ECML Disruption - Saturday 27th December

[asylumxl]

Am I missing something? It seems to me people are using the figures for East Coast AP ticket sales in place of actual passenger numbers.



There are plenty of people who will have bought other types of tickets in advance, or purchased tickets on the day in the hope of travelling.

 

[455driver]

Am I missing something? It seems to me people are using the figures for East Coast AP ticket sales in place of actual passenger numbers.



There are plenty of people who will have bought other types of tickets in advance, or purchased tickets on the day in the hope of travelling.

Plus people who bought Advance tickets that took them nowhere near London!

Oops silly me, everyone goes to or from London dont they! :roll:

 

[talltim]

That's true, if you have 6 unrelated tasks all at 95% probability of success, simple maths indicates probability of all 6 succeeding is 73.5% or an approx 1 in 4 chance of failure.

And if they are related/interlinked, I would assume the probability of success goes down more

 

[QueensCurve]

When an IT project I was part of went wrong, the lowest ranked employees where made scapegoats.

The doctrine of inverse accountability.

Propoer leadership demands that the highest ranking person takes responsibility, authority can be delegated, responsibility can't.

Until this lesson is learned, projects will continue to fail.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Plus people who bought Advance tickets that took them nowhere near London!

Oops silly me, everyone goes to or from London dont they! :roll:

Network Rail, in their report, brought up passenger numbers using AP ticket sales, not us...

 

[asylumxl]

Network Rail, in their report, brought up passenger numbers using AP ticket sales, not us...

Which is true, but it makes the whole Emirates' number thing kind of meaningless, since not everyone alighting will have been using an AP.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Which is true, but it makes the whole Emirates' number thing kind of meaningless, since not everyone alighting will have been using an AP.

Network Rail's report mentioned estimated passenger numbers of 35,000 AP tickets on East Coast and around 35,000 again on Great Northern, across the entire day. They estimated the passenger numbers, not me.

My comparison with chucking out time at the Emirates Stadium or after a gig in Finsbury Park (where similar numbers to that daily total leave within a few minutes of each other- not all to Finsbury Park but that wasn't the point either) was only to point out that the station can cope with big crowds without going into meltdown. The fact that it didn't cope this time shows that something went badly wrong with the crowd management.

 

[Tomnick]

The problem is that they identified major issues with the usual "off the shelf contingency plan"- i.e. Euston was shut and St Pancras was overrun- but took no steps to mitigate the issue.

There's nothing wrong with the plans used for Arsenal home matches, for music events at Finsbury Park, or for all-line blocks at Kings Cross. The problem was these plans were implemented with a truly astounding amount of incompetence. The fact is that, when they finally got around to it, the one-way system cleared the station backlog in about 90 minutes. Why nobody thought to implement that plan from the first train of the morning- preventing the backlog ever building up- is anyone's guess. I'm assuming it comes down to pounds and pence.

It seems that there was nothing wrong with the plan itself, which called for EC trains to shunt from the Up Fast to the Down Fast, presumably to deal with the large opposing flows. The problem was the implementation of that plan on the ground. It'd be useful to establish why the frontline staff implemented their own method of working, apparently contrary to the contingency plan, and then took so long to revert to the plan. Was it poor communication from above, for example?

 

[TUC]

Am I missing something? It seems to me people are using the figures for East Coast AP ticket sales in place of actual passenger numbers.



There are plenty of people who will have bought other types of tickets in advance, or purchased tickets on the day in the hope of travelling.

I think the point is that they represent the journey flows which could be very specifically anticipated and planned for.

 

[Clarence Yard]

When I was on the GN and the Cross had to shut, there was nothing wrong with using FP as long as you kept the up and down flows away from each other. The key to success was to keep the pass flows to/from the Northern City line (and the Victoria line to/from the Cross) going by using the cross platform interchange capability.

On one occasion I remember the GN House control had an additional dedicated circuit of 6 car 313 units going Moorgate to FP and then ECS to Hornsey to access the Harringay flyover and back to FP so when every main liner came in, there was a good chance that they were off to Highbury before too long.

