Bushey Trap and Drag: Questions for Traincrew and Dispatchers.

[Bletchleyite]

This sensitive edge technology. If it's reliable and nothing can be trapped, does this mean that on services which operate this stock, gaining interlock DOES mean nothing trapped and can be relied upon to mean as much? Or does training still stipulate that gaining interlock doesn't indicate nothing is trapped?

It's not sensitive enough to pick up on a thin piece of clothing being trapped, so no, it's just another aid for the driver (DOO) or guard who still needs to use the Mk1 eyeball to ensure it is clear.

 

[philthetube]

It's not sensitive enough to pick up on a thin piece of clothing being trapped, so no, it's just another aid for the driver (DOO) or guard who still needs to use the Mk1 eyeball to ensure it is clear.

It wont pick up the initial trapping, but it will pick it up if the train departs dragging someone attached to the thin piece of clothing.

 

[pt_mad]

It's not sensitive enough to pick up on a thin piece of clothing being trapped, so no, it's just another aid for the driver (DOO) or guard who still needs to use the Mk1 eyeball to ensure it is clear.

Trouble is how could a guard reliably see a bag strap if the person were well back from the train and it was 8 possibly up to 11 coaches away in darkness?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Trouble is how could a guard reliably see a bag strap if the person were well back from the train and it was 8 possibly up to 11 coaches away in darkness?

They can see the person attached to it standing outside the train, probably pulling on it in a panic. If they are inside the train it poses no significant risk, just inconvenience of having to stand by the door until it reopens at the next station.

 

[pt_mad]

It still worries me that the trapped item itself may not be able to be seen and that if the passenger shows no sign of panic and is not stood against the train there may not be clear signs something is trapped before the train safety check is complete.

 

[185]

Trouble is how could a guard reliably see a bag strap if the person were well back from the train and it was 8 possibly up to 11 coaches away in darkness?

Quite agree. No excuse for those not completing dispatch properly, but the lighting on some stations, both those with guard- and DOO- dispatch is shocking, for this day and age. Good quality LED lamps should be the norm nowadays. It surprises me newer rolling stock doesn't have simple, additional lamps illuminating the area around the step, not just the saloon people step into - especially for longer trains where views can be restricted.

 

[pt_mad]

Quite agree. No excuse for those not completing dispatch properly, but the lighting on some stations, both those with guard- and DOO- dispatch is shocking, for this day and age. Good quality LED lamps should be the norm nowadays. It surprises me newer rolling stock doesn't have simple, additional lamps illuminating the area around the step, not just the saloon people step into - especially for longer trains where views can be restricted.

And if the 1inch bag strap were black, and it's dark, good luck. The trouble with theory and reality is, the rule is to do a thorough train safety check, of course, who wouldn't? God help anyone who didnt. If the monitors are that poor in sunlight, or darkness, and it's every other station on a summer's day, or in winter fog and darkness, what does the driver do? Refuse to take the train out of the station? How many times does that actually happen? Or make do with the best they have and 1 percent element is hope that nobody is trapped like it appears on the screens? And hope that should an incident occur that the operator would take some liability due to knowingly operating with poor standard monitors? (If that is the case).

Same with guards duties. All guards must of course carry out the train safety check. If it 'appears' that nothing is trapped, bearing in mind there could be a crowd walking along the platform towards you who have alighted up to 12 coaches away. If it 'appears' nothing is trapped from the guards position and they are in a position that is allowed (i.e. where dispatch plan says guard positioned anywhere alongside the train) then is appears enough? Because surely it is possible a bag strap could be caught that is not visible for a distance of over 100 metres in darkness isn't it? And when people are walking along the platform towards the exits a couple of feet back from the platform edge, someone struggling who was stood back surely couldn't necessarily be seen unless they caused an alert if it was as thin as a bag strap?

 

[Robertj21a]

Silly, but genuine, question.

Do guards/dispatch staff have regular eye checks to ensure that they meet necessary criteria ?

 

[Surreytraveller]

Silly, but genuine, question.

