Doors opened with carriages off the platform

AndyNLondon · 26 Feb 2014

PG said:
This set my mind wandering and after trailing back through RAIB reports this paragraph is in the report into a passenger fall at Brentwood in 2011:

94 The stopping practice of NXEA drivers indicates that most recognised that the eight-car monitor was not fully visible from the eight-car stop board. NXEAs management arrangements did not identify this problem. This was an underlying factor.

Click to expand...

While this is NOT related to the incident the OP describes it does demonstrate that management may well not be aware of deficiencies on-the-ground unless incidents are reported which then cause them to investigate.

Surely if there are deficiencies that everyone on-the-ground knows about, there should be a process for management to find out about those. This doesn't need to be very complex - a questionnaire asking things like "are there platforms where the monitors/mirrors are awkwardly positioned?" will probably reveal things that are widely-known but haven't (yet) caused an incident.

Basically, the management should be making sure that they know about the "everyone knows about it but it's not serious enough for anyone to have to report it" problems. It may well be that this does happen (not being in the industry, I wouldn't know), but equally I'd not be surprised if there's a fair amount of blissful ignorance of minor problems.

RailUK Forums

PG · 26 Feb 2014

AndyNLondon said:
Surely if there are deficiencies that everyone on-the-ground knows about, there should be a process for management to find out about those. This doesn't need to be very complex - a questionnaire asking things like "are there platforms where the monitors/mirrors are awkwardly positioned?" will probably reveal things that are widely-known but haven't (yet) caused an incident.

Basically, the management should be making sure that they know about the "everyone knows about it but it's not serious enough for anyone to have to report it" problems. It may well be that this does happen (not being in the industry, I wouldn't know), but equally I'd not be surprised if there's a fair amount of blissful ignorance of minor problems.

Indeed management should be making sure that they know about these sorts of problems, but as the Brentwood report shows, there were (at that time) deficiencies. Human nature being what it is there is always the potential for error so debating here the possible shortcomings of management in this respect is not particularly relevant.

However what is relevant is reporting the dodgy thingamy-bob that "everyone knows about" because one day (possibly in combination with some other out-of-course event) it could become serious enough to cause harm/affect safety.

I can sympathise however with the "it's not serious enough to report it" attitude if previous reporting has been observed to have not resulted in any action being taken - how long will anyone carry on banging against a brick wall? :roll:

RailwayDan · 27 Feb 2014

I should clarify at this point - I did notify Southeastern customer services after alighting who said they would contact the driver enroute and check if everything was alright. Looking on RTT the train stayed in service RT all the way to destination.

The station in question was Maze Hill but I can't remember the train type, it was definitely the usual type of train though... But I'm not certain what number it was. If someone could update which types of train usually run on the Greenwich line I could probably clarify this.

jon0844 · 27 Feb 2014

I reported a FCC service that stopped short, which I believe turned out to be down to Network Rail having moved the 8-car stop back a distance after doing some work on a platform - which resulted in my door (at the end of a 4-car 321) being opened over a large fall, and the next door being over the ramp section of the platform.

FCC initially denied it had happened, saying they'd investigated and it was all on the platform. I then asked if they were calling me a liar and that I'd seen it personally, not passing on hearsay rumours or what I'd been told 'by a mate' and I have no idea how they then dealt with it.

I don't personally believe that for certain issues you should ever close ranks as an industry/profession - and if it was down to Network Rail putting the stop sign in a dangerous position, then it's fair to say that it could have happened a few times.

TDK · 27 Feb 2014

Tibbs said:
I'm going to use this meme more often:

And as for the 100mph argument - I don't think that driving at that speed on a straight motorway in good weather in a well maintained car is dangerous in the least. Our 70mph speed limit was put in place in the 60s and is an anachronism, kpet in place through inertia and environmental concerns.

If someone was driving like that on the M25 on a foggy day in rush hour, weaving through the traffic, you'd better believe I'd ring the Police. If I could do it safely without breaking the law, that is.

