Southeastern train passengers stuck for 3 hours as train fails yards from Victoria

[bramling]

The passenger alarm isn't linked to the brakes but the emergency egresses on the doors are. The driver has the ability to isolate the interlock circuit to proceed with no door interlock but how do they confirm that every set of doors is closed before doing so? This is what happened at the Kentish Town stranding a few years ago.


Traditionally I believe you could release the brakes with no traction power - not sure if this was with a purely pneumatic system or an electrically actuated system which would need power from batteries. However someone mentioned upthread that this modern trains do not allow this. Perhaps there should be an override to allow brake release if there is power in the batteries and enough air in the reservoirs to be able to stop again?

On most trains you can generally release the brakes and roll, but providing the train still has air (in other words it hasn’t been used up or leaked away - the latter process will naturally vary in time from unit to unit), and providing the battery holds up and crucial circuits don’t drop out. All this also assumes there’s nothing else wrong with the train of course.

What isn’t feasible is to *isolate* brakes, as opposed to merely *releasing* them. The critical difference is that in the first instance it’s not readily possible to re-apply whereas in the second instance it is. There are things which can be done in extreme defect scenarios involving isolating service brakes and relying on parking brakes, but this would only be done under extreme circumstances and under controlled conditions - absolutely no chance with passengers still on for a start.

 

[njamescouk]

I think that programmes such as Paddington 24/7 have shown us is that the railway is extremely poor at; a) working out what has gone wrong, b) working out what to do about it and c) communicating that information internally (let alone to passengers).

the raib report on the peckham rye debacle tells you all you need to know. lots of managers, no leadership, confused and fragmented lines of responsibility and accountability, lack of discipline.

 

[DarloRich]

Despite all these comments (many being quite sensible and constructive), I still believe that the best way to reduce the likelihood of passengers taking matters into their own hands is BETTER COMMUNICATION. We keep touching on it, it crops up in just about every incident, it's always criticized as inadequate - and it's usually follows by 'lessons will be learned'........

Surely, in 2018, with all the technology available at our fingertips/smart phones or whatever, there really must be a way of getting clear, concise information to the stranded passengers. If you are trying to handle such an incident, and can ensure that that issue has been resolved, it should give a little more time for everything else to follow on in a safe and logical order.

I agree. Communication is the key. If there is some way to detonate some kind of text bomb only to the affected train then great. Otherwise we need another plan. If you can identify what that is be my guest.

personally I think it is getting someone to the scene to help the driver who is already up to his eyes in trying to remedy the situation.

I think the disappointment is those who look for excuses even though there is no account that it might be the situation. Envisaging what if there is no driver available, rather than thinking what can be done if there IS. Even better, thinking through all the contingencies in advance so, if necessary, we know where to start, and quickly. Especially if, as the comments above state, gapping in the Victoria throat is a recurring issue.

goodness me. Do you honestly HONESTLY think that if a driver was sat about in the mess room at Stewarts Lane having a brew and fag no one thought to ask him to use his locomotive. Is that what you honestly think happens? I give up.

 

[modernrail]

I agree. Communication is the key. If there is some way to detonate some kind of text bomb only to the affected train then great. Otherwise we need another plan. If you can identify what that is be my guest.

personally I think it is getting someone to the scene to help the driver who is already up to his eyes in trying to remedy the situation.



goodness me. Do you honestly HONESTLY think that if a driver was sat about in the mess room at Stewarts Lane having a brew and fag no one thought to ask him to use his locomotive. Is that what you honestly think happens? I give up.

Surely they are not smoking in a workplace up at Stewarts Lane. Disgraceful. Tells you everything you need to know about the railways these days

Back in the days of steam what would happen- would another locomotive just come and give a broken down train a shove? I suppose this is one of the downsides of EMU and DMU fleets - you don't have spare traction hanging around?

It might have been covered already but is Detraining to another train if you can get one close not an option? I appreciate it is not completely straightforward but is it permitted at all?

 

[Class 170101]

We could have a loco standing 'ready' every 20 miles or so, we could also have a Driver, with said loco 24/7 just 'waiting', and the Shunter too.
We could have a Control Manager for every incident, and one in an office every 50 miles or so

But it all costs money, and I am sure the passengers would not wish to pay for this 'insurance', so we are left with obtaining a loco and crew as quick as it possible to do so.

