Evening Standard Story: More Dangerous DOO Chaos

[BestWestern]

:roll:

An interesting story in today's London Evening Standard, regarding an incident on a FCC service in May. According to the article, on May 26th an eight car train working an evening peak Brighton - Bedford service came to a stand with the rearmost two cars within a tunnel (Kings Cross area is the location mentioned). After a delay of around three hours, and allegedly in soaring temperatures, passengers began to operate the emergency door releases and leave the train of their own accord, at which point the train began to move. According to a quote apparently from the RAIB, "The train began to move at 21.03 but this movement was immediately stopped because passengers were getting out on to the railway from carriages within the tunnel". Passengers were apparently then "escorted back" into the train and it was given clearance to continue set off to Kentish Town, however it is claimed that three sets of passenger doors were open throughout the journey. As would be expected from a casual newspaper story, the information provided is patchy, but several quotes are stated as coming from the RAIB investigation.

Frankly, this is downright frightening. A textbook nightmare situation on a train with not enough staff to cope fully and safely with the situation (or DOO to use the technical term for this!). Obviously we don't know exactly how things unfolded here, but it would seem to be apparent that there was a major problem in communicating effectively with the passengers, and a serious failure to ensure their safety. If indeed they were self-evacuating a train which then began to move, we have a potentially catastrophic incident unfolding. For the train to have then been driven onwards with several sets of doors open just defies belief. Quite how, or why, this could occur will obviously come to light in good time (one would assume that safety systems were for whatever reason isolated and appropriate procedures not followed), but this is another demonstration of the reckless and very nearly lethal realities of running busy passenger trains with insufficient staffing.

Not a good day :roll: Let's finally learn some lessons.

 

[notadriver]

I dont see how a second member of staff would prevent passengers trying to get out of the train after being trapped inside for over an hour.

 

[BestWestern]

I dont see how a second member of staff would prevent passengers trying to get out of the train after being trapped inside for over an hour.

Reassurance, flow of information, updates on progress, and so on. And at the very least, an awareness of what the hell is going inside the train, which was clearly not held by whoever was driving in this case :roll:

 

[Royston Vasey]

Reassurance, flow of information, updates on progress, and so on. And at the very least, an awareness of what the hell is going inside the train, which was clearly not held by whoever was driving in this case :roll:

Sounds like you have an axe to grind. If the driver is being told nothing or decisions aren't yet made, what can he do? If a guard was on board could he have stopped it happening on the other end of an 8 coach train? How do you know the driver wasnt regularly announcing that he was hoping to move soon but was waiting for the go-ahead?

Finally, would you not consider these passengers' irresponsibility to be at the very least a contributing factor?

 

[notadriver]

Yes agreed but I still don't think that's going to stop people forcing their way off the train after being stuck for an hour plus.

 

[ess]

let's remember that it's not that long ago that slam door were the norm and people could open the doors if they needed to BUT people aren't stupid - no one wants to open doors and go walking down the track and especially a tunnel

but 15 minutes is about the limit of no information before frustration really kicks in. after an hour it is reasonable to get really worried (maybe the driver is unwell and can't communicate). Frankly after 3 hours then leaving the train of your own accord is perfectly reasonable in my view. Imprisoned in a train is what it feels like.

It's not like this train was in the middle of the highlands. It's not hard to get a team of 8-10 staff to a train anywhere in greater london within an hour. Getting a whole van full of water bottles can't be that difficult if there's effective emergency planning.

But then it was FCC.

 

[YorkshireRider]

Finding some of this hard to believe, lets wait for some official details to become public i think, the evening standard has been known to miss quote and report things that are a little wide of the facts.

 

[yorkie]

http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications..._register/110526_St_Pancras_International.cfm

Investigation into an incident near London St Pancras International (Low Level), 26 May 2011

