Passengers boarding train prior to display on screens

[Adam Williams]

Mod Note: Posts #1 - #20 originally in this thread.

If you can suggest a better way of departing trains within the constraints of a six-platform London terminus which can get extremely busy, I'm sure Chiltern would be keen to hear it. If the platform is not displayed until near departure time it's because either the train to form the service has not arrived yet, the train ahead of it in the same platform has not yet departed or the train simply isn't ready for service yet.

As someone who sadly has to travel with Chiltern, often quite late at night, in my experience it's very common that the train sits at the platform unadvertised for no legitimate reason, long after it has been serviced by cleaning staff (who - at best, will empty the bins).

And god forbid as a passenger you make your way to the (usually empty at this time of night, and more than capable of dealing with the number of passengers dis-embarking and embarking) platforms to try board "too early". It wasn't too long ago that the gateline staff kicked myself and a bunch of other passengers off the train "because it's not been posted on the departures board yet", only for us to board again 60 seconds later when it did get posted up - please, do tell me what this achieves! There was also an attempt to move everyone on the platform back off the platform and out through the gateline..

Chiltern's front-line staff just seem to deliberately antagonise customers - e.g. kicking off passengers when coupling/uncoupling trains (are there any other TOCs who have this policy?), it doesn't put me in the best of moods when the services are short-formed too since it just results in a massive scrum.

 

[12LDA28C]

As someone who sadly has to travel with Chiltern, often quite late at night, in my experience it's very common that the train sits at the platform unadvertised for no legitimate reason, long after it has been serviced by cleaning staff (who - at best, will empty the bins).

And god forbid as a passenger you make your way to the (usually empty at this time of night, and more than capable of dealing with the number of passengers dis-embarking and embarking) platforms to try board "too early". It wasn't too long ago that the gateline staff kicked myself and a bunch of other passengers off the train "because it's not been posted on the departures board yet", only for us to board again 60 seconds later when it did get posted up - please, do tell me what this achieves! There was also an attempt to move everyone on the platform back off the platform and out through the gateline..

Chiltern's front-line staff just seem to deliberately antagonise customers - e.g. kicking off passengers when coupling/uncoupling trains (are there any other TOCs who have this policy?), it doesn't put me in the best of moods when the services are short-formed too.

Due to noise complaints from local residents, engines should only be started 7 minutes prior to departure time from Marylebone, so trains cannot be left with engines running for passengers to board (especially late at night) which is why they are not posted on departure screens further in advance.

And yes, put simply, Chiltern's policy is that units are not coupled or uncoupled with passengers on board so front line staff are certainly not 'deliberately antagonising customers' as you put it.

 

[Y Ddraig Coch]

Due to noise complaints from local residents, engines should only be started 7 minutes prior to departure time from Marylebone, so trains cannot be left with engines running for passengers to board (especially late at night) which is why they are not posted on departure screens further in advance.

And yes, put simply, Chiltern's policy is that units are not coupled or uncoupled with passengers on board so front line staff are certainly not 'deliberately antagonising customers' as you put it.

Coupling / uncoupling is a push of a button and a pull away.......
To unload all passengers is ridiculous, why do it ?

Very few if any other TOCs do it

 

[Adam Williams]

And yes, put simply, Chiltern's policy

Simply quoting the policy at me, when other TOCs seem to manage without any fuss doesn't really support your point. Whilst I appreciate front-line staff won't have any control over it, I don't care what Arriva's policy is if it's dumb - the end result for me is the same.

Due to noise complaints from local residents, engines should only be started 7 minutes prior to departure time from Marylebone

It's perfectly possible to board the trains before the engines are fully started if the doors aren't locked out of use. The power sockets and full interior lighting won't work until staff board and get it ready to depart, but that's no reason to prevent passengers boarding and finding a seat.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Due to noise complaints from local residents, engines should only be started 7 minutes prior to departure time from Marylebone, so trains cannot be left with engines running for passengers to board (especially late at night) which is why they are not posted on departure screens further in advance.

