Train walk round unnecessary waste of time ?

Swanny200 · 29 Nov 2020

Whistler40145 said:
I agree, the maintenance guys aren’t the ones driving the train

That was my thought, the Western Talisman accident at West Ealing is one reason why, something as simple as an improperly locked maintenance door killed 10 people, I would imagine sensors that would make you aware that a battery cover is loose on a train might not exist and if they did, you would need quite a few of them on even a 4 car train.

As with West Ealing, there are so many occasions with aircraft accidents where maintenance has been done over 2 different shifts or one job has been carried out by 3 or 4 different people, so things have been left either half done or parts not fastened securely, the various Aircraft safety boards have made sure that this sort of thing shouldn't happen in future, an old colleague used to service the Jaguars for the RAF and then he went to work on the Omani ones, he said that after he did any work on one, if it went out and never came back, he would rack his brain wondering if it was something that he missed.

Drivers/Guard/Train Manager should be the ones who check the trains beforehand, it is all well and good being told at the depot that X train has already been checked, it is fine, take it out, but if something was to fail, causing an accident after that that could have been spotted before taking it out, would the RAIB not find fault with the driver if he had not checked the train before taking it out.

RailUK Forums

DunfordBridge · 29 Nov 2020

Seriously cannot believe I am reading this thread although the latter page is educational. I was only reading in a leading railway magazine (TR UK) the other day about how a freight train had passed signals at danger because a group of trainees, led by a trainer, had tampered with brake isolating cocks, but had not restored the cocks to the usual position, during the night, after the driver had done his preparation. The train was essentially braking only on the loco brakes.

FGW_DID · 29 Nov 2020

Swanny200 said:
Drivers/Guard/Train Manager should be the ones who check the trains beforehand, it is all well and good being told at the depot that X train has already been checked, it is fine, take it out, but if something was to fail, causing an accident after that that could have been spotted before taking it out, would the RAIB not find fault with the driver if he had not checked the train before taking it out.

That‘s why whoever does the Prep, be it maintenance staff, train preparer or drivers, signs the book in the unit, the buck stops with them if it was a pre-existing fault!

trebor79 · 29 Nov 2020

Taunton said:
If you told any aircraft pilot, even those of the smallest ones, that the walk round every trip was unnecessary, they would tell you that you are an idiot. If you are going for a flight test, even for a basic private plane licence, the examiner will always covertly snag an item for the walkaround to see if you spot it.

They absolutely will not covertly snag anything. For one thing they aren't licensed to carry out maintenance activities, and secondly it would be highly irresponsible.
What they will expect is for you to do a reasonably thorough A check and be able to answer some oral questions on various technical aspects, what you're looking for, what does this bit do etc.
I have to admit my A checks are pretty perfunctory most of the time. I was more thorough when flying gliders, but they are dismantled and put together fairly frequently which leads to more chance of unconnected controls or damaged parts.

Agree this article is nonsense, though doubtless it's a quicker walk round than it was in days of yore. I'm sure that routing maintenance is much easier to manage and confirm done at the right times with modern computer systems for example. So there's less chance of things being left or going unnoticed in the first place.

Swanny200 · 29 Nov 2020

FGW_DID said:
That‘s why whoever does the Prep, be it maintenance staff, train preparer or drivers, signs the book in the unit, the buck stops with them if it was a pre-existing fault!

I think what I was trying to get at was, if train X went into the depot for servicing the night before and was then moved to the sidings ready for the next day and signed the book to say everything was OK, in the 3 or 4 hours between whoever signed the book or just done the prep and signed the book and the driver getting in the cab, anything could have happened, if it is something that could be easily noticed by the driver doing a walk round, does it not make sense to have the driver doing a walk around before getting into his cab?

Turtle · 29 Nov 2020

Taunton said:
It would actually serve the railway community better if its supporters gave reasoned and sensible comments to such items, sensibly worded, rather than hysterical political invective, which just proves to those who wrote what started this thread off what they have always believed.

Have you not been able to comprehend the perfectly rational replies already given?

Dr Hoo · 29 Nov 2020

Whilst in no way wanting to deny the importance of trains being prepared and checked by competent staff I thought that the tragic West Ealing incident was mainly about the fact that the battery box door fastener had been subject to a poorly designed unofficial local modification that meant that it was neither inherently safe nor easy to observe or detect that it wasn't necessarily secure. It wasn't really about inspection as such.

