Overcrowding at St. Pancras (EMR) 03/12/23

[43055]

Even if there is crew onboard, and passengers have been herded into a crowd until a few minutes before departure, don’t expect the reservations to be booted up for another few minutes after boarding has started.

Why this happens I’ve no idea, as the train PIS will be working so clearly some part of the train knows it’s headcode etc but it’s EMR so I don’t expect any better anymore.

I believe the reservations have to be downloaded but due to the poor signal it is normally won't load until your half way to Luton. Not sure if the 'power saving' mode has any affect as well.

 

[FOH]

It could be handled so much better.

During the Liquid bomb fiasco we turned up at Heathrow Terminal 3 to find a long serpentine queue almost to the door. within a couple of minutes someone came along asking if there was anyone with a departure before 1300. 1235 to Vancouver I said, and we were escorted straight to security.

Difference being there's probably only 1 flight a day whereas I'll assume from what others have posted is EMR's view is they'll get you to your destination on a first come first served basis in the queue and you won't know which train you'll be on until the magic wardrobe door opens in front of you

 

[MCR247]

I believe the reservations have to be downloaded but due to the poor signal it is normally won't load until your half way to Luton. Not sure if the 'power saving' mode has any affect as well.

It certainly seems to be later in the boarding process than it was during EMT days

 

[Killingworth]

It's often difficult to see train deparure details when standing in a mass of people waiting on the concourse. Anxiety among those who are frail, are not regular travellers or are too short to see what's going on must be high. Sounds like orderly queues was a good idea implemented without considering how they'd work in practice.

The fundamental underlying issue is that St Pancras was rebuilt for HS1 without enough consideration of handling the existing MML passenger levels let alone any potential ncrease. How that is easily corrected is hard to see. Is it possible?

 

[eh_oh]

The fundamental underlying issue is that St Pancras was rebuilt for HS1 without enough consideration of handling the existing MML passenger levels let alone any potential ncrease. How that is easily corrected is hard to see. Is it possible?

The only potential solution would be to build more platforms on stilts above Midland Rd, unless the entire MML station was rebuilt underground.

 

[TheBigD]

The fundamental underlying issue is that St Pancras was rebuilt for HS1 without enough consideration of handling the existing MML passenger levels let alone any potential ncrease. How that is easily corrected is hard to see. Is it possible?

Probably one for a thread in the speculative section, but I don't see anything other than tinkling around the edges.

I doubt that it is even possible to add extra platforms even if funding was there.

Maybe more circulation space on the concourse or better separation of arriving and departing passengers?

 

[Killingworth]

Probably one for a thread in the speculative section, but I don't see anything other than tinkling around the edges.

I doubt that it is even possible to add extra platforms even if funding was there.

Maybe more circulation space on the concourse or better separation of arriving and departing passengers?

4 intensively used EMR platforms. 6 HS1 platforms and 3 for the Javelin trains.

It seems to me, as a user of the MML, that the former Midland Railway services have been pushed out by the new cuckoos in their nest!

 

[yorksrob]

I would turn over platform 5 to Midland mainline services. The number of international passengers are limited by the number of people customs can handle anyway.

 

[43066]

But in a lot of the cases I’ve seen it really has just been a poorly managed situation.

To be fair it does descend into utter chaos on a regular basis, unfortunately, so I can understand why you have formed that view. When things are running well it hangs together, but as soon as there’s disruption it’s really just firefighting. There are various reasons for this - one being delays getting the screens altered because the people controlling them sit a long way from the people working on the platform plans/interfacing with the staff during disruption etc. I could go on (and on)!

Why exactly do the doors have to be closed if there is no crew on board? Couldn't the previous crew boot up the reservations for the next working then just leave the doors released for boarding?

Usually the next trip is put in before arrival at St Pancras, and doors remain open between arrival and departure. However if the unit has come in ECS there will only have been a driver aboard, they have nothing to do with seat reservations system. It also won’t necessarily be known to them what the unit’s next working is so, unless otherwise asked by platform staff, it’s best to err on the side of caution and leave it locked, incase another unit is coming in on top to couple to it.

