I am a Signaller, and I would NOT have told the train to pass the signal with the other one within yards of the next signal !
Well surely somebody higher up should have taken that decision?
I am a Signaller, and I would NOT have told the train to pass the signal with the other one within yards of the next signal !
I am a Signaller, and I would NOT have told the train to pass the signal with the other one within yards of the next signal !
Emergency permissive working to allow more than one train in section is definitely a tool able to be used, even if (and in fact mostly used when) it’s all gone hideously wrong. It can take a fair bit of time to implement - but may still be the most appropriate tool to deal with otherwise stranded trains. Permissive working does rely on drivers making sure they can stop short of obstructions, in any case.
There are two major downsides, however: trains have to be able to draw enough power to move - and it’s sometimes no good if the train has several units connected in multiple without through-gangways, as people in the rear unit(s) could still end up stuck outside a platform and pulling egress handles.
And that rule book has evolved after decades, with amendments after every major incident, which is why there are now things like Red Zone working, and not working within a certain distance of the platform edge.The "rule book" is there for a reason and should have provision for dealing with emergencies.
I am a Signaller, and I would NOT have told the train to pass the signal with the other one within yards of the next signal !
So what do you want to happen, how are you going to resource it and how are you going to pay for it?Then the train company's planning needs to be good.
Probably nothing if the PA had failed.I will be interested to find out (If ever we do) what was told to the passengers on the trains where people just got off.
I am a Signaller, and I would NOT have told the train to pass the signal with the other one within yards of the next signal !
But if this was true private industry, thus incident would not have happened in the first place - fares have not covered costs for many years, so the system would have been bankrupt and closed a long time ago. Likewise, the cost of providing your kind of golden 'customer service' simply cannot be afforded - you might not care what it costs, but your government on your behalf does, and they decide the financial priorities of the country, and this is not one of them. You get what you pay for.The lack of empathy and humility staff across the network seem to have shown paying customers in this case is simply staggering. This incident just fills me with utter contempt for those who work on the railway and yet defend what happened. Despite being a privatised industry, this incident merely seems to reinforce the idea that the railways still behaves like a nationalised industry, in which employees seem to think they can still get away with not doing what's right 'because it's more than my job's worth' or because the rulebook doesn't permit it. When the proverbial brown stuff hits the fan, people should be doing what is necessary to make things right not replying on those crutches.
It boils down to two things. Communication with your customers, and using your initiative. Neither seem to have happened. We have an industry waylaid by a rule book that stifles staff from doing what's right for passengers. It wouldn't happen in true private industry, because if it did then ultimately the business would start to collapse. But of course those in the railway can go home at the end of the day with warm fuzzy feelings because they know come what may and however their industry treats passengers, the railway will still be here tomorrow.
Some of the more rediculous things suggested that happe on this topic, that a true customer-focused business would not countenance include:
It really saddens me that the railways still seem to be run for the convenience / in the interests of the industry and the staff, rather than the customers who effectively pay the wages of those who work within it. Until this attitude changes, there will be little improvement. This incident - and the reaction of railway staff responding to this topic - seems to point to the idea that the railway still behaves like it is always right, and the customer is always wrong. It's about time it started finding reasons to do the right thing for customers, rather than hide behind excuses.
- Train drivers not using the PA - crazy, they're customers not self-loading cargo. Keep them informed. PA broken - train driver needs to get off their ass and go back to the coaches to tell passengers what's happening. Set mandatory intervals for drivers talking to customers, and if they won't do it fire them.
- Control not talking to train crews. What's GSMR for? We solved the problem of 'control' talking to aircraft anywhere in the world in the airline industry 20 years ago. Why is it so difficult for railways over a few miles? If they won't talk, find replacement employees who will.
- Signallers not knowing how to use GSMR general broadcast. Teach them. And if they can't master it, fire them or move them to a job they can manage.
- DO NOT TRAVEL - simply preposterous at any time of day other than first thing because some people will already have started their journey or already be at work. They have no choice but to travel.
- Station staff lacking PTS. Train them - don't care if it costs, because it's worth it to avoid these sorts of problems (or it would be if the railway was a business that could fail with enough adverse publicity). Do it after normal working hours if needs be. Make it a condition of new station staff contracts, and if they can't meet the medical requirements don't hire them.