Given the bad PR about fares I expect passengers would expect their fares to cover such eventualities already. :P

 

[MotCO]

Great - let BTP run things. Can they arrange to get the MOM from base to site any quicker? Can they get enough PTS trained staff to site to help get the passengers off? Can they get the fire brigade there to help off load any difficult cases? Can they arrange to get the power shut off and the track isolated any quicker? Can they get the possessions agreed in that time? Can they arrange to de energise everything? Can they arrange to stop all the other trains on the line in stations so no one else is stranded? Can they get lights on site and safe walking routes laid out to the nearest access point? Can they then arrange people in groups to walk them through the site and make sure no one wanders off? Can they do all this inside an hour? Are you sure?
.

Although the BTP may be a strange choice, it may well be the right one. I have been involved in Major Incidents (not rail specific) and the Police are very good at organising things. They may not be experts on rail matters, but they will get advice from those people that are - i.e. the TOCs, NR, even the army if needs be etc. Plus they will undertake training table-top exercises to rehearse what could happen and how it could be done better.

Have any training exercises have been undertaken for when a train fails so that everyone knows what should happen? There should be three strands:

1 - One party seeking a mechanical solution
2 - One party looking at rescuing the passengers
3 - One party looking at the communications

If a mechanical solution is found, the others can be stood down. If not, at least there is a plan to rescue the passengers.

 

[Class 170101]

Have any training exercises have been undertaken for when a train fails so that everyone knows what should happen? There should be three strands:

1 - One party seeking a mechanical solution
2 - One party looking at rescuing the passengers
3 - One party looking at the communications

If a mechanical solution is found, the others can be stood down. If not, at least there is a plan to rescue the passengers.

Surprised option 3 is ever stood down. Communications are vital whatever solution is to be and is then actually implemented.

 

[Taunton]

Do you honestly HONESTLY think that if a driver was sat about in the mess room at Stewarts Lane having a brew and fag no one thought to ask him to use his locomotive. Is that what you honestly think happens?

Yes.

If someone actually did scout around for a diesel to assist, please let us know. But my expectation is that no one did. Or was even allowed to.

 

[MotCO]

Surprised option 3 is ever stood down. Communications are vital whatever solution is to be and is then actually implemented.

I was assuming that the mechanical solution had fixed the problem and everyone was on their way.

 

[DarloRich]

Yes.

If someone actually did scout around for a diesel to assist, please let us know. But my expectation is that no one did. Or was even allowed to.

You are talking utter rot. Why would someone be prevented from looking for a locomotive. Please stop. You are making yourself look silly.

 

[mark-h]

Could another train of the same type (or compatible) have rescued it?

 

[Esker-pades]

Could another train of the same type (or compatible) have rescued it?

In theory, yes. However, the specifics of the situation mean that such a rescue is not always possible.

 

[tsr]

Yes.

If someone actually did scout around for a diesel to assist, please let us know. But my expectation is that no one did. Or was even allowed to.

They did look, and the GTR Class 73 would have been sent (which would have been the second time that week that it had been used as a Thunderbird), but it would have made very little difference to the timescales - it may even have made things worse in the long run.

Another Networker was sent but took time to couple up due to air pressure issues affecting the coupling, caused by people pulling egresses on the stricken train (although nobody seems to have actually left the train of their own accord). The same problems then prevented a brake release. Using traction interlock / emergency bypass switches would not have helped, as you still need to physically check all doors are secure before moving, which would have been a nightmare. So eventually service controllers realised the train would not be movable with passengers on it, without physically locking them in (which was considered), so everyone had to be evacuated. Once everyone was then clear of the train, the problems were sorted quickly.

 

[LAX54]

Yes.

If someone actually did scout around for a diesel to assist, please let us know. But my expectation is that no one did. Or was even allowed to.

Well, whenever we have a failure on our hands, beit a freight or passenger, the first thing the Shift Signaller Manager, or Signaller will do is call the Mess Room at Ipswich, see if there is a driver, and of course a loco, if there is, ask him, can he help ? Invariably it's yes, if he gets the OK, it's then a call to Control, who call the FOC.
If there is no loco around, which can of course be the case even at a loco stabling point, we can ask Control if we can put a freight round the goods and use the loco, and rescue the recessed train later.
Rest assured the Railway does not sit on it's hands for hours before looking for a rescue unit. Obviously an electric unit, will need another unit to help.
Detraining a train, will need a MOM to assist, the chances of him being 300 yards away from the failure will be slim ! it could take him 45 mins / an hour depending on his location, and traffic.

All this is going on in the background whilst Route Control / TOC are trying to get the original failure maybe to move to a suitable location

AS tsr was saying things take time, there is no magical wand to be waved, and it looks like the passengers made the rescue take longer too, by pulling the egress handles.