Do guards/dispatch staff have regular eye checks to ensure that they meet necessary criteria ?

Yes. Although they can go for years without being checked if they're young and haven't got to the age where they have periodical medicals.

 

[philthetube]

And if the 1inch bag strap were black, and it's dark, good luck. The trouble with theory and reality is, the rule is to do a thorough train safety check, of course, who wouldn't? God help anyone who didnt. If the monitors are that poor in sunlight, or darkness, and it's every other station on a summer's day, or in winter fog and darkness, what does the driver do? Refuse to take the train out of the station? How many times does that actually happen? Or make do with the best they have and 1 percent element is hope that nobody is trapped like it appears on the screens? And hope that should an incident occur that the operator would take some liability due to knowingly operating with poor standard monitors? (If that is the case).

Same with guards duties. All guards must of course carry out the train safety check. If it 'appears' that nothing is trapped, bearing in mind there could be a crowd walking along the platform towards you who have alighted up to 12 coaches away. If it 'appears' nothing is trapped from the guards position and they are in a position that is allowed (i.e. where dispatch plan says guard positioned anywhere alongside the train) then is appears enough? Because surely it is possible a bag strap could be caught that is not visible for a distance of over 100 metres in darkness isn't it? And when people are walking along the platform towards the exits a couple of feet back from the platform edge, someone struggling who was stood back surely couldn't necessarily be seen unless they caused an alert if it was as thin as a bag strap?

They should, and heaven help a manager who disciplines said driver, the next time an incident occurs in bad light or with other cause of poor visibility. The RAIB would be down like a ton of bricks on any toc who encourage a non safe system of work.

I am struggling to think of a trap and drag incident where lighting was quoted as a cause, perhaps someone else can.

 

[tsr]

In my personal experience, train crew and platform staff tend to be more cautious dispatching when there are obvious hazards and less so if "it's probably OK". This doesn't always apply but it does seem that many trap and drag incidents involve situations where the visibility has been reasonable, BILs have gone out promptly, the platforms have been fairly quiet, etc. etc.

I have personally been involved in events where station lighting has been either minimal or non-existent and I've been expected to dispatch a train of a fair length - say 8ish coaches - and on occasion I have had to lock out each coach one-by-one, checking each door individually and maintaining a good lookout along the platform throughout. Likewise incidents when monitors have failed or similar and there has been no alternative to taking a lot of time to make sure it's all safe. In some cases you can end up feeling a sense of heightened awareness from dealing with a more complex scenario, and you're definitely scrutinising the situation for anything which may be going wrong. But if it's a clear, sunny day and there's a drunk person wandering around near the station entrance, it may not immediately seem much of a hazard, yet you may need to have been just as observant when dispatching in order to then halt the process when they get too close to the train.

 

[pt_mad]

They should, and heaven help a manager who disciplines said driver, the next time an incident occurs in bad light or with other cause of poor visibility. The RAIB would be down like a ton of bricks on any toc who encourage a non safe system of work.

I am struggling to think of a trap and drag incident where lighting was quoted as a cause, perhaps someone else can.

Have there been any which have happened in darkness where darkness was a factor? I.e. the person may have been noticed in daylight?

I still struggle to see how any guard could see a bag strap 12 coaches away if it were black and it's night time. You'd need better than railway vision for that, more like zoom in vision. Unless the person was right next to the door it'd be like looking for a phone charger on the floor 150 plus metres away.

 

[Intermodal]

Have there been any which have happened in darkness where darkness was a factor? I.e. the person may have been noticed in daylight?

I still struggle to see how any guard could see a bag strap 12 coaches away if it were black and it's night time. You'd need better than railway vision for that, more like zoom in vision. Unless the person was right next to the door it'd be like looking for a phone charger on the floor 150 plus metres away.

I think you are getting a bit of tunnel vision here.

