Weather disruption caused in 2014, and how to prevent it happening again - ongoing discussion

[whole diary]

[a-driver]

As I understand it and my knowledge of engineering is not that detailed (I'm not an engineer), HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) can't run through the water as the electric traction motors are suspended on the bogies thus making them susceptible to water damage. Turbos and Adelantes are mechanically driven with the engine and gearbox suspended in the body of the train, final drive to the axles being by mechanical propshaft therefore less susceptible to water damage.

Anyone with more detailed knowledge care to comment.

There are electrical components hung from the bogies of the Turbos and Adelantes even though they have mechanical transmission. The aerial(s) for the AWS^▸ (Automatic Warning System)/TPWS^▸ (Train Protection and Warning System) are bogie-mounted as is the track circuit exciting loop (can't remember the correct name at the moment but it is the device to ensure that track circuits register the presence of the vehicle even in the presence of rail head or wheel contamination). There are also the connections to the axle end pick ups for the wheel slide protection. The HST certainly has the WSP connections, but IIRC^▸ (if I recall/remember/read correctly), the AWS/TPWS receivers are hung from the body, but are still close to the rails. It doesn't have the track circuit exciter because it's big enough and ugly enough not to need it.

All of these things are proof against water spray, but I wouldn't be so sure about immersion.

Most TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) will not run any of there trains through flood water, the issue is the wheel bearings.  Rusting, pitting and corrosion quickly occurs when the bearings are subject to even a bit of moisture.  The potential for a wheel bearing/axle failing at high speed could result in a major incident.  The 5mph speed limit is purely a precaution to limit the likelihood that the wheel bearings can be contaminated by water.
Each night, trains that have been subject to flood water of any degree are thoroughly checked for signs of corrosion.  Trains, including, HSTs have gone back to the depot at night and inspection panels removed only for fitters to find water pours out of them.
Underneath a train you've got components and values that dumps air to atmosphere at high pressure, enough to disturb standing water.
On HSTs you've got traction motors which draw air in for cooling purposes.  We have several power cars that are currently unserviceable as the traction motors have been burnt out through moisture being drawn in.
As for 180s. The brakes gear is prone to contamination, namely rusting and pitting, when in contact with flood water.  This is the reason the company will not allow 180s to run through any floodwater.

It's a Track Circuit Actuator fitted to the Turbos!  You were close!

Again, the main concern when running trains through floodwater is the wheel bearings though.

[John R]

And now showing as cancelled beyond Bristol. Double Grr!

Looks like by the time the 1730 to WSM gets to Bristol the 1830 to WSM will have caught it up.

Sadly not, it was still around 40 behind. But I had an offer of a free taxi ride to Nailsea, so wasn't so bad after all!

[James]

I am a bit confused, as there are conflicting sorts of information regarding train frequency between London and Maidenhead.
Firstly one website (i think First Great Western journey check) says there's only 4 trains per hour but when i read some other info (again some where on FGW^▸ (First Great Western) website) only 1 train per hour runs?

I think with these information conflicts, it makes it hard to make sense of what actually is running to what is not running.
So my question is what is the situation for tomorrow like and the frequency of trains that are expected to run. Cause if my thinking is correct and only the basic level of 1 train per hour runs, i might as well use the local bus service Maidenhead and Windsor council provide to get to Windsor, which under the circumstances, only was 10 minutes late today.
BTW^▸ (by the way) and aside from what i said here, the level of information and staff presence on three separate occasions at Maidenhead was excellent, and actually whenever i travel i seem to get overwhelmed with information of trains, although having said that the train could do with more carriages. Cant wait until 12 CAR EMU^▸ (Electric Multiple Unit)'s start rolling out

[lordgoata]

However rather worse PR^▸ (Public Relations) concerns the fact that today there is nothing in or out of Paddington (either fast or slow) which is calling at Twyford. Presumably the idea is that Twyford-Paddington passengers are meant to go via Reading? If that's the case then why not put up that advice on the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) website? I kind of feel that Twyford (and Henley Branch) passengers have fallen down an FGW black hole today.

Can't comment on Paddington to Tywford, but Reading to London were stopping at Twyford, occasionally, this morning. As to your second point, I couldn't agree more. I checked the trains before I left this morning, and apart from one service that was too early for me to get there in time, the first non-cancelled service was 08:44 from Goring. I got there and boarded and speaking to a fellow passenger, continued to Twyford to catch a shuttle bus to Maidenhead.

Arriving at Twyford and another chap was speaking to Norman, he looked completely confused when he asked where to go for the buses, and said "Reading". A little more conversation and he said there were shuttles due, but none had arrived. So off we went back to Reading. The chap I was with was going to Slough and had been told to get the shuttle at Twyford, go to Maidenhead and get the train to Slough - not sure where he was told that, Tilehurst or Pangbourne I think.

Anyway there was no information at Goring, on the CIS^▸ (Customer Information System), on the platform announcements, on the train or when we stopped at Reading (the only announcement there was for London passengers to get off and get the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) into London).

Once back at Reading, I asked about getting to Maidenhead, only to be informed there was flooding and they were only going to Twyford! I asked about replacement buses and she said she didn't think so but would check, and asked another guy. He said yes, to her surprise, so I asked where to go, to which the chap replied I'd wait for a train rather than the bus if I were you! (Later found out the traffic was insane so I guess that was why). Anyway next train was 10.03 on 15A, so waited over there. Then it became the 11:33, then became the --:--! In between there was a HST to Paddington due at 10:02, eventually arrived at 10:08. That was stopping at Twyford and Maidenhead, but had all of the HST passengers from the HST that pulled into 15A where it terminated, plus those already on board. The announcer kept telling London passengers to wait for the next HST that was 3 minutes behind (and you could see from the over bridge), but apart from one or two, hardly anyone listened.