 

[Edders23]

I thought there was a requirement for thunderbirds at most major locations so one should have been available at short notice

 

[NSEFAN]

I think the disappointment is those who look for excuses even though there is no account that it might be the situation. Envisaging what if there is no driver available, rather than thinking what can be done if there IS. Even better, thinking through all the contingencies in advance so, if necessary, we know where to start, and quickly. Especially if, as the comments above state, gapping in the Victoria throat is a recurring issue.

Perhaps it is a good argument for maximum train length operation all day? It's much harder to gap an 8-12 car set compared to a 4 car one.

 

[theageofthetra]

Perhaps it is a good argument for maximum train length operation all day? It's much harder to gap an 8-12 car set compared to a 4 car one.

Was it a 4 though? -personally if it was a 4 I'd have questioned with the signaller if I was only given a single yellow particularly as it was off peak and not so busy.

 

[NSEFAN]

Was it a 4 though? -personally if it was a 4 I'd have questioned with the signaller if I was only given a single yellow particularly as it was off peak and not so busy.

I presumed it was, I'm not actually sure. It must be absolutely dire at Victoria if it's possible to gap 8 cars!

 

[ChiefPlanner]

I thought there was a requirement for thunderbirds at most major locations so one should have been available at short notice

"Thunderbirds" have use for dealing with failed I/C and freight services , with standard drawgear - I do not see how a 100% EMU railway is appropriate for a hulking class 67 or similar ,which cannot directly couple - let alone be electrically etc compatible. Your rescue here is a compatible unit , provided the 3d rail is charged and working.

 

[hwl]

I presumed it was, I'm not actually sure. It must be absolutely dire at Victoria if it's possible to gap 8 cars!

On 465s the shoe gear is only located on the outer bogies so have higher chance of getting gaped than electrostars which have shoe gear on both bogies on the end cars

 

[DarloRich]

As an a aside i would like to thank @swills & @tsr for their additions. I am afraid i had reached exasperation point and was not prepared to offer any more information to challenge ultra wibble.

Although the BTP may be a strange choice, it may well be the right one. I have been involved in Major Incidents (not rail specific) and the Police are very good at organising things. They may not be experts on rail matters, but they will get advice from those people that are - i.e. the TOCs, NR, even the army if needs be etc. Plus they will undertake training table-top exercises to rehearse what could happen and how it could be done better.

Have any training exercises have been undertaken for when a train fails so that everyone knows what should happen? There should be three strands:

1 - One party seeking a mechanical solution
2 - One party looking at rescuing the passengers
3 - One party looking at the communications

If a mechanical solution is found, the others can be stood down. If not, at least there is a plan to rescue the passengers.

Those exercises already happen and those roles are assigned. It may well be that the structure and management of those roles needs looking at but I honestly do not think having the BTP co ordinate things would make any difference. They are but one part of the response and no matter how much the BTP shout they wont magic a locomotive out of thin air or enough pts trained staff on site to evacuate a train.

"Thunderbirds" have use for dealing with failed I/C and freight services , with standard drawgear - I do not see how a 100% EMU railway is appropriate for a hulking class 67 or similar ,which cannot directly couple - let alone be electrically etc compatible. Your rescue here is a compatible unit , provided the 3d rail is charged and working.

was that not the point of the yellow 57's?

 

[hwl]

Although the BTP may be a strange choice, it may well be the right one.

BTP HQ is next to the tracks 250m away and they could possibly even see the train by looking out the office windows...

 

[SouthernRail]

A railtour is stuck at a junction outside Victoria I think... is this the broken down trains?

 

[30907]

A railtour is stuck at a junction outside Victoria I think... is this the broken down trains?

Welcome aboard.
No. Looks like the 0945 Victoria-Bath, which may well have failed, but this thread is/was about a regular train on Sunday.

 

[SouthernRail]

Welcome aboard.
No. Looks like the 0945 Victoria-Bath, which may well have failed, but this thread is/was about a regular train on Sunday.

Are the class 67s confirmed failed? Haven't moves for an hour now. Was going to see it at Salisbury at 5 but considering not. Will a rescue train be coming or will it be cancelled?

 

[30907]

Are the class 67s confirmed failed? Haven't moves for an hour now. Was going to see it at Salisbury at 5 but considering not. Will a rescue train be coming or will it be cancelled?

In case you don't know, this is the current situation.
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/train/P81064/2018/10/24/advanced

 

[swaldman]

• I have broken down
• I have broken down and am trying to find out why
• I have broken down because of X
• I have a plan to fix X
• I am speaking to the fitters as that didn't work but they have a plan.
• I am still broken as that plan didn't work
• The fitters are coming as they think they can fix it
• we cant fix it. I need rescue.