What about station lighting - albeit not great at all locations?
What about the inevitable human stood next to the bag strap - it's not like the bag is going for a walk on it's own?
What about the guard's ability to, god forbid, move closer for a better inspection?
What about the guard's experience culminating in instinct which may indicate to them something is off at that particular time at that particular platform?
What about the ability of passengers on board the train to alert train crew of a problem?
What about the ability of the passenger to take their bag off in a worst case scenario?

Your example assumes none of the above things have gone right. A very unlikely proposition indeed, in my mind.

 

[pt_mad]

I think you are getting a bit of tunnel vision here.

What about station lighting - albeit not great at all locations?
What about the inevitable human stood next to the bag strap - it's not like the bag is going for a walk on it's own?
What about the guard's ability to, god forbid, move closer for a better inspection?
What about the guard's experience culminating in instinct which may indicate to them something is off at that particular time at that particular platform?
What about the ability of passengers on board the train to alert train crew of a problem?
What about the ability of the passenger to take their bag off in a worst case scenario?

Your example assumes none of the above things have gone right. A very unlikely proposition indeed, in my mind.

Very unlikely, true, but not at all impossible. If trap and drags are happening at the rate of one every two or three years they're very unlikely in general, but not impossible as we've seen.

It's unlikely that an item will be trapped in the doors and nobody alerted and interlock gained to begin with, but it's something the industry is worried about.

Will it not be the case in most trap and drags which have happened up until now, that the above factors didn't alert the train staff that someone was trapped before the train ready to start was given? Otherwise they probably wouldn't have happened surely.

 

[HLE]

Prior to the fitting of hustle alarms where it wastes too much time, the effect of that would usually be a (manual) reopening, too - some people may well have thought it was automatic.

It's also the case that doors on at least some LU trains close softly enough (and each door moves independently rather than both together on the mainline) that they are easy to hold open.

Now, try that on a Class 153 and expect to still have your fingers...

Well some lad up this way tried to do the same thing to a 153 door earlier this week. Give it another millisecond and his fingers may well have been a nice shade of black and blue.

 

[156478]

As a train dispatcher I believe mindsets really, really need to change.

1) I will get on this train and defy my own safety/compromise punctuality- "sod everyone else, I complain about bad punctuality but this train will wait for me and I will delay it by blocking the closing doors to get on"
2) I will ignore the instructions of staff who are there for my safety and can be prosecuted despite my actions being unsafe and they gave me strong instructions to not put myself in danger.
3) I won't get caught in the doors as they are like lift doors and they will re-open
4) and also while it's covering old ground- customers with no tickets, leaving litter, feet on seats, antisocial behavior etc etc. To me and probably controversially Standards of behavior like this are a breeding ground for a lack of respect for safety as society these days has almost delegated that someone else will clean up after you, someone else can be blamed for your dangerous actions, it's someone elses fault in general, people not being accountable for their own actions in life. To me if you respect the travelling environment, the staff and your own safety this kind of incident should not be happening as often as they are just now.

In my opinion there really needs to be a real concentrated safety and behavioral campaign for Customers. Frontline staff get regularly briefed and assessed on Platform Train Interface almost close to being blue in the face- however these incidents still occur. Safety and respect should work both ways. Just my two cents.

 

[philthetube]

I think you are getting a bit of tunnel vision here.

What about station lighting - albeit not great at all locations?
What about the inevitable human stood next to the bag strap - it's not like the bag is going for a walk on it's own?
What about the guard's ability to, god forbid, move closer for a better inspection?
What about the guard's experience culminating in instinct which may indicate to them something is off at that particular time at that particular platform?
What about the ability of passengers on board the train to alert train crew of a problem?
What about the ability of the passenger to take their bag off in a worst case scenario?

Your example assumes none of the above things have gone right. A very unlikely proposition indeed, in my mind.

However it does happen, if any of the above had gone right this incident would not have happened

 

[bramling]

As a train dispatcher I believe mindsets really, really need to change.