Once you have punters going up and down those stairs at the same time, with all that luggage they carry after Xmas, you have lost it big style. There doesn't appear to be much wrong with the basic plan for the 27th but trying to use the same platform for up and down traffic was a very bad idea and it looks as if the NCL service was not working well enough too.

I don't condone the mess that NR got themselves into (and the map in the initial version of their report was hilarious for sheer incompetence!) but the TOCs need to ask themselves a fair few questions too.

 

[21C101]

Interesting article in todays Telegraph by former Network Rail employee Richard Shepherd.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ll-happen-again-unless-we-fix-the-system.html

 

[TUC]

Interesting article in todays Telegraph by former Network Rail employee Richard Shepherd.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...ll-happen-again-unless-we-fix-the-system.html

In the article, he cites the seven day railway as part of the problem and cites France as an alternative where he says services are cancelled and stations closed to accommodate engineering work, but that seems to me to a very selective use of examples.When in New York I was struck by how services like the Long Island Railroad operate 24/7, and yet must accommodate maintainance work somehow.

 

[Taunton]

Interesting points from one involved, but like a number of commentaries the general tenor is :

"The cause of the chaos was <insert my own pet topic about railway operation, that this is a good chance to get aired> so that's why it happened." And everyone has a different view.

As I understand it, a major problem was the drivers for the works trains got out of sync, there weren't enough relief drivers, and being Christmas the office of the engineering train supplier was closed. The project plan didn't take account of the fact that, unlike other staff on site, the drivers of the engineering trains have stipulated hours they are not allowed to exceed with overtime. When trains were left alongside the worksite without drivers that then gummed up everything that was to come along behind. So bad planning of the critical path.

I also find that works are arranged for this time on the belief that fewer passengers are travelling, yet we find that East Coast were having one of their busiest days and many of their trains were sold out. There is a trend to believe that commuters are the only passengers on the railway that matter.

But none of that comes out in the attached article.

 

[D1009]

I also find that works are arranged for this time on the belief that fewer passengers are travelling, yet we find that East Coast were having one of their busiest days and many of their trains were sold out. There is a trend to believe that commuters are the only passengers on the railway that matter.

Might this be due to more or cheaper advance tickets being available in anticipation of it being quiet?

 

[Tetchytyke]

I also find that works are arranged for this time on the belief that fewer passengers are travelling, yet we find that East Coast were having one of their busiest days and many of their trains were sold out. There is a trend to believe that commuters are the only passengers on the railway that matter.

There's a reason why East Coast prevent use of Rewards tickets at Christmas, and there's a reason why they remove peak restrictions at that time too.

The days around Christmas are extremely busy, but- as you say- the travellers are not businessmen so nobody really seems to care. There's an attitude that leisure travellers can choose when they want to travel, and at Christmas that isn't really the case.

The article was an interesting insight, but seemed to boil down to "passengers get in the way of running our railway". You see this time and time again with Network Rail. They seemed genuinely surprised when every single stakeholder objected to them closing the WCML for the whole of August 2014, for instance, as though because it's August nobody needs to go to work or wants to use the trains they've paid a fortune for. And now, when they've made a Horlicks of the Watford upgrades, the excuse is "we wanted to shut it and you wouldn't let us".

Network Rail do need to be realistic about how long work will take, rather than "massaging the figures", but as we saw with the WCML upgrade 15 years ago work will always expand to fill the time allotted. But if they'd planned to shut Kings Cross that day, with the mainline trains stopping at Peterborough and GN running frequent 12-car shuttles to Finsbury Park, all would have been well.

 

[QueensCurve]

In the article, he cites the seven day railway as part of the problem and cites France as an alternative where he says services are cancelled and stations closed to accommodate engineering work, but that seems to me to a very selective use of examples.When in New York I was struck by how services like the Long Island Railroad operate 24/7, and yet must accommodate maintainance work somehow.