The other issue with 222s is that opening the doors before the trip has been loaded will mean the seat reservations don’t display correctly (or at all). Therefore it’s best to wait until the guard has boarded before releasing doors. You also need both a driver and a guard present as releasing requires a driver’s key on. Is it a stupid design? Yes - hopefully the 810s will be better, but it’s early 00s tech, and what has to be worked with for now.

And why is people standing on the platform not acceptable, when standing on the concourse is considered OK

Simply because the concourse doesn’t have a platform-train-interface!

Why this happens I’ve no idea, as the train PIS will be working so clearly some part of the train knows it’s headcode etc

The reservations are downloaded to the on-train TMS in the middle of the night AIUI but still have to be manually activated for each trip by the TM (in case of disruption, last minute set swaps etc.)

I've often found the EMR St Pancras staff to be rude and unhelpful. It's disappointing to hear not much has improved since I used the station last, which was over a year ago now due to me living in Australia.

I can’t speak for your experiences, of course. However I would say, as a bunch, they’re not rude and unpleasant on a personal basis at all.

Keep in mind it’s generally a fairly thankless job, not well paid, dealing with stressed, abusive, drunk and otherwise downright unpleasant individuals (I doubt I’d get half way through a shift on the barriers without either swearing at someone, or worse , based on some of the behaviour they have to deal with). No surprise it’s fairly high turnover, many either quit or look for another job internally ASAP.

How much does the typical passenger really interact with gateline staff/dispatchers anyway!?

 

[Jim the Jim]

The arrangements have been signed off and risk assessed by various members of staff at both EMR and NR, as being safer than a free for all, given the available infrastructure. The railway does a pretty good job of being extremely safe, so I’m afraid this suggestion is simply nonsense.

You're saying that both EMR and NR have explicitly risk assessed and signed off an arrangement stating (a) that passengers for an intercity service departing a major terminus will not be permitted onto the platform until 1 minute before departure; and (b) that said service will depart before all passengers have managed to board?

 

[43066]

You're saying that both EMR and NR have explicitly risk assessed and signed off an arrangement stating (a) that passengers for an intercity service departing a major terminus will not be permitted onto the platform until 1 minute before departure; and (b) that said service will depart before all passengers have managed to board?

Well, no. That’s obviously not what I’m saying. Nice strawman, though!

 

[Wolfie]

The other thing if they did that, then passengers would spread along the length of the train. Now letting people on near dispatch time means most people who can get to the train end up getting on the first few carriages, even though the other end of the train is nearly empty. Surely there could be a way of letting, say, half the train capacity onto the platform, and trying to spread them, only holding back the rest?

Perhaps a few senior railway Execs and their employer have to be convicted of corporate manslaughter for the message to sink home. If so l hope that the victim's families sue those individuals personally - the bonuses they are doubtless currently on should be forfeited.

 

[Killingworth]

The other thing if they did that, then passengers would spread along the length of the train. Now letting people on near dispatch time means most people who can get to the train end up getting on the first few carriages, even though the other end of the train is nearly empty. Surely there could be a way of letting, say, half the train capacity onto the platform, and trying to spread them, only holding back the rest?

This issue is fairly common on many terminal platforms and on long platforms used by very long trains, although with long fixed units of 8, 9, 10, or 12 cars it's possible to walk through after boarding. I recall boarding busy trains in the early 1960s in York for Newcastle. They were very long and I'd push forward to find space near the front, passing soldiers with big kit bags standing in the corridor as they returned from Aden or Cyprus to Darlington for Catterick and Barnard Castle.

When boarding at Manchester Piccadilly I usually walk forward to the front unit or coach for most space. Rammed rear coaches are very common yet little seems to happen to improve that. Keeping passengers off the platform until very late compounds the problem

I would turn over platform 5 to Midland mainline services. The number of international passengers are limited by the number of people customs can handle anyway.

Would that include the Champagne Bar?

