-
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!
Coupling trains: which is safest?
- Thread starter Chris217
- 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
WelshBluebird
Established Member
- Joined
- 14 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 4,923
No problem with coupling units with passengers on board, it is likely done hundreds of times a day over the country.
What I do agree with though is the the coupling / uncoupling units should not be done before passengers have been allowed to alight the service.
On more than one occasion I have missed a tight (but legit) connection because of not being able to alight the incoming service straight away.
What I do agree with though is the the coupling / uncoupling units should not be done before passengers have been allowed to alight the service.
On more than one occasion I have missed a tight (but legit) connection because of not being able to alight the incoming service straight away.
This conversation is going round and round in circles, and I think people need to agree to disagree.
I see no issues going straight on top of a unit providing the TOC and the stock allows it. As has been said, newer stock where the guard can release the doors can be attached and released in about 15 seconds. I’ve never known an egress pulled on stock because a train has gone straight in on top. Desiros (Reading this at least) are most suitable for the practice of going straight on, but I completely understand that Bombardier trains don’t like it, which is why GTRs policy is different to TPE or SWR.
I see no issues going straight on top of a unit providing the TOC and the stock allows it. As has been said, newer stock where the guard can release the doors can be attached and released in about 15 seconds. I’ve never known an egress pulled on stock because a train has gone straight in on top. Desiros (Reading this at least) are most suitable for the practice of going straight on, but I completely understand that Bombardier trains don’t like it, which is why GTRs policy is different to TPE or SWR.
This is where you need to switch your understanding. The safest option is to remove all passengers from the area and complete numerous safety checks before any movement takes place. That, as I stated earlier, is just impractical and in all honesty a little overly safety conscious.
What happens is that procedures are developed that are considered to be safe and at a safety level that is acceptable. Is there a better option ? of course but it starts to become detrimental in the long term and any benefits long diminished. What is happening is that as long as it is determined to be 'safe' then unless there is an incident then the procedure is used. They often get reviewed but essentially as long as nothing has changed then it continues as is.
A safe option is always chosen but not specifically the 'safest'
Not really. Passengers still make attempts to board services going out as ECS. Which is why they get checked.
Because you are introducing additional risks. Because the more steps you add into any procedure the more likely it is to go wrong. I can only give you anecdotal evidence as to what the risks potentially are but I'm sure that somebody has carried out their assessments and risk models etc etc and determined that a simple announcement potentially poses the least risk.
swt_passenger
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 7 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 31,438
My usual experience is the SWR join at Eastleigh on Sundays, where the train from Portsmouth joins the portion from Poole waiting in the platform. I’d also estimate the added delay in door release being about 15 secs. I’ve never seen a passenger waiting to get off confused or troubled by this.
That matches my experience, even attachments at Waterloo during the run up to the evening peak cause minimal delay, I’d estimate that more time is lost slowing and waiting for the calling-on signal than the actual attachment. Again no emergency equipment has been activated at Waterloo that I know of... perhaps passengers using Waterloo are far better behaved than @tsr ’s passengers (removes tongue from cheek!)
I suppose trains in mid service
Joining up or uncoupling have
the attatchment/detatchments timetabled into the service schedule.
But people should be allowed to alight first,then the doors could be locked and the train proceeds with its attatchment/detatchments.
I expect it's different again for terminating services where the train arrives at its scheduled time,then,time is allocated seperately outside of the service timetable for the coupling/uncoupling,and then the new schedule begins as per time tabled departure,whether it continues in service or ecs.
Safety here only seems to be the issue when something happens.
Until then,I see the opinion of many that it's safe for both,but not always the safest.
Safe is only safe until something goes wrong.
And standing passengers on a busy moving train isn't the safest ideal when coupling sets up.
Better letting people off first to reduce risk.
If safety is paramount,then the safest option should always come first regardless if other options are deemed 'as safe'
In this day of compensation culture,I am surprised theres not a universal procedure?
Thanks for your continued replies here.
Joining up or uncoupling have
the attatchment/detatchments timetabled into the service schedule.
But people should be allowed to alight first,then the doors could be locked and the train proceeds with its attatchment/detatchments.
I expect it's different again for terminating services where the train arrives at its scheduled time,then,time is allocated seperately outside of the service timetable for the coupling/uncoupling,and then the new schedule begins as per time tabled departure,whether it continues in service or ecs.
Safety here only seems to be the issue when something happens.
Until then,I see the opinion of many that it's safe for both,but not always the safest.
Safe is only safe until something goes wrong.
And standing passengers on a busy moving train isn't the safest ideal when coupling sets up.