Your comment is noted but look at the statistics for death on the roads and see how many are related to speed. Then look at the statistics to death on the railways and see how many are related to drivers stopping short, we are talking percentages here. Then think about the driver doing 100mph on that straight motorway and getting distracted by anything, losing control and killing someone. Sorry but I feel that because it is a railway incident all and sundry jump on the "report it" band wagon. You are totally wrong with the driving at 100mph is not dangerous in fact driving at 100mph is breaking the law! and you wouldn't report it? WHY!!!

BestWestern · 27 Feb 2014

RailwayDan:1720770 said:
I should clarify at this point - I did notify Southeastern customer services after alighting who said they would contact the driver enroute and check if everything was alright. Looking on RTT the train stayed in service RT all the way to destination.

The station in question was Maze Hill but I can't remember the train type, it was definitely the usual type of train though... But I'm not certain what number it was. If someone could update which types of train usually run on the Greenwich line I could probably clarify this.

I'm confused...So you did report it then?!

In which case the wheels of management may very well already be turning, making this thread all rather superfluous!

ModernRailways · 27 Feb 2014

BestWestern said:
I'm confused...So you did report it then?!

In which case the wheels of management may very well already be turning, making this thread all rather superfluous!

Nothing like a good bit of drama against South Eastern :lol:

Tibbs · 27 Feb 2014

TDK said:
Your comment is noted but look at the statistics for death on the roads and see how many are related to speed. Then look at the statistics to death on the railways and see how many are related to drivers stopping short, we are talking percentages here. Then think about the driver doing 100mph on that straight motorway and getting distracted by anything, losing control and killing someone. Sorry but I feel that because it is a railway incident all and sundry jump on the "report it" band wagon. You are totally wrong with the driving at 100mph is not dangerous in fact driving at 100mph is breaking the law! and you wouldn't report it? WHY!!!

You're looking at the numbers the wrong way. In this situation, other incidents are irrelevant, what matters is the ratio of incident causing situations to accidents.

Look at how many people do 100mph+ on the motorway (lots)
Look at how many people are killed/injured in accidents on the motorway doing 100mph+ (few, very few?)

Look at how often doors are opened over empty air (very few)
Look at how many people are killed/injured as a direct result (even fewer)

It's not about the relative danger - getting in a crash at 100mph is very likely to be fatal, falling out of an open train door is not, it's about how often an accident occurs. Also of course, the person driving the car is very likely to be the casualty in an accident like that, the train driver is very unlikely to fall out the train doors to the rear of his train.

I'm fairly confident that the % of people hurt as a result of opening a train door over fresh air is higher that people driving over 100mph, mainly due to the sheer number of people doing it.

Of course this is ignoring the duty of care argument. By getting paid to drive people around a train driver is held to a higher standard of behaviour than a person driving a car.

/edit Speed doesn't kill. Inappropriate speed kills. I would argue that there are times that 100mph is an appropriate speed, setting legality aside. I would strongly contend that someone driving a Bugatti Veyron (top speed 250mph+) at 100mph is safer than someone driving a 1987 Land Rover D90 (Top speed 85mph) at 70mph on the motorway.

RailwayDan · 27 Feb 2014

BestWestern said:
I'm confused...So you did report it then?!

In which case the wheels of management may very well already be turning, making this thread all rather superfluous!

I didn't state that I hadn't reported it. Just that I wasn't going to air specific details on a public forum.

My original question was as to whether it would have already been noticed by either driver or management before I contacted them.

As has been discussed earlier in the thread, it appears that a majority feel like it was not worth ignoring, as it could have been any number of reasons for the error and anything done to reduce these are surely worth doing?

user15681 · 27 Feb 2014

Having spoke with the OP, the service was formed of the normal stock for the line and was of normal length for that diagram. The platform was long enough to accommodate the train. It seems like a stop short incident. I don't think there's much more to add than that.

jon0844 · 27 Feb 2014

TDK said:
Then think about the driver doing 100mph on that straight motorway and getting distracted by anything, losing control and killing someone. Sorry but I feel that because it is a railway incident all and sundry jump on the "report it" band wagon. You are totally wrong with the driving at 100mph is not dangerous in fact driving at 100mph is breaking the law! and you wouldn't report it? WHY!!!

