Could the railways handle storm disruption better?

Bovverboy · 18 Feb 2020

Grumpy Git said:
OK, restricted (by poor / non-existant maintenance).

Restricted, in what way?

RailUK Forums

Furryanimal · 18 Feb 2020

Today the Marches line is running except between Abergavenny and Hereford where problems have occurred before this Winter.One wonders exactly where the problem(s) is/are because last time we got pictures of washed away ballast at Pontrilas.Just interested.
And I keep my fingers crossed for better weather as I already have my tickets for North Wales in early April!

krus_aragon · 18 Feb 2020

Furryanimal said:
It has been suggested in local press that the Marches line could be closed until next Monday.How many buses do you need to transport the extra thousands heading for a rugby international?

Remember that many of those thousands would be from the Valleys, whose railways are also in a sorry state.

Bantamzen · 18 Feb 2020

broadgage said:
I think that improvements could be made to infrastructure, not everywhere, and not overnight.
In areas where the track floods regularly, then it should be raised whenever possible. To do this throughout would be prohibitively costly, but a little at a time and starting with the most problematic locations might be reasonable.
All new bridges over vulnerable railways could have an extra meter of clearance, in order that the track can be later raised by that much.
New platforms could be a little higher, again the track can later be raised without altering the platform.
All new signaling and telecoms equipment in vulnerable areas should be raised on plinths, a concrete plinth a meter high is not expensive if done as part of other works.
When drains or culverts under the line are washed out, they should be replaced by larger or more numerous water passages, not like for like.

And all new electric trains should have a small diesel engine or a battery to permit of limited operation when the wires come down. Whilst for reasons expounded upon elsewhere, I don't much like the IETs, a great merit of the nominally electric units is the inclusion of a single engine for use in such circumstances.

The problem is that even raising the lines, if possible of course, doesn't necessarily reduce the risk. Flood waters can move very quickly, and exert a lot of force. If you've ever watched your local, usually placid river throw a shipping container and a bus at a bridge, you'll know what I mean. So even if you raised the lines, the earth underneath could still be impacted enough to cause problems. And if you build walls to enclose the lines, you could just be creating an alternative path for the flood waters to run alongside and flood elsewhere. Rivers & waterways are very dynamic, not static at all, so if you build defences or raise infrastructure in one place, the waters will just find somewhere else to go. This I'm afraid is the price for us building homes & infrastructure through valleys and flood plains.

Floods are always going to happen, no matter how much we try to fight them. What the railways need to do is to plan more robust contingencies, and make it clearer to passengers as soon as these are evoked. Obvious things like all-TOC acceptance should be standard when weather / flood alerts go into place, and where possible alternative transport automatically arranged. Of course the latter will depend on availability locally, but the issue of RRBs is covered in depth in its own thread. And where it might not be possible to offer any services, the message should be made clear so that even the most die-hard know-it-alls can be in no doubt, i.e. "Do not travel, we cannot guarantee that you will be able to start or complete your journey. The alternative arrangements are....."

Phil from Mon · 18 Feb 2020

underbank said:
Of course, we could do what has been done for centuries prior and clear/dredge the streams and rivers. Farmers used to look after the streams on their land (I think they got grants to do it), but now the Environment Agency frowns on such activity. Not surprising that streams and rivers burst their banks when they're actively allowed to become blocked and clogged up.

The problem there is that dredging just shifts the problem downstream to the next pinch-point, which is often a village or town and where the economic and psychological damage is likely to be much greater. What is vital is to slow down the rate that water flows off fields and into watercourses, which in normal times is effective and I believe was this time around Pickering in Yorkshire, for example. The trouble really starts though, as @Llanigraham has noted, when the fields are so saturated that no amount of “soft” engineering will slow the flow.

I am no fan of George Monbiot, but in one of his recent columns in The Guardian he said he had asked Network Rail why they did not pay neighbouring farmers to invest in tree planting and ditch blocking to do just that, and the response was that they were not allowed to.