Better letting people off first to reduce risk.
If safety is paramount,then the safest option should always come first regardless if other options are deemed 'as safe'
In this day of compensation culture,I am surprised theres not a universal procedure?
Thanks for your continued replies here.
@pompeyfan
I was at Waterloo about 2 weeks ago.
My train arrived and I alighted accordingly.
The train doors closed and locked up once everyone was off then the train coupled up to the train that was in front of it.
That seemed to be their procedure.
No one on the platform waiting to get on as everyone was on the concourse waiting for the departure board info to come up.
To me that would be the safest way to do it.
Maybe it's different there because them trains have hundreds of passengers getting off and on each time.
They also,probably have allocated times to execute detatchments/attachments etc outside of the passengers timetable.
I was at Waterloo about 2 weeks ago.
My train arrived and I alighted accordingly.
The train doors closed and locked up once everyone was off then the train coupled up to the train that was in front of it.
That seemed to be their procedure.
No one on the platform waiting to get on as everyone was on the concourse waiting for the departure board info to come up.
To me that would be the safest way to do it.
Maybe it's different there because them trains have hundreds of passengers getting off and on each time.
They also,probably have allocated times to execute detatchments/attachments etc outside of the passengers timetable.
Standing passengers are victim to far more lateral movement from poor track quality than they are from an attachment.
As I mentioned, it’s stock dependant and also crew depending, some attachments are booked to be done by a different driver to allow meal breaks or sufficient walking time to their next working etc, some are booked to attach the train on arrival. In general though most 450/444 stock will attach without doors being opened. I can’t recall if that goes for the rest of their stock.
Like the other poster I replied to, have you ever been to Reading Stn? As soon as those doors open you have people boarding, quite often before (or through
) those wishing to get off!When something happens, there needs to be a review. Not everything can be accounted for so the initial procedure is what is the best practice based on prior experience and risk assessments. Mistakes can be made, new techniques get introduced and even new rules and regulations.
You cannot determine that. There is no evidence to support that and you are still ignoring the risk of carrying out train movements with people on the platform, walking down past a moving train, and with the various risks at the platform train interface.
If you let people off you have the standard risks involved at the platform edge. Doing this before the attachment increases risk because you now have a moving train to deal with. I remind you that there is no requirement to carry out a train safety check during an attachment. That is a dispatch requirement. People leave items onboard and that can cause panic and the passenger may attempt to board. Again, increasing the risk. Your point here is difficult and almost impossible to prove either way. There are other risks involved.
Because they don't work. There are too many differences with units and stock types and too many infrastructure constraints. Local instructions are rife. Each TOC needs to have that freedom to create bespoke policies that are suitable for their stock and locations. As this appears to be a TPE specific policy it may be the case that they have indeed taken a universal approach and that is to couple before a door release.
How on earth has this topic taken on such a life of it's own.
Get people off the train and get rid. They're not going to stand around on the platform edge ogling the coupling. It is no different to uncoupling in the risks. I'm just trying to picture the scene in my head without laughing.
"Ladies and gentlemen. When we arrive at Leeds will you remain seating whilst we couple up. It won't take more than a minute in theory, mind you, it's a bit chilly this morning so the electrical box could be frozen. The driver will come within a few feet, jump out to check the couplings are somewhere near level, then he'll do what he usually does, have a controlled crash. Whilst he has opened the door to get out and check, please don't follow him onto the platform, it is safer if you remain on board. (yeah right)
If you have bought a advanced ticket to London costing £25, it will cost you five times that if you miss your train whilst we bugger about. But hey, rules are rules.
If you are late for work because we arrived late, just tell your boss you were involved in a train crash, because most coupling movements around here resemble it. I'm sure your P45 won't be coming floating down from the heavens just yet"
Yes, as a train guard of 20 years. I like to think I deal in reality.
Get people off the train and get rid. They're not going to stand around on the platform edge ogling the coupling. It is no different to uncoupling in the risks. I'm just trying to picture the scene in my head without laughing.
"Ladies and gentlemen. When we arrive at Leeds will you remain seating whilst we couple up. It won't take more than a minute in theory, mind you, it's a bit chilly this morning so the electrical box could be frozen. The driver will come within a few feet, jump out to check the couplings are somewhere near level, then he'll do what he usually does, have a controlled crash. Whilst he has opened the door to get out and check, please don't follow him onto the platform, it is safer if you remain on board. (yeah right)
If you have bought a advanced ticket to London costing £25, it will cost you five times that if you miss your train whilst we bugger about. But hey, rules are rules.
