Are train dispatchers essential?

[Shrop]

Presently sitting at Manchester Victoria and 10 minutes late, so far. Train ready, driver ready, train manager ready, signal ready, the only reason we can't go is because there is no train dispatcher. Hmm ...

 

[greyman42]

Presently sitting at Manchester Victoria and 10 minutes late, so far. Train ready, driver ready, train manager ready, signal ready, the only reason we can't go is because there is no train dispatcher. Hmm ...

At stations such as York where you have curved platforms they are essential.

 

[Shrop]

At stations such as York where you have curved platforms they are essential.

Thanks, yes that's understandable for long trains but this was only a 4 coach DMU. At Ludlow for example, they manage a Class 67 plus 5 coaches on quite a curve, and I've not seen any dispatchers employed there? It did make me wonder what actually dictated the reason for the dispatcher being so essential?

 

[The exile]

Thanks, yes that's understandable for long trains but this was only a 4 coach DMU. At Ludlow for example, they manage a Class 67 plus 5 coaches on quite a curve, and I've not seen any dispatchers employed there? It did make me wonder what actually dictated the reason for the dispatcher being so essential?

Directly and immediately- the rules. Others will have to explain why rules require them in some places but not others (must be plenty of curved platforms at unstaffed stations)

 

[Shrop]

Directly and immediately- the rules. Others will have to explain why rules require them in some places but not others (must be plenty of curved platforms at unstaffed stations)

I thought it was simply "The rules", but a significant question remains, ie the inconsistency of standards.

Let's assume that it's deemed to be unsafe for trains to leave Manchester Victoria without a dispatcher (and I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong), but somehow at other stations which are arguably more hazardous (eg. Ludlow and others with curved platforms), it is deemed safe simply because of the impracticality of employing a dispatcher. Of course rules are needed, such as at Victoria, but given the penalties for late running, are these rules in need of re-writing, eg. if a dispatcher is not present once the train is, say, 3 minutes late, then the train manager can be pre-authorised to make the decision to depart, just as he/she would at other stations?

 

[pokemonsuper9]

I thought it was simply "The rules", but a significant question remains, ie the inconsistency of standards.

Let's assume that it's deemed to be unsafe for trains to leave Manchester Victoria without a dispatcher (and I'm happy to be corrected if I'm wrong), but somehow at other stations which are arguably more hazardous (eg. Ludlow and others with curved platforms), it is deemed safe simply because of the impracticality of employing a dispatcher. Of course rules are needed, such as at Victoria, but given the penalties for late running, are these rules in need of re-writing, eg. if a dispatcher is not present once the train is, say, 3 minutes late, then the train manager can be pre-authorised to make the decision to depart, just as he/she would at other stations?

Maybe because Manchester Victoria is a busy station, while some stations that may be curvier are quieter.

 

[Shrop]

Maybe because Manchester Victoria is a busy station, while some stations that may be curvier are quieter.

We were the only train in at the time. I reiterate my previous point about revisiting "The Rules", given the huge costs and inconveniences that delays cause ...

 

[357]

given the penalties for late running, are these rules in need of re-writing, eg. if a dispatcher is not present once the train is, say, 3 minutes late, then the train manager can be pre-authorised to make the decision to depart,

I completely agree. In the same way that if the guard isn't available or is late then the driver should be able to make the decision to run the service DOO.

We only really need drivers, and in the future with AI we can get rid of them too!!

 

[Bletchleyite]

DOO with decent cameras can of course dispatch safely on a curved platform in a way guarded operation can't. Though I seem to recall a few stations have strategically placed cameras and screens to assist a guard with dispatch on a curved platform without a dispatcher - I believe Liverpool James St does, and Berkhamsted certainly did but I don't know if it still does or if they're still used even if there.

 

[Kite159]

At busy stations, a dispatcher can be worth their weight in gold at being able to keep passengers away from the train once the guard has closed their local door, and it begins to move. Especially on stock where the guard hasn't got a window they can open to look out of when being close to the bell buzzer in case of emergency.

@Bletchleyite you can add Clapham Junction to that list with platform 7 & 9 having CCTV monitors positioned, so guards can use them to monitor loading/unloading with the curve without the need of a dispatcher. Plus plenty other stations in SWR metro land which have curved platforms.

 

[Sonic1234]

In the same way that if the guard isn't available or is late then the driver should be able to make the decision to run the service DOO.

People like the idea of the guard on the train until their train is cancelled because the guard isn't available. Then DOO sounds good.

Years ago, I complained to XC about a train being cancelled because of no guard. Not knowing about railway politics then, I made the point that First Great Western (as they were then) run DOO (Thames Valley service), so why can't XC. I was told no such thing happens anywhere by Customer Relations!

 

[Magdalia]

We were the only train in at the time. I reiterate my previous point about revisiting "The Rules", given the huge costs and inconveniences that delays cause ...