- Accusing customers of trespassing if they detrain. Appaling. So I pay you to use your services, you fail to deliver, and then you try to persecute me for walking away from your business. Madness. If you'd have sorted the problem before your customers got edgy, or at least kept them fully informed, the problem probably wouldn't have arisen.
I understand your dilemma - but who exactly could have authorised it ?
Emergency permissive working to allow more than one train in section is definitely a tool able to be used, even if (and in fact mostly used when) it’s all gone hideously wrong. It can take a fair bit of time to implement - but may still be the most appropriate tool to deal with otherwise stranded trains. Permissive working does rely on drivers making sure they can stop short of obstructions, in any case.
There are two major downsides, however: trains have to be able to draw enough power to move - and it’s sometimes no good if the train has several units connected in multiple without through-gangways, as people in the rear unit(s) could still end up stuck outside a platform and pulling egress handles.
Surely the solution is to, as far as possible, provide walkways alongside all running lines, and improve the granularity of DC sectioning so the rail on the line the train is on can be isolated without collapsing the whole network.
Essentially more track paralleling huts and improved comms with the electrical control room.
It's covered by the Rule Book, and discussed with Control, once the driver has declared himself a failure, will go back and put out assistance protection (dets) to stop any errors,the asissting train will draw forward into station, stop, detrain, and then get permission to pass signal protecting the failure, by which time the other Driver will be at the dets with a red light too, hopefully another Ops staff member around to help as well in bad weather, now whilst it seems like the Signaller could have cut corners and let the train into the station, it would have been a dangerous thing to do.
If the message was "DO NOT TRAVEL" in capitals on Southeastern's website homepage, as Bromley Boy tells us, then that is unequivocal.
It's a clear unambiguous statement. It's not implied "we advise", "be prepared". It is absolute. You therefore back it up by not giving folk the opportunity to travel.
Some quite staggering generalisations and insults to railway staff there.
It's your nirvana of private enterprise and the the franchises desire to profit maximise and enhance shareholder value that is leading to a relentless drive to cut costs and reduce staffing across the railway.
.
The lack of empathy and humility staff across the network seem to have shown paying customers in this case is simply staggering. This incident just fills me with utter contempt for those who work on the railway and yet defend what happened. Despite being a privatised industry, this incident merely seems to reinforce the idea that the railways still behaves like a nationalised industry, in which employees seem to think they can still get away with not doing what's right 'because it's more than my job's worth' or because the rulebook doesn't permit it. When the proverbial brown stuff hits the fan, people should be doing what is necessary to make things right not replying on those crutches.
It boils down to two things. Communication with your customers, and using your initiative. Neither seem to have happened. We have an industry waylaid by a rule book that stifles staff from doing what's right for passengers. It wouldn't happen in true private industry, because if it did then ultimately the business would start to collapse. But of course those in the railway can go home at the end of the day with warm fuzzy feelings because they know come what may and however their industry treats passengers, the railway will still be here tomorrow.
It's covered by the Rule Book, and discussed with Control, once the driver has declared himself a failure, will go back and put out assistance protection (dets) to stop any errors,the asissting train will draw forward into station, stop, detrain, and then get permission to pass signal protecting the failure, by which time the other Driver will be at the dets with a red light too, hopefully another Ops staff member around to help as well in bad weather, now whilst it seems like the Signaller could have cut corners and let the train into the station, it would have been a dangerous thing to do.
Probably with some improvement to the reliability of PA systems too!Perhaps the lesson learned from this will be that the net lowest risk option is to trigger a 'proceed to station at caution' directive from Gold command and signallers can then inform drivers, with the message being repeated on social media to inform pax.
It's clear that with the vast majority of pax having access to social media, they can be better informed than the driver that the system is in chaos. Risk assessments that were made decades ago need to be reviewed accordingly
Apologies but I disagree. Certainly not in every circumstance but I have sat on trains for over 30 mins with no announcements but the PA system was working just fine and there were crew on board "Report anything suspicious etc". That is just bad service.In terms of information a key problem is that customers will claim they have 'no information' if the reality is that they have information they do not like, or if the information does not define in precise minutes when things will happen. People need to respect the choice they have made to consume the product, and, quite frankly, if they don't like it stop buying it.