I don't see this as relevant simply because we used to have no speed limit (at a time when cars weren't exactly that safe) and you could cause just as much damage if you got distracted or lost control at a lower, legal, speed.

And what about driving at 160mph on an autobahn? Would it be safer to drop to 155mph or 150mph? Or would it be considered dangerous by someone here simply because it's over our own limit, which much of Europe has changed to nearer 80mph.

If you did 70mph on an autobahn, would that then be okay?

There wasn't much thought and planning put into the 70mph limit imposed on the motorways, which was more down to fuel shortages at the time.

A train driver could potentially be distracted too, but there are safety aids to reduce the harm done. Likewise, a train is on rails and as such there's not the same comparison on what could be a nasty situation if a driver lost control on a patch of diesel, had a blow out etc. Even swerving to avoid debris on a road from something that happens ahead that is totally outside of your control.

Speed will be a factor in an accident, but quite rarely the outright cause of the accident.

So why even try and compare the two - especially on a thread about a train stopping short!

Tibbs · 27 Feb 2014

jonmorris0844 said:
So why even try and compare the two - especially on a thread about a train stopping short!

Can I repost my picture? :P

Lockwood · 27 Feb 2014

Your use of that Futurama meme is bad and you should feel bad!

SF-02 · 27 Feb 2014

RailwayDan said:
Just been on a train in Southeastern land (won't name train here), train stopped and doors were opened - the rear 1 1/2 carriages being off the platform.

Luckily train was lightly loaded and no-one attempted to jump down to the track and everyone made it off the train okay. Driver seemed not to realise and shut doors and went off as normal.

I do not want to get the driver in question in trouble, but this could have potentially been quite a serious incident.

What is normal procedure for this? Can the driver tell if the train is fully in the platform on the DOO cameras?

Last week in southeastern land a train overshot - it braked but too late and then carried on. Apparently weather conditions were fine and the driver sounded flustered over the intercom. I didn't see it but read a few accounts. People wrote about it on twitter and on realtimetrains it was shown as not stopping so SE probably knew about it.

A few months back I did see a southeastern train arrive too quickly and the driver slam on the breaks at the last minute. A pretty violent stop. He overshot the viewing monitors so had to jump out the train to check people getting on/off before rushing back on and getting going. Again weather and visibility fine. He opened the doors for a ridiculously short time too - about 5 seconds all in.

I know trains often overshoot with the weather but I've not seen anything too bad in years myself.

Carlisle · 28 Feb 2014

For all my dislike of the supposedly privatised ,fragmented ,DFT micromanaged system that runs our railways today , I'm pretty certain that incidents and accidents like the ones on this thread are far less common nowadays than 20 years ago under BR so something must be right

Dieseldriver · 28 Feb 2014

SF-02 said:
Last week in southeastern land a train overshot - it braked but too late and then carried on. Apparently weather conditions were fine and the driver sounded flustered over the intercom. I didn't see it but read a few accounts. People wrote about it on twitter and on realtimetrains it was shown as not stopping so SE probably knew about it.

A few months back I did see a southeastern train arrive too quickly and the driver slam on the breaks at the last minute. A pretty violent stop. He overshot the viewing monitors so had to jump out the train to check people getting on/off before rushing back on and getting going. Again weather and visibility fine. He opened the doors for a ridiculously short time too - about 5 seconds all in.

I know trains often overshoot with the weather but I've not seen anything too bad in years myself.

Varying stopping patterns, slight lapse in concentration, distractions etc etc. Trouble with driving a train is usually once you've realised your mistake, it's already too late. In short, train drivers are human and unfortunately are prone to making the odd error.

