-
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!
Thameslink meltdown 02/10
- Thread starter flitwickbeds
- 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
The problem is that those relying on Thameslink services see any delay as a failure of the trains/infrastructure. Frequently, outside forces play a part. Cumulative delays are often caused (directly or indirectly) by passenger behaviour at stations. Similarly, a train delay remote from the area in question can cause a build-up of delays in locations like the core. Then there are the natural events that interfere with the railway, e.g. floods, high winds, high or low temperatures, animals on lines etc., which might to a passenger waiting in a TL core station seem irrelevant, are very much part of a railway's operation.
This time however, it seems that two unlikely failures have struck at the same time. I can't remember the OLE coming down since the the old Kings Cross Thameslink station was closed, and the rigid bar conductor was installed. 3rd rail insulaters do occasionally fail (I can remember that happening in Victoria Station a short while ago), but the 3rd rail from Farringdon to Blackfriars is a very special and well looked-after installation so I await the verdict on the cause with interest.
So as you say, the actual rate of failures would be interesting, and compare it to a route that runs up to 20tph whether on two tracks or four.
Surreytraveller
On Moderation
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 2,810
I think it was looked at. It was just blagged - "we'll terminate at London Bridge/divert into Kings Cross". Then they moved onto the next item on the agenda.
bengley
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2008
- Messages
- 1,844
-deleted-
Last edited:
I thought the point of having it at City/Blackfriars is that if this situation did happen; the pantograph would simply slide off the end and then drop before it hit the roof at Blackfriars ?
Sounds like one of those situations where there'd be very high mental load on the driver to begin with, then they've been asked to do an unusual move. Isn't surprising that something was overlooked, I think they could be forgiven for the mistake.
Given the potential for safety issues with falling OHLE in an enclosed station, I'm guessing the RAIB be looking at this one?
Islineclear3_1
Established Member
Really?
Surreytraveller
On Moderation
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 2,810
The pans going up/down are automatic in the core. I wonder if that confused the driver? I don't think its a case of the driver being 'forgiven' - but the reasons why it happened will need to be looked at.
Dr Hoo
Established Member
Didn’t the RAIB investigate when the live OHLE fell on the Eurostar platform at St Pancras a few years ago?
Yup.
They also seem to routinely investigate tram OHLE falling in places people could come in to contact with the wires.
Anyway, I'm sure the rail bodies are capable of deciding if an investigation is necessary. I was mainly asking because I'd be interested to read the report and sequence of events when it eventually gets published, if indeed they investigate at all.
bengley
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 May 2008
- Messages
- 1,844
Indeed, drivers rarely need to touch the pantograph raising/lowering switch anymore with 700s, so it's unsurprising that this would be overlooked.
I can't imagine the concept of reducing services just in case things go wrong being too well received.
What happens if the core section goes down and drivers are stranded on the wrong side?
Last edited by a moderator:
Surreytraveller
On Moderation
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 2,810
Indeed. And any plan would need to be developed far enough in advance in order to advise drivers of what they are doing when they book on duty.
Also, signallers, station staff and everyone else would need to know what the plan is. You cannot introduce a plan at the drop of a hat, nor change a plan or revert to a full service once a plan has been implemented.
Sorry for multi quoting so many posts, but some answers are needed.
There were two separate incidents, which occurred at half midnight. Both needed repair before trains could operate. This meant assessing the problem, assembling the repair teams, and getting them to central London with all the relevant tools and materials. The repairs were done by around 0700.
There are lots of ‘plan Bs’ for GTR service disruption. The bloke who wrote them spent half a year of his life doing so, working with various operational teams up and down the route. The necessary plans were implemented this morning. But, obviously, some incidents do cause major problems, and closing the core is a big one.
Incidentally the core doesn’t fail ‘a lot’. The flooding that closed the core was about 5 years ago. Signalling issues do happen, but it is very rare that they ‘close’ the core. I can’t remember the last time a 700 was ‘failed’ For more than 20 minutes - disruptive, yes, but not exactly a closure. (Except for the infamous National Grid day).
It was. At length.
You were in the room then? Didn’t think so. (See above, it was half a year’s work).
I’m guessing here, but going through the crossover south of City TL might have made a difference.
Unlikely I’d say.
If you mean ATO, then it wouldn’t have made a difference. If there’s a problem the trains can still be diverted and driven normally.
There were two separate incidents, which occurred at half midnight. Both needed repair before trains could operate. This meant assessing the problem, assembling the repair teams, and getting them to central London with all the relevant tools and materials. The repairs were done by around 0700.
