IET's grounded - what would you run?

[43096]

My experience is having spent many months learning and being certified to drive class 117 on the Swanage Railway back in the early 1990's. I had to be re - certified by the safety boards at the time on a yearly basis, which at times took most of the winter period before the railway started again the next Easter. This was as well, as doing my actual job at the time as a Computer Operator for a local building society doing anything from 8 - 12 hour shifts ether through the day or through the night. Given the time, each time it would take for me to be certified I would expect that drivers on mainline trains, that it would possibly take twice as long.

So driving knowledge that is around 25 years out of date on a train type that is from another world compared to 80x and not main line. So totally irrelevant to the issue at hand, really.

 

[C37]

are you just a troll now?, explain how live will be lost if we dont run HST's right now?

I didn't say lives would be lost?
This thread is titled

"IET's grounded - what would you run?"​

I answered HSTs
I was told not possible due to the time expired since drivers last drove HSTs.
All I am saying is that if ex Medics were able to come back to the NHS then surely ex HST drivers (who are still working on different stock) could go back to driving HSTs.
Do try to keep up.

I remember a lot of hubbub about retired healthcare staff being brought back, but I also remember there being a lot of talk about them willing to go back but not actually being needed/getting stuck doing online training courses about radicalisation before going back onto the front line. It struck me very much as an optics story, but not one that materially made a difference

A driver could probably prove competence relatively easily, but it's having the system for them to prove their competence in place that would be the trickier part. Plus of course, it's not just the drivers, but maintenance staff (if they can catch a break between inspecting welds), guards, platform staff, etc.

If push came to shove then I'm sure they could reintroduce HSTs from a competency/training aspect, but the situation would have to get pretty dire for that to be the case

As for the stock itself - per this post only 5 ex-LNER sets made it into traffic with EMR, 3 of which are still in traffic (for 2 diagrams) with the other 2 sets stored at Ely & Neville Hill. The Neville Hill set was due to move to Ely but I suspect they might hold tight on it for now! From next weekend all 5 sets would be available to press into service (assuming that they aren't also being ran into the ground) which does make it feel like it'd have to be a real "last roll of the dice" to consider their introduction



Oh, it's definitely the least of the issues, but between the (some would argue rightful) pig-headedness of the DfT on the matter of PRM-TSI, the poor-optics, and the fact that we've still got a zombie industry being propped up by Westminster which is generally advising people not to travel, it won't be the first option they turn to

Many thanks for your insights

 

[popeter45]

I didn't say lives would be lost?
This thread is titled

"IET's grounded - what would you run?"​

I answered HSTs
I was told not possible due to the time expired since drivers last drove HSTs.
All I am saying is that if ex Medics were able to come back to the NHS then surely ex HST drivers (who are still working on different stock) could go back to driving HSTs.
Do try to keep up.

the reason the medical staff came back was becuase the risk of them messing up was outweighed by the risk of patient deaths due to lack of staff, that just isnt the case here as there isnt a material risk to life from not running these service and a material risk of somthing like a SPAD causing a derailment so please stop with this argument as its deeply disrespectful to NHS staff

 

[RobShipway]

So driving knowledge that is around 25 years out of date on a train type that is from another world compared to 80x and not main line. So totally irrelevant to the issue at hand, really.

What is your experience then please?

 

[C37]

the reason the medical staff came back was becuase the risk of them messing up was outweighed by the risk of patient deaths due to lack of staff, that just isnt the case here as there isnt a material risk to life from not running these service and a material risk of somthing like a SPAD causing a derailment so please stop with this argument as its deeply disrespectful to NHS staff

Good grief, I was merely speculating, on a thread that specifically asks for speculation.
The NHS is not a religion and mentioning it is not blasphemy, so chill your boots.

 

[D365]

Driving a car is just putting your life at risk, driving a train or flying a plane is putting hundreds of people's lives at risk, hence the need for certification on a yearly basis.

Being someone in their early 50's, who has driven 18 seat minibuses from time to time taking people from A to B I understand your point well.

Seeing these two posts from the very same member is one of the most concerning things I've read on this forum.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Seeing these two posts from the very same member is one of the most concerning things I've read on this forum.

The attitude that you are only responsible for your own safety on the road in a car is as common as it is dangerous. You are driving primarily for the safety of other road users, whatever vehicle you are using (or even using the road as a pedestrian). Your own safety is important but secondary.

 

[bramling]

The concern at the moment would I guess be that regional TOCs may not allow that because it might cause COVID related issues for them?

Anything out of the ordinary is likely to cause Covid issues, indeed there’s already been times when people can’t achieve social distancing on a given service.

Dropping social distancing is fine when the government wants to, for example if they want to save a bit of money by deleting services from a timetable or putting out shorter trains, but not fine if I want to spend a night in a hotel for leisure purposes...

 

[Annetts key]

With the staff working on safety critical systems that can go for far more than a year between working on equipment without having to be re-trained or re-certified, they are not driving a train or coach that is taking members of the public and that is the difference.