Meerkat · 18 Feb 2020

Phil from Mon said:
I am no fan of George Monbiot, but in one of his recent columns in The Guardian he said he had asked Network Rail why they did not pay neighbouring farmers to invest in tree planting and ditch blocking to do just that, and the response was that they were not allowed to.

That isn’t practicable for Network Rail. Tree planting has to be at landscape scale to make a difference, and ditch blocking is a project too wide in planning/implementation/outcomes for NR to get involved in.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

Dai Corner said:
(Whispers) Hyperloop.

There isn't really an issue with trains staying on the track (unless it got very deep), the issue is (and I say this having almost run down a hidden cattle grid at the weekend which would have resulted in a nice snapped ankle) that you might not be able to see that the track is in fact not there any more.

Belperpete · 18 Feb 2020

tnjmorris said:
My experiance today with the wonderful TfW, coming home from Cardiff Queen Street to Cogan I checked websites and everything looked OK. Got to QS and Barry Island trains cancelled. A Bridgend train was the next chance, that turned up as a 2 car, which as it was the first to central for about 25 minutes was absolutely rammed. As they knew that they would not be running services N of Pontypridd could they not get the services south of there to 4 car? Anyway got cancelled at Central due to an unsafe structure at Grangetown which I accept is beyond thir control.Will stick to the bus from now on, proper real time information, a seat and much more flexibility

TfW journey check says this: Some services on the Cardiff Valley Lines will be operating with 2 carriages instead of 4 due to the closure of the Treherbert line as several trains are trapped on the route

Belperpete · 18 Feb 2020

Bletchleyite said:
What it should be is a decent period before and after (at least two days), and it should be a national decision. People genuinely get stuck between a rock and a hard place when they have a long through Advance involving multiple TOCs or worse a set of split tickets.

So in essence what I would propose is that the rule should be that if any TOC declares "do not travel" for whatever reason, any ticket, of whatever type, that was purchased before that declaration and has validity on that TOC should gain Anytime validity during any period of say two days before and two days after for the entirety of the journey, and that should also apply to a sequence of contiguous splits other than them remaining routed via the split point.

Agreed. It was quite confusing following Ciara, as each TOC seemed to have its own rules as to when they would accept tickets on the following days. I could easily see someone getting caught out if following their local TOC's advice, and then getting into trouble when changing onto another TOC's service. At a very minimum, each TOC should warn that other TOCs may have different acceptance conditions.

Belperpete · 18 Feb 2020

Bletchleyite said:
There isn't really an issue with trains staying on the track (unless it got very deep), the issue is (and I say this having almost run down a hidden cattle grid at the weekend which would have resulted in a nice snapped ankle) that you might not be able to see that the track is in fact not there any more.

Or the track might be there, but with nothing supporting it. Bridges are also a problem, where the abutments may be undercut by scouring.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

Belperpete said:
Agreed. It was quite confusing following Ciara, as each TOC seemed to have its own rules as to when they would accept tickets on the following days. I could easily see someone getting caught out if following their local TOC's advice, and then getting into trouble when changing onto another TOC's service. At a very minimum, each TOC should warn that other TOCs may have different acceptance conditions.

See your point, but I don't think that is good enough as it imposes financial pressure on people to travel anyway. Even a refund isn't good enough as an Anytime for tomorrow may break the bank.

The only acceptable answer is that if any TOC on the journey calls "do not travel" or requests travel to be delayed is that all TOCs on that journey (ticket or set of tickets) are mandated to accept that declaration.

mmh · 18 Feb 2020

Bletchleyite said:
See your point, but I don't think that is good enough as it imposes financial pressure on people to travel anyway. Even a refund isn't good enough as an Anytime for tomorrow may break the bank.

The only acceptable answer is that if any TOC on the journey calls "do not travel" or requests travel to be delayed is that all TOCs on that journey (ticket or set of tickets) are mandated to accept that declaration.