And yes, put simply, Chiltern's policy is that units are not coupled or uncoupled with passengers on board so front line staff are certainly not 'deliberately antagonising customers' as you put it.

This is also a policy at Euston but not Northampton. I did once ask why and was told it had something to do with the layout of the signalling and what would happen in a failed "pull test" or when uncoupling, but I may have misunderstood.

 

[BJames]

It's perfectly possible to board the trains before the engines are fully started if the doors aren't locked out of use. The power sockets and full interior lighting won't work until staff board and get it ready to depart, but that's no reason to prevent passengers boarding and finding a seat.

The engines are often off on EMR meridians before departure, a scrolling message actually shows on the screens inside to advise that full power will be restored (for plug sockets, lighting etc) nearer to the time of departure.

LU didn’t want their lines too far away as they didn’t want to create a space where people would be tempted to use it as a walking route.

I had always wondered what the reason was and never thought of this but this is very smart. Although I still see people walking concerningly close to the edge of tubes as they leave particularly at the busiest times but it would definitely be worse if a de-facto walking corridor was created, especially with commuters in a rush versus slow walkers.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Chiltern trains are very often boarded quite far from departure time with engines not running.

 

[Adam Williams]

The engines are often off on EMR meridians before departure, a scrolling message actually shows on the screens inside to advise that full power will be restored (for plug sockets, lighting etc) nearer to the time of departure.

This seems like a useful, passenger friendly thing to do

 

[12LDA28C]

Simply quoting the policy at me, when other TOCs seem to manage without any fuss doesn't really support your point. Whilst I appreciate front-line staff won't have any control over it, I don't care what Arriva's policy is if it's dumb - the end result for me is the same.

I'm sure that policy is in place for a reason, whether you think it's 'dumb' or not is of no consequence.

It's perfectly possible to board the trains before the engines are fully started if the doors aren't locked out of use. The power sockets and full interior lighting won't work until staff board and get it ready to depart, but that's no reason to prevent passengers boarding and finding a seat.

I'm well aware of what will and won't work on board the train if the engines are not 'fully started', whatever that means. Engines are either running or they're not. However, it's really not ideal for passengers to be boarding a train late at night in the dark with no interior lighting. I'm sure anyone who injured themselves due to tripping over in the dark would be only too happy to take Chiltern to court.

Coupling / uncoupling is a push of a button and a pull away.......
To unload all passengers is ridiculous, why do it ?

Very few if any other TOCs do it

'All passengers' are not unloaded, as you put it. Passengers are simply not allowed to board until coupling or uncoupling has taken place.

Wouldn't be too clever to allow loads of passengers to board say a 4-car train and then split into 2 x 2-cars so a load of people are then in the wrong half of the train, would it?

Chiltern trains are very often boarded quite far from departure time with engines not running.

That's ok in daylight, not such a good idea late at night when the train is in darkness.

 

[Purple Train]

When my regular journeys were with EMT (on what is now EMR Regional), passengers were always allowed to board at Nottingham without the engine running, and they would come on around 10 minutes prior to departure. I think this practice still occurs with EMR as of when I last travelled on the line.

Kicking passengers off at a terminus when coupling and uncoupling doesn't really strike me as an idiotic policy - at through stations, the doors must remain shut, so, at a terminus station, where no one has any reason to be on the train prior to uncoupling, making sure the train is clear doesn't seem to me like it's a particular inconvenience. Obviously, if this policy applies for trains coupling and uncoupling en-route, then I would agree that it is silly - but I'm not aware of any Chiltern services that split and join at intermediate stations.

 

[12LDA28C]

Kicking passengers off at a terminus when coupling and uncoupling doesn't really strike me as an idiotic policy - at through stations, the doors must remain shut, so, at a terminus station, where no one has any reason to be on the train prior to uncoupling, making sure the train is clear doesn't seem to me like it's a particular inconvenience. Obviously, if this policy applies for trains coupling and uncoupling en-route, then I would agree that it is silly - but I'm not aware of any Chiltern services that split and join at intermediate stations.

As I explained above, this very rarely happens, it's more that passengers are not allowed to board before coupling / uncoupling has taken place.