Not as inconvenient as somebody being injured because "the rules" were not followed, for example here:

Rail Accident Report: Person trapped in doors and pulled along platform at Kings Cross station, London - 10 October 2011 :: The Railways Archive

Archive of UK railways documents

www.railwaysarchive.co.uk

"A passenger became trapped in a train door and was pulled along a platform, for a distance of approximately 20 metres, at London King's Cross station on 10 October 2011. She suffered bruising to the fingers of her left hand.

The passenger's hand became trapped when she attempted to board the train while the doors were closing. The train started to move before the passenger's fingers were released because a member of staff on the platform did not fully check the train doors before signalling that the train could depart. The requirement to check doors is given in the railway Rule Book.

The form of dispatch will be informed by a risk assessment regularly reviewed.

 

[Shrop]

Not as inconvenient as somebody being injured because "the rules" were not followed, for example here:

Rail Accident Report: Person trapped in doors and pulled along platform at Kings Cross station, London - 10 October 2011 :: The Railways Archive

Archive of UK railways documents

www.railwaysarchive.co.uk

The form of dispatch will be informed by a risk assessment regularly reviewed.

Rules are valuable in many situations but they will never stop every problem, and your example isn't really relevant to our situation where the doors were already locked shut.
I find it hard to accept that it would have been unsafe for the train manager to authorise departure on his own. If it would have been unsafe, then so would many other situations, it just needs a sensible amount of discretion. Of course you could argue the detail that the decision has been made that departures at Victoria require a dispatcher to be present, but I would still contest that this rule is worthy of re-visiting, for the reasons I have given.

 

[AlterEgo]

We were the only train in at the time. I reiterate my previous point about revisiting "The Rules", given the huge costs and inconveniences that delays cause ...

Do you think the industry should have rules and deviate from them when it is expedient to do so? Which other rules would you like to see go? You can't just dispense with rules on the odd occasion it seems convenient.

 

[357]

Do you think the industry should have rules and deviate from them when it is expedient to do so? Which other rules would you like to see go? You can't just dispense with rules on the odd occasion it seems convenient.

Pesky TPWS can get stuffed for one. I think I should be able to drive as fast as I want everywhere and be able to isolate it as required.

 

[Fragezeichnen]

British risk assessments around the closure of doors and dispatch seem to be unbelievably cautious in comparison to the rest of Europe.

As far as I know the only place in Germany where platform dispatchers are employed is Hamburg, which is very crowded and on a sharp curve. Everywhere else, even Cologne, Berlin or Munich all dispatch is done by the train crew.

On the vast majority of trains the doors decide for themselves when to close based on sensors, and if nothing is blocking the doors the train can leave. If the driver wants extra reassurance they can look out of the window. There are no cameras.

And despite the dire warnings posted here, it all works fine.

Meanwhile in Britain even small stations with minimal curvature such as Macclesfield have a team of dispatchers. At London terminals I've even seen dispatchers standing right next to the driver's door, which makes you wonder if British drivers get bolted to the seat when they start their duty.

 

[Shrop]

Do you think the industry should have rules and deviate from them when it is expedient to do so? Which other rules would you like to see go? You can't just dispense with rules on the odd occasion it seems convenient.

You should re-read my comments and hopefully understand them as intended. Simply taking up your contrary position isn't helpful. You sound like rules should never be changed under any circumstances, when in fact they sometimes can be improved upon as and when necessary, after further consideration. Changes in the law, or to rules, are actually normal progress.

 

[Lewisham2221]

Rules are valuable in many situations but they will never stop every problem, and your example isn't really relevant to our situation where the doors were already locked shut.
I find it hard to accept that it would have been unsafe for the train manager to authorise departure on his own. If it would have been unsafe, then so would many other situations, it just needs a sensible amount of discretion. Of course you could argue the detail that the decision has been made that departures at Victoria require a dispatcher to be present, but I would still contest that this rule is worthy of re-visiting, for the reasons I have given.

Are you sure the train doors were locked shut? Isn't the standard procedure that the guard waits for the dispatcher to give the first "tip" before closing/locking the doors?

 

[Lewisham2221]

We were the only train in at the time. I reiterate my previous point about revisiting "The Rules", given the huge costs and inconveniences that delays cause ...

Looking at the time of your posting, there were 5 services departing from 5 different platforms in a 4 minute time period (as per RTT). If your train really was the only train in the station, it can't have been so for very long at all. Neither does this account for how busy the station is in terms of passenger numbers. Nor does it take into account overall visibility, signal location and visibility or a whole host of other things that will form part of the decision on whether a dispatcher is or isn't required.