The RAIB is investigating an incident which took place between London St Pancras International (Low Level) and Kentish Town stations, on 26 May 2011. At approximately 18:00 hrs the 16:30 hrs Brighton to Bedford service, formed of two Class 377 units (a total of eight carriages), stopped close to the northern portal of Kings Cross Tunnel with the rear two carriages within the tunnel. The train had stopped because of an electrical problem on the train itself that had caused the overhead line’s electrical protection equipment to trip, cutting off power to several trains in the area. At this time the train, which had a seating capacity of 476, was fully loaded, with many standing passengers. Another train of the same type was sent to assist the failed train, and was eventually coupled to it at 20:20 hrs. By this time some passengers had used the emergency release handles to open the train doors in an attempt to improve ventilation (the air conditioning and lighting systems were no longer functioning). The train began to move at 21:03 hrs but this movement was immediately stopped because passengers were getting out onto the railway from the carriages within the tunnel. The passengers were escorted back onto the train, which was then authorised to move forward again at 21:12 hrs. Three sets of doors towards the rear of the train were still fully open while it travelled approximately one mile to reach Kentish Town station, where all the passengers left the train.
The RAIB investigation will identify the sequence of events that led to the movement of the failed train with open doors. Factors for consideration will include the design and operation of the trains, the management of the incident and the information available to the passengers and staff who were involved.
The RAIB’s investigation is independent of any investigations by the British Transport Police or the safety authority (the Office of Rail Regulation).
The RAIB will publish a report, including any recommendations to improve safety, at the conclusion of its investigation. This report will be available on the RAIB website.
You can subscribe to automated emails notifying you when the RAIB publishes its reports. Click here to subscribe.

I don't think it could be guaranteed that this would not have happened without DOO. For example, on TPE we have 6-car trains with no gangway. TPE guards on this forum have confirmed that they can be in either unit. So the rear 3 cars could be in a tunnel with no member of staff on a train with a guard. Also it does not take a guard to announce that the train will shortly start moving, the driver could announce that. By the way the above is worded it does suggest that the train started moving without passengers expecting it to move, which suggests an announcement was not made.

I do not think there is sufficient evidence here to say that this could not happen if the train was not DOO.

 

[causton]

What was in the post above was what the RAIB sent me in an email, so I think this is as bad as it sounds. FCC have a knack of not giving enough information to passengers on the ground during disruption...

 

[BestWestern]

Sounds like you have an axe to grind. If the driver is being told nothing or decisions aren't yet made, what can he do? If a guard was on board could he have stopped it happening on the other end of an 8 coach train? How do you know the driver wasnt regularly announcing that he was hoping to move soon but was waiting for the go-ahead?

If a Guard were on board, in this particular case he/she would have been in a position to focus on those passengers who had been left marooned in the dark, and very possibly provide enough reassurance to keep them calm and prevent such irrational actions. Yes, what they did was stupid, but then if they're stuck in a hot, unlit coach and last announcement they heard was an hour or so ago, it is sadly inevitable. If a Driver is busy dealing with the train/signaller/controller etc then the passengers, quite frankly, can lump it. On a packed eight car rush hour commuter train, this is not a sensible way to operate, and the consequences have been displayed here for all to see.

 

[Firestarter]

Kings Cross Tunnel area + Lack/No mobile signal = Lack/No information???

 

[notadriver]

I still dont think you can guarantee even if there was a second person on board that people wouldn't try to get out. The investigation is more focused on what happened afterwards - the train moving off with doors open.

Are guards able to isolate safety systems on the train (apart from individual doors)?

 

[ess]

so, a genuine question...

on a route with so many trains, so close to london, how does it take 140 minutes to couple another train onto the failed one?

i'll allow 20 minutes for the driver to conclude 'nope it's knackered, we need another train'

 

[BestWestern]

http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications..._register/110526_St_Pancras_International.cfm



I don't think it could be guaranteed that this would not have happened without DOO. For example, on TPE we have 6-car trains with no gangway. TPE guards on this forum have confirmed that they can be in either unit. So the rear 3 cars could be in a tunnel with no member of staff on a train with a guard. Also it does not take a guard to announce that the train will shortly start moving, the driver could announce that. By the way the above is worded it does suggest that the train started moving without passengers expecting it to move, which suggests an announcement was not made.

I do not think there is sufficient evidence here to say that this could not happen if the train was not DOO.

Any situation involving a train coming to a stand within a tunnel is potentially serious. Even if it's only an infrastructure or mechanical issue, people will panic if the train grinds to a halt in the dark. If the lights then go out because the batteries are hopeless - as they often are - then things will get far worse. In this type of situation, a Driver will be busy liasing with those who are dealing with the incident, i.e. Signallers, Control, technical staff and so on. This means that they may not have time to go and deal with the passengers properly. A brief announcement is not sufficient to keep a trainload of panicking passengers happy. In these sort of situations, a decent Guard can make the difference between a calm, well managed scenario, and complete bedlam. Being able to deal with things properly is not a trivial matter, and even if some people might imagine that they wouldn't have a problem with it all, be assured there are many who would.