1) I will get on this train and defy my own safety/compromise punctuality- "sod everyone else, I complain about bad punctuality but this train will wait for me and I will delay it by blocking the closing doors to get on"
2) I will ignore the instructions of staff who are there for my safety and can be prosecuted despite my actions being unsafe and they gave me strong instructions to not put myself in danger.
3) I won't get caught in the doors as they are like lift doors and they will re-open
4) and also while it's covering old ground- customers with no tickets, leaving litter, feet on seats, antisocial behavior etc etc. To me and probably controversially Standards of behavior like this are a breeding ground for a lack of respect for safety as society these days has almost delegated that someone else will clean up after you, someone else can be blamed for your dangerous actions, it's someone elses fault in general, people not being accountable for their own actions in life. To me if you respect the travelling environment, the staff and your own safety this kind of incident should not be happening as often as they are just now.

In my opinion there really needs to be a real concentrated safety and behavioral campaign for Customers. Frontline staff get regularly briefed and assessed on Platform Train Interface almost close to being blue in the face- however these incidents still occur. Safety and respect should work both ways. Just my two cents.

I very much agree with all this. The passenger agrees to comply with various obligations when they choose to travel by rail, and the relevant rules, actually laws, already exist in the form of byelaws.

The industry could do a lot to encourage a shift in behaviour by simply making some effort to enforce the byelaws with assistance from the BTP which it funds.

Dispatch is a potentially hazardous process and this point needs to be better emphasised, realistically staff are never going to get this 100.0% right 100.0% of the time, and people do need to take some responsibility for minimising their own exposure to risk.

Of course it doesn’t help that we have a high-profile case where an intoxicated and drugged-up youth was playing around at the side of a train and ignored a safety instruction shouted to her, during a train dispatch which in every other respect apart from the presence of this youth was quite properly able to be dispatched, and the guard ended up with a lengthy prison sentence. I still find that highly objectionable.

 

[Robertj21a]

As a train dispatcher I believe mindsets really, really need to change.

1) I will get on this train and defy my own safety/compromise punctuality- "sod everyone else, I complain about bad punctuality but this train will wait for me and I will delay it by blocking the closing doors to get on"
2) I will ignore the instructions of staff who are there for my safety and can be prosecuted despite my actions being unsafe and they gave me strong instructions to not put myself in danger.
3) I won't get caught in the doors as they are like lift doors and they will re-open
4) and also while it's covering old ground- customers with no tickets, leaving litter, feet on seats, antisocial behavior etc etc. To me and probably controversially Standards of behavior like this are a breeding ground for a lack of respect for safety as society these days has almost delegated that someone else will clean up after you, someone else can be blamed for your dangerous actions, it's someone elses fault in general, people not being accountable for their own actions in life. To me if you respect the travelling environment, the staff and your own safety this kind of incident should not be happening as often as they are just now.

In my opinion there really needs to be a real concentrated safety and behavioral campaign for Customers. Frontline staff get regularly briefed and assessed on Platform Train Interface almost close to being blue in the face- however these incidents still occur. Safety and respect should work both ways. Just my two cents.

I don't disagree with any of that but I'd like to see the TOCs and manufacturers pay more attention to ensuring that the doors will reopen, at the slightest indication of a problem. I'm sure many passengers are more than used to lift doors and Tube door reopening if they put an arm/leg in the way - there's every likelihood that they will expect a train door to work the same.
I know there have been issues over it then becoming over-sensitive, and delaying despatch - hence my wish for more work to be done to investigate what can still be improved.

 

[mr_jrt]

I had my coat trapped in the doors at Harrow & Wealdstone once. My train was a fair few minutes late and usually, whenever the trains are late, all the passengers for the next service(s) pile onto the earlier (late) service, leading to massive overcrowding. I had a connection to make, so I just about managed to barge my way into the vestibule. Doors closed, I knew I was getting to work on time. Got to Euston, doors opened on opposite side, waited for the carriage to empty out, then went to leave, except I couldn't. The back of my coat was caught in the door seals. I gave it an almighty tug to free it, but it still wouldn't come, turns out there's a buckle of sorts at the end of a strap that had splayed out. Had to leave it hanging there whilst I found a member of staff to wrong side open the doors to free it.