 

[bramling]

I'm sure that policy is in place for a reason, whether you think it's 'dumb' or not is of no consequence.



I'm well aware of what will and won't work on board the train if the engines are not 'fully started', whatever that means. Engines are either running or they're not. However, it's really not ideal for passengers to be boarding a train late at night in the dark with no interior lighting. I'm sure anyone who injured themselves due to tripping over in the dark would be only too happy to take Chiltern to court.



'All passengers' are not unloaded, as you put it. Passengers are simply not allowed to board until coupling or uncoupling has taken place.

Wouldn't be too clever to allow loads of passengers to board say a 4-car train and then split into 2 x 2-cars so a load of people are then in the wrong half of the train, would it?

This doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny, for the simple reason that other places seem to manage perfectly well without anything awful happening. No one has yet provided a reason why Chiltern *can’t* work like this, as opposed to that they choose not to (presumably because it’s easier for Chiltern).

 

[12LDA28C]

This doesn’t really stand up to scrutiny, for the simple reason that other places seem to manage perfectly well without anything awful happening. No one has yet provided a reason why Chiltern *can’t* work like this, as opposed to that they choose not to (presumably because it’s easier for Chiltern).

Lack of capacity at Marylebone meaning many trains have to attach or detach on arrival / prior to departure and the potential for passengers to board the wrong train has probably contributed to this policy being in place I would suggest.

If other operators are happy for passengers to board a train with no interior lighting during the hours of darkness then that's up to them, perhaps they do not operate under the same constraints that Chiltern do.

 

[bramling]

Lack of capacity at Marylebone meaning many trains have to attach or detach on arrival / prior to departure and the potential for passengers to board the wrong train has probably contributed to this policy being in place I would suggest.

Again, this seems to come down to making life easier for Chiltern. King’s Cross used to do a massive amount of detaching and attaching in 317/365 days, and there was never any issue with people being on the train during the coupling or uncoupling process.

 

[12LDA28C]

Again, this seems to come down to making life easier for Chiltern. King’s Cross used to do a massive amount of detaching and attaching in 317/365 days, and there was never any issue with people being on the train during the coupling or uncoupling process.

Ok. So that begs the question why would an operator not do something that makes life easier for them?

 

[bramling]

Ok. So that begs the question why would an operator not do something that makes life easier for them?

Surely the answer to that one is obvious, namely that it makes the experience better for the end user? People absolutely hate being kept outside the train for longer than is necessary, especially in poor weather conditions. All the more important at the moment with ridership down and the industry needing to fight for every pound of revenue, pee-ing passengers off unnecessary isn’t the way to go.

 

[12LDA28C]

Surely the answer to that one is obvious, namely that it makes the experience better for the end user? People absolutely hate being kept outside the train for longer than is necessary, especially in poor weather conditions. All the more important at the moment with ridership down and the industry needing to fight for every pound of revenue, pee-ing passengers off unnecessary isn’t the way to go.

Most of Marylebone, like most London termini is under a canopy. It's not like people are going to get wet/cold/whatever when waiting to board their train. I'm sure the way Chiltern operate is done for a reason and arguing against it just for the sake of argument is futile.

If we're going down that route and even further off-topic, it's not as if the DfT seems remotely interested in things being 'better for the end user', quite the opposite.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Again, this seems to come down to making life easier for Chiltern. King’s Cross used to do a massive amount of detaching and attaching in 317/365 days, and there was never any issue with people being on the train during the coupling or uncoupling process.

They'd not be left dark, though, lights are left on on EMUs.

That said emergency lighting usually remains on on 16x laying over at Marylebone, so I do see that argument. Better though would be to lock the doors, put the platform up and let people queue at the train. The "Euston scrum" approach advantages nobody but cleaning staff.

 

[Western Sunset]

Again, this seems to come down to making life easier for Chiltern. King’s Cross used to do a massive amount of detaching and attaching in 317/365 days, and there was never any issue with people being on the train during the coupling or uncoupling process.

387s are still split at KX, particularly after/before the morning and afternoon peaks. Never any probs as far as I can see.