If you are late for work because we arrived late, just tell your boss you were involved in a train crash, because most coupling movements around here resemble it. I'm sure your P45 won't be coming floating down from the heavens just yet"
Yes, as a train guard of 20 years. I like to think I deal in reality.
They watch all the time.
Really embarrassing when you mess it up. And its not about people standing about watching. It's those that walk inches from the train whilst its moving or woodpecker the buttons on locked out trains, people who lean on the trains and chat, and people that dive through doors with a hustle alarm sounding.
I know what you are saying. But can we ever really budget for every eventuality. At some point we have to get on with it.They watch all the time.
And its not about people standing about watching. It's those that walk inches from the train whilst its moving or woodpecker the buttons on locked out trains, people who lean on the trains and chat, and people that dive through doors with a hustle alarm sounding.
The problem is, when you challenge things like this, the person you're challenging gets offended.
If you think the procedure is unsafe, contact the RSSB and enquire why coupling is safer that way rather than emptying everyone off first. The poor railway worker is following their procedures so probably doesn't care why it's done that way. When you ask them why, they have to half make up an answer. Persist and you'll get a rude response as your question is unimportant to them (IE, not their responsibility to answer, too busy to answer...)
I'm all for living in a society where reporting unsafe things is common place, but when you've reported it, don't worry about whether the person will do anything about it. You've done your "duty", now let it go.
It's not about "it must be safe, it's been done this way for years" as that's complacency. But when first presented with the options, turfing everyone off the train first has obviously been seen as more unsafe.
If you think the procedure is unsafe, contact the RSSB and enquire why coupling is safer that way rather than emptying everyone off first. The poor railway worker is following their procedures so probably doesn't care why it's done that way. When you ask them why, they have to half make up an answer. Persist and you'll get a rude response as your question is unimportant to them (IE, not their responsibility to answer, too busy to answer...)
I'm all for living in a society where reporting unsafe things is common place, but when you've reported it, don't worry about whether the person will do anything about it. You've done your "duty", now let it go.
It's not about "it must be safe, it's been done this way for years" as that's complacency. But when first presented with the options, turfing everyone off the train first has obviously been seen as more unsafe.
We do not do things in a particular way in the rail industry because "that's the way it has always been done". Policies and procedures are continually being changed largely as a result of investigations into incidents and accidents, or to improve performance. Anyone who has anything to do with the Rule Book, Sectional Appendix, Professional Driving Policies, Traction Manuals etc will fully understand just how often policies and procedures are reviewed and updated.
With regard to class 185s specifically, as they were the subject of the first post, the current method of working is not "the way it has always been done". When first introduced the procedure was to allow passengers to board and alight first. This caused numerous delays particularly at Preston so an alternative method of operation was sought.
That alternative method is the one currently in use. As has been stated on this thread before, the current procedure "has been through full safety validation and was employed by other operators long before TPE adopted it for themselves. It's neither unsafe or dangerous and there have been no incidents since the method of work was adopted".
TPE staff, and Northern staff when operating class 185s are required to follow that procedure. Doing something different because some anonymous person on the internet thinks the procedure is not safe is not an option.
Once again, if people see something happening that they believe to be unsafe, why not contact the relevant TOC or the RSSB? This would be far more productive than ranting about the issue on an internet forum for railway enthusiasts. Please feel free to come back and let us know what the response is. Who knows, maybe the TOC and/or RSSB will decide you are right. Or maybe they will have good evidence that you are not.
With regard to class 185s specifically, as they were the subject of the first post, the current method of working is not "the way it has always been done". When first introduced the procedure was to allow passengers to board and alight first. This caused numerous delays particularly at Preston so an alternative method of operation was sought.
That alternative method is the one currently in use. As has been stated on this thread before, the current procedure "has been through full safety validation and was employed by other operators long before TPE adopted it for themselves. It's neither unsafe or dangerous and there have been no incidents since the method of work was adopted".
TPE staff, and Northern staff when operating class 185s are required to follow that procedure. Doing something different because some anonymous person on the internet thinks the procedure is not safe is not an option.
Once again, if people see something happening that they believe to be unsafe, why not contact the relevant TOC or the RSSB? This would be far more productive than ranting about the issue on an internet forum for railway enthusiasts. Please feel free to come back and let us know what the response is. Who knows, maybe the TOC and/or RSSB will decide you are right. Or maybe they will have good evidence that you are not.
well the reality is is that you are wrong. people actually do hang about for their connections to other stations - take faversham for example where the un/coupling happens - and people hang about on the platform as they want the stopper that will follow a little later.
As a guard for 20 years you should really understand that the railway is different all over the country. Maybe expand your knowledgebase and listen to others who keep saying that its perfectly safe to keep people on the train whilst completing the movement.