It all depends on various risk assesments (and no doubt some sort of cost analysis too). Variations can include:

• Dispatcher for certain TOCs only
• Dispatcher for certain rolling stock only
• Dispatcher for certain platforms only
• Dispatcher at certain times only
• Multiple dispatchers required

There are situations where self-dispatch can be authorised for an otherwise manned-dispatch station - but they're not likely to include a busy, multiple platform station where dispatchers are busy dispatching other services resulting in a few minutes delay to another service.

 

[Harpo]

At London terminals I've even seen dispatchers standing right next to the driver's door, which makes you wonder if British drivers get bolted to the seat when they start their duty.

From HST onwards drivers’ seats/controls have migrated towards the centre and don’t automatically get a drop-down ‘wos appnin?’ window.

If there’s a dispatcher by the cab, they presumably also observe the train leaving which the driver could not. Even if the role was only up to the point of departure, the driver would cease to observe any last minute changes as they return to the desk.

Lastly, don’t assume the driver is sitting idle. The diagram will provide for the time needed to set up the cab for departure but there’s no guarantee of there being longer than needed on the diagram.

Much like the premise of this thread and other elf n safety views, questioning of safety controls starts at the wrong end.

 

[AlterEgo]

You should re-read my comments and hopefully understand them as intended. Simply taking up your contrary position isn't helpful. You sound like rules should never be changed under any circumstances, when in fact they sometimes can be improved upon as and when necessary, after further consideration. Changes in the law, or to rules, are actually normal progress.

It's not just taking up a contrary position. You said:

I find it hard to accept that it would have been unsafe for the train manager to authorise departure on his own. If it would have been unsafe, then so would many other situations, it just needs a sensible amount of discretion

and therefore implied that on this occasion the guard should have had the opportunity to self dispatch using discretion.

There is not a lot of discretion allowable in the rule book, and things are black and white for a reason. Rules and methods of working are not dispensed of for expediency; MCV has dispatchers for a reason, which is that it is a busy station with a high risk of trap and drag. "It actually looks fine at the moment, I reckon we don't need the dispatcher" is not good safety culture.

 

[43066]

Presently sitting at Manchester Victoria and 10 minutes late, so far. Train ready, driver ready, train manager ready, signal ready, the only reason we can't go is because there is no train dispatcher. Hmm ...

It depends on location but, where they’re required, yes they’re absolutely essential.

If a station is short of dispatchers you might wait a couple of minutes while they’re dispatching another train, but ten minutes would be highly unusual in my experience.

You sound like rules should never be changed under any circumstances, when in fact they sometimes can be improved upon as and when necessary, after further consideration. Changes in the law, or to rules, are actually normal progress.

Rules can be and are changed over time, but what you seem to be proposing is that traincrew should ignore rules when it suits you/them.

 

[Kite159]

It all depends on various risk assesments (and no doubt some sort of cost analysis too). Variations can include:

• Dispatcher for certain TOCs only
• Dispatcher for certain rolling stock only
• Dispatcher for certain platforms only
• Dispatcher at certain times only
• Multiple dispatchers required

Add on for certain train lengths.

Southampton Central for example the guard can self dispatch for upto 5 coaches. Anything longer requires a dispatcher.

 

[Shrop]

Rules can be and are changed over time, but what you seem to be proposing is that traincrew should ignore rules when it suits you/them.

Absolutely not. I was proposing that the rules could be re-visited, and changed so that in the event of a train being ready to depart with everything ready except for the absence of a train dispatcher, then once it reaches, say, 3 minutes after departure time, the rules could then permit the train manager to allow the train to depart. I was NOT proposing that the rules should be disobeyed, but that they could be upgraded after due consideration, in order to avoid trains being delayed by too much when a dispatcher has become unavailable for whatever reason.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Absolutely not. I was proposing that the rules could be re-visited, and changed so that in the event of a train being ready to depart with everything ready except for the absence of a train dispatcher, then once it reaches, say, 3 minutes after departure time, the rules could then permit the train manager to allow the train to depart. I was NOT proposing that the rules should be disobeyed, but that they could be upgraded after due consideration, in order to avoid trains being delayed by too much when a dispatcher has become unavailable for whatever reason.

If it's considered safe enough to dispatch without a dispatcher, then the dispatchers should be removed because it's an unnecessary cost, as WMT have done at most stations.

If it's not safe enough, being late doesn't make it safer. Indeed, skimping on safety due to delays is the start of quite a few episodes of Air Crash Investigation...

 

[Shrop]

If a station is short of dispatchers you might wait a couple of minutes while they’re dispatching another train, but ten minutes would be highly unusual in my experience.

You might claim this was highly unusual, but in a real world it happens, and did. Interestingly, when we arrived at Halifax the information on the departure board claimed that the train was late due to another train in front being late. In the real world, there really are times when the reasons for delays become distorted and changed, for whatever reason.

 

[43066]

And despite the dire warnings posted here, it all works fine.