 

[12LDA28C]

387s are still split at KX, particularly after/before the morning and afternoon peaks. Never any probs as far as I can see.

With passengers on board both portions of the train?

 

[Adam Williams]

Lack of capacity at Marylebone meaning many trains have to attach or detach on arrival / prior to departure and the potential for passengers to board the wrong train has probably contributed to this policy being in place I would suggest

If the passenger experience was the priority then you'd simply make it clearer in the carriage as to where the part of the train was going in order to reduce this risk.

Surely the answer to that one is obvious, namely that it makes the experience better for the end user? People absolutely hate being kept outside the train for longer than is necessary, especially in poor weather conditions. All the more important at the moment with ridership down and the industry needing to fight for every pound of revenue, pee-ing passengers off unnecessary isn’t the way to go.

The problem seems to be that some rail staff care very little about the passenger experience and prioritise operational convenience or supporting rules "because it's policy and always has been". This doesn't surprise me in the slightest, it's a culture problem.

no interior lighting

It's incorrect to suggest that the interiors of the carriages are pitch black when the engines are off at a terminus.

If we're going down that route and even further off-topic, it's not as if the DfT seems remotely interested in things being 'better for the end user', quite the opposite

DfT do care about revenue recovery/reducing the burden on public funds - and there are some areas where this can overlap with improving the passenger experience.

Letting passengers queue on the platform doesn't cost anything. Leaving them frustrated after a poor experience is a good way to make them consider another transport method!

Most of Marylebone, like most London termini is under a canopy. It's not like people are going to get wet/cold/whatever when waiting to board their train

Have you ever been to Marylebone in the winter?! It's not a pleasant experience waiting in the cold, nor is standing for an hour and a half after the service turns up short-formed and you weren't allowed on the platform to get a seat.

I'm sure anyone who injured themselves due to tripping over in the dark would be only too happy to take Chiltern to court

This isn't the United States. Has this actually ever actually happened and ended up in court, with a judgement awarded to the person who tripped?

 

[12LDA28C]

The problem seems to be that some rail staff care very little about the passenger experience and prioritise operational convenience or supporting rules "because it's policy and always has been". This doesn't surprise me in the slightest, it's a culture problem.

If it's a policy that is in place for a reason, it's not 'a culture problem' it's for ease of operation. I'm sure you'd be the first person to complain if you'd boarded the wrong portion of a train and ended up at the wrong destination.

It's incorrect to suggest that the interiors of the carriages are pitch black when the engines are off at a terminus.

Not pitch black but certainly very dark at the country end of Marylebone where the station lights are not very bright. Depending on the condition of the batteries on the train, there is frequently no interior lighting at all as soon as the engines are shut down, particularly on Class 165 units.

 

[The exile]

Simply quoting the policy at me, when other TOCs seem to manage without any fuss doesn't really support your point. Whilst I appreciate front-line staff won't have any control over it, I don't care what Arriva's policy is if it's dumb - the end result for me is the same.

Agreed - if the only reason for anything is “it’s policy” then it’s indefensible and those responsible for the policy should be required to justify it in person. If there is a reason why it’s policy, then the customer should be told (especially where the customer is also, through taxes, the subsidy payer)

 

[12LDA28C]

Letting passengers queue on the platform doesn't cost anything. Leaving them frustrated after a poor experience is a good way to make them consider another transport method!

Unfortunately as no doubt you're aware, the limited capacity and design of Marylebone means that people who are let through the barriers before their train is advertised tend to congregate immediately beyond the barriers so that they can then get to whichever platform they need to. Experience has shown that passengers congregating the platform side of the barriers then obstructs other passengers trying to access the platforms. That's why it's better to keep passengers on the concourse until trains are advertised on a specific platform.

Agreed - if the only reason for anything is “it’s policy” then it’s indefensible and those responsible for the policy should be required to justify it in person. If there is a reason why it’s policy, then the customer should be told (especially where the customer is also, through taxes, the subsidy payer)

What rubbish. Do you expect each individual passenger to be given a briefing by staff as to why everything is done in a particular way? Is that done in other industries?

