PHILIPE
Veteran Member
A simple and logical answer as to the failure to obtain water is that nobody knew how long the train would be there and would not be expecting it to be standing for the length of time it was.
You're missing the point. Waiting until it runs out is not acceptable. The very latest time that additional water should have arrived is on the same train that dropped off the fitter. (Because FGW control knew before he set off that that even if he got the failed train going quickly, it would have been at a stand for three hours.)My point is that basic provisions were provided. There was food and water on the train, ok it ran out but we can't debate if more water should have Ben provided until we know when it ran out.
I seem to be repeating myself a bit here. The partial log posted upthread shows that FGW knew very early on that the fitter would not arrive on-scene until the failed train had been at a stand for two-and-a-half hours. That already is a long time. Then add in some time for him to fix the problem, and you're talking about three hours minimum before the train gets underway.A simple and logical answer as to the failure to obtain water is that nobody knew how long the train would be there and would not be expecting it to be standing for the length of time it was.
You're missing the point. Waiting until it runs out is not acceptable. The very latest time that additional water should have arrived is on the same train that dropped off the fitter. (Because FGW control knew before he set off that that even if he got the failed train going quickly, it would have been at a stand for three hours.)
Even if it turns out later that the extra water wasn't needed it demonstrates to the passengers that something is being done and that they haven't been abandoned. Surely you can realise that psychologically this is important and helps the on-board team in managing the situation.
(500 people that feel 'something is being done' are going to far easier to deal with than 500 people who feel they have been abandoned.)
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I seem to be repeating myself a bit here. The partial log posted upthread shows that FGW knew very early on that the fitter would not arrive on-scene until the failed train had been at a stand for two-and-a-half hours. That already is a long time. Then add in some time for him to fix the problem, and you're talking about three hours minimum before the train gets underway.
As soon as FGW control realised that, they should have started making arrangements to get extra food/water to the stranded train.
Whilst the delay is indeed unacceptable and regrettable, it would appear to be a sequence of very unfortunate events which has created this big problem. People say that evacuation should have been made but the problem with events like this is that there is an expectation by those trying to fix the problem that the problem shall be fixed 'soon' and all will be well, so why evacuate? While we all have the benefit of hindsight this doesn't seem to me to be an unreasonable stance to be taking. Why would you evacuate a train you are trying to fix if there is no immediate danger? It's worth pointing out too that this delay could well have been considerably less if it wasn't for the fact that the company issued mobile phones were not working (no signal, not much you can do about that), the TM's personal phone I understand also ran flat (so that option was out of the window too rather quickly) and the only other method of communication was via the GSM-R. Given that it would mean walking up and down the full length of the train in order to investigate or try something and then report back would add a big chunk of time I would have thought.
The breakdown at Reading would not have helped matters either. I am sure there are lessons to be learnt from this. The provision of refreshments will I am sure be looked into. But from what I can gather on the whole from what I have seen is that this does appear to be mostly a sequence of unfortunate events. We will likely not see something like it again (hopefully) for quite some time.
Did I say that it was? Just highlighting that someone somewhere (possibly 'someone in an office hundreds of miles away') has the responsibility to make sure those things happen as well.As for Crisis management, Jesus, its the railway and here we have some one saying D and E were not being carried out. I am sure I read that the driver and then subsequently the fitter were in fact trying to fix the fault. You see its not someone in an office hundreds of miles away that fixes is it?
I've answered that already.If the fitter arrived after 3 hours and the train was still well stocked with food and water why waste more time sourcing more to have put on that train?
Only fitter available over at Reading and had to wait for the next train west? Swindon is 30 minutes drive in a company van away from the lane that apparently was alongside the line. Is there really not a fitter available for FGW at Swindon, of all places?
That's pure speculation - you have no idea what the buffet stock levels were like.And as I said, within the first 3 hours the buffet was probably more than adequately stocked to last until the train was able to move again.
ATOC said:Within 60 minutes: Arrange for (additional) refreshment supplies to be available for transport to site from the most practicable location.
I've answered that already.
The words 'waste' and 'time' are the ones to look out for here folks. That's 'WASTE' and 'TIME'. As in providing water *just in case* during the best opportunity to do so would be a *waste of time*.If the fitter arrived after 3 hours and the train was still well stocked with food and water why waste more time sourcing more to have put on that train? 99% of the time when a fitter attends a failed train they get it moving again very quickly. They know the traction inside out and have very good systems in place for diagnosing and recognising faults. It is normally a case of fitter getting under train with spanner, tweaking the parking break and everyone carries on 3 hours late on a train with a well stocked buffet.