“Works fine” according to the prevailing safety culture/legal system in Germany. As a UK driver or guard if you dispatch a train with someone touching it, or without checking whether someone is caught in the doors, you could end up in prison. That may well not be the case in Germany, so it isn’t really an “apples with apples” comparison.

Absolutely not. I was proposing that the rules could be re-visited, and changed so that in the event of a train being ready to depart with everything ready except for the absence of a train dispatcher, then once it reaches, say, 3 minutes after departure time, the rules could then permit the train manager to allow the train to depart. I was NOT proposing that the rules should be disobeyed, but that they could be upgraded after due consideration, in order to avoid trains being delayed by too much when a dispatcher has become unavailable for whatever reason.

The decision to use a particular dispatch method is made based on location and various other factors. Once made, it’s necessary to stick to it. You couldn’t decide to operate a guarded train DOO, for example, just because a guard hasn’t shown up, where guard dispatch is necessary.

The solution to the dispatcher issue you mention is to ensure stations are properly staffed. As I say, delay due to dispatcher unavailability is pretty rare.

You might claim this was highly unusual, but in a real world it happens, and did. Interestingly, when we arrived at Halifax the information on the departure board claimed that the train was late due to another train in front being late. In the real world, there really are times when the reasons for delays become distorted and changed, for whatever reason.

Having re read your previous post, was the entire delay due to the lack of dispatcher, or was it an already late train further delayed? Someone else has pointed out that yours was one of five trains departing a the same time so that may well explain the delay.

 

[Shrop]

Having re read your previous post, was the entire delay due to the lack of dispatcher, or was it an already late train further delayed? Someone else has pointed out that yours was one of five trains departing a the same time so that may well explain the delay.

Ah how I wish I was paid to provide all of the necessary details, and that people would take note accordingly, my fees would be very reasonable and I would then be happy to prepare more detailed and evidenced reports! For a couple of minutes after our train was due to depart I couldn't see any other trains in the station, let alone four others. Perhaps you might like to consult Realtimetrains (RTT) to confirm. (Note - I've been on the naughty step on this forum for not providing evidence for my comments and I risk going there again by not providing a screenshot of RTT at 11.00 on 21st January, but when making unpaid comments I don't think this should really be necessary, when my genuine objective is to seek ways to improve rail services). I would be very interested to know where the other four trains were, when all I could see (apart from numerous trams on their separate network) were a couple of trains that came and went after we were due to depart.

I hope visitors to this forum might accept that my wish is NOT to seek ways to discredit anything about the rail industry, but to seek ways that it could be improved. My background is in the roads industry where the world and his wife thought they knew better than myself or my colleagues did, but the issues were usually resolved amicably and with mutual understanding. I don't claim to be the most eloquent of people, but my intentions in making suggestions for improvement of the rail industry are genuine. Thus, it isn't really necessary to scrutinise my comments in order to prove me wrong, I hope members of this forum might see past that.

 

[Oxfordblues]

When I worked at Swindon my train home was the 16:35 3-car turbo to Oxford. But there was another 16:35 departure from the opposite platform, an HST to Bristol. There was only one despatcher, who understandably prioritised the HST. This was the only occasion on the late shift of such a clash, so it was clearly not worth employing a second despatcher just to deal with our train. It was mildly frustrating that we often got away 3 minutes late, but usually made that up with a swift turn-round at Didcot.

 

[43066]

Ah how I wish I was paid to provide all of the necessary details, and that people would take note accordingly, my fees would be very reasonable and I would then be happy to prepare more detailed and evidenced reports! For a couple of minutes after our train was due to depart I couldn't see any other trains in the station, let alone four others. Perhaps you might like to consult Realtimetrains (RTT) to confirm. (Note - I've been on the naughty step on this forum for not providing evidence for my comments and I risk going there again by not providing a screenshot of RTT at 11.00 on 21st January, but when making unpaid comments I don't think this should really be necessary, when my genuine objective is to seek ways to improve rail services). I would be very interested to know where the other four trains were, when all I could see (apart from numerous trams on their separate network) were a couple of trains that came and went after we were due to depart.

I hope visitors to this forum might accept that my wish is NOT to seek ways to discredit anything about the rail industry, but to seek ways that it could be improved. My background is in the roads industry where the world and his wife thought they knew better than myself or my colleagues did, but the issues were usually resolved amicably and with mutual understanding. I don't claim to be the most eloquent of people, but my intentions in making suggestions for improvement of the rail industry are genuine. Thus, it isn't really necessary to scrutinise my comments in order to prove me wrong, I hope members of this forum might see past that.

I don’t quite understand what point you’re making here. I’m certainly not trying “prove you wrong”, just to better understand the context of the question you’ve chosen to ask, in order to aid discussion.

Nobody is paid to contribute anything here, but thankfully participation is entirely voluntary.