Absolutely. I'd like that to be extended beyond "do not travel" times too. If an operator specific ticket cannot be used due to that operator not running (either no service at all or a single cancelled train), that ticket should automatically become valid on any operator's service. It would remove the ticket acceptance lottery at a single strike.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

mmh said:
Absolutely. I'd like that to be extended beyond "do not travel" times too. If an operator specific ticket cannot be used due to that operator not running (either no service at all or a single cancelled train), that ticket should automatically become valid on any operator's service. It would remove the ticket acceptance lottery at a single strike.

"If you are unable to travel on the services of the operator or via the route printed on the ticket or following its time restrictions, or to do so would cause your journey to be delayed in excess of two hours, you may travel on any National Rail train services to complete your journey where this could allow such delay to be avoided. This does not require your ticket to be endorsed prior to doing so."

perhaps?

Phil from Mon · 18 Feb 2020

Meerkat said:
That isn’t practicable for Network Rail. Tree planting has to be at landscape scale to make a difference, and ditch blocking is a project too wide in planning/implementation/outcomes for NR to get involved in.

I’m not suggesting they do it themselves, but if they could pay farmers and other landowners to do the work, or work in conjunction with other agencies, then it could be done on a large scale. It is highly likely in any case that the post-brexit support system for agriculture will provide payments for this sort of thing, so additional support from NR could push farmers who were wavering to do it.

Also pretty sure that the work at Pontbren in the Upper Severn catchment (https://www.agricology.co.uk/resources/pontbren-project) has been on a relatively small scale, and has made a difference locally, as has the Pickering work (https://www.forestresearch.gov.uk/research/slowing-the-flow-at-pickering/).

Belperpete · 18 Feb 2020

mmh said:
Absolutely. I'd like that to be extended beyond "do not travel" times too. If an operator specific ticket cannot be used due to that operator not running (either no service at all or a single cancelled train), that ticket should automatically become valid on any operator's service. It would remove the ticket acceptance lottery at a single strike.

I was under the impression that was already the case, when a TOC is not running a service at all. Other TOCs are obliged to provide assistance.

Belperpete · 18 Feb 2020

Bletchleyite said:
See your point, but I don't think that is good enough as it imposes financial pressure on people to travel anyway. Even a refund isn't good enough as an Anytime for tomorrow may break the bank.

The only acceptable answer is that if any TOC on the journey calls "do not travel" or requests travel to be delayed is that all TOCs on that journey (ticket or set of tickets) are mandated to accept that declaration.

The problem is that although most TOCs were accepting tickets on the following days, some were saying you had to travel at the same time as originally booked, while others were saying only after 0930.

bspahh · 18 Feb 2020

Meerkat said:
That isn’t practicable for Network Rail. Tree planting has to be at landscape scale to make a difference, and ditch blocking is a project too wide in planning/implementation/outcomes for NR to get involved in.

A lot of maintenance of watercourses gets ignored. This document from Surrey County Council explains https://www.surreycc.gov.uk/__data/assets/pdf_file/0018/104175/Riparian-Owners-FAQs.pdf explains how you can work out who is responsible for the maintenance of a watercourse. It might be a ditch that only fills with water in a storm. A "Riperian" owner has these legal responsibilities:

To pass on water flow without obstruction, pollution or diversion that would affect the rights of others.
To maintain the banks and bed of the watercourse (including any trees and shrubs growing on the banks) and any flood defences that exist on it.
To maintain any approved structures on their stretch of the watercourse and keep them free of debris. These may include trash screens, culverts, weirs and mill gates.
Riparian Owners must not build new structures (for example a culvert, bridge or board walk) that encroach upon the watercourse, or alter the flow of water or prevent the free passage of fish without first obtaining permission from the Lead Local Flood Authority (perhaps the County Council) or Environment Agency.