I suspect I wasn't in any danger as anything that would have caught the straps would have made a real mess of the trains, but still. You would hope the door detection would have picked it up! LM Class 350, FWIW.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't disagree with any of that but I'd like to see the TOCs and manufacturers pay more attention to ensuring that the doors will reopen, at the slightest indication of a problem. I'm sure many passengers are more than used to lift doors and Tube door reopening if they put an arm/leg in the way - there's every likelihood that they will expect a train door to work the same.
I know there have been issues over it then becoming over-sensitive, and delaying despatch - hence my wish for more work to be done to investigate what can still be improved.

Rather than reopening, an option would be for the system to detect such a thing and not give interlock until the doors have been reopened and closed manually. That would prevent people from using it as a means of holding doors open.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I very much agree with all this. The passenger agrees to comply with various obligations when they choose to travel by rail, and the relevant rules, actually laws, already exist in the form of byelaws.

The industry could do a lot to encourage a shift in behaviour by simply making some effort to enforce the byelaws with assistance from the BTP which it funds.

That is an interesting point. A few high profile prosecutions for boarding when the hustle alarms were sounding might concentrate minds. But there will still be idiots, and society at present doesn't like to allow for "Darwin awards", so we still cater for them.

One thing to think about though that would be worth looking at. In a heritage DMU or Mk1 EMU, on dispatch the guard would remain by his open door with the buzzer just above his head until the train had wholly left the platform, so someone trapped would be seen panicking and the train stopped immediately. Most modern stock means that once you've done the dispatch check nobody who can actually intervene (bar a dispatcher shouting "stand away") to stop the train. Standing by open doors did cause some staff-falling-out issues, but should we perhaps, for example, have screens for guards at all dispatch locations so they can safely watch the train out with their hand on the buzzer, and only once the platform has been fully left move onto other stuff?

As for the prosecution you note, I agree it was absolutely nuts and not in the national interest at all. I'm firmly of the belief that being drunk does not alter expectations on behaviour at all, so someone who took a dangerous action when drunk should not be treated as any more vulnerable as if they were sober. You choose to drink; if you can't handle your drink, don't; if you can't not drink, seek help.

 

[Robertj21a]

That is an interesting point. A few high profile prosecutions for boarding when the hustle alarms were sounding might concentrate minds. But there will still be idiots, and society at present doesn't like to allow for "Darwin awards", so we still cater for them.

One thing to think about though that would be worth looking at. In a heritage DMU or Mk1 EMU, on dispatch the guard would remain by his open door with the buzzer just above his head until the train had wholly left the platform, so someone trapped would be seen panicking and the train stopped immediately. Most modern stock means that once you've done the dispatch check nobody who can actually intervene (bar a dispatcher shouting "stand away") to stop the train. Standing by open doors did cause some staff-falling-out issues, but should we perhaps, for example, have screens for guards at all dispatch locations so they can safely watch the train out with their hand on the buzzer, and only once the platform has been fully left move onto other stuff?

As for the prosecution you note, I agree it was absolutely nuts and not in the national interest at all. I'm firmly of the belief that being drunk does not alter expectations on behaviour at all, so someone who took a dangerous action when drunk should not be treated as any more vulnerable as if they were sober. You choose to drink; if you can't handle your drink, don't; if you can't not drink, seek help.

Only on a train forum would we have a suggestion that you might be prosecuted for boarding while the hustle alarms are on !!
To many 'ordinary' passengers these alarms simply mean 'Hurry along, we're about to leave' - nothing more. They only mean more to rail staff.

 

[pt_mad]

Dispatch is a potentially hazardous process and this point needs to be better emphasised, realistically staff are never going to get this 100.0% right 100.0% of the time, and people do need to take some responsibility for minimising their own exposure to risk.

Of course it doesn’t help that we have a high-profile case where an intoxicated and drugged-up youth was playing around at the side of a train and ignored a safety instruction shouted to her, during a train dispatch which in every other respect apart from the presence of this youth was quite properly able to be dispatched, and the guard ended up with a lengthy prison sentence. I still find that highly objectionable.