 

[43066]

This issue is fairly common on many terminal platforms and on long platforms used by very long trains, although with long fixed units of 8, 9, 10, or 12 cars it's possible to walk through after boarding. I recall boarding busy trains in the early 1960s in York for Newcastle. They were very long and I'd push forward to find space near the front, passing soldiers with big kit bags standing in the corridor as they returned from Aden or Cyprus to Darlington for Catterick and Barnard Castle.

Unfortunately, while the St Pancras platforms are (reasonably) long, the stock EMR uses isn’t. It also has no gangways between units so, when it’s doubled up, if people board the rear unit they will be stuck there until the first stop - up to an hour (or more) away…

That won’t be changing with the new intercity fleet being introduced (albeit there will be more seats on the IC services). A sign of the times, but hardly progress, given your memories of the sixties …

 

[Deafdoggie]

The arrangements have been signed off and risk assessed by various members of staff at both EMR and NR, as being safer than a free for all, given the available infrastructure. The railway does a pretty good job of being extremely safe, so I’m afraid this suggestion is simply nonsense.

then either they are totally incompetent and should be out of a job. Or staff are not following the rules correctly.
you can not seriously be claiming someone has risk assessed penning people in till virtually the train departure time and making them run for the train and dispatching it before they get there is the risk-assessed procedure? If so, I'd love to see this document.
If the risk assessment doesn't say that then clearly the staff are blatantly not following it, with apparent immunity.
Either way, the risk assesment doesn't seem worth the paper it's written on and the system is incredibly dangerous.

 

[yorksrob]

Would that include the Champagne Bar?

I'd rebrand that as a retro-Travellers Fare experience, complete with Cadburys hot chocolate machines and burgers with ketchup and mustard.

More seriously, access could be provided easily enough without moving the Champagne bar.

 

[duffield]

Unfortunately, while the St Pancras platforms are (reasonably) long, the stock EMR uses isn’t. It also has no gangways between units so, when it’s doubled up, if people board the rear unit they will be stuck there until the first stop - up to an hour (or more) away…

That won’t be changing with the new intercity fleet being introduced (albeit there will be more seats on the IC services). A sign of the times, but hardly progress, given your memories of the sixties …

There should be a small improvement in platform utilisation with the removal of all the seven coach 222s which waste 30% of a platform. Of course the downside is that some services which merited seven coaches but not really ten will probably end up with only five...

 

[43055]

There should be a small improvement in platform utilisation with the removal of all the seven coach 222s which waste 30% of a platform. Of course the downside is that some services which merited seven coaches but not really ten will probably end up with only five...

The 810's will have a capacity of around a 7 car 222 so most services will actually have an increase in capacity. Even better if it is a 10 car which hopefully there is more of.

 

[londonmidland]

The EMR concourse at St. Pancras is really poor when it comes to train information and boarding.

InterCity services are often advertised around and/or less than 10 minutes before departure, leading to a mad rush when the platform number is displayed on the screens.

Apart from ‘A’ and ‘B’ platform prefixes, there is no obvious way for passengers to know whether their train is the front or rear 222. It doesn’t help that services which aren’t due to depart for a considerable amount of time already have their destination displayed on the front and side of the train, which makes passengers think it’s the first train to leave for that destination.

Announcements, or lack of them, are a complete joke. They are only made manually when staff have the time or resources to do it. This results in very infrequent announcements actually being made. East Midlands Railway seem to have no intention to pay Network Rail to install a proper automated P.A system, which I think just about every other London terminal has this by standard.

 

[duffield]

The 810's will have a capacity of around a 7 car 222 so most services will actually have an increase in capacity. Even better if it is a 10 car which hopefully there is more of.

I knew the capacity was noticeably more than the 5 coach 222s but I'd forgotten it was *that* much more!
Just looked it up and Wikipedia says 254 standard seats on a 5 coach 810 vs 236 on a 7 coach 222, of course the 222 has an over supply of 1st class, but even so that's quite a remarkable difference.

 

[TPO]

Of course one answer is to mandate a minimum boarding time.... so if the TOC only let's people on 2 min before departure (for whatever reason) and they must give minimum 10 minutes then they depart 8 down AND will be attributed all the delay minutes ensuing.