After the major floods a few years ago, the government agreed to help insurance companies pay out for flood damage until 2039. https://www.floodre.co.uk/ has more on that. If the scheme doesn't get renewed, then insurers would charge the market rate for flood risk insurance, which could be a lot of money if your house is prone to flooding.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

Belperpete said:
The problem is that although most TOCs were accepting tickets on the following days, some were saying you had to travel at the same time as originally booked, while others were saying only after 0930.

Yes, and I'm saying that isn't acceptable. In particular the most likely need for someone unable to travel Sunday evening is in fact to travel first thing Monday, and that should be allowed.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

Belperpete said:
I was under the impression that was already the case, when a TOC is not running a service at all. Other TOCs are obliged to provide assistance.

"If they reasonably can", which some TOCs, most notably LNER, have used as a get-out this time. I would remove this clause, mandating them to treat any such passengers the same as any holding tickets ordinarily valid on their services.

With regard to hotel accommodation, there would need to be a get-out if none was available, but it could be more specific such as "hotel accommodation is only not to be provided where no such accommodation is available within N miles of the stranded passenger's location or where it is declined by the passenger, and must be offered proactively, and a passenger is entitled to a full refund against a receipt if they sourced such accommodation themselves". Might also be worth specifying a maximum cost/class of accommodation as it wouldn't be reasonable to be put up in the Savoy.

87electric · 18 Feb 2020

Belperpete said:
I was under the impression that was already the case, when a TOC is not running a service at all. Other TOCs are obliged to provide assistance.

There seem to be occasions when LNER are reluctant to help out Hull Trains.

al78 · 18 Feb 2020

Bald Rick said:
Drainage only works if there is somewhere down hill for the water to go. It Can get very expensive, very quickly.

It is like that on my allotment site, which is on a slope. The ditch which runs the length of my plot did a good job of channeling the water from the top to the bottom of the site, but once it got there, it just flowed out across the lowest point, turning the bottom of the site into a marsh.

Bletchleyite · 18 Feb 2020

87electric said:
There seem to be occasions when LNER are reluctant to help out Hull Trains.

You can sort of see why the main TOC is reluctant to help an abstractive Open Access Operator who has great difficulty operating its services reliably at the best of times. I'm not sure how I feel about those specifically in this regard. (I am in other regards - I would ban them).

Dai Corner · 18 Feb 2020

Bletchleyite said:
Yes, and I'm saying that isn't acceptable. In particular the most likely need for someone unable to travel Sunday evening is in fact to travel first thing Monday, and that should be allowed.

What about those who'd planned to travel on Monday, seen the trains were running normally and turned up at the station only to find they can't get on as the delayed Sunday travellers have taken all the seats (and vestibules, luggage racks and floors)?

PHILIPE · 18 Feb 2020

Belperpete said:
TfW journey check says this: Some services on the Cardiff Valley Lines will be operating with 2 carriages instead of 4 due to the closure of the Treherbert line as several trains are trapped on the route

9 units trapped at Treherbert and a 170 trapped at Ebbw Vale.

PHILIPE · 18 Feb 2020

It comes through that not only now, but for years and in spite of the "lessons have been learnt" message keeping on raising it's head, information is still a major problem for passengers.. Different sources such as NRE, Trainline, Jouney Check, Twitter and various apps are not always saying the same thing and when they ask station staff, often as requested by TOCs, again receive different info or none at all because the staff concerned are not in the know regarding any particular situation. Whether this communication ptoblem, especially with a fragmented railway, will ever be overcome I don't know.

Nick_C · 18 Feb 2020

Phil from Mon said:
The problem there is that dredging just shifts the problem downstream to the next pinch-point, which is often a village or town and where the economic and psychological damage is likely to be much greater. What is vital is to slow down the rate that water flows off fields and into watercourses, which in normal times is effective and I believe was this time around Pickering in Yorkshire, for example. The trouble really starts though, as @Llanigraham has noted, when the fields are so saturated that no amount of “soft” engineering will slow the flow.