ComUtoR · 29 Nov 2020

DunfordBridge said:
Seriously cannot believe I am reading this thread although the latter page is educational. I was only reading in a leading railway magazine (TR UK) the other day about how a freight train had passed signals at danger because a group of trainees, led by a trainer, had tampered with brake isolating cocks, but had not restored the cocks to the usual position, during the night, after the driver had done his preparation. The train was essentially braking only on the loco brakes.

The incident would have happened regardless of the prep being done or not. There is always going to be a gap between Unit prep and unit into service or a train being prepped but then being used by others. A unit can be prepped for service in the morning then sit in the yard all day or come back from the morning peak and then sit in the yard till the afernoon. If anyone interferes with the unit in that interim period then nothing is gonna catch that. Which is why the incident with the Trainer would have happened regardless of the prep.

the sniper · 29 Nov 2020

37057 said:
Yes. At my place fuel point staff do most of the preps. Alternatively if a unit is in the shed for repairs theres a good chance that the person who's worked on it will conclude with a prep if asked to do so. Trains are then formed and handed over to mainline drivers who usually get going after a couple of minutes.

Thankfully most outside (or even within) the industry aren't aware of the pay of these grades or they might consider them too expense to waste time on preps too! :lol:

DunfordBridge · 29 Nov 2020

ComUtoR said:
The incident would have happened regardless of the prep being done or not. There is always going to be a gap between Unit prep and unit into service or a train being prepped but then being used by others. A unit can be prepped for service in the morning then sit in the yard all day or come back from the morning peak and then sit in the yard till the afernoon. If anyone interferes with the unit in that interim period then nothing is gonna catch that. Which is why the incident with the Trainer would have happened regardless of the prep.

I am guessing that different companies have different policies. I seem to remember reading a few posts back on this thread that someone said their trains are also prepped before the evening peak if they have been standing in the yard all day.

At least the trainees put their hand up to this incident described above, no idea what they were actually training to do, hopefully not train driving, but it does demonstrate why checks are important rather than just ticking boxes.

FGW_DID · 29 Nov 2020

ComUtoR said:
The incident would have happened regardless of the prep being done or not. There is always going to be a gap between Unit prep and unit into service or a train being prepped but then being used by others. A unit can be prepped for service in the morning then sit in the yard all day or come back from the morning peak and then sit in the yard till the afernoon. If anyone interferes with the unit in that interim period then nothing is gonna catch that. Which is why the incident with the Trainer would have happened regardless of the prep.

At our place, if any training is to be carried out, there is paperwork to be completed by the trainer and yard controller. As part of that the trainer has to state if any on train equipment will be isolated etc and when the training is complete, the trainer has to sign to say that all equipment has been returned to “normal state”.

ComUtoR · 29 Nov 2020

DunfordBridge said:
At least the trainees put their hand up to this incident described above, no idea what they were actually training to do, hopefully not train driving, but it does demonstrate why checks are important rather than just ticking boxes.

Training by doing is important. At My TOC some things are required to be carried out to be proven competent.

FGW_DID said:
At our place, if any training is to be carried out, there is paperwork to be completed by the trainer and yard controller. As part of that the trainer has to state if any on train equipment will be isolated etc and when the training is complete, the trainer has to sign to say that all equipment has been returned to “normal state”.

There are many policies and procedures that protect our trains going into service safely. Most are carried out dilligently and yes, sometimes they can go wrong or human errors creep in. BUT, and I think Mr Shapps misses this point. It is important that they are carried out.

theageofthetra · 29 Nov 2020

boxerdog said:
So, the train is stabled at a remote location, no security etc. Local vandals decide to open a few panels. Driver jumps in, off they go. First platform rips said panels off or slices someone. Sounds risky to me....

Wouldn’t get noticed at our depot as it could be on a side with a walkway we are not allowed to use.

scotraildriver · 29 Nov 2020

I've been told by enough depot staff that it's "ready to go" only to find white lights at the rear, gangway doors open, incomplete couple ups and a myriad of other things to know that I will ALWAYS check a train before I leave. Its not up for debate in my opinion. The buck stops with me.