With that incentive (delay minutes being the currency of the railway and all that) I would bet that within a couple of months the issue would be resolved....

(Back when I used to travel regularly out of Padd this was a similar issue with calling trains late and a scrum ensuing, but at least at Padd you could wait on the bridge partway down the platform so be closer to the front of the train and avoid much of the scrum.)

TPO

 

[baz962]

I would turn over platform 5 to Midland mainline services. The number of international passengers are limited by the number of people customs can handle anyway.

I might need a passport to drive my train

 

[yorksrob]

I might need a passport to drive my train

You will do - if Yorkshire declares independence

 

[Killingworth]

You will do - if Yorkshire declares independence

New thread please!

 

[43066]

then either they are totally incompetent and should be out of a job. Or staff are not following the rules correctly.
you can not seriously be claiming someone has risk assessed penning people in till virtually the train departure time and making them run for the train and dispatching it before they get there is the risk-assessed procedure? If so, I'd love to see this document.
If the risk assessment doesn't say that then clearly the staff are blatantly not following it, with apparent immunity.

As noted above, what you’ve described isn’t what happens. The OP’s objection appeared to be that a train was being dispatched before everyone in the queue had boarded - but that’s the whole point of the queuing system - as trains reach capacity they depart and if you miss one you will be expected to take the next one. Platforms are closed in a timely manner to facilitate this, otherwise the whole station would simply grind to a halt.

Either way, the risk assesment doesn't seem worth the paper it's written on and the system is incredibly dangerous.

In your opinion, but evidently not in the opinions of those whose job it is to sign these arrangements off. What experience do you have in managing crowds at stations to know better than the professionals?

To describe it as “incredibly dangerous” is ridiculous hyperbole. Can I ask, were you actually at St. Pancras yourself on Sunday to witness this “incredibly dangerous” system in operation? It seems to me you’re just jumping on a band wagon and making wild accusations based on hearsay.

I might need a passport to drive my train

As usual, looking for any excuse to get out of some work .

 

[Deafdoggie]

As noted above, what you’ve described isn’t what happens. The OP’s objection appeared to be that a train was being dispatched before everyone in the queue had boarded - but that’s the whole point of the queuing system - as trains reach capacity they depart and if you miss one you will be expected to take the next one. Platforms are closed in a timely manner to facilitate this, otherwise the whole station would simply grind to a halt.




In your opinion, but evidently not in the opinions of those whose job it is to sign these arrangements off. What experience do you have in managing crowds at stations to know better than the professionals?

To describe it as “incredibly dangerous” is ridiculous hyperbole. Can I ask, were you actually at St. Pancras yourself on Sunday to witness this “incredibly dangerous” system in operation? It seems to me you’re just jumping on a band wagon and making wild accusations based on hearsay.



As usual, any excuse to get out of some work .

I've worked in crowd control (dealing with 52,000 people passing through within a couple of hours in one direction & 45 minutes in the other onto shuttles that held 150 each) and we absolutely were not allowed to pen people in or hold them back as this was considered an accident waiting to happen. Instead we organised an orderly queue and kept it free-flowing. Admittedly everyone was heading to the same place, but even if not, penning people and holding them back is considered worst practice in the industry as it leads to crushes, injuries and deaths. I don't know anyone in the crowd control industry that would authorise such a thing.

 

[43066]

I've worked in crowd control (dealing with 52,000 people passing through within a couple of hours in one direction & 45 minutes in the other onto shuttles that held 150 each) and we absolutely were not allowed to pen people in or hold them back as this was considered an accident waiting to happen. Instead we organised an orderly queue and kept it free-flowing. Admittedly everyone was heading to the same place, but even if not, penning people and holding them back is considered worst practice in the industry as it leads to crushes, injuries and deaths. I don't know anyone in the crowd control industry that would authorise such a thing.

(Noting that working in crowd control isn’t the same as managing and designing the arrangements), an orderly queue is what happens at St Pancras, it cannot be entirely free flowing because you don’t want people running onto platforms when trains are being dispatched. Nobody is “penned in” and the arrangements have worked pretty well for years in dealing with huge numbers in a tight area. It is not “incredibly dangerous”.

