Carriage Sheds

Nothing directly to do with railways but a classic example of penny pinching getting, for once, its due reward concerned a supermarket not too far from where I live. At the behest of the fire officer, a planning condition requiring provision of sprinklers was imposed but was deleted on appeal. Some people blamed political influence but I am not able to comment on this.

Anyway, in due course the building caught fire (it may well have been set on fire) and burned out completely.

Moral to tourist railways. A. equip any new shed with sprinklers. B. fit existing sheds with sprinklers as a priority over extending the line to Ultima Thule!

Paul H.

 

Evan if sprinklers are not present, do all workers fully understand the dangers from hot works. A ember from welding can still cause combustion many hours after the welding has ceased. Four hours is a recomended time, plus a fire extinguisher should be present and all combustable materials should be removed from the working area. The storage of oils etc should be controlled and gas cylinders kept in a sealed cosh cage.

When it comes to electricity i have seen some really dangerous things, from old extension lead conected to another extension lead, broken cables, and overloaded muti-gangs. The same comments apply to bus restoration. Where seats are left next to someone welding the bodywork.

Some people think it wont happen to them but it will if the risks are not understood. If places like Windsor Castle, Hampton Court, Cutty Sark and recently close to me Battersea Town Hall can have fires during their restoration by full time workers, then the risks must be high. Some of the examples i have given were believed to be from hot works not being monitered correctly after the work has taken place.

On your railway do you really wait four hours after finishing any hot works , do you weld next to piles of wood or seating, and are your extension leads pat tested and checked for broken cables?

 

Hello
Fire is a great menace.I remember a Marquee fire at a railway centre many years ago....spark from a passing steam locomotive landing on the canvas...went up in flames like a candle...the marquee was a distance from the running line...
Just a smouldering mess by the time the fire brigade arrived.

Sprinkler system top of the list.

Nick

 

If its the same Marquee, i think i was there at the time. Its what started my concerns origionally on the rolling stock stored there.

 

I should also point out that not only are wooden-bodied stock more combustible, they are also historically more important too.

That is, if you do lose a bunch of Mk1s to fire, there is still going to be a fair few of these workhorse carts trundling around, and maybe with insurance you can put on a brave face and carry on. It's not ideal but worse things have happened to heritage railawys.

Whereas if you destroy your whole railway's collection of unique wooden pre-grouping (or pre-nat) vehicles, then that's not good.

 

So lots of examples of things to consider for anyone looking at future shed provision. The SVR and IOWSR seem to set the example, Didcot is a worry and some are planing to build a storage shed right next to a workshop (Bluebell, although i think theres to be a fire break wall).

 

The problem with connected storage and workshops is that there are usually doors between the two. Probably 60 minute fire doors with closers as required by the local planning dept - and just as probably propped open to make carrying stuff between the two easier - which defeats the object really. I have actually seen a fire door propped open with an extinguisher that had been taken from the nearby fire point "...because it was handy" !!!

 

Just to expand on Pauls comments, the sprinkler system not only has it own water tank but when activated it is pumped into the sprinkler system. The shed also has a fire wall down the centre as per the SVR shed.

 

Oi! That's no way to describe the Dreadnought

Works are in hand to extend the block wall between the works & display areas (1 to 3 roads) up to a height of approx 12 ft & install retardant sheeting above that.

Long term there is a plan to extend the whole shed forwards over the traverser pit & do away with much of the 'trampoline' resulting in direct access to 2-6 roads. I'd hope that a sprinkler system will be incorporated in that, but I'm not holding my breath - I fear it'll take a yellow card from the insurers to bring that about.

It's a problem that all of us in the 'bodies & boxes' department are lumbered with I'm afraid, & it's an uphill struggle to get the management to focus on something other than a shiny nameplate.

Pete S.

 

I thought that the reason for the "trampoline" was that not enough room was available for trackwork. I must say Didcot has such a wonderful collection of GWR stock, is such a shame they dont have a line to really give them a run. Maybe one day they can look at hireing out restored stock to lines such as WSR or GWSR, not only as a way of generating funds but also would mean the shed would not need extending and the remaining stock would be able to be under cover. Part of the loan agreement could be that the stock has to be kept under cover at the host line, plus wear and tare maintainance.

The fire risk should anything happen is then reduced as a percentage of the collection may be away on hire.

Note: I dont want to get into a discussion on the use of the GWS stock thats up to them, and if anyone wishes to carry this part on please open a new thread, my comments are only in realation to the carrrage shed (would not need extending) and releate to that matter in this thread.

 

Good to read some suggestions that can't be accused of being "wouldn't it be nice".

Paul H

 

At one stage sprinkler system was ruled out due to a lack of good water supply to the site, to be able to make this work. I don't know if this has been up graded or not.

 

There was a massive water tank next to entrance last time i looked. Was that water not usable in a emergancy. If not what would the Fire Brigade use as a supply, only a certain amount can be carried pumps?

 

Sprinkler systems aren't the be all and end all. In some situation they can exasperate the initial damaged caused by the fire... So there isn't a simple solution.

 

This was the reason given by the supermarket owners referred to earlier for getting the planning condition requiring sprinklers removed. By not providing them the ensured that the shop was a total loss when it burned.

PH

 

And there we have the challenge of risk management - the constant battle to calculate the probability of something happening, the cost if it does, and the cost of mitigation. I've no sympathy for the supermarkets, but suspect the value of the contents of a supermarket are in a different order to the contents of a carriage shed - financially and historically.

 

Indeed so. When we built our first museum building, which incidentally contains three wooden carriages and a couple of wooden vans, we were advised against installing a sprinkler system by our insurers, for exactly that reason. What's more, they advised us to be sparing with the provision of liquid fire extinguishers because of the risk of damage to museum exhibits.

Carriages stored outside are subject to general deterioration and fire related and other vandalism. Carriages in a shed are secure from most of those risks. Never mind "nice to haves" like sprinkler systems, if you can afford it, just build the b****y shed!

 

Put in a nut shell if you have overhead sprinklers installed and you have a fire inside a coach, if a canvas roof the fire will have to burn a hole in the roof for the sprinklers to work, and if a later metal roof the sprinklers will never work. If it is a fire starting in some wood stored in the same building as the coach the sprinklers would help then to stop the fire spreading to any coaches etc in the same building.

 

In a storage shed, as opposed to a workshop, I suspect fires are more likely to start outside the carriages (excepting electrical equipment that is}.

Paul. H.

 

Can you expand on that? Assuming that said carriages can survive a shower of rain, why is a sprinkler more injurious to them than a fire?