The safety critical systems that I talk about are the very same systems that train drivers rely on. If one of my team members or I drop the ball, it could potentially cause a train crash. Drivers expect a signal showing a proceed aspect to tell them that it’s okay and safe to proceed. Drivers also expect that the facing points are set correctly for the move that they are making and that they are not open part way...
If that line has passenger trains, then yes, it does concern the safety of many, many passengers.

The railways are very complex systems. Hence why there are rules, regulations, instructions, operating procedures etc. But these are not all set in stone. If requirements change, as long as it is safe to do so, and as long as a full and proper risk assessment has been done, it may be possible to make minor changes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Anything out of the ordinary is likely to cause Covid issues, indeed there’s already been times when people can’t achieve social distancing on a given service.

Happened last week when the WCML was shut and Chiltern were taking all the Brum-London passengers. One of the LHCS sets wasn't out on Sunday, and was substituted with a 4-car 168 formation, which was, unsurprisingly, rather busy.

(My mate also wasn't impressed when I'd rushed him to get to the station in time for the LHCS and a unit showed up...)

Dropping social distancing is fine when the government wants to, for example if they want to save a bit of money by deleting services from a timetable or putting out shorter trains, but not fine if I want to spend a night in a hotel for leisure purposes...

Quite.

 

[LondonExile]

If the NHS can fast track retired medics onto the front line, then there must be a way of ex HST drivers showing competence. This really isn't brain surgery.
And if those former HST drivers still work on the ECML, then the signal placements bla bla bla problem is solved too

It's a safety concern that's shut the IET fleets down in the first case.

For all we know - ignoring the cracks may be less risky than ignoring the driver competency requirements (probably not; but I doubt anyone who can actually calculate good estimates of the relative risks is going to go on the record)

As things stand your idea is not viable whilst complying with the rules and would require someone very senior indeed to authorise suspending the rules to allow it to work. This is independent of whether the rule is required, makes sense to you etc.

 

[Wolfie]

Thanks, for your response.
I think I mentioned earlier, how the NHS fast tracked former medical staff back into service.
If needs must, realistically, how difficult would it be for an experienced former driver to demonstrate competence?
As regards the stock, as recently as 6 weeks ago, MK3 sets were flying up and down the MML at full speed, where has that stock gone?

There is rather a large difference between bringing retired medics back in the middle of a global pandemic - when not doing so could easily mean that people die - and allowing non-compliant train drivers to operate on the mainline - when the consequence of not doing so is at worst that people can't travel by train. In the latter case if things go wrong the result could easily be that people die.

are you just a troll now?, explain how lives will be lost if we dont run HST's right now?

Exactly.

the reason the medical staff came back was becuase the risk of them messing up was outweighed by the risk of patient deaths due to lack of staff, that just isnt the case here as there isnt a material risk to life from not running these service and a material risk of somthing like a SPAD causing a derailment so please stop with this argument as its deeply disrespectful to NHS staff

I'd missed this when l posted similarly.

It's a safety concern that's shut the IET fleets down in the first case.

For all we know - ignoring the cracks may be less risky than ignoring the driver competency requirements (probably not; but I doubt anyone who can actually calculate good estimates of the relative risks is going to go on the record)

As things stand your idea is not viable whilst complying with the rules and would require someone very senior indeed to authorise suspending the rules to allow it to work. This is independent of whether the rule is required, makes sense to you etc.

Re your last para, l strongly suspect that any decision maker would be extremely hesitant to give such authorisation, given the obvious risks, as it would be their ass on the line in the event that things went wrong....

 

[43096]

What is your experience then please?

Unlike you, I'm quite happy to admit I don't have relevant experience. But then I'm not the one claiming knowledge.

 

[Anonymous10]

what i would do is try get units which have passed their exam on a route such as Paddington to bristol or newport as often as possible with regional tocs assisting so tfw covering newport to swansea for example via the 175s that already operate on that stretch

 

[Meglos]

Back on topic (perhaps)!

Until GWR have enough 800/802's back in service, terminate all London services at Reading. Operate the 800/802 which have passed maintenance checks on as many services as possible west of Reading. Each termination at Reading would potentially save the 60 minutes round trip to Paddington.

TFL to utilise the currently excess 345's (more units than are currently needed until the Crossrail Core opens) to run fast services direct from Reading to Paddington.

 

[JonathanH]

Until GWR have enough 800/802's back in service, terminate all London services at Reading. Operate the 800/802 which have passed maintenance checks on as many services as possible west of Reading. Each termination at Reading would potentially save the 60 minutes round trip to Paddington.

TFL to utilise the currently excess 345's (more units than are currently needed until the Crossrail Core opens) to run fast services direct from Reading to Paddington.

Not necessary to involve 345s - GWR have enough 387s to run Paddington to Didcot and 80x can run west of there and even more time would be saved.

 

[popeter45]

dumb idea but how close are the TfW 67 mark 4 set to being ready to use?
if the premier service isnt starting for a while would they be allowed to run at least reading-swansea?

