Brake van rides?

A downside of the current railway safety regime is that there is less certainty on points such as this, than was the case in the past.
When we started, 25 years ago, we were given precise instructions as to what we could and could not do by H.M. Inspector. Back then, we only had brake-vans in which to carry passengers and propelled in one direction. The system that was agreed and is still used is as follows;
Loco and "end" van to be fitted with vacuum or air brake, up to three vans to be used, which can include a "piped" vehicle, provided that the end van is fully fitted. Guard to ride on the end van, brake valve to be fitted at the leading/trailing end and arrangements to be made to ensure that the guard has uninterrupted access to the brake valve and handbrake. Guard to have a suitable warning instrument. Suitable person (not necessarily a fully qualified guard) to ride on each intermediate vehicle. Speed to be limited to 10 mph.
We have 4 brake vans suitable for use as "driving" brakes- 2 GWR "Toads", an LNER ballast (crew) brake and a CPR Caboose.
I notice that an earlier poster doubts that the vacuum/air brake would stop the train. It should, and if not, your brakes are probably knackered!

 

The system you describe above Flaman is the system we would normal operate using. But the key issue is that at present both steam locomotives (with the vacuum ejectors fitted) are inoperable without work - a new steam pipe and worn back to backs. So the proposal is to use a non vac fitted internal combustion and brake van unit to earn money until one of the steam engines is repaired i.e. a temporary measure. The vans themselves are in full working condition and have been tested to that effect and are working on both the vac and hand brakes.

 

Hello Avonside, the vans are vac fitted and the vac is working, unfortunately it is the locomotives which are currently inoperable in passenger service, requiring costly repairs.

 

The layout at Bowes is as follows, leaving the yard at Springwell the line crosses a fully manned crossing with lights and full barriers, the line climbs the blackhams hill bank before turning and running past the platform at Blackhams hill, rounding the pelaw main curve.

At the end of the curve is a pedestrian crossing (Waggon Inn crossing), currently this has no gates as these have been stolen, the line proceeds in a straight line from here crossing a second pedestrian crossing (this time with a stile on either side) before finally reaching the run around loop at Wrekenton. the fourth crossing is across part of the loop, but is again temporarily ungated due to vandalism. The plan is to restore full lineside fencing, whistle boards, gates and warning signs to all four crossings.

 

As the one who suggested a vacuum brake valve on the brake van would be useless at stopping the train, perhaps I might be permitted to ask you exactly how operating either a vacuum or air brake valve will do anything to slow the train when it is being moved by a locomotive that is not fitted for air/vacuum operation?!

When the locomotive is incapable of creating either a vacuum nor air pressure, exactly where is the braking force going to come from when the valve is opened?
(....assuming the brakevan itself hasn't been fitted with either a compressed air bottle or a petrol compressor/exhauster)

 

Well quite! I must admit that I hadn't quite got the bit about the loco not having operable vac. brakes. I would have thought it's a no-no; you might get away with it, with a risk assessment, but if something went wrong, on one of those crossings for instance, you could be in big trouble!

 

If you cross a public highway (over/level/under) then the Regs apply.

The important thing with the footpath crossings is that there is good sighting, for both the driver/guard and the pedestrian. If not, have a 'Stop/Whistle/Proceed with caution' board. Gates can sometimes be more of a hazard than no gates, depending on the layout.

 

25 years ago, the law required you to have continuous brakes. It doesn't now. See my first post (no.4). However, not having them makes it much harder to have a suitable and sufficient braking system and method of operation.

 

Which Regs do you refer to here Steve?

 

Luckily the initial section we plan to use for brake van rides only crosses the manned level crossing and stops short of the three unmanned pedestrian crossings. We hope to reopen the full line once a vac fitted locomotive is available.

 

Even a manned level crossing involves risk- come to that, there is a risk of unexpected obstruction and therefore the need to make an emergency stop, at any point, not just at crossings.
Assume the train is being propelled. Where a loco is fitted with a proportional valve or it's own vac/air cylinder and the guard applies the brake valve, the train stops almost immediately. Where the loco creates vac/air for the train, but the vac/air does not brake the loco itself, there is a risk that, if the driver fails to realise that the guard has made an emergency brake application and keeps power on, then depending on the differential weights of loco and train, the loco could continue to push the train into the obstruction. Where the guard has to rely solely on the brake van handbrake, application of the handbrake takes, at best, several seconds and, again, the loco is likely to keep pushing the train on.
Do a risk assessment based on the above. I would find the risk unacceptable.

 

The Railway & Other Guided Transport Systems Regulations 2006 (ROGS) are the basic ones that you have to comply with. They have been amended and a consolidated version is available here:
http://orr.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/2547/rogs_2006_consolidated_with_amendments.pdf

These are not the only Regs that you have to comply with, though. It can be a bit of a minefield if you don't know what's out there.

 

Isn't the Planet vac fitted Rob? It's over 12 months since I last drove at Bowes, so can't remember.

 

Thanks Steve, I didn't have the regs to hand, so your clarification is much appreciated

 

No unfortunately the Ruston, Hunslet and Planet are not vac fitted, hence the slight issue we are having atm.

 

Interesting. On the heritage railway I worked we sometimes used a vac piped brake van and a loco on special days for short passenger rides (within the last 20 years) - so only brake on the vehicle was the handbrake. Having a brake valve on the BV to operate the locos brake was good - via the through pipe. Plus apply rule of Guard positioning themselves on BV to have clear view of line ahead when propelling. That was when I was Ops Manager of the line - I backed off the operation of the above with a risk assessment - special instructions with controlling measures - lower speed than normal line speed when propelling - comms between engine crew and guard on the BV.

I gave guidance to a nascent line some some four years ago, based on the above - and that was with a 0-4-0 diesel, straight air brake only, and a BR standard brake van with a handbrake, they came up with a Method of Work and started running passenger brake van trips - key proviso being only one vehicle, Guard on BV, comms driver to Guard, low(er) speed when propelling the BV. I'd recommend testing the approach with your local ORR inspector.

Regards Paul

 

I sincerely hope that I am not teaching anyone to suck eggs, but might I suggest that the first step required is a risk assessment? It does not have to be complicated. An excel spreadsheet with columns marked RISK DESCRIPTION, PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE, SEVERITY OF IMPACT, PROB x SEVERITY, MITIGATION, PROBABILITY OF OCCURRENCE AFTER MITIGATION, SEVERITY AFTER MITIGATION, REDUCED PROBABILITY x SEVERITY, RESULT

So, describe the risk (e.g. person stepping in front of train at a foot crossing)
Estimate the probability. Describe the probability and give it a score. High medium or low will do. It might help to do some research though such as how many people use the crossings during a typical period of the day. Score 3 for high 2 for medium 1 for low.
Severity of impact. Well for this one, serious injury of death is a possibility so it will come out high.
Mitigation. Horns, whistles, extra staff on crossings etc etc are possible, but you'll need to work out what you can do. Whistle and very slow speed will mitigate the risk quite well though.
Re-estimate the risk and give it a score. the object is to eliminate or seriously reduce the risks. The issue is only having enough imagination (use plenty of people with the right experience) to consider all the risks, but since you already have operated trains there must be a risk assessment available as a starting point?

 

At the moment this is simply a proposal so not completing risk assessments yet. It is simply one avenue which is being considered to return trains to Bowes.

 

With respect, that is the wrong way round. How will you know it is feasible if you don't carry out an assessment, or indeed know if you can afford the mitigations you might need to take?

 

The line has been used for passenger carrying over that section is proven to be feasible, it is the method of operation which is in question. Hence this thread is simply to gather opinions. All aspects like this will be covered.