London Overground in chaos

[ChiefPlanner]

Couldn't they work it so that they just worked Watford - Harrow and Wealdstone (with a reversal at Kenton?) and Euston - Queens Park to connect with Bakerloo line services to better utilise the resources?

That was often the contingency plan in my day - shuttle Watford to Harrow and reverse at the south end , with 2 drivers and / or passed out management or other staff as "temporary" assistant / guards.

Ditto shuttle to Queens Park from Euston.

Depends on resources on the day etc , in my time we could use Watford train crew to ferry sets to Euston via the main lne to assist resourcing - this option may not be available today due to the LM / LOROL split.

 

[Class377/5]

Just logged in to the TfL service updates website at 09:52 to discover that over 75% of the LOROL network is either suspended due to power problems and signal failures, plus planned engineering work.

Last week was the turn of LUL to prove it's no ready for the Olympics with the Jubilee Line fiasco, now it's the turn of LOROL and NR to prove that they're just as unprepared, too...

North London / West London Line
Suspended between Stratford and Richmond/Clapham Junction due to power problems.

Watford DC Lines
Suspended between Euston and Watford Junction due to a signal failure in the Queens Park area.

Gospel Oak - South Tottenham (-Barking)
Suspended between Gospel Oak and South Tottenham due to power problems.

(Gospel Oak-) South Tottenham - Barking
Engineering Work. No service between South Tottenham and Barking.

East London Line
Engineering Work. No service between New Cross Gate and West Croydon / Crystal Palace.

Considering LOROL just operate trains, I don't see why you blame them. They don't have the power to do anything. Its TfL who would take it up with NR, who fault it all is.

 

[notadriver]

This is the sixth consecutive day of problems on the NLL section of LOROL that i know of.

Signal failures, Points failures, Train Failures, Overhead Line problems, One Fire and one train derailment has meant that there has been a part suspension and severe delays, every day since Wednesday.

The Euston Watford DC service is down due to the radio systems being down, and not wanting to put Guards on them and run conventionally ( so in theory admit DOO is unworkable) it is decided to withdaw half the service and double man the rest with two drivers!

There's nothing wrong with DOO on suburban routes where stations are close together. I assume Lorol conductors no longer sign Willesden Junction to Watford Junction hence the use of a second driver?

 

[DarloRich]

A temperature change of 6.5 degrees is not very large. If the rail infrastructure is likely to fail because of such a change then the design/implementation/maintenance (I don't know which) is very poor. If network rail don't know what to do to cope with such small changes then they need to take advice from other European rail operators, who cope with far greater changes in temperature because of their continental climate, than we get with our maritime climate.

I tell you what why don’t you give the Route Infrastructure Maintenance Director a ring - I am sure he (or she!) will be more than happy to take you on as a consultant. Shall we say 300k per annum?

I could tell you how the heat affects the various bits of infrastructure but seeing as you know all this I wont bother.

I am interested in your plans for altering the thermal properties of metals and your plans for dealing with the various rail/heat related issues.

Please fire away.................
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Couldn't they work it so that they just worked Watford - Harrow and Wealdstone (with a reversal at Kenton?) and Euston - Queens Park to connect with Bakerloo line services to better utilise the resources?

that is what would happen on any sensible integrated, unified railway - so not in the UK!

 

[jon0844]

Interestingly last Sunday I was in London and automated announcements were saying the Waterloo and City line was suspended...

It's not suspended - it's closed! *sigh*

The text-to-speech woman at King's Cross was telling me last week about severe delays on two lines, followed by 'There is a good service on all London Underground lines'.

Erm, I think it was supposed to say all OTHER London Underground lines, unless the problems mentioned just 2 seconds before, in the same announcement, had been resolved!

 

[1018509]

I tell you what why don’t you give the Route Infrastructure Maintenance Director a ring - I am sure he (or she!) will be more than happy to take you on as a consultant. Shall we say 300k per annum?!

I'll do it for a week (£5,769), thanks very much.

 

[313103]

There's nothing wrong with DOO on suburban routes where stations are close together. I assume Lorol conductors no longer sign Willesden Junction to Watford Junction hence the use of a second driver?

So if there is no need for a Guard, why use 2 Drivers? If it was that good they wouldnt need to use another Driver.

The reason why they wont let the Guards learn the Watford Junction to Euston line is because that would be admitting defeat in proving that DOO is completely failsafe. Surely having Guards who sign the route on half the salary of a driver is better usage and more cost effective. But i will leave the Math for you.

 

[notadriver]

I assume in this emergency situation two drivers were used as guards don't sign the route. When the radio is working which is the majority of the time only a driver is needed, not a driver and a guard. Do the math.

 

[johnnychips]

Unless you're both American, do the maths! :P

 

[Poggs]

The reason why they wont let the Guards learn the Watford Junction to Euston line is because that would be admitting defeat in proving that DOO is completely failsafe. Surely having Guards who sign the route on half the salary of a driver is better usage and more cost effective. But i will leave the Math for you.

I'm sorry, but I don't find your argument terribly convincing. You appear anti-DOO and want guards just in case the radio fails, and when a guard isn't available for a train... what then? Cancel it because you rely on two members of staff? Aren't you swapping service disruption due to Less Frequent Occurrence #1 with service disruption due to More Frequent Occurrence #2, albeit the latter happening more often with less impact, rather than less often with more impact?

 

[313103]

I assume in this emergency situation two drivers were used as guards don't sign the route. When the radio is working which is the majority of the time only a driver is needed, not a driver and a guard. Do the math.

Its quite easy to do the math

Two drivers are required to work a train is ok when there is suffecient drivers, however one in every three trains yesterday were cancelled yesterday because they used one of the drivers to double up on another train!

One thrid of your booked service being cancelled doesnt sound like good maths to me, but i is not to know the reason why!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm sorry, but I don't find your argument terribly convincing. You appear anti-DOO and want guards just in case the radio fails, and when a guard isn't available for a train... what then? Cancel it because you rely on two members of staff? Aren't you swapping service disruption due to Less Frequent Occurrence #1 with service disruption due to More Frequent Occurrence #2, albeit the latter happening more often with less impact, rather than less often with more impact?

Actually that is not what i am saying. Infact some of the drivers being used didnt sign the route either (some were loan from our sister depot in South London) they were used on a just in case basis. Which is the argument i am using. They could have used Guards without cancelling any train yesterday.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Unless you're both American, do the maths! :P

Ok i will say it in English then Mathematics

 

[notadriver]

Its quite easy to do the math

Two drivers are required to work a train is ok when there is suffecient drivers, however one in every three trains yesterday were cancelled yesterday because they used one of the drivers to double up on another train!

One thrid of your booked service being cancelled doesnt sound like good maths to me, but i is not to know the reason why!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Actually that is not what i am saying. Infact some of the drivers being used didnt sign the route either (some were loan from our sister depot in South London) they were used on a just in case basis. Which is the argument i am using. They could have used Guards without cancelling any train yesterday.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Ok i will say it in English then Mathematics

Are you sure drivers who didn't sign the route were being used?

 

[313103]

Are you sure drivers who didn't sign the route were being used?

Absolutley i was on duty yesterday.

 

[notadriver]

Absolutley i was on duty yesterday.

The rule book doesn't explicitly say who may act as a competent person if the CSR equipment fails. I can only assume they prefer drivers in the leading cabs of trains rather than guards where possible.