L&Y Robert · 28 Feb 2014

The old L&Y Bury to Manchester electrics (I mean the really old original ones) sometimes used to travel between stations with some doors open. They had inward opening doors, and station staff couldn't tell. Nobody seemed to take any notice however, staff or passengers - except me, looking out and seeing the infrastructure, track, pointwork and live rail rattling past at 40 m.p.h.

LBSCR Times · 28 Feb 2014

Dieseldriver said:
In short, train drivers are human and unfortunately are prone to making the odd error.

However, it is getting a lot harder to cover it up these days.
There is always someone out there willing to drop a colleague in it, if it furthers their career.
There have been times when I've decided no further action was necessary, and it never went beyond me, with no written record of what took place.
However, no two circumstances are the same, and I have to do the opposite too.

island · 28 Feb 2014

RailwayDan said:
I should clarify at this point - I did notify Southeastern customer services after alighting who said they would contact the driver enroute and check if everything was alright. Looking on RTT the train stayed in service RT all the way to destination.

The station in question was Maze Hill but I can't remember the train type, it was definitely the usual type of train though... But I'm not certain what number it was. If someone could update which types of train usually run on the Greenwich line I could probably clarify this.

Primarily 465s at Maze Hill with the very odd 376.

TEW · 28 Feb 2014

I wouldn't say it's just the odd 376 at Maze Hill. The services via Greenwich are one of the main routes for 376s.

island · 1 Mar 2014

TEW said:
I wouldn't say it's just the odd 376 at Maze Hill. The services via Greenwich are one of the main routes for 376s.

Are they? Off-peak services via Greenwich are primarily the Cannon Street to Cannon Street services which tend to be Networkers IME. The Electrostars show up more on the Charing Cross to Gillingham semi-fasts via Lewisham and Woolwich Arsenal.

Latecomer · 1 Mar 2014

SF-02 said:
A few months back I did see a southeastern train arrive too quickly and the driver slam on the breaks at the last minute. A pretty violent stop. He overshot the viewing monitors so had to jump out the train to check people getting on/off before rushing back on and getting going. Again weather and visibility fine. He opened the doors for a ridiculously short time too - about 5 seconds all in.

I know trains often overshoot with the weather but I've not seen anything too bad in years myself.

It's pretty common that a driver won't be on the monitors all the time out of the thousands of stops they do annually. Not a problem provided dispatch is still safe.

What I am trying to work through is that you say the doors were opened for just 5 seconds. That's unlikely even if the driver stayed in their seat and was on internal DOO monitors. I'm working through in my head the actions of the driver to be out on the platform carrying out their duties and I think you need to multiply the 5 seconds a few times. It shows how the perceptions of passengers can be quite wrong sometimes. Time being a common one.

user15681 · 1 Mar 2014

island said:
Are they? Off-peak services via Greenwich are primarily the Cannon Street to Cannon Street services which tend to be Networkers IME. The Electrostars show up more on the Charing Cross to Gillingham semi-fasts via Lewisham and Woolwich Arsenal.

Electrostars, 375 or 376, do not work CHX-GLM under usual circumstances, they're normally 465s.

The service in question for this thread was an 8 car 465.

TDK · 2 Mar 2014

jonmorris0844 said:
I don't see this as relevant simply because we used to have no speed limit (at a time when cars weren't exactly that safe) and you could cause just as much damage if you got distracted or lost control at a lower, legal, speed.

And what about driving at 160mph on an autobahn? Would it be safer to drop to 155mph or 150mph? Or would it be considered dangerous by someone here simply because it's over our own limit, which much of Europe has changed to nearer 80mph.

If you did 70mph on an autobahn, would that then be okay?

There wasn't much thought and planning put into the 70mph limit imposed on the motorways, which was more down to fuel shortages at the time.

A train driver could potentially be distracted too, but there are safety aids to reduce the harm done. Likewise, a train is on rails and as such there's not the same comparison on what could be a nasty situation if a driver lost control on a patch of diesel, had a blow out etc. Even swerving to avoid debris on a road from something that happens ahead that is totally outside of your control.

