Coupling trains: which is safest?

[MDB1images]

At Vt we used to let passengers alight before coupling up.
Feedback from staff was that once passengers alighted there would be a steady stream of passengers trying to board.
This leads to platform staff and the guard shouting at passengers not to board a train with open doors a few minutes before departure, on many occasions passengers were diving through half closed doors or kicking of that the train was being despatched early.
Vt then looked at the risks and now we couple before release.

In my opinion this has made the procedure much safer and I’ve never had anyone injured during this, but we were told to announce passenger to hold on to the handrail provided or stay seated as there may be a sharp jolt ?

Exactly the same reasons TPE did it.

 

[Johncleesefan]

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.

Well you talents are wasted on buses as you know railway operations better than operational railway staff. You should get a job at rssb then you can change the rules all you like.

Railway staff have answered your question, they don’t question the rule, they FOLLOW it! Unfortunately on this occasion you don’t like that answer and that’s your problem.

A typical driver diagram will list stations then at the station in question will say AP (attach portion) so the driver follows his duty, by arriving at the station and....yep you guessed it, attaching the portion.

 

[coppercapped]

Coming back from Manchester to Liverpool a few weeks ago,I was
travelling on a class 185.
Arriving into Lime Street when the guard
announced that everyone remain seated
as the train was going to couple up to
another 185 before he opened the doors.

Then the train stopped,people still standing and a second or two later moved forward again to couple up to the other set.
Upon alighting,I asked the guard,why was it not possible to let everyone off the train first,then couple the trains up.
Surely that would have been safer?
He couldn't give me a reasonable answer and refused my question accusing me of
Not knowing what I was talking about as it was completely safe they way they did it.
Knowing that many passengers were still standing anyway because it was a busy service,they still did it that way.

A Network Rail staff member told me it was completely safe,but what if the train didn't successfully couple the first time,were all the passengers to be shunted on the train whilst trying to couple.?
He says I was talking rubbish and told me to move on!

This whole thread has developed because several things have been confused or combined.

Firstly - safety.

What does the OP mean by 'safe' or 'safer'? What injuries are being anticipated? And how many have actually occurred during the coupling process? Is it a real problem, or only a perceived risk?

During coupling speeds are low, so the worst case is that the train is severely jolted. This could cause people to stumble or fall or luggage to become dislodged. There might be some bruises or, in extreme cases, a broken limb. Couplers used on modern stock have reduced the forces needed to make the mechanical connection so this potential cause of injury has almost been eliminated.

The Scharffenberg/Dellner type of coupler fitted to much modern passenger stock - including the Class 185 - does not need to be banged together to get the two couplings to lock together - in fact a gentle push is all that is required; anything more may damage the coupler heads. Knuckle couplers, such as the Buckeye and Tightlock which were in common use on much BR passenger stock do need to be forcibly closed as does the BSI coupler used on DMUs from the Class 150 to the Class 172, but not to the same extent as a Buckeye. (For the pedants - the Class 171 uses Scharffenberg/Dellners ). With the phasing out of older stock the traditional bangs and crashes of shunting operations are also becoming a thing of the past.

There also seems a perceived issue with the delay caused to passengers in the arriving portion of the train which stops, moves forwards and couples before the doors are opened. This delay could depend on whether the trains are being joined at a terminus or en-route. At a terminus there could be an argument to let the passengers off first and then couple the units (but the driver would then have to wait around until everybody had disembarked before he/she couples the units) but doing this en-route may well increase the dwell time to the whole train, including the part which is sat at the platform waiting, as the doors on the arriving train then have to be closed again before the unit moves forward to couple.

There really is no issue if the arriving train couples before the doors are opened. I used to live in Munich and trains on the S1 S-Bahn line join at Neufahrn every 20 minutes with sections coming from the Airport and from Freising. The stock uses the Scharffenberg coupler and the delay was minimal, measured in seconds, before the doors opened. In all the years I never saw anyone lurch or stagger because of the joining - in fact at the back of the train it was scarcely noticeable.

 

[Deafdoggie]

Well, if the safest way to couple & uncouple is get all passengers off first, then that is what we must do! Are you going to tell Caledonian Sleepers or am I?

 

[PermitToTravel]

Because that would technically be classed as a collision

Because the rules are daft

 

[tsr]

Because the rules are daft

Believe it or not, they aren’t.

Just because the driver has been signalled towards another train in the platform, it doesn’t necessarily mean that’s the right one to couple with, or that it’s safe to do so.