I can top that one.I did wonder that, I once had a delay of about 3 hours on a Lincoln Central - Grimsby Town train. The train was held about 1 mile before Market Rasen station, the points failure was at Holton-Le-Moor about 2 miles after the station.
The driver at the time said that he couldn't pass to continue for Market Rasen because once he had got to the station to detrain us all it would actaully cause more problems than it resolved to recover the service. he did note that it was a shame the signal at Market Rasen was removed during resignalling.
The recovery plan was to send us back to the nearest cross over points and then send us on the wrong line to Market Rasen, but they needed network rail staff to assist. Again seemed odd that they could terminate us on the wrong line but I guess they could then send it the unit back to Lincoln in the normal way. As it happens they fixed the points before the people who needed to assist arrived.
or people left after 30 mins
The lack of empathy and humility staff across the network seem to have shown paying customers in this case is simply staggering. This incident just fills me with utter contempt for those who work on the railway and yet defend what happened. Despite being a privatised industry, this incident merely seems to reinforce the idea that the railways still behaves like a nationalised industry, in which employees seem to think they can still get away with not doing what's right 'because it's more than my job's worth' or because the rulebook doesn't permit it. When the proverbial brown stuff hits the fan, people should be doing what is necessary to make things right not replying on those crutches.
It boils down to two things. Communication with your customers, and using your initiative. Neither seem to have happened. We have an industry waylaid by a rule book that stifles staff from doing what's right for passengers. It wouldn't happen in true private industry, because if it did then ultimately the business would start to collapse. But of course those in the railway can go home at the end of the day with warm fuzzy feelings because they know come what may and however their industry treats passengers, the railway will still be here tomorrow.
Some of the more rediculous things suggested that happe on this topic, that a true customer-focused business would not countenance include:
It really saddens me that the railways still seem to be run for the convenience / in the interests of the industry and the staff, rather than the customers who effectively pay the wages of those who work within it. Until this attitude changes, there will be little improvement. This incident - and the reaction of railway staff responding to this topic - seems to point to the idea that the railway still behaves like it is always right, and the customer is always wrong. It's about time it started finding reasons to do the right thing for customers, rather than hide behind excuses.
- Train drivers not using the PA - crazy, they're customers not self-loading cargo. Keep them informed. PA broken - train driver needs to get off their ass and go back to the coaches to tell passengers what's happening. Set mandatory intervals for drivers talking to customers, and if they won't do it fire them.
- Control not talking to train crews. What's GSMR for? We solved the problem of 'control' talking to aircraft anywhere in the world in the airline industry 20 years ago. Why is it so difficult for railways over a few miles? If they won't talk, find replacement employees who will.
- Signallers not knowing how to use GSMR general broadcast. Teach them. And if they can't master it, fire them or move them to a job they can manage.
- DO NOT TRAVEL - simply preposterous at any time of day other than first thing because some people will already have started their journey or already be at work. They have no choice but to travel.
- Station staff lacking PTS. Train them - don't care if it costs, because it's worth it to avoid these sorts of problems (or it would be if the railway was a business that could fail with enough adverse publicity). Do it after normal working hours if needs be. Make it a condition of new station staff contracts, and if they can't meet the medical requirements don't hire them.
- Accusing customers of trespassing if they detrain. Appaling. So I pay you to use your services, you fail to deliver, and then you try to persecute me for walking away from your business. Madness. If you'd have sorted the problem before your customers got edgy, or at least kept them fully informed, the problem probably wouldn't have arisen.
It worries me that the railway procedures are so risk averse and give so little discretion to staff.
Isn't this what you have GOLD command on duty for?
These are your most experienced operational managers who are paid to make important decisions and judgements.
These people have the experience to be able to make those important decisions. They should also have more information available to them that individual drivers or signallers.
Apologies but I disagree. Certainly not in every circumstance but I have sat on trains for over 30 mins with no announcements but the PA system was working just fine and there were crew on board "Report anything suspicious etc". That is just bad service.
I think it was 2M48 - stuck just after Lewisham. 2M50 was then stuck just before Lewisham - pictured in #766. 2S54 was on the Tanners Hill Flydown and the rear was foul of the points - blocking 2R46, 2H50 etc from going down the fasts to Orpington. Attached was how things were looking at 18:29.
(This is all just based off looking at the signalling maps across the evening and various pictures on Twitter though, I could be totally wrong).