Dr Hoo · 29 Nov 2020

ComUtoR said:
Training by doing is important. At My TOC some things are required to be carried out to be proven competent.

There are many policies and procedures that protect our trains going into service safely. Most are carried out dilligently and yes, sometimes they can go wrong or human errors creep in. BUT, and I think Mr Shapps misses this point. It is important that they are carried out.

It isn't very clear that Grant Shapps is particularly associated with this idea. The rather peculiar original article refers to a group set up by the Transport Secretary as long ago as March and including knowledgable people like Peter Hendy and Andrew Haines under his chairmanship. The rest of the piece seems to be the musings of a political blogger.

L401CJF · 29 Nov 2020

I work as a bus driver, every morning we have to do a walk around check, even though the bus was checked yesterday morning and the morning before and so on, you still end up finding something that needs sorting most mornings. Buses rack up a lot of miles each day, it may have been fine yesterday morning but 200miles later the next day its more than likely a bulb may have blown, a panel could have become loose, a wheel nut might not be quite torqued up, the list goes on.

In the event of a wheel falling off - which isn't unknown, the first person to be looked at is the driver who did the checks that morning.

How can a train - which racks up a considerable number of miles compared to a bus - possibly be considered ok to use the following day purely on the basis that it was OK the other day?

FGW_DID · 29 Nov 2020

I think people are confusing a full “train prep” and what the driver will have a look at whilst having a quick shufty round. A full prep on a 4 car Class 387 is in the region of 40 minutes, a driver collecting the unit isn’t going to be checking all that on their walk round. The Driver should be checking for the obvious, like Not to Be Moved boards, CET pipes still attached etc etc. A walk round is important and should still happen but it won’t cover everything a train prep will.

ComUtoR · 29 Nov 2020

FGW_DID said:
A walk round is important and should still happen but it won’t cover everything a train prep will.

I have never done a walkaround that your describing.

Grumpy · 29 Nov 2020

Dr Hoo said:
It isn't very clear that Grant Shapps is particularly associated with this idea. The rather peculiar original article refers to a group set up by the Transport Secretary as long ago as March and including knowledgable people like Peter Hendy and Andrew Haines under his chairmanship. The rest of the piece seems to be the musings of a political blogger.

Indeed. Only three sentences out of the original article cover train preparation, with no evidence that Shapps even mentioned it. However we then get nearly four pages of anti Tory rantings on here.
Asking people with years of senior experience in the industry to put forward some strategic advice seems eminently sensible.
And I have to say that now would be an ideal time to take the unions on. Drivers opening doors, more one man operation, driverless operation, wages determined by comparable work rather than the ability to cause passenger misery etc

ComUtoR · 29 Nov 2020

Grumpy said:
Indeed. Only three sentences out of the original article cover train preparation, with no evidence that Shapps even mentioned it. However we then get nearly four pages of anti Tory rantings on here.
Asking people with years of senior experience in the industry to put forward some strategic advice seems eminently sensible.
And I have to say that now would be an ideal time to take the unions on. Drivers opening doors, more one man operation, driverless operation, wages determined by comparable work rather than the ability to cause passenger misery etc

From Anti Tory to anti Union :rolleyes:

bb21 · 29 Nov 2020

Grumpy said:
Indeed. Only three sentences out of the original article cover train preparation, with no evidence that Shapps even mentioned it. However we then get nearly four pages of anti Tory rantings on here.
Asking people with years of senior experience in the industry to put forward some strategic advice seems eminently sensible.
And I have to say that now would be an ideal time to take the unions on. Drivers opening doors, more one man operation, driverless operation, wages determined by comparable work rather than the ability to cause passenger misery etc

Ah, yes. A few vague mentions about reform and bringing in industry expertise, then proceeds to give a nonsense example when it touches on the specifics about train prep (when there are far more suitable examples), before conveniently attacking driver wages, and it being a Tory mouthpiece. Nothing about the extensive waste in the likes of, ahem, consultants, some of whom cost £1000+ a day, potter around all day, before drawing conclusions at the end of projects existing staff can tell you in 5 minutes. I see it with my own eyes.