In the situation you give, my preference would be to obtain permission to escort the passengers in the rear 'dark' portion on the train to the front section if possible. This is something a Driver may not have the time to consider doing. If this isn't possible, a Guard could man the rear section of the train with a bardic lamp, and provide some reassurance. Again, not something a Driver is likely to be in a position to do if he/she is up the front end dealing with the technicalities of it all.

 

[lauraGeeGee]

Finding some of this hard to believe, lets wait for some official details to become public i think, the evening standard has been known to miss quote and report things that are a little wide of the facts.

Agree with this.

Doesn't seem to add up to me.

Train would NOT move with doors open. Unless the driver had operated the TIS, then it could. Unlikely that the driver would do that however. TIS being operated means train out of service.

Even if driver is not getting information, regular communication is a must. Passengers have been known to leave trains and take their lives in their own hands, despite being given information in the past!

 

[Peter Mugridge]

so, a genuine question...

on a route with so many trains, so close to london, how does it take 140 minutes to couple another train onto the failed one?

i'll allow 20 minutes for the driver to conclude 'nope it's knackered, we need another train'

The report says the overheads tripped out though.

No juice = no other surrounding train moving.

 

[Royston Vasey]

If a Guard were on board, in this particular case he/she would have been in a position to focus on those passengers who had been left marooned in the dark, and very possibly provide enough reassurance to keep them calm and prevent such irrational actions. Yes, what they did was stupid, but then if they're stuck in a hot, unlit coach and last announcement they heard was an hour or so ago, it is sadly inevitable. If a Driver is busy dealing with the train/signaller/controller etc then the passengers, quite frankly, can lump it. On a packed eight car rush hour commuter train, this is not a sensible way to operate, and the consequences have been displayed here for all to see.

This is all guesswork... The guard may have been attacked by said irate passengers!

There were obviously some serious failings somewhere but summing the incident up as "DOO chaos" is just misleading. Furthermore if the train was being rescued it seems likely that other staff were by then present. Otherwise who noticed passengers were on the tracks?

 

[BestWestern]

Kings Cross Tunnel area + Lack/No mobile signal = Lack/No information???

That's what an SPT is for!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

This is all guesswork... The guard may have been attacked by said irate passengers!

There were obviously some serious failings somewhere but summing the incident up as "DOO chaos" is just misleading. Furthermore if the train was being rescued it seems likely that other staff were by then present. Otherwise who noticed passengers were on the tracks?

Well, I'm afraid I disagree. The whole thing smacks of panic, disorder, and indeed 'chaos'. The more people are present to take responsibility for a train, the easier it is to keep control. Common sense really.

 

[lauraGeeGee]

That's what an SPT is for!!

The train could well have been stopped in a position where the driver is not permitted to leave the train to use an SPT. Except in an emergency.

Unable to pass the signal at danger on own authority as it is most probably a controlled signal. It really is a case of waiting it out I'm afraid.

 

[yorkie]

Please can people be careful to quote correctly? Ta

Kings Cross Tunnel area + Lack/No mobile signal = Lack/No information???

The rules on DOO routes are much more rigorous than on routes with guards, the driver must be able to contact signallers at all times.

That's what an SPT is for!! .

Are you sure the driver would have to use a signal post telephone? On a route with a guard the driver may well have had to locate one, but on a DOO route he should be able to simply use the radio. This point is often conveniently missed out by people who are anti-DOO

By the way I am against only having one member of staff on trains, and I am also not in favour units that do not have a gangway connection. However I am not against DOO providing it's done properly (e.g. in Glasgow), I do not support how it's done on FCC where it is an excuse to cut on-board staff.

Well, I'm afraid I disagree. The whole thing smacks of panic, disorder, and indeed 'chaos'. The more people are present to take responsibility for a train, the easier it is to keep control. Common sense really.

Well, I agree it is 'chaos' but it's not DOO chaos, really. Would a guard on an SWT inner-suburban train who usually just sits in the back cab really be better at calming passengers than a ticket examiner who has a much more customer-facing role on the Glasgow suburban network? There will always be exceptions of course, but in most cases I suspect not.

I agree there should be at least 2 member of staff per train but that doesn't mean one person operating the train is unsafe.

If there wasn't DOO on FCC, what do you think would have happened in the aftermath of Potters Bar? Would a guard running along the track with detonators and searching for a signal post telephone have been better? think not.