At that point I gave up and went home.

FGW really need to work on their information flow.

I was greeted with the attached the morning before   

[IndustryInsider]

Again, the main concern when running trains through floodwater is the wheel bearings though.

That may well be the case, but I repeat, the levels of water at Hinksey were so low yesterday that I doubt even the wheelflange would have got wet.  And the chance of the air tank purge valve dumping as a train passes through the flood and that then disturbing water to contaminate the train in a meaningful way is so small as to not compute I would say.

The inconsistency is staggering though.  Flood water as high, if not higher, was at Moreton-In-Marsh and near Kingham over Christmas and there were no speed restrictions or amended working caused as a direct result of those locations.  What makes them different?

Finally, surely all these freight trains that have passed through Hinksey unaffected (observing the 5mph limit of course) would suffer the same wheel bearing problems?  Why have they not been vastly curtailed/diverted?  I saw more of them than passenger trains yesterday... 

[johoare]

I am still struggling to get any official information that says how it will be tomorrow.. Even a "no info" just yet information would be better than this...

[a-driver]

The very basic train plan today from Maidenhead was

Maidenhead to Paddington runs every 30 minutes leaving xx:03 and xx:33 calling at Taplow, Burnham, Slough, Langley, Iver, Hayes & Harlington, Southall, Ealing Broadway, Paddington.  
These would be the local stopping services that normally originated from Reading.


The plan was, when I left today, that the 3 HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) an hour from Bristol, Exeter and Swansea to Paddington would call Twyford and Maidenhead but you would need to check that in the morning to see if that's the case.  

[stebbo]

Thank you a-driver. Is that why Adelante brakes are always squealing? Always wonder if they're going to stop.

[James]

Cheers a-driver.
I will take the advice and check in the morning, hopefully will be less conflicting than today's info.

[johoare]

Thanks a-driver.. I kind of hoped that might be the case.. The lack of official communication is getting a bit frustrating.. I'll get up early tomorrow to see if I need to..erm.. get up early  

[a-driver]

Again, the main concern when running trains through floodwater is the wheel bearings though.

That may well be the case, but I repeat, the levels of water at Hinksey were so low yesterday that I doubt even the wheelflange would have got wet.  And the chance of the air tank purge valve dumping as a train passes through the flood and that then disturbing water to contaminate the train in a meaningful way is so small as to not compute I would say.

The inconsistency is staggering though.  Flood water as high, if not higher, was at Moreton-In-Marsh and near Kingham over Christmas and there were no speed restrictions or amended working caused as a direct result of those locations.  What makes them different?

Finally, surely all these freight trains that have passed through Hinksey unaffected (observing the 5mph limit of course) would suffer the same wheel bearing problems?  Why have they not been vastly curtailed/diverted?  I saw more of them than passenger trains yesterday... 

A small amount of moisture in the wheel bearing is enough to cause damage.  I know not all rail vehicles use the same wheel bearings.  I also know that some freight vehicles are fitted with built in hot axle box detectors which would detect a failing.  
We all know that Network Rail gives freight priority!  The passenger comes second and that's all down to ^.  According to rumour, FGW^▸ (First Great Western) had words last time with NR^» (Network Rail - home page) after the attempts at running a shuttle was hampered by freight trains being given priority.

FGW rules are 20 mph between the height of the sleepers to 50mm below the top of the rail.  5mph from 50mm to the top of the rail.  Network Rail has the final say though, they can impose lower speed limits if they have concerns over the stability of the track bed.  It is the signaller who advises us drivers the speed to proceed through the affected area.  It's not an instruction issued by FGW.  I think Turbos can go through upto 100mm above height of the rail.  HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) is a lot lower.  Plus, the flooding at Hinksey I think involve points, which may be another reason for the lower speed limit???  I don't know if they have been clipped and scotched though or wether that would even make a difference!

[a-driver]

Thank you a-driver. Is that why Adelante brakes are always squealing? Always wonder if they're going to stop.

The brake pads that are fitted to the 180s are sintered (contain metal) whereas most other types of train use an organic pad.  Sintered brake pads offer far better braking performance.

The 180s were built with a hydrodynamic brake, basically using the traction motors to brake the train rather than the pads, but this was never proven to be reliable I think so it remains isolated.  They talk of trying to reinstate it though, mainly because they currently eat there was through brake pads!!

[ray951]

Plus, the flooding at Hinksey I think involve points, which may be another reason for the lower speed limit???  I don't know if they have been clipped and scotched though or wether that would even make a difference!

I haven't spotted any point clips but I have noticed that the point motors had been raised up onto several sleepers so that they didn't flood, so I assume that the points are disconnected. If that is the case then I guess they would have to be clipped out of use?

[Electric train]

Plus, the flooding at Hinksey I think involve points, which may be another reason for the lower speed limit???  I don't know if they have been clipped and scotched though or wether that would even make a difference!

If points are clipped and scotched and the points machines disconnected and raised out of the water at Hinksey that means there will be no detection and if they are facing points this will explain the 5 mph limit.  Facing points with no facing point lock or detection one of the if not the most dangerous situations there is

[bobm]

Thanks a-driver.. I kind of hoped that might be the case.. The lack of official communication is getting a bit frustrating.. I'll get up early tomorrow to see if I need to..erm.. get up early  

I am still getting texts each day telling me the sleepers are cancelled.  Yet I don't get ones telling me the 08:27 from Swindon is only running as far as Bristol.  It is all a bit disjointed.