Imagine if there has been some unforeseen issue with the train already in situ. Driver A is dealing with a problem on their train and Driver B is called into the platform with the other one. Driver B knows an attachment takes place but it doesn’t say on their diagram if it’s safe to couple up or if there may be some amendment to working.

Driver A is still sorting out their train and is requested to try something with the brake controller, or cycle the doors on stock where that happens to affect the braking system. Halfway through, they notice Driver B’s train approaching, but it’s OK because they won’t be able to couple up yet... but without warning, it pushes straight onto the front, just as Driver A has their hand on the brake. The unexpected force means the brakes are released and half the train goes into the buffers. Or in other versions of the story, the electrics go kaput. Or whatever.

Stranger things have happened. Which is why you don’t just assume it’s safe to crash into other trains...

 

[Jonfun]

Well, if the safest way to couple & uncouple is get all passengers off first, then that is what we must do! Are you going to tell Caledonian Sleepers or am I?

Of course that would be the safest option. But you have to balance that against everything else, including customer service, and it's unrealistic to suggest such an action would be necessary.

 

[Tomnick]

Believe it or not, they aren’t.

Just because the driver has been signalled towards another train in the platform, it doesn’t necessarily mean that’s the right one to couple with, or that it’s safe to do so.

Imagine if there has been some unforeseen issue with the train already in situ. Driver A is dealing with a problem on their train and Driver B is called into the platform with the other one. Driver B knows an attachment takes place but it doesn’t say on their diagram if it’s safe to couple up or if there may be some amendment to working.

Driver A is still sorting out their train and is requested to try something with the brake controller, or cycle the doors on stock where that happens to affect the braking system. Halfway through, they notice Driver B’s train approaching, but it’s OK because they won’t be able to couple up yet... but without warning, it pushes straight onto the front, just as Driver A has their hand on the brake. The unexpected force means the brakes are released and half the train goes into the buffers. Or in other versions of the story, the electrics go kaput. Or whatever.

Stranger things have happened. Which is why you don’t just assume it’s safe to crash into other trains...

Even something as simple as the other unit being left for several hours previously, so it has no air and it’s being held on the spring-applied parking brake only.

 

[duffield]

Believe it or not, they aren’t.

Just because the driver has been signalled towards another train in the platform, it doesn’t necessarily mean that’s the right one to couple with, or that it’s safe to do so.

Imagine if there has been some unforeseen issue with the train already in situ. Driver A is dealing with a problem on their train and Driver B is called into the platform with the other one. Driver B knows an attachment takes place but it doesn’t say on their diagram if it’s safe to couple up or if there may be some amendment to working.

Driver A is still sorting out their train and is requested to try something with the brake controller, or cycle the doors on stock where that happens to affect the braking system. Halfway through, they notice Driver B’s train approaching, but it’s OK because they won’t be able to couple up yet... but without warning, it pushes straight onto the front, just as Driver A has their hand on the brake. The unexpected force means the brakes are released and half the train goes into the buffers. Or in other versions of the story, the electrics go kaput. Or whatever.

Stranger things have happened. Which is why you don’t just assume it’s safe to crash into other trains...

Would it be practical to have a system where the platform staff signal in some way that it's safe to attach immediately (and the default being no immediate attachment if no such signal is received)?

 

[bahnause]

Would it be practical to have a system where the platform staff signal in some way that it's safe to attach immediately (and the default being no immediate attachment if no such signal is received)?

It would be even more practical for the unit to signalise "ready for coupling". This is what our EMUs do.

 

[ComUtoR]

Would it be practical to have a system where the platform staff signal in some way that it's safe to attach immediately (and the default being no immediate attachment if no such signal is received)?

There are a few unofficial hand-signals that get used.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Passengers standing up ready to get off, driver misjudges their speed, and bang. Have you heard of the Cannon Street crash, where a train crashed into buffers at 5mph? I think 5 passengers were killed.
Or a coupler might not be properly open on either unit, and if the train doesn't stop beforehand it wouldn't be noticed.

 

[DanDaDriver]

Passengers standing up ready to get off, driver misjudges their speed, and bang. Have you heard of the Cannon Street crash, where a train crashed into buffers at 5mph? I think 5 passengers were killed.
Or a coupler might not be properly open on either unit, and if the train doesn't stop beforehand it wouldn't be noticed.

Which is why you stop 2ft off the other train. And if you misjudge so badly that you’re coupling up at 5mph then you shouldn’t be in the grade.