In any case I think it’s now clear you didn’t witness the arrangements for yourself and are just speculating.

 

[edwin_m]

As noted above, what you’ve described isn’t what happens. The OP’s objection appeared to be that a train was being dispatched before everyone in the queue had boarded - but that’s the whole point of the queuing system - as trains reach capacity they depart and if you miss one you will be expected to take the next one. Platforms are closed in a timely manner to facilitate this, otherwise the whole station would simply grind to a halt.

The OP stated:

Security kept us penned in the queue despite the dispatcher announcing “the train on platform 1” would leave in one minute. At which point I remonstrated with EMR staff at the barrier to let us through and called to the dispatcher as we passed to say that there were many more behind for the Sheffield train.

I witnessed a lady trip and drop her case in the rush to get on. The whole situation felt very unsafe, especially traveling with young children.

It was clear that they were going to dispatch the train without letting everyone in the queue onboard. And this indeed did happen.

The guard has just informed us the front half has seats available (2 units coupled together). Meanwhile we are standing as our reserved seats are in the front half.

So at least on the face of it, the train was boarded too late and left with empty seats.

 

[Taunton]

an orderly queue is what happens at St Pancras, it cannot be entirely free flowing because you don’t want people running onto platforms when trains are being dispatched.

Which of course London Underground (and many others) handle every minute of the day without issue.

Anyway, this is getting away from the original point, which is not letting people onto the platform in time and then dispatching the train due to a disconnect between different staff groups working there, PLUS paranoia about on time departures and not caring about inconveniencing passengers. Because one appears in statistics reported to the DfT, and the other doesn't.

It's just like a recent thread about Marylebone (and then, we found out, others) sending trains off where the platform has not yet been advised on the indicator, and passengers are all still waiting before the barrier.

 

[43066]

So at least on the face of it, the train was boarded too late and left with empty seats.

It might have become crush loaded at the rear to the point where keeping it in the platform would have made matters worse - remember passengers cannot pass between units. At that point it might have made sense to send it despite some seats being free towards the front (note we don’t know how many seats were free when it left Pancras, and we also don’t know many passengers alighted at Mkt Harborough when the OP walked forward).

The alternative is it sits in the platform with the rear unit getting more and more crowded to the point where it’s unsafe and either it cannot be dispatched or the crew simply refuse to take it. At that point all the problems become ten times worse. Much better to get rid of it and keep things moving. Need to also consider that there are busy inbound trains waiting outside the station for free platforms - it only takes someone to get impatient and pull an egress in the station throat, and suddenly nothing will be able to move into or out of the station.

Which of course London Underground (and many others) handle every minute of the day without issue.

London underground also regularly close their gate lines (and sometimes entire stations) to prevent dangerous overcrowding on platforms. It’s also a poor comparison for various other reasons - they are a high intensity metro operation, EMR are not. LU platforms don’t tend to be islands with one entry/exit point.

Anyway, this is getting away from the original point, which is not letting people onto the platform in time and then dispatching the train due to a disconnect between different staff groups working there, PLUS paranoia about on time departures and not caring about inconveniencing passengers. Because one appears in statistics reported to the DfT, and the other doesn't.

As noted above when the queueing system is in place the trains are dispatched when judged to be full and the access closed at that point (or just prior to). Yes it’s inconvenient to get to the head of the queue as this happens and miss one (as noted above the fact the meridians show their destination below the rear windscreen doesn’t help as people will try to push through the gates even when being told “sorry you’ve missed that one”.).

A separate point seems to have become somewhat conflated on this thread which is trains usually being advertised around ten minutes before departure during normal operations, which is usually plenty of time on those platforms. There isn’t the luxury of long dwells given how intensively the platforms and trains are utilised, let alone during disruption, and when 25% of the platform space is being used by a different operator from next door.

The whole set up is a compromise. I’m not saying it’s perfect, and people are free to pick holes, but I doubt anybody here could come up with anything better given the infrastructure limitations as described! The use of poorly trained, surly agency staff to manage the queue doesn’t help matters, but that’s now common practice across the industry