 

[Adam Williams]

I'm sure you'd be the first person to complain if you'd boarded the wrong portion of a train and ended up at the wrong destination.

I'd complain if the data in the industry systems was incorrect and I got in the wrong part of the train due to that, but not otherwise. The two staff information boards and formation data in Darwin make it pretty clear where to board for which service.

Unfortunately as no doubt you're aware, the limited capacity and design of Marylebone means that people who are let through the barriers before their train is advertised tend to congregate immediately beyond the barriers so that they can then get to whichever platform they need to

Perhaps the platforms should be advertised earlier?

 

[12LDA28C]

Have you ever been to Marylebone in the winter?! It's not a pleasant experience waiting in the cold, nor is standing for an hour and a half after the service turns up short-formed and you weren't allowed on the platform to get a seat.

Yes I have, many times. Short-forming due to a train failure or lack of fleet availability is an ongoing problem and well-documented but I suggest the scenario you refer to is rather rare.

Perhaps the platforms should be advertised earlier?

Again, this is not always possible due to the limited constraints that Chiltern operates under at Marylebone and the frequent attaching/detaching units as well as quick turn-round times in many instances. How many other London terminals have only six platforms, run diesel trains and are subject to regular complaints from local residents regarding noise pollution from those trains? Not many, I'd suggest.

 

[The exile]

What rubbish. Do you expect each individual passenger to be given a briefing by staff as to why everything is done in a particular way? Is that done in other industries?

In any customer facing industry I would expect customer facing staff to be able to provide an answer that is more than “it’s company policy” - especially when there are apparent inconsistencies. At the very least a complaints department should explain the reasons behind the policy in a timely fashion. “It’s company policy” is no better than “Because I say so”.
The only justifiable exceptions are “because it’s the law” (if it really is) and where there is imminent danger. (Not risk)

 

[12LDA28C]

In any customer facing industry I would expect customer facing staff to be able to provide an answer that is more than “it’s company policy” - especially when there are apparent inconsistencies. At the very least a complaints department should explain the reasons behind the policy in a timely fashion. “It’s company policy” is no better than “Because I say so”.
The only justifiable exceptions are “because it’s the law” (if it really is) and where there is imminent danger. (Not risk)

I've provided several reasons as to why things are done the way they are at Marylebone. How other operators work is irrelevant, just because EMR or CrossCountry do something at say Nottingham, this has no bearing on or relevance to a different operator's processes at a different location.

Railway staff (drivers, guards, signallers, dispatchers and so on) work to the Rule Book. Instructions contained within this publication might seem onerous to those outside the industry but that does not mean that the Rule Book can be ignored by staff because it contains processes and procedures that might be perceived by passengers to make their 'experience' poorer. Those Rules are there for a reason.

 

[Elecman]

I've provided several reasons as to why things are done the way they are at Marylebone. How other operators work is irrelevant, just because EMR or CrossCountry do something at say Nottingham, this has no bearing on or relevance to a different operator's processes at a different location.

Railway staff (drivers, guards, signallers, dispatchers and so on) work to the Rule Book. Instructions contained within this publication might seem onerous to those outside the industry but that does not mean that the Rule Book can be ignored by staff because it contains processes and procedures that might be perceived by passengers to make their 'experience' poorer. Those Rules are there for a reason.

And often written in blood

 

[ainsworth74]

Railway staff (drivers, guards, signallers, dispatchers and so on) work to the Rule Book. Instructions contained within this publication might seem onerous to those outside the industry but that does not mean that the Rule Book can be ignored by staff because it contains processes and procedures that might be perceived by passengers to make their 'experience' poorer. Those Rules are there for a reason.

But what's being discussed here presumably isn't part of the Rule Book as otherwise the other TOCs mentioned would not be operating in the way that they do?

I wouldn't expect frontline staff to be able to give chapter and verse about why a certain policy is in place but I don't think it's unreasonable to expect that customer services should be able to find an answer should a passenger ask a question that is better than "it's our policy and we've always done it this way".