If they thought for a moment that they may be looking at a delay of 6 hours they would have sent provisions in with the fitter.
Only fitter available over at Reading and had to wait for the next train west? Swindon is 30 minutes drive in a company van away from the lane that apparently was alongside the line. Is there really not a fitter available for FGW at Swindon, of all places?
The words 'waste' and 'time' are the ones to look out for here folks. That's 'WASTE' and 'TIME'. As in providing water *just in case* during the best opportunity to do so would be a *waste of time*.
Welcome to where the customer comes first. I give up.
very well put...
whilst i really canne be bothered to read all 25 pages of "armchair expertise" on this subject, i do wonder how many claiming this should have happened and that should have happened are actually fully trained traincrew(?) my guess is hardly, if not any.... i doubt many were even on board that particular service to know what actually took place and only have hear'say and gossip to base their "ideas" on.... six hours is exceptional yes, but unless you are trained to deal with a situation like that, or where actually there, you canne really comment.... also hindsight is a wonderful gift, unfortunatly we are not all superheroes blessed with this power!!! :roll:
When?
You're missing the point. Waiting until it runs out is not acceptable. The very latest time that additional water should have arrived is on the same train that dropped off the fitter. (Because FGW control knew before he set off that that even if he got the failed train going quickly, it would have been at a stand for three hours.)
Even if it turns out later that the extra water wasn't needed it demonstrates to the passengers that something is being done and that they haven't been abandoned. Surely you can realise that psychologically this is important and helps the on-board team in managing the situation.
(500 people that feel 'something is being done' are going to far easier to deal with than 500 people who feel they have been abandoned.)
Are three hour delays 'very common'? Because the relevant point that you seem to be ignoring is that they knew very early on that the fitter would not get there and get the train underway in anything less than three hours.You mean when you said it should be done as a just Incase? Even though these things are common and routine and very very rarely take this long to sort out.
I'd say following the ATOC guidance is a good, sensible basis. I mean that's why they wrote the best practice guidelines. (I appreciate that they are guidelines not rules; but having gone to all that effort to produce them, you'd think that ATOC members would actually bother to follow them.)Where do you draw the line on the just Incase?
But they knew it would be at least three hours, which is long enough.No one thought for a second that the fitter would take so long to come up with a solution. And why would they? Experience tells you that it won't.
This is just a thought, but did the train really run out of water?
Could it not be that the crew onboard realise they were running low and then started rationing it? Maybe a crate or two was kept stored in the power cars in case someone really needed it rather than people helping themselves to bottled water because it was free! Even it was half a dozen bottles
Here, in the post you responded to:
Are three hour delays 'very common'? Because the relevant point that you seem to be ignoring is that they knew very early on that the fitter would not get there and get the train underway in anything less than three hours.
I'd say following the ATOC guidance is a good, sensible basis. I mean that's why they wrote the best practice guidelines. (I appreciate that they are guidelines not rules; but having gone to all that effort to produce them, you'd think that ATOC members would actually bother to follow them.)
But they knew it would be at least three hours, which is long enough.
I wish you would read things properly and actually think before spouting the rubbish you are.
Why delay things even further to wait for enough water to be loaded onto a train before getting a fitter there when the train may well, for all you know, have plenty of water already on it, enough to last another hour anyway which is more than enough time for the fitter to fix it.
You have taken words in my post out of context to fuel your very weak argument that the customer is not considered in any of this. Of course the fact that they were doing anything at all to get the train moving was for the benefit of those customers and the thousands of others stranded around the west of England by the blocked line.
And unless you can be bothered to read the thread you can't really comment.
Next!
i've read enough "armchair expertise" as i said and threads like this are always full of know-it-alls versions of what they think happened and what they would have done... blah blah blah!!
i never said i hadn't read the thread, i said i hadn't read all 25 (now 26) pages of it and the drivel it contains!!!!
now kindly remove yourself from you high horse!!
I am wondering what you think the internet is actually FOR??
Why would it cause any extra delay?Why delay things even further to wait for enough water to be loaded onto a train before getting a fitter there.
Sorry, that's not an acceptable excuse.And stop waving that stupid ATOC guide around. Just quoting stuff from that isn't helpful and as I said before, just shows you to be no more than someone who 'read it on google'.
Putting that stuff into practice is different
We are also stopping a service opposite to replenish the buffet at the request of the guard
Well that's really good to know something was done. About four hours too late - but better than nothing!Don't know if this has already been mentioned but this was also on the log at about 1940..
If the people working in FGW control cannot 'put that stuff into practice' then quite possibly they're in the wrong job.