 

[BestWestern]

The train could well have been stopped in a position where the driver is not permitted to leave the train to use an SPT. Except in an emergency.

Unable to pass the signal at danger on own authority as it is most probably a controlled signal. It really is a case of waiting it out I'm afraid.

If the train grinds to a halt, in a tunnel, with no obvious explanation and no other means of communication, that is plenty of reason for a Driver to use the SPT. It might well be an emergency, and if the NRN/CSR etc has no reception then the use of the SPT is a necessity.

 

[Firestarter]

That's what an SPT is for!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Well, I'm afraid I disagree. The whole thing smacks of panic, disorder, and indeed 'chaos'. The more people are present to take responsibility for a train, the easier it is to keep control. Common sense really.

What use is a SPT for passengers. By all accounts passengers on-board were checking FCC twitter, NRE, Jorneycheck and god knows what else to try and find info but within 15-20 mins could no longer get mobile phone signals due to being stuck in the tunnel. Maybe also the drivers PA system failed as well hence the lack of on board info.

 

[BestWestern]

Please can people be careful to quote correctly? Ta

The rules on DOO routes are much more rigorous than on routes with guards, the driver must be able to contact signallers at all times.

Are you sure the driver would have to use a signal post telephone? On a route with a guard the driver may well have had to locate one, but on a DOO route he should be able to simply use the radio. This point is often conveniently missed out by people who are anti-DOO

By the way I am against only having one member of staff on trains, and I am also not in favour units that do not have a gangway connection. However I am not against DOO providing it's done properly (e.g. in Glasgow), I do not support how it's done on FCC where it is an excuse to cut on-board staff.

I've no idea of which radio system if any would have been available to the Driver of this particular train, so who knows if he used a radio, an SPT or god knows what else!? I'd hope that a rush hour train on a major route like this one would have a radio system up to the job though!

I agree that non-gangway stock is a bad idea, although 319's do at least have an end exit door which is something. I'm slightly perplexed that you say you're against only having a single member of staff on board, but not against DOO; I presume you mean having a non-safety critical second person aboard? That may well have helped here.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What use is a SPT for passengers. By all accounts passengers on-board were checking FCC twitter, NRE, Jorneycheck and god knows what else to try and find info but within 15-20 mins could no longer get mobile phone signals due to being stuck in the tunnel. Maybe also the drivers PA system failed as well hence the lack of on board info.

SPT allows signaller to communicate with Driver, hence information passed to passengers! If the PA fails it's a case of walk through the train I'm afraid; in a situation like this you can't just leave them all sat there wondering.

 

[lauraGeeGee]

What use is a SPT for passengers. By all accounts passengers on-board were checking FCC twitter, NRE, Jorneycheck and god knows what else to try and find info but within 15-20 mins could no longer get mobile phone signals due to being stuck in the tunnel. Maybe also the drivers PA system failed as well hence the lack of on board info.

If the batteries failed, which they would have after that amount of time, the PA system would too.

Having just read the report myself, I am rather bewildered as to how this chain of events could have unfolded. I will await the more in depth report. Just to add, if a train is sent to assist, which it was in this case, the driver of the failed train would be waiting on the line 300 meters from the failed one to await the rescue unit. He could have been not even on the train for an hour for all we know!

It is really a worst case scenario. Heat, packed train, no power, no communication. Doesn't bear thinking about and my worst nightmare!

 

[Skimble19]

377's have gangways, passengers should have been free to move throughout the 8 car train. If there was only the last 2 carriages in the tunnel then signal shouldn't have been a problem in that area. Honestly don't think it would have made any difference were there a guard on there, certain types of people will always do things like this - even if one of FCC's mobs of RPI's (often 3-5 of them) was on board they'd have probably opened the doors - see the event recently where they walked along the track despite being told not to! Still not quite sure how the the unit could have moved with the doors open though.

 

[yorkie]

I agree that non-gangway stock is a bad idea, although 319's do at least have an end exit door which is something.

Ah yes, so they do. Good point.

But my point on TPE (to name just one example) still stands, an entire unit could be left without a member of staff on a train with a guard, so banning DOO wouldn't prevent that.

I'm slightly perplexed that you say you're against only having a single member of staff on board, but not against DOO; I presume you mean having a non-safety critical second person aboard? That may well have helped here.