The 7 day railway seems to work in most European Countries. Not really sure that the proximity of houses or the difficulties of signal sighting have anything to do with it.

The lack of verticle integration is an interesting thing to consider, but even in the vertically integrated railway a possession is by definition a time when the operators hand over to the engineers.

 

[GB]

Interesting points from one involved, but like a number of commentaries the general tenor is :

"The cause of the chaos was <insert my own pet topic about railway operation, that this is a good chance to get aired> so that's why it happened." And everyone has a different view.

As I understand it, a major problem was the drivers for the works trains got out of sync, there weren't enough relief drivers, and being Christmas the office of the engineering train supplier was closed. The project plan didn't take account of the fact that, unlike other staff on site, the drivers of the engineering trains have stipulated hours they are not allowed to exceed with overtime. When trains were left alongside the worksite without drivers that then gummed up everything that was to come along behind. So bad planning of the critical path.

I also find that works are arranged for this time on the belief that fewer passengers are travelling, yet we find that East Coast were having one of their busiest days and many of their trains were sold out. There is a trend to believe that commuters are the only passengers on the railway that matter.

But none of that comes out in the attached article.

(my bold)

The control office for GBRf and DBS were open and fully operational.

As I said previously, drivers can (and did) exceed their booked time. The only stipulation is adhering to the 12 hour rule. The work got so far out of sync that even staying on a couple of extra hours did not really help all that much.

 

[21C101]

I suspect in mainland Europe such weekend/block closures are mitigated by the availability of alternative routes.

In the UK alternative routes have largely been closed or eviscerated with long stretches of single track like the Salisbury - Exeter line (and Chiltern prior to privatisation).

Prior to beeching the Kings Cross closure would have been handled quite comfortably by diverting everything into Broad Street via the Canonbury curve. It had seven platforms only about two of which were needed for the North London line.

 

[petersi]

I thought Broad Street shut in the 1980's so not directly related to breeching's report

 

[Aictos]

It seems that there was nothing wrong with the plan itself, which called for EC trains to shunt from the Up Fast to the Down Fast, presumably to deal with the large opposing flows. The problem was the implementation of that plan on the ground. It'd be useful to establish why the frontline staff implemented their own method of working, apparently contrary to the contingency plan, and then took so long to revert to the plan. Was it poor communication from above, for example?

I be interested to know why the frontline staff did that too, one has to wonder if the service would have been better if they did?

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

I suspect in mainland Europe such weekend/block closures are mitigated by the availability of alternative routes.

I think it's more the availability (and regular use, even on weekdays) of reversible signalling.
That way you can work on one track at a time and still run a basic service on the other.

 

[Tomnick]

I be interested to know why the frontline staff did that too, one has to wonder if the service would have been better if they did?

Almost certainly, I think - it probably wouldn't have avoided the need for better crowd control, but it'd have stopped things getting anywhere near as out of hand as they did.

 

[21C101]

I thought Broad Street shut in the 1980's so not directly related to breeching's report

It was filleted & run down in and after the Beeching era (platforms out of use etc.) and would not have been able to handle diverted ECML after that.

 

[Taunton]

When in New York I was struck by how services like the Long Island Railroad operate 24/7, and yet must accommodate maintainance work somehow.

You didn't used to have to go as far as New York to see this once upon a time, the main lines of Britain were not only in use 24/7, but overnight was often the busiest time, with heavy freight, sleepers, parcels trains, etc. Certainly in Taunton in the 1960s the sounds of hydraulic locomotives permeated across the town all night, as well as daytime.

Now as I understand it the work outside Kings Cross involved replacing 8 points and their ballast. The ganger at Taunton in those days would regard this as straightforward stuff, there must have been a couple of hundred points there at the time. How have such onetime straightforward tasks been allowed to balloon in requirements like this.

As I said previously, drivers can (and did) exceed their booked time. The only stipulation is adhering to the 12 hour rule. The work got so far out of sync that even staying on a couple of extra hours did not really help all that much.