There are lots of ‘plan Bs’ for GTR service disruption. The bloke who wrote them spent half a year of his life doing so, working with various operational teams up and down the route. The necessary plans were implemented this morning. But, obviously, some incidents do cause major problems, and closing the core is a big one.
Incidentally the core doesn’t fail ‘a lot’. The flooding that closed the core was about 5 years ago. Signalling issues do happen, but it is very rare that they ‘close’ the core. I can’t remember the last time a 700 was ‘failed’ For more than 20 minutes - disruptive, yes, but not exactly a closure. (Except for the infamous National Grid day).
It was. At length.
You were in the room then? Didn’t think so. (See above, it was half a year’s work).
I’m guessing here, but going through the crossover south of City TL might have made a difference.
Unlikely I’d say.
Surreytraveller
On Moderation
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 2,810
So why didn't the plan work, then? What is the plan?
As far as I can tell, the plan for this scenario did work, reasonably well in terms of train service. It twin,y worked well on the MML. However this plan results in a very significant reduction in capacity, and therefore for passengers - including me - it was a very difficult morning. Hence the messages to seek alternative routes / do not travel.
Failed Unit
Established Member
Even on the great northern side it was better than normal some congestion at kings cross because of the extra trains. Some delays because of train crews out of place.
But non of this block all platforms at Finsbury Park, while drivers to move the trains are stuck on trains behind.
a refreshing change from what we normally experience with GTR. The route didn’t go into meltdown and most people got at least to kings cross without too much disruption.
But non of this block all platforms at Finsbury Park, while drivers to move the trains are stuck on trains behind.
a refreshing change from what we normally experience with GTR. The route didn’t go into meltdown and most people got at least to kings cross without too much disruption.
gazthomas
Established Member
Given the criticality of the core would it be prudent to have maintenance teams closer to hand?
It’s prudent to have maintenance teams located where the work is, and where they can most easily access their work sites. Bear in mind that the guys who fix OLE faults are the routine maintenance teams who spend most of their time doing routine inspection and running repairs.
Given that the OLE in the core is almost bullet proof (today’s was the first core OLE failure for some time), and there’s a lot of OLE on the MML, I’d argue that the best place for them is not in central London. Particularly as getting in/out of central London every day/night to do routine maintenance would be a very inefficient use of resource.
And of course, it is almost irrelevant where they are based, it’s ehere they are at the time of the shout that is the issue. That comes down to sheer luck.
gazthomas
Established Member
I get your logic, but I do wonder if more work is required to plan for the most common eventualities. Today seems response seems more ad-hoc than practiced
It depends on what you mean by 'maintenance teams'. First they would need to have a not inconsiderable cache of components, plant and other material, then there's accommodation, and finally, rail access. Given the speed at which the work has been done I don't think the expense of almost every train, S & T, OLE, 3rd rail, PW, drainage etc. discipline closer than they obviously were would be justified. As has been said here, the core and trains running through it have been pretty reliable since bedding in. Service interruptions can be inconvenient but they aren't life threatening given the recovery levels planned into the system.
It would only be 'practiced' if exactly the same type of failures had happened many times before, and as has been said, it hasn't. Random failures happen, everywhere.
modernrail
Member
- Joined
- 26 Jul 2015
- Messages
- 1,053
If the pan goes up automatically, why does it not go down automatically if the train moves off in the opposite direction? What is the trigger that normally tells the train to raise it/drop it automatically?
1) it wasn’t a common eventuality. Far from it. As far as I know, the wires have never come down at City TL before.
2) it wasn’t ad hoc. Response teams were called and got to site as quickly as they could. Some had to stop doing other work, in other places, clear their sites, and then travel.
Surreytraveller
On Moderation
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 2,810
The balises that tell the train to open the doors. If the train does anything out of sequence or out of normality, then the driver needs to take control of what would normally be an automatic task. The train isn't clever enough to know its going the wrong way unless there is something there to tell it that
BRX
Established Member
- Joined
- 20 Oct 2008
- Messages
- 3,631
Sounds like the classic scenario of a task being automated enough that the human stops thinking about it, but not automated enough that the system can survive the human not thinking about it when something abnormal happens.
Marylebone-Princes Risborough? Any problem there and Chiltern is effectively closed. But that doesn’t happen.... oh hang on....
This is my fault for saying “I can’t remember the last time a train failed for more than 20 mins” in post #45.
I tempted fate, and fate bit. I will keep quiet in future.
- Status