I am no fan of George Monbiot, but in one of his recent columns in The Guardian he said he had asked Network Rail why they did not pay neighbouring farmers to invest in tree planting and ditch blocking to do just that, and the response was that they were not allowed to.

One of the biggest problems causing flooding now is the loss of space for the water to go - because so many flood plains have been built on. Flood defences are then built up to stop those new houses from flooding, which quickly channels the water further downstream - causing other places to flood which didn't before, simply because more water turns up more quickly, instead of sitting on the flood plain and channelling through slowly.

Another issue is that so much more of the country is paved over - most front gardens are now driveways for example, which means there's less soil available for the water to soak into.

RLBH · 18 Feb 2020

There are two questions in my mind: extreme weather, and normal bad weather.

In truly extreme weather, widespread cancellations and so forth have to be expected, and the necessary provision needs to be for accomodating passengers on earlier or later trains as far as practicable, and offering refunds as appropriate. However that's done it will annoy some people, but most will be basically understanding of conditions well outside the norm.

The other problem is 'normal' bad weather - if a particular area floods every year when the rivers are in spate, is prone to blockage by landslides (e.g. A83 Rest And Be Thankful), doesn't like high tides (Dawlish) or any other such thing, then a solution is required. That's where things like bank stabilisation, raising track, or in extreme cases rerouting the line may be appropriate. Kidding ourselves that such things are abnormal weather just perpetuates the problems they cause.

Horizon22 · 18 Feb 2020

Bantamzen said:
Floods are always going to happen, no matter how much we try to fight them. What the railways need to do is to plan more robust contingencies, and make it clearer to passengers as soon as these are evoked. Obvious things like all-TOC acceptance should be standard when weather / flood alerts go into place, and where possible alternative transport automatically arranged. Of course the latter will depend on availability locally, but the issue of RRBs is covered in depth in its own thread. And where it might not be possible to offer any services, the message should be made clear so that even the most die-hard know-it-alls can be in no doubt, i.e. "Do not travel, we cannot guarantee that you will be able to start or complete your journey. The alternative arrangements are....."

I agree especially the "we cannot guaranteee you can complete or start your journey" - I did see some TOCS use this messaging - however this message has varied impact dependent on where you are.

During Ciara on the Sunday I saw a surprising amount of people making metro trips in London. Longer distance passenger numbers were significantly down on the other hand. I think it's difficult to reach the "turn-up-and-go" market in major cities who normally have a regular service, even on Sundays.

MotorcycleAlan · 18 Feb 2020

A further issue is the fact that people watch terrestrial tv less and less, and therefore don't ever see a weather forecast. The forecasts were accurate for both of the recent named storms, but if you only watch Netflix, Amazon, Sky Sports etc you won't ever see a human being spelling out the dangers ahead. An app on your phone, if you bother to look at even that, doesn't convey the seriousness of what is coming.

Bantamzen · 18 Feb 2020

Horizon22 said:
I agree especially the "we cannot guaranteee you can complete or start your journey" - I did see some TOCS use this messaging - however this message has varied impact dependent on where you are.

During Ciara on the Sunday I saw a surprising amount of people making metro trips in London. Longer distance passenger numbers were significantly down on the other hand. I think it's difficult to reach the "turn-up-and-go" market in major cities who normally have a regular service, even on Sundays.

MotorcycleAlan said:
A further issue is the fact that people watch terrestrial tv less and less, and therefore don't ever see a weather forecast. The forecasts were accurate for both of the recent named storms, but if you only watch Netflix, Amazon, Sky Sports etc you won't ever see a human being spelling out the dangers ahead. An app on your phone, if you bother to look at even that, doesn't convey the seriousness of what is coming.

It can indeed be difficult to reach people via regular TV scheduling. However a lot of people use social media channels, so a more coordinated approach would be for National Rail / TOCs to use sponsored posts across the most popular ones to get the message out further.

Could the railways handle storm disruption better?

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Veteran Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member