Storm Babet

bobm

Administrator
Hero Member

Posts: 10218

Re: Storm Babet

« Reply #60 on: October 19, 2023, 19:59:17 »

Is it just GWR^▸ though? Network Rail control the signalling and therefore the option to run reversible on the up line. Can GWR insist on it?


	Logged

TonyK

Global Moderator
Hero Member

Posts: 6637

The artist formerly known as Four Track, Now!

Re: Storm Babet

« Reply #61 on: October 19, 2023, 20:17:24 »

Quote from: Trowres on October 19, 2023, 16:05:00

Apparently on its way from Newton Abbot to Stoke Gifford at 15:15. 800007+802114 according to RTT^» .
Just passed Cowley Bridge Jn at 16:04.

Finally made it to bed at 1853, without further drama.


	Logged

Now, please!

a-driver

Hero Member

Posts: 1109

Re: Storm Babet

« Reply #62 on: October 19, 2023, 20:47:26 »

Quote from: bobm on October 19, 2023, 19:59:17

Is it just GWR^▸ though? Network Rail control the signalling and therefore the option to run reversible on the up line. Can GWR insist on it?

Network Rail will have staff on sight who will travel up and down on the trains when rough weather is expected. They would normally be the first port of call when it comes to closing the down main.
Other than that, if Network Rail receives reports from drivers via the signallers stating waves are crashing over, debris or potential that may give them cause to close the down main.
GWR Control would be unlikely to demand that course of action.


	Logged

JayMac

Data Manager
Hero Member

Posts: 19291

Re: Storm Babet

« Reply #63 on: October 19, 2023, 23:12:23 »

The subtext here appears to be a collective bout of 'get there-itis' among management, control and Network Rail. In this instance the only damage was to rolling stock. But 'get there-itis' can often lead to degraded safety. What if there had been a track defect caused by the waves? What if there had been another instance of smashed windows?

Continuing to send IETs^▸ through after one failure does appear to have been a little reckless, notwithstanding the known issues with the Hitachi product versus seawater. CrossCountry rightly stopped their Voyagers in the first instance. Different level of risk of damage from seawater perhaps, but seemingly more prudent. They now don't have five sets at Central Rivers TMD^▸ needing repair. GWRs^▸ actions will have knock on effects for days to come due to 'more trains than usual needing repairs'. Largely self inflicted.

In our fragmented railway system who does the buck stop with? Mark Hopwood? Giuseppe Marino? Michelle Handforth? The weather god of your choice?


	Logged

"Good news for regular users of Euston Station in London! One day they will die. Then they won't have to go to Euston Station ever again." - David Mitchell

Do you have something you would like to add to this thread, or would you like to raise a new question at the Coffee Shop? Please [register] (it is free) if you have not done so before, or login (at the top of this page) if you already have an account - we would love to read what you have to say!

You can find out more about how this forum works [here] - that will link you to a copy of the forum agreement that you can read before you join, and tell you very much more about how we operate. We are an independent forum, provided and run by customers of Great Western Railway, for customers of Great Western Railway and we welcome railway professionals as members too, in either a personal or official capacity. Views expressed in posts are not necessarily the views of the operators of the forum.

As well as posting messages onto existing threads, and starting new subjects, members can communicate with each other through personal messages if they wish. And once members have made a certain number of posts, they will automatically be admitted to the "frequent posters club", where subjects not-for-public-domain are discussed; anything from the occasional rant to meetups we may be having ...

Pages: 1 ... 3 4 [5]

« previous next »