I do wonder why people are moaning about the Tories (which isn't always about ministers, but including sections of their general membership too sometimes, that is not to say every Tory supporter) and discussing train prep practice given the above, silly me.

I have the pleasure of dealing with current government departments since the coalition days, so I can only speak from experience. The words I would use to describe them cannot possibly be suitable for this forum. Excuse me for being sceptical and unimpressed.

43066 · 29 Nov 2020

bb21 said:
Ah, yes. A few vague mentions about reform and bringing in industry expertise, then proceeds to give a nonsense example when it touches on the specifics about train prep (when there are far more suitable examples), before conveniently attacking driver wages, and it being a Tory mouthpiece. Nothing about the extensive waste in the likes of, ahem, consultants, some of whom cost £1000+ a day, potter around all day, before drawing conclusions at the end of projects existing staff can tell you in 5 minutes. I see it with my own eyes.

I do wonder why people are moaning about the Tories (which isn't always about ministers, but including sections of their general membership too sometimes, that is not to say every Tory supporter) and discussing train prep practice given the above, silly me.

I have the pleasure of dealing with current government departments since the coalition days, so I can only speak from experience. The words I would use to describe them cannot possibly be suitable for this forum. Excuse me for being sceptical and unimpressed.

trebor79 said:
They absolutely will not covertly snag anything. For one thing they aren't licensed to carry out maintenance activities, and secondly it would be highly irresponsible.

Agreed. I suppose they might leave a pitot probe cover on to see if you notice it, but they certainly wouldn’t deliberately break anything!

trebor79 said:
I have to admit my A checks are pretty perfunctory most of the time. I was more thorough when flying gliders, but they are dismantled and put together fairly frequently which leads to more chance of unconnected controls or damaged parts.

I’ve never fancied flying microlights or gliders, for that exact reason!

bb21 said:
Ah, yes. A few vague mentions about reform and bringing in industry expertise, then proceeds to give a nonsense example when it touches on the specifics about train prep (when there are far more suitable examples), before conveniently attacking driver wages, and it being a Tory mouthpiece. Nothing about the extensive waste in the likes of, ahem, consultants, some of whom cost £1000+ a day, potter around all day, before drawing conclusions at the end of projects existing staff can tell you in 5 minutes. I see it with my own eyes.

I do wonder why people are moaning about the Tories (which isn't always about ministers, but including sections of their general membership too sometimes, that is not to say every Tory supporter) and discussing train prep practice given the above, silly me.

I have the pleasure of dealing with current government departments since the coalition days, so I can only speak from experience. The words I would use to describe them cannot possibly be suitable for this forum. Excuse me for being sceptical and unimpressed.

They’re basically looking for anything they can to deflect attention from the absolute mess they’re making of being in government. Many people (wrongly) hate unions in this country, so they’re a convenient whipping boy.

Re 4/4 · 29 Nov 2020

would the RAIB not find fault with the driver if he had not checked the train before taking it out.

Pedantic note: as far as I know, the job of the RAIB is to do everything except find fault with someone.

heart-of-wessex · 29 Nov 2020

L401CJF said:
I work as a bus driver, every morning we have to do a walk around check, even though the bus was checked yesterday morning and the morning before and so on, you still end up finding something that needs sorting most mornings. Buses rack up a lot of miles each day, it may have been fine yesterday morning but 200miles later the next day its more than likely a bulb may have blown, a panel could have become loose, a wheel nut might not be quite torqued up, the list goes on.

In the event of a wheel falling off - which isn't unknown, the first person to be looked at is the driver who did the checks that morning.

How can a train - which racks up a considerable number of miles compared to a bus - possibly be considered ok to use the following day purely on the basis that it was OK the other day?

Spot on, if I said I didn't need to do the walkround this morning before I set off in the coach as it would come up in the info display on the dashboard, I think DVSA would have something to say about that!! Wheels and Wheel nuts certainly don't come up!

philthetube · 29 Nov 2020

philthetube said:
sensors on equipment doors will provide many more false alerts than real ones

MarkyT said:
And each one will require a walk down the train to investigate anyway, so if insufficient time has been allowed for prepping, that train will be late into service. Or does the driver just automatically fail the train on any fault detected and hand it straight back to maintenance staff to investigate (where present), in which case the first working is likely to be cancelled. Drivers ARE first line technicians. That's an increasingly important function as trains get more complex. More onboard diagnostics is good to simplify and speed the prepping tasks though.

