Train at Clapham Junction: did it stop short?

[GodAtum]

Yesterday, the 1758 from East Grinstead, stopped short of platform 14. It had 12 carriages but the rear 3 were not on the platform. Anyone know what happended, was it driver error?

 

[Duffer]

Platform 14 (Up Slow) can only accommodate 10 coaches - the rear 2 coaches would have been locked out by the SDO (Selective Door Opening). Normal working, nothing to worry about.

 

[Fincra5]

Platform 14 (Up Slow) can only accommodate 10 coaches - the rear 2 coaches would have been locked out by the SDO (Selective Door Opening). Normal working, nothing to worry about.

What he said The up and down Slow, as in Platform 14/15 are 10car platforms and the up and down fast, as in Platform 12/13 are 12 car.

 

[GodAtum]

What he said The up and down Slow, as in Platform 14/15 are 10car platforms and the up and down fast, as in Platform 12/13 are 12 car.

Ah OK, thanks!

 

[455driver]

Nice to see you put all the train details in so the driver can be traced easily! :roll:

 

[3141]

Nice to see you put all the train details in so the driver can be traced easily! :roll:

The probability is that errors represent only a very small percentage of all train operations.

But I don't think posters on this site should be ashamed of giving information that might lead to a rail employee being identifiable, if there was an error.

As it turns out that there wasn't one in this case the potential identification shouldn't cause any problem for anyone.

 

[SPADTrap]

The probability is that errors represent only a very small percentage of all train operations.

But I don't think posters on this site should be ashamed of giving information that might lead to a rail employee being identifiable, if there was an error.

As it turns out that there wasn't one in this case the potential identification shouldn't cause any problem for anyone.

I think its more misinformed speculation where conclusions are jumped to that raises backs. This only snowballs with more assumptions. Case in point the OP..it still says it stopped short.

Is a sticky required that says this forum isn't appropriate for reporting things? If someone witnesses something this forum isn't the place to 'report' it.

 

[talltim]

If the train was 12 cars, and the platform can fit 10, surely the fact that there rear 3 were off the end means it stopped short?

 

[SPADTrap]

If the train was 12 cars, and the platform can fit 10, surely the fact that there rear 3 were off the end means it stopped short?

Have you read any further than that? :roll:

Lost as to how you came to that conclusion?

 

[Searle]

Have you read any further than that? :roll:

Lost as to how you came to that conclusion?

well if you're going to bring out the rolling eyes...

You see if the train was 12 coaches long, and the platform holds 10 coaches, by my calculation that means 2 coaches should be off the end. However the OP said that 3 coaches were off the end, to which we can come to the conclusion that only 9 coaches were on the platform, and therefore it stopped short by 1 coach length.

Is that simple enough for you? :roll:

 

[jopsuk]

If the train was 12 cars, and the platform can fit 10, surely the fact that there rear 3 were off the end means it stopped short?

if he didn't know about the short platform/SDO can you be sure he got the number of carriages not at the platform correct?

 

[Fincra5]

The curvature on platform 14 means you can't see the rear coach (10) that is actually on the platform, unless you are standing close to the station buildings/ rear of the train.

So its likely OP saw 9 on there, as the 10th is round the corner.

 

[SPADTrap]

well if you're going to bring out the rolling eyes...

You see if the train was 12 coaches long, and the platform holds 10 coaches, by my calculation that means 2 coaches should be off the end. However the OP said that 3 coaches were off the end, to which we can come to the conclusion that only 9 coaches were on the platform, and therefore it stopped short by 1 coach length.

Is that simple enough for you? :roll:

Isn't only simplicity you have to a T! It was just a smiley!

 

[Minstral25]

I had to look twice, what is an East Grinstead train doing in Platform 14 - I thought they all crossed over at Windmill Junction to the fast lines at thus platform 12. Are there any others that go all the way up the slow lines?

 

[Fincra5]

I had to look twice, what is an East Grinstead train doing in Platform 14 - I thought they all crossed over at Windmill Junction to the fast lines at thus platform 12. Are there any others that go all the way up the slow lines?

Depends, if like Last night there is a block on the fasts or something. My train (2332 VIC-HHE), was diverted onto the slows just outside CLJ.

