of being able to have wholly unelectrified depots. I seem to recall that while only a few Merseyrail 777s will have enough battery to extend onto unwired lines, all of them will have a smaller shunt battery allowing a safer depot without fizzy trip hazards all over the place.

Is there any evidence that third rail electrified depots are more dangerous in terms of injuries than non electrified depots?

 

[66701GBRF]

Is there any evidence that third rail electrified depots are more dangerous in terms of injuries than non electrified depots?

Probably not in terms of actual injuries but certainly in terms of risk and risk assessments.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Their weight, and the expense of maintaining and periodically replacing said batteries will count against this, of course. As they get smaller and lighter that will improve over time

I suspect massively and quickly. The holy grail in the automotive world is a 400-500 mile actual range on an EV, roughly the same as an average petrol car. The desire to achieve this quickly to drive EV adoption is going to make battery tech develop very quickly as huge amounts of money are poured into it.

 

[Taunton]

A big issue here is having a loco to rescue available with compatible couplers!

The real big issue is why Network Rail and immediate predecessors even allowed trains on the network without universally compatible couplers of the previous 150 years. Even with the change from link to buckeye couplers in those former times, vehicles were long fitted with both.

The Kentish Town stranding some years ago showed the stupidity of a rescue plan which relied on assistance from behind, where there were two types of rolling stock on the line with incompatible couplers, and the timetable was arranged so alternate trains were formed of the alternate stock types ...

Apart from rescue locomotives, the progressive removal of emergency crossovers, which the PW department find inconvenient to maintain, also grossly impacts recovery events.

 

[zwk500]

Their weight, and the expense of maintaining and periodically replacing said batteries will count against this, of course. As they get smaller and lighter that will improve over time

I expect the greater utility of batteries for this kind of limp-home capability and the potential savings on performance/resilience and depot electrification will count for it quite strongly even today

 

[Bletchleyite]

The real big issue is why Network Rail and immediate predecessors even allowed trains on the network without universally compatible couplers of the previous 150 years. Even with the change from link to buckeye couplers in those former times, vehicles were long fitted with both.

It's not hard to have emergency couplers available. 153s (due to their single engine making failure more likely than a two car unit) always used to have one just sat there in the bike area so you'd have to manoeuvre your bike round it.

The issue of being able to work stuff in multiple is perhaps a bit different, and involves the need for more compatible systems than just the physical coupler and brake lines. Even with regard to the latter Westcode brakes probably didn't help - though I think newer kit has generally gone back to traditional air braking.

 

[zwk500]

The real big issue is why Network Rail and immediate predecessors even allowed trains on the network without universally compatible couplers of the previous 150 years. Even with the change from link to buckeye couplers in those former times, vehicles were long fitted with both.

The first opportunity to have a national standard coupler would have been the 1955 modernisation plan, unless Parliament had legislated earlier.

 

[Supercoss]

Hard to imaginee that " LASER Rail" (London And South East Rail) just 10 years ago Network Rail had six dedicated assistance locos 57

301/303/305/306/310/312 with a vision to assist Multiple Unit stock to clear the line , a mixture of Dellner and Tightlock fitted coupler heads for all eventualitiesj

 

[zwk500]

Hard to image that just 10 years ago Network Rail had six dedicated assistance locos 57

301/303/305/306/310/312 with a vision to assist Multiple Unit stock to clear the line , a mixture of Dellner and Tightlock fitted coupler heads for all eventualitiesj

The thing is that nowadays it's usually faster, and simpler to rescue a unit with another unit. Not least because on most lines the nearest thing is probably the unit stuck behind!