 

[SteelWeelApeal]

As Crosscountry are running mainly double voyagers with half the frequency, could they single some and use the spare ones or HSTs to run extra York/Leeds/Doncaster to Edinburgh shuttles, and Cheltenham to Plymouth (perhaps via Swindon, I know they have used this route for diversions, but not sure if they are set up to stop at Stonehouse, Stroud, Kemble and Chippenham) shuttles? It would take extra staff, but presumably at least some might be available due to the currently reduced frequency.

 

[JonathanH]

dumb idea but how close are the TfW 67 mark 4 set to being ready to use?
if the premier service isnt starting for a while would they be allowed to run at least reading-swansea?

No crew trained to run that route and traction. GWR seem to be working from contingencies in their existing fleet.

As Crosscountry are running mainly double voyagers with half the frequency

Double voyagers with half the frequency uses the same proportion of the fleet as single voyagers running the full frequency.

but not sure if they are set up to stop at Stonehouse, Stroud, Kemble and Chippenham) shuttles

GWR have Turbos for Swindon to Gloucester shuttles as they have demonstrated today.

 

[silverfoxcc]

Can't the LNER get out on very shortterm lease all the 215and317units for the anglo scottish routes?

OK toilet stops will be a must, but the seatsare more comfortable?? and lets face it a train is a train to the average traveller

Please note said as a joke

 

[SteelWeelApeal]

Double voyagers with half the frequency uses the same proportion of the fleet as single voyagers running the full frequency.


GWR have Turbos for Swindon to Gloucester shuttles as they have demonstrated today.

Yes, but they could run some of those services (or at least the extremities of them, e.g. south of Reading) using single voyagers but with the current frequency to free some up.

GWR did run Swindon to Gloucester/Cheltenham shuttles, but they were very thin on the ground, in most cases with gaps over 3 hours. Also these turbos would be very useful elsewhere at the minute, such as the Cotswold line.

 

[ashkeba]

I can't really remember (m)any other than the 365s to Scotrail, though they were in service for a year - so not exactly short. There's been some "stays of execution" with pacers and the like, but those aren't substitutions

I wonder if @Bletchleyite is thinking about things like 2x cl 37 with IC (Mk3 maybe) coaches substituting for sprinters on GA a year or two ago.

 

[JonathanH]

I wonder if @Bletchleyite is thinking about things like 2x cl 37 with IC (Mk3 maybe) coaches substituting for sprinters on GA a year or two ago.

Which can't happen now because of slam doors, lack of controlled emission toilets, traincrew knowledge and PRM issues.

 

[Iliketrains123]

"Putting all your eggs in one basket" is a piece of advice which means that one should not concentrate all efforts and resources in one area as one could lose everything.
Don't know why that popped into my head. Oh well.

 

[RobShipway]

Unlike you, I'm quite happy to admit I don't have relevant experience. But then I'm not the one claiming knowledge.

Well, I have knowledge from having driven a train with the public on board and also from speaking from trains drivers currently working for some of the TOC's.

So for you to say that my experience is irrelevant when you have had no experience of driving a train with the public on, I feel is rude. But this is a public forum and each is entitled to their own thoughts.

Seeing these two posts from the very same member is one of the most concerning things I've read on this forum.

Whilst the person driving the car could crash into other cars while driving it, my comment was meant on the basis of them being the single occupant within said car that they are driving. Whereas if a train driver driving a train was not aware of the controls of the train that they where driving, would be doing so potentially with hundreds of people aboard and yes, with the likely possibility of killing many more people outside of the train depending on where the accident occurs, then a single person driving their car would be killing.

Whether it is a vehicle on the road or a train on the tracks, neither should be driven unless the driver feels confident that they can do so safely. But unlike a car on the road, a train driver needs certification to be allowed to drive said train or be driving it, with an experience driver within the cab of the train with them.

I would also like to remind you both of the post from ainsworth74 that you both should have read before posting which is https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/please-read-before-posting-in-speculative-ideas.201939/

 

[RPI]

"Putting all your eggs in one basket" is a piece of advice which means that one should not concentrate all efforts and resources in one area as one could lose everything.
Don't know why that popped into my head. Oh well.

Yes GWR only have one type of train......

 

[357]

If there are plenty of HSTs that could be crewed by GWR staff as far as Reading - then it begs the question why this isn't being done already, then use the Electrostars from Reading to London.

Either they really don't want to run any trains, there aren't the crews qualified to operate them, or the stock isn't actually available...

 

[Ianno87]

If there are plenty of HSTs that could be crewed by GWR staff as far as Reading - then it begs the question why this isn't being done already, then use the Electrostars from Reading to London.

Either they really don't want to run any trains, there aren't the crews qualified to operate them, or the stock isn't actually available...

Or it's considerably more logistically complicated than it may seem based on an online discussion forum, and a two sentence long post.

 

[Townsend Hook]

If there are plenty of HSTs that could be crewed by GWR staff as far as Reading - then it begs the question why this isn't being done already, then use the Electrostars from Reading to London.

Either they really don't want to run any trains, there aren't the crews qualified to operate them, or the stock isn't actually available...

Or they’re just seeing today as a bit of a freebie given it’s Sunday, getting their ducks in a row ready for Monday.

 

[RobShipway]

Would the drivers of the class 387 units have route knowledge to Swindon?