HaggisBotherer
Member
- Joined
- 25 Sep 2018
- Messages
- 253
Let me put myself in a real world simulation of their position:
I'm sitting at my desk, doing my job (which I've been doing for many years and am, I believe, quite good at) and I'm extremely busy.
Then some random stranger comes up, stands by my desk, looks at my screen and says "Why are you doing your job like that?"
I reply that it's the best way to do it.
The stranger replies that they know better. How I should do my job is... (blah blah blah blah etc etc)
I reply, politely, that I've been doing my job for a long time, that this is how my employer wants it to be done and so that's how I do it.
We then get into an exchange like an adult with a toddler "But whyyyy?", "Because this is how we do it", "Yes, but whyyyyy?", "Because this is how we do it" and so on - and all the time I just want to get on with my job, because I have a gazillion and one things to do, none of which involve standing around chattering to one bystander who wants the answer to a question which I don't have the time, inclination or particular interest to debate.
Personally I hate being told how to do my job by people who have no experience whatsoever of doing it. In my opinion the staff displayed plenty of 'professionalism' by just asking you to move on, rather than anything more earthy! Certainly not 'ignorance and contempt'.
Try and see it from their point of view, rather than just from that of your own bruised ego, eh?
Last edited:
I am a bus driver.
When I get to my change over relief point/ bus stop.
I drop off and pick up any passengers that are waiting before
I leave my bus so they ain't inconveniently having to wait regardless if I am late or not.
The same cannot be said with my regards to my post.
If it was passengers prerogative,then they would prefer to get off first.
As for the safety issue,I repeat...
If there are 2 options
1...Safe
2...safest
Which would you adhere to in all circumstances.?
Keeping passengers waiting on a train just for coupling up etc,is an inconvenience.
It doesn't matter if it's 2mins or 30 seconds.
It's not a perfect world or a perfect system.
So better doing it with the train empty.
Don't forget,it was a terminating service and the rights of the passengers to alight upon arrival.
Just because another job needed to be done prior to it's departure is nothing to do with the passenger service or passengers.
The fact it went out ecs as well which isn't another passenger service made me think other reasons as to why it was done the way it was.
That operation should not be part of the passengers timetable upon arrival at the terminal station.
That operation should have it's own timetable whilst NOT in service!
And as long as there ever are passengers on the train it remains in service until the last person gets off and the doors locked closed.
It must be in the drivers working timetable.
Take train to Liverpool Lime Street,terminating at 23.47.
Couple up to set xxx by xxx.hrs. then
Take train ecs departing at xxx.hrs
Nothing about delaying passengers from alighting.
If I were to delay my passengers so I could get of my bus faster,I'd be hauled into the office.
Keeping passengers delayed from alighting is an inconvenience and unnecessary when there is enough time to couple up when the train is empty.
Having standing passengers wait for drivers to stop to check and couple up trains is unacceptable and Defo not the safest option for that reason my enquiry
couldn't be answered...
More like they couldn't be bothered because they didn't like the question!
It seems the opinion of some,that because it's not dangerous generally,then its safe,but not the safest.
Why wouldn't anyone not adhere to
the safest every single time?
Regardless of trains terminating or in mid journey. The safest option has to be the best.
When I get to my change over relief point/ bus stop.
I drop off and pick up any passengers that are waiting before
I leave my bus so they ain't inconveniently having to wait regardless if I am late or not.
The same cannot be said with my regards to my post.
If it was passengers prerogative,then they would prefer to get off first.
As for the safety issue,I repeat...
If there are 2 options
1...Safe
2...safest
Which would you adhere to in all circumstances.?
Keeping passengers waiting on a train just for coupling up etc,is an inconvenience.
It doesn't matter if it's 2mins or 30 seconds.
It's not a perfect world or a perfect system.
So better doing it with the train empty.
Don't forget,it was a terminating service and the rights of the passengers to alight upon arrival.
Just because another job needed to be done prior to it's departure is nothing to do with the passenger service or passengers.
The fact it went out ecs as well which isn't another passenger service made me think other reasons as to why it was done the way it was.
That operation should not be part of the passengers timetable upon arrival at the terminal station.
That operation should have it's own timetable whilst NOT in service!
And as long as there ever are passengers on the train it remains in service until the last person gets off and the doors locked closed.
It must be in the drivers working timetable.
Take train to Liverpool Lime Street,terminating at 23.47.
Couple up to set xxx by xxx.hrs. then
Take train ecs departing at xxx.hrs
Nothing about delaying passengers from alighting.