Yes, that's what I mean. Overall I feel that the Glasgow system is, in nearly all respects, safer overall than the SWT inner-suburban system.

The former has much more rigorous requirements for safety in the form of cab secure radio, and is also safe from a passenger security point of view as a member of staff is constantly patrolling the train.

I feel (and, no doubt am) safer on a train in Glasgow than I do on an SWT inner suburban train. In fact, if you asked members of the public (who won't know what the difference between a guard and a ticket examiner is!) if their trains have guards, I bet a higher percentage in Glasgow would say "yes" than on SWT inner suburban workings, despite the reverse actually being true, but those guards are invisible to the public as they just sit in the cab between stations.

 

[lauraGeeGee]

I've no idea of which radio system if any would have been available to the Driver of this particular train, so who knows if he used a radio, an SPT or god knows what else!? I'd hope that a rush hour train on a major route like this one would have a radio system up to the job though!

I agree that non-gangway stock is a bad idea, although 319's do at least have an end exit door which is something. I'm slightly perplexed that you say you're against only having a single member of staff on board, but not against DOO; I presume you mean having a non-safety critical second person aboard? That may well have helped here.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


SPT allows signaller to communicate with Driver, hence information passed to passengers! If the PA fails it's a case of walk through the train I'm afraid; in a situation like this you can't just leave them all sat there wondering.

"walk through the train?"

If it was packed, that's impossible! I've tried it to go and re set a passenger alarm.

As I said, until the full report comes out, we can only guess what went on but please don't put all the blame on the driver for lack of information etc. Some people just cannot and will not be told. I feel very sorry for the passengers in this situation and can understand why they felt the need to open doors for ventilation. Being on a packed train is not fun, even less in situations like that! As also previously said, even if people ARE informed, some will still take their lives in their own hands and there's nothing anyone can do to prevent that, even if there were 10 guards on each train it wouldn't necessarily mean that people would not open doors and pile out if they wanted to.

 

[BestWestern]

I agree there should be at least 2 member of staff per train but that doesn't mean one person operating the train is unsafe.

If there wasn't DOO on FCC, what do you think would have happened in the aftermath of Potters Bar? Would a guard running along the track with detonators and searching for a signal post telephone have been better? think not.

Potters bar was a major train crash, as was Heck, Southall, Grayrigg etc etc. I'd still raise the point that you have double the chance of at least one member of staff being intact enough to deal with safety, but laying dets and suchlike is of very little relevance in those circumstances. Try the example of the Class 156 which hit a sewage tanker on a level crossing, or the one which derailed and slid down an embankment, or the Class 158 which collided with a fallen footbridge, etc etc, if you want examples of accidents in which a Guard can make the difference to both safety of the line and dealing with passengers.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

"walk through the train?"

If it was packed, that's impossible! I've tried it to go and re set a passenger alarm.

As I said, until the full report comes out, we can only guess what went on but please don't put all the blame on the driver for lack of information etc. Some people just cannot and will not be told. I feel very sorry for the passengers in this situation and can understand why they felt the need to open doors for ventilation. Being on a packed train is not fun, even less in situations like that! As also previously said, even if people ARE informed, some will still take their lives in their own hands and there's nothing anyone can do to prevent that, even if there were 10 guards on each train it wouldn't necessarily mean that people would not open doors and pile out if they wanted to.

Agreed, until a proper report (i.e. RAIB rather than local rag!) comes out, we just won't know. Clearly it went t*tsup somewhere along the way, and I feel for the Driver who was wrongly expected to singlehandedly deal with not only a nightmare technical failure in the middle of the evening peak time, but also a train full of punters with short fuses.

 

[O L Leigh]

I read the article in this evening's Sub Standard with some interest. As it happens, not even this august journal is making any points about the number of staff available on the train. The biggest issue, which seems to be the main reason for the RAIB's interest, is how the train came to be moved with open doors.

But it is a nightmare scenario and every driver's worst fear. I've been stuck between stations in the peak with a Cl315 packed full of people with nothing to tell them. I just kept bothering the signaller and control for updates and then making regular PA announcements, but it is frustrating when those in control can't tell you what's going to happen and how long it might take.

O L Leigh

 

[185]

Gonna be some questions asked there about how the train was able to move with the doors open, as the interlock should have halted it.

Additionally, if permission was given to bypass the interlock system from control, then surely the standard procedure for a driver (as there is no guard to do the check) is to visually examine all doors prior to moving.

FCC should get FCCD for this mess.