Trains without retention tanks spray human effluent over railway trackside workers

[whole diary]

[IndustryInsider]

Flushing the lav at speed is less of an issue because the "effluent" gets caught up in the 125 mph slipstream and is mostly splattered over the running gear of the train itself rather than falling straight on the ground as happens when the train is stationary.

Though not much fun for the poor track workers who end up getting covered in a fine mist which is only about 50% water...

[Super Guard]

I am sure there was some news report last year about the huge cost to NR^» (Network Rail - home page) to do with the cleaning of the line.

[smithy]

Doesn't sound like it'll be perfect, I admit, but has to be a big improvement on the current situation. Flushing the lav at speed is less of an issue because the "effluent" gets caught up in the 125 mph slipstream and is mostly splattered over the running gear of the train itself rather than falling straight on the ground as happens when the train is stationary.

I have first-hand experience of a "near miss" from an illiterate bog user - they flushed the loo when I was coupling a locomotive onto the train and their little offering (yes, it was solid  ) missed me by inches. I don't suppose they expected to be bawled at by an angry shunter because they emerged from the khazi looking a little shell shocked.

i remember a 143 i was working had fitters attention on plat 1 at btm,they were doing something underneath when a passenger flushed the lav missing them by inches.upon leaving the toilet the passenger found it funny until the fitter had some choice words.

[Chris from Nailsea]

I am sure there was some news report last year about the huge cost to NR^» (Network Rail - home page) to do with the cleaning of the line.

Quite right, SDA/Guard - and congratulations on your new job (if you'll pardon that expression, on this particular topic!)

Network Rail's claim for the ^7.2 million cost of this track cleaning was rejected - see http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/3286898/Network-Rail-rebuffed-on-lavatory-levy.html

For the Network Rail report itself, see http://www.networkrail.co.uk/browse%20documents/regulatory%20documents/access%20charges%20reviews/consultations%20on%20future%20charging/final%20charging%20proposals/b%20-effluent%20on%20track%20nr%20&%20atoc%20consultation%20%204%20sept%2008.pdf

[Super Guard]

Cheers  .... I'll soon just be 'Guard' or such, but thought a transition period was probably required 

[devon_metro]

Was just on the FGW^▸ (First Great Western) jobs website, I never realised SDAs were just platform based at a particular station 

I'm sure being a Guard will be a nice change. Shame about the traction

[IndustryInsider]

In my experience, just because the CDL^▸ (Central Door Locking) is engaged doesn't necessarily mean the train is going to leave the platform within 20 seconds.  Indeed, even if the train does pull away fairly promptly, the rear (if you'll pardon the expression) carriages will probably still be opposite the platform, even if the front of the train is well beyond it? 

Indeed. A minute would be a more appropriate delay - twenty seconds and the train will only have moved a couple of feet even with the promptest of dispatching!

[onthecushions]

What do folks think of the revolting mess underneath the SLE's and SLEP's at Paddington (that's the night sleepers)? There used to be brick channels that could be hosed down but now there's ballast covered by plastic sheeting. The net result is slowly evaporating pools of liquid, solidus, papier mache etc between the platforms, perfuming Brunel's masterpiece and appropriately introducing Heathrow Express customers to the Country where they have just landed. Stations are probably exempt from the Public Health Acts otherwise the Local Authority could close the lot down.

NR^» (Network Rail - home page), FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and all the King's horses could do better than this.

Emetically,

OTC

[dog box]

Paddington Station is run by Network Rail and i believe they are responsible for Station Cleaning

[Tim]

What do folks think of the revolting mess underneath the SLE's and SLEP's at Paddington (that's the night sleepers)? There used to be brick channels that could be hosed down but now there's ballast covered by plastic sheeting. The net result is slowly evaporating pools of liquid, solidus, papier mache etc between the platforms, perfuming Brunel's masterpiece and appropriately introducing Heathrow Express customers to the Country where they have just landed. Stations are probably exempt from the Public Health Acts otherwise the Local Authority could close the lot down.

NR^» (Network Rail - home page), FGW^▸ (First Great Western) and all the King's horses could do better than this.

Emetically,

OTC

the plastic sheeting is supposed to make cleaning easier.  It is changed sometimes although perhaps not enough. 

I have never used the FGW sleeper but have used the Scotrail one many times.  I am sure that the Scottish sleeper coaches do have retention toilets and I am surpised that the FGW ones do not. 

Whilst I wouldn't favour retrofitting tanks to all older stock the sleeper trains could probably be justified as an exception - afterall you are allowed to baord at Paddington an hour or so before departure.  Supposing you board at 10:30 and want to use the facilities before going to bed.  Are you supposed to leave your compartment and find a station toilet or stay awake until the train has left paddington at 11:45 pm?  If so the train is effectively without a toilet during the times demand for one is likely to be highest

[super tm]

The sleepers do have retention tanks.  The mess comes from people who use the HST^▸ (High Speed Train) toilets whilst the train is standing in the platform.

[smokey]

Let's get it clear, the sleeping cars have retention tanks, the Day Cars of the sleeper train DO NOT.

The class 159's were modified 158's (and modified before they ever entered service) and 159's have retention tanks, the 158 do not.

[paul7575]

Let's get it clear, the sleeping cars have retention tanks, the Day Cars of the sleeper train DO NOT.

The class 159's were modified 158's (and modified before they ever entered service) and 159's have retention tanks, the 158 do not.

SWT^▸ (South West Trains)'s 158s have retention tanks. The refurbishment included fitting them.

Paul

[onthecushions]

Let's get it clear, the sleeping cars have retention tanks, the Day Cars of the sleeper train DO NOT.

The class 159's were modified 158's (and modified before they ever entered service) and 159's have retention tanks, the 158 do not.

In my experience, very little use of the toilets in HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s is made in Paddington Station, certainly for No. 2's. Most customers are either fighting to get a seat or lining up to get off.

Thus if the few Mk3a loco hauled cars marshalled with the sleepers were given retention tanks, the station sewage problem would be almost gone.

In this case it's the Railway that has the dirty habits rather than its customers.

OTC

[SuperGlam]

What are the worst stations for toilet waste on the track in our areas?  Merthyr isn't too pretty!