EM2
Established Member
Not since 1964. Funnily enough, most people were using cars, so they stopped running the trains...
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
My bad experience travelling on FGW from Clifton (26/09): Total and utter debacle.
- Thread starter Cinc026
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
SpacePhoenix
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Mar 2014
- Messages
- 5,492
Also part of the blame could possibly go to the stricter emissions regs, which means that some existing designs in service can probably never be built again as they'd never be able to fit in the increased equipment for dealing with the emissions along with the engine, fuel tank, water tank, sewage tank, etc
Using the bizarre logic being displayed by some comments on this thread it looks as if some posters think Asda would be able to 'borrow a shop' from Tesco or another operator in the same business!! :roll:
That seems to be the appropriate parallel with FGW borrowing rolling stock from C2C etc.
This threads got very silly now. Seriously, suggesting Bristol area uses SWT stock from Clapham?! How, get the passengers to push the coaches along as they wont be able to get power around Bristol due to the lack of electrification!
Once a thread descends into this kind of stupid comment it's pointless any of us who actually know how these things work carrying on contributing.
So I guess at the end of the day FGW deliberately arranged trains to be a short and overcrowded as possible and ensured it got stuck for as long as possible as all the staff just wanted a good laugh at the discomfort of the punters.
Once a thread descends into this kind of stupid comment it's pointless any of us who actually know how these things work carrying on contributing.
So I guess at the end of the day FGW deliberately arranged trains to be a short and overcrowded as possible and ensured it got stuck for as long as possible as all the staff just wanted a good laugh at the discomfort of the punters.
Yeah, when there are perfectly good 442's and locos sitting around looking for a use... *grabs coat and runs*
Clearly, then, there is a gap or breakdown in communications. Perhaps there should be some way of monitoring platform crowding further along the route to allow a controller or the signaller (or the driver) to make a decision about whether to hold a train in the platform, or cancel stops before it's too late for pax to change. Perhaps Redland could've briefly been made exit-only, which in my view would've been preferable to making a train run fast past a crowded platform.
Clearly it was long enough for people to panic or get fed up.
This is the funny thing about transporting human members of the public. They don't behave like mechanical equipment. They don't behave according to operational rule books. They become confused. They don't like being confined in a stationary train with no control over the situation and no way out. They can, and do, panic in certain conditions, and not after some arbitrary time limit of minutes-packed-in-at-a-given-density.
I'm of the view that any stop between station calls should be avoided where possible, particularly on very crowded trains. Clearly in many cases they are not avoidable, so the Driver or the Guard should act very quickly to reassure passengers that they will be moving again as quickly as possible, and operations staff should, wherever possible, provide an opportunity for a train to be brought alongside a platform and the doors opened to allow passengers to alight if they wish.
But the bottom line is that prevention is better than cure, and if the Railway wants to prevent passengers self-evacuating, perhaps they should put more effort into preventing conditions where passengers want to self-evacuate.
Last edited:
They get down B&Q and buy a long extension lead!
You ain't quick enough, we will catch you this time!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Lots of your "the railway is at fault' or 'the railway should do something' wibble, now actually come up with a viable, workable solution!
You do realise we're talking about a minor branch line with (generally) unstaffed stations?
Or, alternatively, event organisers should put more effort into working with transportation providers (the railway being only one) to make sure that there's a workable plan, rather than leaving punters to fend for themselves, as appears to have happened here.
...presumably with closed-circuit television cameras? Is it too much to ask for someone to actually monitor the output of these cameras, and, in the event of something unusual happening, crowd control measures to be imposed and staff deployed? (TfL seem to be able to do it on the mainly-unstaffed DLR stations.)
No-one was saying the event organisers shouldn't have done more (clearly they should.) But as soon as the railway realised something was going on, they should've done better too. Indeed, it seems First Bus was aware of the event taking placeso why didn't they inform (First) Great Western? One presumes the event was well advertised in the local areapresumably no GWR staff saw these and thought, "maybe I should check to see if our planning team have spoken to the organisers"?
It seems various sections of the Railway have an allergy to being proactive and engaging in joined up thinking.
Actually monitor the CCTV at the stations? Operate crowded platforms as exit-only rather than cancelling stops and running fast? Holding trains in platforms wherever possible? Proactively finding out about local events and working with organisers?
Your attitude seems to be that anyone suggesting the Railway should do more to proactively serve its customers' needs is spouting "anti-Railway wibble." Nonsense. The Railway should do more to proactively serve the needs of its passengers. This involves coming up with viable, workable solutions to these problems, and not blaming passengers for using the Railway.
The event organisers specifically stated on their website that they were working with the local bus companies. No such mention of the train companies - they just say 'the nearest station is' and leave it at that.
It's also worth noting that the problem didn't occur at the closest station, but three stations down the branch, rather than main, line so I'm sure that GWR was as surprised at the events as everyone else is.
The impression I had was that First Bus and Great Western Railway were part of the same group of companies. Could First Bus not have informed GWR of the upcoming event, or advised the organisers to get in touch with them? Perhaps this is something both GWR and First Bus can look into in the future.
This is fair. But it shouldn't matter where. Assuming there is CCTV at the stations, which is presumably being monitored by someone, someone must have been aware of an increase in passenger volume.
Technically, you don't even need a CCTV operator. Modern computer vision techniques are capable of identifying people moving around on a railway station platform acting suspiciously, or identifying people who want to die and are thinking of throwing themselves under the train. I'm sure it's capable of detecting when there are more people than usual entering a station or waiting for a train.
(Personally, I would like all stations to be staffed during traffic hours anyway. But let's be honest: that's not going to happen.)
Same parent company but it isn't clear how much communication there is (or is allowed) between them. Competition and cartel laws and all that.
It would appear that this did actually happen - to an extent - as the OP later amended his story to say that the train was being held at a signal due to crowding at Redland station (rather than due to crowding on the train he was on). There's limits to what GWR could do in those circumstances however - they can see that there is a problem, but it will take time to call up the staff and get them to the station. And in the meantime, people are already on crowded trains stopped at red signals...
But not because they haven't got enough staff to staff the capacity they do have.
No, it's because the pubs aren't big enough (or, I suppose, that there aren't enough pubs). I can't see the point you're trying to make.
Think 1964 is the end of Christmas day trains, the end of Boxing day services was much later.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
The point is that this incident occurred because the existing capacity wasn't used for want of extra staff and the odd extra or longer train.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Using the bizarre logic being displayed by some comments on this thread it looks as if some posters think Asda would be able to 'borrow a shop' from Tesco or another operator in the same business!! :roll:
That seems to be the appropriate parallel with FGW borrowing rolling stock from C2C etc.
You are deliberately missing the point.
We don't expect a new line to be built any more than we expect Asda to build a new store.
But we would expect Asda to open more tills if busy the same way we expect more and/or larger trains to be put on to meet demand.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
No.
It's just that if SWT have spare stock off peak it's reasonable to expect another TOC to also have spare stock off peak.
It's silly that people won't get this idea that peak usage is normally greater than off peak.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
This is TfL's approach - since the London bombings there will always be an announcement within a few seconds of stopping between stations to reassure passengers that this is a normal situation even if they aren't quite sure why yet.
No. Staffing is only one factor that needs to be considered - and actually would be the easiest to resolve.
Finding the units will be the biggest consideration - as repeatedly stated above, there just isn't that much spare diesel stock sitting around. 445driver gave the situation at his depot where there was only one spare unit on a Saturday (and that would be required as a backup). Finding the paths - Redland station sits on a single line section, even assuming that you can find the stock it may not be possible to run it as the current Saturday service provision is basically the same as weekdays.
And I'll point out again that this problem occurred at Redland Station which is almost 3km away from the site of the festival. If anything, GWR would have been expecting problems at Stapeleton Road which is less than 1km away.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
I don't know if you're London based, but this is a very London-centric way of thinking. On many branch lines the Saturday service provision is almost exactly the same as the weekday.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
I agree in principle, though it seems a "UK thing" that signalling infrastructure isn't closely tied with where the stations are. In mainland Europe, it appears usual that "signalboxes" are found actually within the station building, and blocks coincide with the locations of stations, so if you're sitting and waiting it is almost always in a station. The UK never seemed to work like that pretty much from day one.
I think it's down to the difference between speed signalling and route signalling.
With speed signalling you need a starter signal, as the train will typically be signalled to a stop at the station. That isn't required with route signalling.
We're not talking about lots of extra trains, just one extra or one longer train would have done. From just one of the depots in the area.
One extra train would just have shifted the problem to the next one.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
True, even with very simple, manual systems like in Thailand the station stop is signalled (with a man with a red flag if stopping, or a green flag if proceeding). Whereas in the UK the driver alone is responsible for stopping at stations - the signaller will only give a red/not set a route if there is a purely signalling reason to do so.
- Status