Peak Rail General Discussion

If you want to propel with passengers on, you'll probably find that any assessment will require someone (the guard?) has to travel in the leading vehicle, have good forward vision and have a means of applying the brake. In the days when HMRI used to sanction such things, these were fundamentals for propelling passenger trains.

 

Peak rail used to have such a thing.....at Buxton.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

...and at Darley Dale when it ran to just shy of Bridge 38 (or Bridge 37)

 

And they can again potentially, the Buxton site previously occupied by them is fully vacant, and has been for a few years now

 

Yes, with the reported intention of the leadership to re-establish a presence in Buxton and the talk of having the railway fully restored within ten years, now would seem the time to do this.

It was indeed unfortunate that the Buxton site was completely abandoned when the decision was made to concentrate activity at the other end of the line. It was even more unfortunate that it occurred so shortly after the bridge had been re-instated, allowing a "break out" from the yard. IIRC, the bridge was financed by a grant from the Greater Manchester Council in its death throes. To completely abandon Buxton, so soon after receiving this public money, was not a good look.

Now would certainly be the time to re-establish a presence in the form of brake van rides in the station area.

 

unfortunately the propelling of passenger carriages would be on NR not PR and though discussed at an early stage, the main crux is that NR don't do propelling in this manner anymore, so unfeasible for us to even entertain, the bit between Matlock town and Matlock riverside being owned by NR, walkie talkie or PMR has been thought of and this is nothing different than NR and others do now for working say stock or freight backwards in sidings etc, im aware of a few HR railways that do same with carriages too.

Im glad someone else thought it added around 15 minutes ,id thought twenty, but then had balanced that up with the fact once you extend to Rowsley proper that would add say twenty minutes getting there from Northwood ,running around and getting back to Northwood anyway so would balance the timetable out again anyway.

finally as you say your last paragraph is correct ,thoughts that we've also had for galas and boosting future operations, good minds think alike boss

 

Thanks, Dom. I can understand that NR might have issues with propelling carriages with passengers aboard, but are you also saying that they would not allow empty carriages to be propelled on their tracks?

 

I'm sure I read ages ago that the reason NR had for not allowing propelling into P2 was simply the higher risk of a derailment occurring and possibly fouling the platform 1 line in Matlock station, and not to do with whether there were passengers aboard.

 

What's happening about heading north to Rowsley

 

Very possible,but propelling with passengers over national network infrastructure is not a done thing nowadays,think the deathknell came with an accident up Scotland where one train hit a bull adjacent to a large loch, after that it was generally phased out only to trains where either a DVT or emergency conditions arose, last time I saw some propelling was on the west coast last year when the wires came down,only to get passengers back from a stranded train

The extension needs to be planned in,as I think was mentioned in one of the last years in house mags,funding needs to be sorted,materials,labour,plus a whole load more things at the higher levels of the railway.

 

Not sure what PR are doing but the council are replacing bridges etc due to building a cycle network from Buxton through various grants etc (Google white peak loop), negotiations for the a6 bridge are in the advance stages with PR I understand, not sure who would be footing the bill for the difference between a cycle/footbridge and one capable of taking trains.

 

surely a check rail arrangement as seen on many viaducts etc would alleviate this potential issue?

 

I do not understand how on earth there could be a higher risk of derailment when propelling as compared to pulling!

 

IIRC, that Scottish incident occurred with a DVT leading.

 

There should be no risk of a derailment with bogie coaches. A bogie does not know whether it is being pushed or pulled. Apart from control position, the only additional risk with propelling is the liability to telescoping if the leading vehicle hits a relatively solid object. Trains are propelled at high speed on the big railway every day.

 

Those interested in the rather strange management style at Peak Rail might like to peruse the following statement on Andrew Briddon's website.


http://www.andrewbriddonlocos.co.uk/latest-news/174-public-statement.html

It appears that the Peak Rail hierarchy got a little bit over confident concerning their ability to avoid settling accounts.
This time they foolishly tried pushing their luck with seasoned rail business professionals, who knew exactly how to deal with non payers, and SFR lost out as a consequence.

Jamie.

 

No incentive to buy PR shares then..

 

Ah well, something to watch if and when West Somerset settles down?

In all seriousness I hope it doesn't get as bad as that, but it does sounds like some sort of hierarchical change is needed if the railway is to progress.

 

Propelling on NR is achieved with specifically built vehicles DVTs,full safety cases agreed by both NR,ORR and ToCs, the one previously mentioned which we used to use was a carriage which had a door end vestibule modified with a window,an additional brake valve and horn and lights,none of which would even meet the requirements of modern safety cases for stock operated on NR (not forgetting the section from riverside to matlock is NR property not ours), let's not forget heritage lines like to do methods of operation which weren't that much of an issue a hundred years ago to the then present railway companies,a complete different case from today's safety driven legislative railways, even many of the heritage railways I'm aware of that propell use either purpose built auto train carriages or an assisting engine in rear, the only one I've seen different being the Waterford and suir line who used to operate an engine in advance of the propelled train which could stop or alert the main train and it only ran under 5mph around twenty metres in advance of the train,a strange option when you could simply have attached it to the train anyhow

Some usefull information on propelling is contained in the railway rule book section 13.2 which states propelling movements may only be made where authorised,only if absolutely necessary and over short distances, the rspg for heritage lines in notes 399 and403 propelling information but the key pointer is at the beginning of the section where it notes any stock setup for propelling on a permanent basis must be considered with ORR , it's a balance between well it's been done before with appeasing those in higher echelons of a very large safety driven company, not forgetting the HMRI themselves in their original letter to the railway pointed out engine release as being the most suitable method they would be pleased to see entertained

The Scottish incident at polmont didn't remove propelling moves but following it several safety modifications were made such as cow deflectors,ship to shore radio which is now gsmr,but since then propelling has been limited to one offs mainly for freight (low speed moves such as peak forest where it regularly occurs with a shunter in constant comms to the driver and signaller) and even engineers inspection trains are limited too, it has been reasonably eliminated by the fact nearly all modern stock is. Capable of being driven from either end,whether dmu,emu or dvts.

 

I have to admit I would rather see a train pulled by one locomotive rather than seeing another tagged on at the other end. Also I have found it odd that there are always 5 or 6 coaches in use when you could probably get away with three - there must be some savings in terms of fuel used and maintenance