 

[TRAX]

Passengers standing up ready to get off, driver misjudges their speed, and bang. Have you heard of the Cannon Street crash, where a train crashed into buffers at 5mph? I think 5 passengers were killed.
Or a coupler might not be properly open on either unit, and if the train doesn't stop beforehand it wouldn't be noticed.

Two people died, not five.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Two people died, not five.

Fair enough .People were still killed, though. That was the point I was making

 

[Surreytraveller]

Which is why you stop 2ft off the other train. And if you misjudge so badly that you’re coupling up at 5mph then you shouldn’t be in the grade.

Six feet. Then you draw up to two.

 

[bahnause]

Two people died, not five.

And it was 10mph with slam door stock and problaby weak structure. We couple without stopping countless times a day without any issues.

 

[TRAX]

France never has any issues with automatic coupling either.

 

[DanDaDriver]

Six feet. Then you draw up to two.

I know, but my point is still the same...

 

[bramling]

Two people died, not five.

To be fair, Cannon Street seemingly wasn’t a misjudgement. The driver simply failed to make the final stop. So it probably wouldn’t have mattered what procedure was in place and what move was being attempted. Likewise the reason for the high number of fatalities was likely to have been a point of weakness on the rolling stock involved and the tendency of underframed stock to override.

 

[Arrpi87]

Would it be practical to have a system where the platform staff signal in some way that it's safe to attach immediately (and the default being no immediate attachment if no such signal is received)?

When the time is right and all the signs are there that your fellow unit is ready, you'll just know when you can make your move and engage in coupling.

 

[Clip]

Fair enough .People were still killed, though. That was the point I was making

And to be fair you know that what happened then isnt comparable to now when we have, in recent years, had crashes into buffer stops at terminals which is basically the same with no casualties. That shows your point had no need to be made

 

[sw1ller]

I’ve seen plenty of drivers go straight on and couple up in the UK. Normally the older drivers but it happens most days. I don’t see a problem with it, it’s how it should be done. Passengers are expecting a slight jolt for the stopping motion anyway, why not tie in a coupling procedure into too. with one of our units, the gearbox is a pig, and you end up slamming into the other unit anyway, gotta start the procedure from more than 2ft away so you can slow it down, either that or start it from 4 inches away. Otherwise it’s going to be a big old jolt.

 

[tsr]

When the time is right and all the signs are there that your fellow unit is ready, you'll just know when you can make your move and engage in coupling.

And assumptions kill people.

 

[gray1404]

I notice when Merseyrail are attaching another unit to form a 6 car set or indeed detaching to form a 3 (usually done at Southport station before/after the peak) they allow customers off the arriving service but will not allow customers to board until the attachment or detachment has taken taken place. Is this because they are older units? Having been on board many time in Southern land I always wondered why Merseyrail require the train to be empty.

 

[pompeyfan]

I’ve seen plenty of drivers go straight on and couple up in the UK. Normally the older drivers but it happens most days. I don’t see a problem with it, it’s how it should be done. Passengers are expecting a slight jolt for the stopping motion anyway, why not tie in a coupling procedure into too. with one of our units, the gearbox is a pig, and you end up slamming into the other unit anyway, gotta start the procedure from more than 2ft away so you can slow it down, either that or start it from 4 inches away. Otherwise it’s going to be a big old jolt.

Well they really shouldn’t, because if they get downloaded or a manager saw them, then they all know there’s a meeting (no tea and no biscuits) waiting for them, if not their P45. I’ve never seen a driver go straight on personally because it’s not worth their job.

 

[Eccles1983]

When the time is right and all the signs are there that your fellow unit is ready, you'll just know when you can make your move and engage in coupling.

This has been overlooked, and it's a shame as it's very very funny.

Well done, you've made me chuckle.

 

[TRAX]

When the time is right and all the signs are there that your fellow unit is ready, you'll just know when you can make your move and engage in coupling.

Genius.

 

[Arrpi87]

And assumptions kill people.

Spoken as someone who's never known when it's right to engage in coupling to a fellow unit.

This has been overlooked, and it's a shame as it's very very funny.

Well done, you've made me chuckle.

Genius.

Thank you, thank you. I'm here all week. I'm glad someone saw the funny side.

 

[tsr]

Spoken as someone who's never known when it's right to engage in coupling to a fellow unit.

I’m only trying to prevent violent incidents when couplings are not welcomed...