If I were to delay my passengers so I could get of my bus faster,I'd be hauled into the office.
Keeping passengers delayed from alighting is an inconvenience and unnecessary when there is enough time to couple up when the train is empty.
Having standing passengers wait for drivers to stop to check and couple up trains is unacceptable and Defo not the safest option for that reason my enquiry
couldn't be answered...
More like they couldn't be bothered because they didn't like the question!
It seems the opinion of some,that because it's not dangerous generally,then its safe,but not the safest.
Why wouldn't anyone not adhere to
the safest every single time?
Regardless of trains terminating or in mid journey. The safest option has to be the best.
@HaggisBotherer
Thanks for your insight into my enquiry.
Everyone has an opinion as do you and I.
Just because I am travelling public doesn't dismiss me as not knowing what I am talking about,and it would be rude to asume otherwise when the person/rail staff doesn't even know me.
All communications should be treated professionally and without contempt.
Being told to move on was rude as I wasn't even offered another line for my enquiry.
In fact I have had more info on here than I did at the station.
I suppose at quarter to 12 at night,most people just want to get home,whether they have just come off a long rail journey or done a 10hr shift at the station or on the train!
Thanks for your insight into my enquiry.
Everyone has an opinion as do you and I.
Just because I am travelling public doesn't dismiss me as not knowing what I am talking about,and it would be rude to asume otherwise when the person/rail staff doesn't even know me.
All communications should be treated professionally and without contempt.
Being told to move on was rude as I wasn't even offered another line for my enquiry.
In fact I have had more info on here than I did at the station.
I suppose at quarter to 12 at night,most people just want to get home,whether they have just come off a long rail journey or done a 10hr shift at the station or on the train!
Llanigraham
On Moderation
Sorry, Chris217, but you are a bus driver and not a railwayman.
I drive a car and was a signalman but wouldn't dream of TELLING a bus driver their job if I considered something might be POSSIBLY unsafe, and I certainly wouldn't go on a bus enthusiasts forum lambasting people about my perceived difference, plus I certainly wouldn't accuse people of ignoring safety when this is blatently not true, as you have been told by many members here.
Communications need to be polite and timeous as well as professional, and telling someone that something is unsafe whilst they are doing their job isn't that. Would you accept a passenger walking to the front of your bus and criticising you about some perceived fault in your driving as you drove along? I think we all know the answer to that!
I drive a car and was a signalman but wouldn't dream of TELLING a bus driver their job if I considered something might be POSSIBLY unsafe, and I certainly wouldn't go on a bus enthusiasts forum lambasting people about my perceived difference, plus I certainly wouldn't accuse people of ignoring safety when this is blatently not true, as you have been told by many members here.
Communications need to be polite and timeous as well as professional, and telling someone that something is unsafe whilst they are doing their job isn't that. Would you accept a passenger walking to the front of your bus and criticising you about some perceived fault in your driving as you drove along? I think we all know the answer to that!
So just clarify your issue was
1) you think it was less safe to expose the passengers to the forces of an attachment than to wait and perform the attachment when the train was empty
2) passengers were delayed while the attachment took place.
In response to that I would like to point out
1) passengers standing on your bus would be subjected to much worse lateral movement due to potholes, sunken drain covers, dodgey retarder brakes and gearboxes that aren’t as smooth as they should be.
2) if a Desiro attachment on FTPE is the same as SWR, it takes approximately 15 seconds. Again as a bus driver you can hardly pull rank when things like traffic lights cause you to run late. If a train is running to time, and is scheduled to arrive at 14:30 and then do an attachment, the doors will still be opened at 14:30. In fact the WTT might even take an attachment into account compared to the public time.
The best way to do it IMO is the way they do it on Southern. Train arrives at station, people get on/get off straight away. Doors lock, train couples or decouples. Doors open again and an announcement is made like "if you can hear this, you're going to Eastbourne. If you want Hove, move quickly to the other bit". Doors close, train leaves. Happens all the time with no issues. It's the best experience for passengers, other than not doing it all.
bahnause
Member
Why bother with stopping at all? Just couple in one go if the used rolling stock is capable to do so. Over here, this is the standard procedure for >20 years.
Surreytraveller
On Moderation
- Joined
- 21 Oct 2009
- Messages
- 2,810
Because that would technically be classed as a collision
Because it's not necessarily the safer option?
Because you will never eliminate "all risks"?
If they are told to remain seated, there is a chance they will at least hold tight.
Do you then re-open the doors after the coupling, or leave people fuming on the platform as the train departs (as stated earlier, you can't have a different procedure for ECS.)
- Status