Not responding to this particular post, but quoting it because it's a really good illustration. I think what some people are saying here (and from my naiive outsider viewpoint seems sensible) is that while that's a rational sequence to follow from an engineering standpoint, when we're dealing with crowded commuter trains there needs to be a parallel track that bypasses as many of those steps as necessary to ensure that, if the problem isn't fixed, people are detrained within an hour. You can start making arrangements for that early on, and cancel it as soon as it becomes clear that the train will be moving again in the necessary time.
Yes, this will obviously cost, because you're potentially setting things in motion and then cancelling them.

 

[transmanche]

I haven't slagged anyone off!

Well, I think accusing someone of 'trying to score cheap points' is slagging them off...

I am simply saying I don' t think you are are being accurate.

My initial post was an observation on what I have seen on TV documentaries as representative of the railway industry. I did mention that a detailed discussion of Paddington 24/7 and other documentaries was off-topic here, but you seem determined to continue it. So here goes.

What you are seeing is how information changes from an initial call to a solution:

• I have broken down
• I have broken down and am trying to find out why
• I have broken down because of X
• I have a plan to fix X
• I am speaking to the fitters as that didn't work but they have a plan.
• I am still broken as that plan didn't work
• The fitters are coming as they think they can fix it
• we cant fix it. I need rescue.

That's just one track of resolving the incident. Following your plan suggests the fitters are not mobilised until after it's proved the driver cannot fix it (presumably after multiples attempts). And that plans to instigate a rescue are not started until after the fitters have attended and been unable to fix it (presumably after multiple attempts).

It seems that all resources are focused on a single plan and only when that plan fails do they investigate/prepare for an alternative.

What is really hard is to get the resulting information out to people on the ground at the stations.

Agreed.

Getting back to the topic at hand, perhaps there's an argument for breakdowns at certain bottlenecks to be treated in a similar fashion to how vehicle breakdowns are treated in tunnels, motorway roadworks, etc. Tow 'em out of the way first and try to fix it afterwards. (This is only a semi-serious suggestion, I know it's not that simple. But, to the average passenger, it is that simple and they cannot fathom how it can take three hours to rescue passengers when they are literally within spitting distance of a platform.)

 

[DarloRich]

Not responding to this particular post, but quoting it because it's a really good illustration. I think what some people are saying here (and from my naiive outsider viewpoint seems sensible) is that while that's a rational sequence to follow from an engineering standpoint, when we're dealing with crowded commuter trains there needs to be a parallel track that bypasses as many of those steps as necessary to ensure that, if the problem isn't fixed, people are detrained within an hour. You can start making arrangements for that early on, and cancel it as soon as it becomes clear that the train will be moving again in the necessary time.
Yes, this will obviously cost, because you're potentially setting things in motion and then cancelling them.

Well, I think accusing someone of 'trying to score cheap points' is slagging them off...

if you think that is slagging off you live a sheltered life!

My initial post was an observation on what I have seen on TV documentaries as representative of the railway industry. I did mention that a detailed discussion of Paddington 24/7 and other documentaries was off-topic here, but you seem determined to continue it. So here goes.

It is a good representation of some of the challenges faced in trying to run the railway but rather obviously edited for dramatic effect.

That's just one track of resolving the incident. Following your plan suggests the fitters are not mobilised until after it's proved the driver cannot fix it (presumably after multiples attempts). And that plans to instigate a rescue are not started until after the fitters have attended and been unable to fix it (presumably after multiple attempts).

It seems that all resources are focused on a single plan and only when that plan fails do they investigate/prepare for an alternative.

I was trying to illustrate a point about information changing. Those steps don't occur in isolation. I assumed that would be obvious.

Getting back to the topic at hand, perhaps there's an argument for breakdowns at certain bottlenecks to be treated in a similar fashion to how vehicle breakdowns are treated in tunnels, motorway roadworks, etc. Tow 'em out of the way first and try to fix it afterwards. (This is only a semi-serious suggestion, I know it's not that simple. But, to the average passenger, it is that simple and they cannot fathom how it can take three hours to rescue passengers when they are literally within spitting distance of a platform.)

I agree, however as you point out it isnt that easy to provide a rescue service nor is it going to be cheap. Are you happy to pay for it?

 

[Esker-pades]

I agree, however as you point out it isnt that easy to provide a rescue service nor is it going to be cheap. Are you happy to pay for it?

It has to be the Train or Rolling Stock Operating Company's responsibility to recover their own train when it breaks down. Getting the stranded passengers to pay for it is (and should never be) a thing that happens.