Page 3 of 3
| Bi-Directional Signaling 12/03/2015 at 13:20 #69971 | |
Ron_J
329 posts |
In the early hours of this morning an infrastructure monitoring train developed a fuel leak, which caused the Down and Up lines into and out of Glasgow Queen Street station to become contaminated with diesel. For the first 60 chains the Up and Down lines run through a single bore tunnel at a gradient of 1 in 45 gradient; both lines are fully bi-directionally signalled as far as Cadder (4 miles away). The first Up train of the morning didn't make it up the hill because of extremely low railhead adhesion caused by the diesel contamination. The Down line was less badly affected so for the first couple of hours of the morning peak all Up traffic ran over the Down line and Down traffic ran over the Up line, crossing over to the correct line at Cowlairs South Jn. See, we can do it in this country! Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Hawk777 |
| Bi-Directional Signaling 12/03/2015 at 13:58 #69972 | |
|
Muzer
718 posts |
Is it just me, or is it worse to have poor adhesion when you're going down a hill due to the potential inability to stop? I suppose they probably had some special arrangement whereby the signaller had to give the driver a completely clear road or something? Or is the affected area so small it doesn't matter much?
Log in to reply |
| Bi-Directional Signaling 12/03/2015 at 17:13 #69978 | |
|
Hawk777
386 posts |
I guess one might invoke the quantum observer effect: the infrastructure monitoring train tried to observe the infrastructure and, in doing so, altered that which it was observing 
Log in to reply |
| Bi-Directional Signaling 13/03/2015 at 02:12 #69998 | |
|
TylerE
149 posts |
" said:Is it just me, or is it worse to have poor adhesion when you're going down a hill due to the potential inability to stop?All axles braked vs only a couple of axles powered. Log in to reply The following user said thank you: Muzer |
| Bi-Directional Signaling 13/03/2015 at 02:34 #69999 | |
|
Muzer
718 posts |
Point.
Log in to reply |
| Bi-Directional Signaling 13/03/2015 at 11:01 #70001 | |
|
Danny252
1461 posts |
Does that apply to most modern DMUs? I was under the impression that they tended to be all axles powered.
Log in to reply |
| Bi-Directional Signaling 13/03/2015 at 11:05 #70002 | |
jc92
3631 posts |
" said:Does that apply to most modern DMUs? I was under the impression that they tended to be all axles powered.158's and 156's are definetely only powered on one bogie per vehicle, not sure about 170's. "We don't stop camborne wednesdays" Log in to reply |
| Bi-Directional Signaling 13/03/2015 at 11:10 #70003 | |
|
Ron_J
329 posts |
Scotrail 170s have four powered axles out of twelve and struggle with wheelspin under accelaration at the best of times.
Log in to reply |
| Bi-Directional Signaling 13/03/2015 at 17:38 #70006 | |
|
GW43125
495 posts |
" said:" said:Still. I'd have thought they'd not risk it. There was a SPAD at Broughty Ferry some years ago where the line was shut for emergency services, the leaves on the line made the adhesion so low that despite the driver braking in plenty of time, the train slid through the signal and station at 60-70mph and overran the signal by a mile.Is it just me, or is it worse to have poor adhesion when you're going down a hill due to the potential inability to stop?All axles braked vs only a couple of axles powered. Log in to reply |