All true, though I was thinking of the delays caused by an alarm while out in service.

6Gman · 29 Nov 2020

Grumpy said:
Indeed. Only three sentences out of the original article cover train preparation, with no evidence that Shapps even mentioned it. However we then get nearly four pages of anti Tory rantings on here.
Asking people with years of senior experience in the industry to put forward some strategic advice seems eminently sensible.
And I have to say that now would be an ideal time to take the unions on. Drivers opening doors, more one man operation, driverless operation, wages determined by comparable work rather than the ability to cause passenger misery etc

In recent times wages have been determined by the TOCs' taste for poaching staff rather than training them up themselves.

Given issues of safety, revenue protection and disability access I wonder how much potential there is for further "one man operation".

And where do you think "driverless operation" would be practical?

Flange Squeal · 29 Nov 2020

Bow Fell said:
Here’s a question and there will be some different answers varying by TOC. Unit prepped/fitness to run certificate and runs in the AM peak then put down the sidings and driver booked to dispose. Around 8 hours later, unit booked back out of the sidings and into traffic. Does it need a prep? Where I work it definitely would.

At my place, a prep slip for a train leaving a depot is valid for 24 hours, but only for 'one departure'.

So a train could in theory be prepped at midnight, but not leave the yard until 2350.

But a train that has worked the morning peak, goes into a depot for the day, then back out for the evening peak will be prepped again before the evening service. Although it will still be within its 24 hour window from its last prep, it used up its 'one departure' from a depot validity in the morning.

DorkingMain · 29 Nov 2020

6Gman said:
Because the driver is more likely to be diligent? Because he's not looking at train after train and because he has very good reason to be attentive as he'll be at the pointy end of said train?

A broader point (and, as background, I spent a big chunk of my railway career diagramming traincrew.

The prep allowance in my experience was rarely more than 20 minutes, sometimes less. Is this writer really suggesting that taking 20 minutes out once or twice in a shift is going to have any significant financial benefit? Can't see it myself.

The biggest change that raised traincrew efficiency in my time was flexible rostering, followed by DOO. Both in BR days.

And if the writer is upset that drivers are paid too much I would say that was down to privatisation when the TOCs realised that poaching staff with higher pay was a lot cheaper than training up their own staff.

So, basically, what I'm saying is that the article is poorly researched **** (insert term of choice).

Given some of the train crew diagrams we end up working with, 20 dead minutes is nothing in the grand scheme of things.

Whistler40145 said:
Had I been a train driver, I would walk around my train to ensure everything was okay, otherwise my train wouldn’t move an inch from where it has been stabled overnight.

I wouldn’t want to reprimanded if we had started off in service and the train discovered a fault, especially when it was stabled in full working order

You wouldn't be reprimanded for a train developing a fault (you don't maintain the trains, you just work them). But you would end up being the person that had to attempt to deal with it, fix it, or fail the train.

37057 · 30 Nov 2020

Ashley Hill said:
Train/loco prep IMO should be done independently from any person who has maintained it. It can be easy to overlook ones own mistakes so an independent check is vital. Also it's often the crew who work it forward who do the prep so it's in their interest to do it properly. Proper preparation prevents poor performance etc.........

I would like to think that anyone who is trained & assessed can do it, whether they're the person taking it or not.

If you're the person carrying out the prep then you're potentially accountable for anything that may go wrong that is on the 'to do' list, so that's ultimately why it's in your interest to do it diligently.

Just one benefit of maintenance staff carrying out preps is that if there are any faults then there's a good chance they can be sorted before the driver shows up!

60019 · 30 Nov 2020

Grumpy said:
wages determined by comparable work rather than the ability to cause passenger misery etc

Isn’t the whole right wing theory of wages that you acquire skills and then get paid in accordance with the demand for your skills and the supply of other workers? After all, if drivers are demanding too much wouldn’t the TOCs or their owning groups want to invest in training more, and wouldn’t non-drivers be interested in the work?

Train walk round unnecessary waste of time ?

Member

RailUK Forums

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Emeritus Moderator

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Member