Speed will be a factor in an accident, but quite rarely the outright cause of the accident.

So why even try and compare the two - especially on a thread about a train stopping short!

The relevance is if you do a risk assessment on the 2 different scenarios, the scenario I used could have been anything that has the potential to cause injury or death in any circumstance. My observation is that: On the railway there are many individuals that would love to report an error for what ever reason but in other industries they wouldn't. I used the blatant breaking of the law that in my opinion has a much higher risk of injury or death than the door open scenario, some would report one and not the other and in my opinion again I think they get some sort of importance from the reporting of any railway incident. Not all people but some. Any other railway workers on here agree?

pompeyfan · 2 Mar 2014

TDK said:
The relevance is if you do a risk assessment on the 2 different scenarios, the scenario I used could have been anything that has the potential to cause injury or death in any circumstance. My observation is that: On the railway there are many individuals that would love to report an error for what ever reason but in other industries they wouldn't. I used the blatant breaking of the law that in my opinion has a much higher risk of injury or death than the door open scenario, some would report one and not the other and in my opinion again I think they get some sort of importance from the reporting of any railway incident. Not all people but some. Any other railway workers on here agree?

Personally I'd say it's all public transport. In our various jobs we know exactly what is safe and what isn't. Is going round a large round about with one hand on the steering wheel particularly unsafe? Unfortunately in public transport, the service that is being sold is not a product. It is a means to get from a2b and so if something goes wrong the complaints on social media tend to roll in. There is no consideration except for their own little bubble... What me and my colleagues seem as perfectly safe, Jo and Geoff public might believe they are at risk. I presume this is the same on the railways too?

It does make me laugh when passengers on social media come up with quick fixes that are completely stupid... My favorite is 'I've seen X not in services buses, but not MY bus... Why can't these NIS buses be my bus' sorry genuine rant!

transmanche · 2 Mar 2014

pompeyfan said:
My favorite is 'I've seen X not in services buses, but not MY bus... Why can't these NIS buses be my bus' sorry genuine rant!

It may not be as daft as it seems. In London, before privatisation, lots of buses going to and from their garage would operate in service - either as short journeys, or running off the normal line of route. Nowadays they operate as out of service.

So yes, it can be quite frustrating when you see a bus depart the terminus out of service, when you know it's going past your stop en route to the garage.

pompeyfan · 2 Mar 2014

Obviously don't want to de-rail the topic, but taking in to consideration driving hours, 6 weeks notice required by vosa, the fact running in service requires more time, the fact the driver may be going on a break or about to finish their duty, or it may be the driver has been told to perform service recovery and so is about to pick the journey half way through the route on time. I do understand the frustration, however a quick fix is out the question apart from in extreme disruption, and even then most drivers will just want to go home if the day has been that bad.

The Citadel · 2 Mar 2014

First rule of proper railway work, never ever ever put anything in writing unless you have too.

Modern railway types seem to have lost this skill, end up writing reports that weren't needed and then dropping themselves in the shoite.

LBSCR Times · 2 Mar 2014

The Citadel said:
First rule of proper railway work, never ever ever put anything in writing unless you have too.

Or these days use a mobile phone to contact another person, preferably on their mobile too.....
Has anyone noticed that is what senior management do all the time?
That way there are no voice tapes to listen too.......

itsjamierawr · 2 Mar 2014

I had a similar incident a year ago at Reading. I was on a Paddington-Oxford semi-fast formed of a 166 & 165. The driver I think mistook the platform number for the stop sign and released the doors as normal, however platform staff spotted it, people still jumped down from the rear doors onto the ground though.

With Southeastern, the 375s have GPS SDO and this rarely malfunctions, on non-DOO services the driver still releases the doors but the guard closes them in my experience. From what I've heard the 465/466 don't have a reliable or automatic SDO system on them.

Doors opened with carriages off the platform

Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member