You would hope that on key works like this each locomotive would be planned to be manned from the start to the finish, so no matter what happened out on the track or where it was, each loco had someone on board. From the Network Rail report this clearly didn't happen, on my reading it states the work got so out of sync because of engineering trains left without drivers, not the other way round.

 

[drbdrb]

The project plan didn't take account of the fact that, unlike other staff on site, the drivers of the engineering trains have stipulated hours they are not allowed to exceed with overtime.

Because driving a train is so much more dangerous than any other job on site?

 

[GB]

You would hope that on key works like this each locomotive would be planned to be manned from the start to the finish, so no matter what happened out on the track or where it was, each loco had someone on board. From the Network Rail report this clearly didn't happen, on my reading it states the work got so out of sync because of engineering trains left without drivers, not the other way round.

In a perfect world where money doesn't matter then yes, but comes down to costs and available resources at the end of the day. Makes no sense to plan to man trains that are going to be left doing nothing upwards of 12-24hrs....particularity on a day when you would struggle to get drivers in at the best of times.

 

[21C101]

Now as I understand it the work outside Kings Cross involved replacing 8 points and their ballast. The ganger at Taunton in those days would regard this as straightforward stuff, there must have been a couple of hundred points there at the time. How have such onetime straightforward tasks been allowed to balloon in requirements like this.

I think it is the modern disease of overcomplicating everything.

Unfortunately, if this civilisation continues like all previous ones, things will get more and more complicated and bureaucratic until the civilization collapses under its own weight and everything reverts to simplicity very fast (not that this will be much fun for anyone). The last event of this sort was the collapse of the USSR in 1990.

 

[po8crg]

A lot of this is Baumol's Cost Disease.

For them as don't know, salaries roughly track pcGDP (over the long term), but some sectors don't get big efficiency improvements. Train drivers are one, as there's been one driver per train since we got rid of the fireman with dieselization in the sixties.

This means that train drivers look ever more expensive year on year. So the numbers get cut and the drivers get stretched ever thinner.

Personal service is the place that sees this worst, which is why service has got ever more impersonal right across the board.

Given improvements in machines, the actual engineering work shouldn't be overly subject to this.

 

[DarloRich]

Now as I understand it the work outside Kings Cross involved replacing 8 points and their ballast. The ganger at Taunton in those days would regard this as straightforward stuff, there must have been a couple of hundred points there at the time. How have such onetime straightforward tasks been allowed to balloon in requirements like this.

Yes because all that was happening was 8 points being replaced. :roll: Two complete junctions, 500ms of track and 12000 tonnes of ballast handled plus all the associated signalling & electrical gubbins. Not points, complete S&C units. All of which was done under OHLE, which they dont have at Taunton, within a tight metropolitan environment, which they dont have at Taunton.

You would hope that on key works like this each locomotive would be planned to be manned from the start to the finish, so no matter what happened out on the track or where it was, each loco had someone on board. From the Network Rail report this clearly didn't happen, on my reading it states the work got so out of sync because of engineering trains left without drivers, not the other way round.

Whilst i am sure you are right and know best your plan would involve several drivers sitting around doing nothing for 24-48 hours. Does that seem sensible or cost effective? Which other jobs will be cancelled to allow this to happen?

I can see the headlines now lazy train drivers paid £XXXXX to suit around doing nothing!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think it is the modern disease of overcomplicating everything.

Unfortunately, if this civilisation continues like all previous ones, things will get more and more complicated and bureaucratic until the civilization collapses under its own weight and everything reverts to simplicity very fast (not that this will be much fun for anyone). The last event of this sort was the collapse of the USSR in 1990.

How did they replace full S&C units in the past then? How long did it take?

 

[455driver]

Its just a pity none of you geniuses was in on the planning then isnt it, things would have been sooo much better with your 20/20 hindsight to help in the planning wouldnt it!

Maybe if you had been involved in the actual work from the beginning you could have told them when it was going to go wrong and what extra equipment they would need to work around the failure!

Jeez everyones an exspurt after the event arent they! :roll: