Six inch gap on 125mph railway line near Selby

York Press: Six inch gap on 125mph railway line Six inch gap on 125mph railway line

RAIL passengers were “dicing with death” after a six-inch gap was found in a railway line, it has been claimed.

The damaged rail, on the East Coast Mainline near Selby, meant railway bosses were “risking another major rail tragedy”, according to Bob Crow, general secretary of the RMT. But rail managers have insisted teh incident was managed safely.

A picture of the damaged rail, taken last week shows the gap at the Hambleton South Junction, where normal running speed for trains is 125mph, and the union said the damage could have been in place for up to two weeks.

Mr Crow said: “This shocking new picture highlights the reality on Britain’s railways today – staffing, inspections and track renewals have been cut in the dash to save money and there is massive pressure right from the top of Government to keep services running at all costs regardless of the potential human cost. If we don’t reverse the cuts on Britain’s railways another major tragedy is inevitable.

“We are now facing exactly the same set of poisonous conditions that led us to the Hatfield disaster and as this picture, following on from similar evidence exposed by RMT late last year, shows we are dicing with death and risking another major rail tragedy.”

Reg French, from the Selby and District Rail Users Group (SADRUG), said he was particularly worried as his son is a train driver who travels on that line at 125mph.

He said: “Obviously, it’s disturbing because this is the second time this has been a problem on that line.

“My other concern is that it originally was seen not as a six-inch gap, but as a dip or problem to be resolved, and as far as I can gather, it looks as if the works were done a little bit late.”

A Network Rail spokeswoman said a “dip” in the track had first been identified at Hambleton on January 17, with repairs scheduled to take place on February 2, the day after the picture was taken.

She said: “Unfortunately the track deteriorated more quickly than is to be expected and, on discovering the broken rail, all traffic was stopped immediately while a repair was carried out. This incident was managed within all safety standards and was in no way affected by changes to staffing levels. Safety issues will never be compromised in the name of managing costs.”

Comments (11)

Please log in to enable comment sorting

11:29am Sat 9 Feb 13

pedalling paul says...

Superman will unfortunately not be around should this situation recur............
Superman will unfortunately not be around should this situation recur............ pedalling paul

11:51am Sat 9 Feb 13

Keeet Lemon says...

Hambleton south junction where normal running speeds are 125 mph.... Really!!!???
Hambleton south junction where normal running speeds are 125 mph.... Really!!!??? Keeet Lemon

12:18pm Sat 9 Feb 13

Paul Meoff says...

Have the p1kies moved on from nicking the cables.
Have the p1kies moved on from nicking the cables. Paul Meoff

6:18pm Sat 9 Feb 13

deckhanddave says...

Well, what do you expect? The ConDems need to save money for the new High Speed train line that only they and the rich can afford to ride. Some commoners use the 125 service, using apex advanced cheap fares. This country's going to hell on a rail! and fast.
Well, what do you expect? The ConDems need to save money for the new High Speed train line that only they and the rich can afford to ride. Some commoners use the 125 service, using apex advanced cheap fares. This country's going to hell on a rail! and fast. deckhanddave

11:16pm Sat 9 Feb 13

jumbojet says...

We had a problem, very similar, at the end of last year, Colton, if I remember correctly. I shall sit with trepidation all the way to Kings X, the customer was never told why the line was in such a s**t state, and now we have exactly the same. What is the track like at Doncaster, Retford, Newark, Peterborough, this is not funny, it is time for some sort of statement about the procedures before people die, these trains zip along and they will not keep riding track in that condition. I shall contact our MP, I'll see what that brings.
We had a problem, very similar, at the end of last year, Colton, if I remember correctly. I shall sit with trepidation all the way to Kings X, the customer was never told why the line was in such a s**t state, and now we have exactly the same. What is the track like at Doncaster, Retford, Newark, Peterborough, this is not funny, it is time for some sort of statement about the procedures before people die, these trains zip along and they will not keep riding track in that condition. I shall contact our MP, I'll see what that brings. jumbojet

1:33am Sun 10 Feb 13

Chrido81 says...

Wrong type of rain.
Wrong type of sun.
Wrong type of leaves.
Wrong type of snow.

Now we have the wrong type of rails it seems.

How about wrong type of rail management too? I don't think they'll admit to that one though... Haha.
Wrong type of rain. Wrong type of sun. Wrong type of leaves. Wrong type of snow. Now we have the wrong type of rails it seems. How about wrong type of rail management too? I don't think they'll admit to that one though... Haha. Chrido81

8:09am Sun 10 Feb 13

Priapus says...

deckhanddave wrote:
Well, what do you expect? The ConDems need to save money for the new High Speed train line that only they and the rich can afford to ride. Some commoners use the 125 service, using apex advanced cheap fares. This country's going to hell on a rail! and fast.
Meanwhile, back on planet Earth...
[quote][p][bold]deckhanddave[/bold] wrote: Well, what do you expect? The ConDems need to save money for the new High Speed train line that only they and the rich can afford to ride. Some commoners use the 125 service, using apex advanced cheap fares. This country's going to hell on a rail! and fast.[/p][/quote]Meanwhile, back on planet Earth... Priapus

10:49am Sun 10 Feb 13

old_geezer says...

That's two such incidents within 3 months on one stretch of track. Network Rail's safety standards obviously aren't good enough, since "This incident was managed within all safety standards".

And as to cost, elsewhere an inquest was told the other day that a safety device that would have saved a woman's life hadn't been installed at a level crossing specifically because it cost £40,000.
That's two such incidents within 3 months on one stretch of track. Network Rail's safety standards obviously aren't good enough, since "This incident was managed within all safety standards". And as to cost, elsewhere an inquest was told the other day that a safety device that would have saved a woman's life hadn't been installed at a level crossing specifically because it cost £40,000. old_geezer

2:45pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Sillybillies says...

Seems to me that travelling by rail is a form of Russian roulette. Far safer and cheaper by car.
Seems to me that travelling by rail is a form of Russian roulette. Far safer and cheaper by car. Sillybillies

3:34pm Sun 10 Feb 13

yorkborn66 says...

Makes you really wonder: spend billions of pounds on HS2, but forget about the existing infrastructure. With this kind of rhetoric, this is why we have become the laughing stock to amuse the rest of the world. A complete disgrace.
I suppose we will have to wait for another rail disaster and unnecessary loss of life’s, for our politicians to gloss over the incident with more false promises and false remorse.
Makes you really wonder: spend billions of pounds on HS2, but forget about the existing infrastructure. With this kind of rhetoric, this is why we have become the laughing stock to amuse the rest of the world. A complete disgrace. I suppose we will have to wait for another rail disaster and unnecessary loss of life’s, for our politicians to gloss over the incident with more false promises and false remorse. yorkborn66

6:35pm Sun 10 Feb 13

Paul Meoff says...

Sillybillies wrote:
Seems to me that travelling by rail is a form of Russian roulette. Far safer and cheaper by car.
How do you conclude car is safer?

8 passenger deaths from 34bn rail miles in 2010. That's about 0.25 per billion miles.

1901 road deaths at 4 per billion miles.

16 times more likely to be killed in a car.
[quote][p][bold]Sillybillies[/bold] wrote: Seems to me that travelling by rail is a form of Russian roulette. Far safer and cheaper by car.[/p][/quote]How do you conclude car is safer? 8 passenger deaths from 34bn rail miles in 2010. That's about 0.25 per billion miles. 1901 road deaths at 4 per billion miles. 16 times more likely to be killed in a car. Paul Meoff

Comments are closed on this article.

click2find

About cookies

We want you to enjoy your visit to our website. That's why we use cookies to enhance your experience. By staying on our website you agree to our use of cookies. Find out more about the cookies we use.

I agree