It doesn't seem to be widely accepted that staff won't get it right 100 percent of the time though? It seems to be accepted that car and lorry drivers will get it wrong, but not that train drivers or rail staff will now and again, even if it's one mistake in 3000 trains. Which is 99.99 percent accuracy. There are that many car accidents, but instead of testing drivers more than once in their whole road driving life, even professional drivers are just left to it as far as standards. Saying well I'm human and I'm liable to make a mistake at least once in every 50000 actions I make probably won't be a good enough explaination however true.

 

[Bromley boy]

Only on a train forum would we have a suggestion that you might be prosecuted for boarding while the hustle alarms are on !!
To many 'ordinary' passengers these alarms simply mean 'Hurry along, we're about to leave' - nothing more. They only mean more to rail staff.

There is a specific bylaw offence under which which you could be prosecuted for boarding while the hustle alarm is sounding. Perhaps it should be better enforced (probably difficult in practice, I realise).

I would hope most people would associate the hustle alarm with stand clear, do not board rather than “hurry along”, but clearly many do not!

There really does need to be a change of attitude. I see people do unbelievably stupid and dangerous things on platforms on a daily basis.

As for the prosecution you note, I agree it was absolutely nuts and not in the national interest at all. I'm firmly of the belief that being drunk does not alter expectations on behaviour at all, so someone who took a dangerous action when drunk should not be treated as any more vulnerable as if they were sober. You choose to drink; if you can't handle your drink, don't; if you can't not drink, seek help.

Quite right.

 

[HSTEd]

But then we get into all sorts of arguments about when a person is "committed" to boarding the train.

What if they are half way through the door when the hustle alarm sounds?
Or have one foot on the footplate?
Or are about to put their foot on the footplate?

 

[pt_mad]

But then we get into all sorts of arguments about when a person is "committed" to boarding the train.

What if they are half way through the door when the hustle alarm sounds?
Or have one foot on the footplate?
Or are about to put their foot on the footplate?

I think where the passenger is clearly at fault is where they deliberately attempt to board when the hustle alarm can clearly be heard beforehand. Or even when the doors have started to close and they attempt to jump through them or push them open or resist them closing.

There are still a good few passengers who think staff are in the wrong or trying to do them out of their train by telling them to stand clear because doors have been set to close and they've arrived late.

 

[Bromley boy]

But then we get into all sorts of arguments about when a person is "committed" to boarding the train.

What if they are half way through the door when the hustle alarm sounds?
Or have one foot on the footplate?
Or are about to put their foot on the footplate?

It’s the people who run onto the platform during dispatch and swan dive through the doors as they are closing that get me. They generally either succeed in wresteling the doors open and getting on (I generally don’t re release as that can be a can of worms). I’ve had several who’ve almost ended up falling between the train and the platform.

People often stand half in half out of the doors when waiting for someone else or checking the train is the one they require. They will often then ignore the hustle alarm and hold the doors open. Maddening!

 

[Bromley boy]

I think where the passenger is clearly at fault is where they deliberately attempt to board when the hustle alarm can clearly be heard beforehand. Or even when the doors have started to close and they attempt to jump through them or push them over or resist them.

There are still a good few passengers who think staff are in the wrong or trying to do them out of their train by telling them to stand clear because doors have been set to close and they've arrived late.

Yes indeed. Unfortunately many people seem to have an extreme sense of entitlement when it comes to things like this.

I even had someone run onto the platform as I took power the other day and start punching the side of the train as it began to move. Clever bloke.

 

[pt_mad]

It’s the people who run onto the platform during dispatch and swan dive through the doors as they are closing that gets me. They generally either succeed in wresteling the doors open and getting on (I generally don’t re release as that can be a can of worms). I’ve had several who’ve almost ended up falling between the train and the platform.

And if they run onto the platform during dispatch and are unsuccessful in boarding, they call to you and want to know why you closed the doors and wouldn't let them board, which they seem to view as misconduct?