Real Time Trains shows trains after around 2330 from ECR being sent by the slows and V/V

 

[yorkie]

Is a sticky required that says this forum isn't appropriate for reporting things?

But on the other hand, is not better that someone asks on here if something was correct, to which the answer will in nearly all cases be that it is correct, rather than goes on Twitter (as a number of commuters do, in militant style) or some other medium, to make an allegation?

As it happens, we've potentially avoided a false allegation in this thread.

Now we could go for a heavy handed approach, by removing times/places and saying how they shouldn't say anything that could get someone into trouble and therefore we need to cover it all up or whatever, but is there not a risk that the person might think along the lines "sod this, I'm going straight to the TOC and relevant bodies to report this" and wasting time (or worse) getting something investigated that wouldn't have been, had it been explained to them on here?

It's a fact that some people will think that something has been done incorrectly when there is nothing incorrect at all. I believe when this happens the best thing to do to satisfy their concerns is to educate them and explain that the correct procedures were, in fact, followed.

 

[Fincra5]

I'd imagine TOC's spend more time looking at Twitter - where passengers love to dob staff in - than browsing Train Forums.

 

[LBSCR Times]

I'd imagine TOC's spend more time looking at Twitter - where passengers love to dob staff in - than browsing Train Forums.

Yes, unfortunately it is a lot more difficult to avoid Twitter allegations, as it normally goes to the Customer Relations staff / manager.
As for train forums, I've never had a report through one yet.....
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As it happens, we've potentially avoided a false allegation in this thread.

It's a fact that some people will think that something has been done incorrectly when there is nothing incorrect at all. I believe when this happens the best thing to do to satisfy their concerns is to educate them and explain that the correct procedures were, in fact, followed.

And when it has been reported on Twitter and investigated, having to explain to staff who do not have operating knowledge can be difficult, especially if the person who made the accusation then goes to the local press as he feels the TOC is covering up.....

 

[physics34]

Passengers complain on twitter that a driver was sipping his tea in the cab.....

..craziness like this is the reason twitter should not be used for customer complaints.

Regarding the original post, i don't think this sort of thing should be posted on this forum as others have said. Nobody likes a "grass"....

 

[Fincra5]

The worst one I saw was some woman tweeting to ask if the driver of a Grinny to London was drunk because he was singing in the cab!

 

[physics34]

The worst one I saw was some woman tweeting to ask if the driver of a Grinny to London was drunk because he was singing in the cab!

ha ha yeah i read that. We are still trying to find out who the driver was and give him some stick!

 

[ainsworth74]

The worst one I saw was some woman tweeting to ask if the driver of a Grinny to London was drunk because he was singing in the cab!

In time to the beat of the AWS and Vigilance?

 

[ctrh136]

I had to look twice, what is an East Grinstead train doing in Platform 14 - I thought they all crossed over at Windmill Junction to the fast lines at thus platform 12. Are there any others that go all the way up the slow lines?

That is the only one I know that stays on the slow lines as there isn't a suitable path to get it across at Windmill, apart from evening/weekend trains that are diverted onto the slow lines when there are engineering works.

 

[3141]

But on the other hand, is not better that someone asks on here if something was correct, to which the answer will in nearly all cases be that it is correct, rather than goes on Twitter (as a number of commuters do, in militant style) or some other medium, to make an allegation?

As it happens, we've potentially avoided a false allegation in this thread.

Now we could go for a heavy handed approach, by removing times/places and saying how they shouldn't say anything that could get someone into trouble and therefore we need to cover it all up or whatever, but is there not a risk that the person might think along the lines "sod this, I'm going straight to the TOC and relevant bodies to report this" and wasting time (or worse) getting something investigated that wouldn't have been, had it been explained to them on here?

It's a fact that some people will think that something has been done incorrectly when there is nothing incorrect at all. I believe when this happens the best thing to do to satisfy their concerns is to educate them and explain that the correct procedures were, in fact, followed.

Brilliant post, brilliant!

 

[Latecomer]

But on the other hand, is not better that someone asks on here if something was correct, to which the answer will in nearly all cases be that it is correct, rather than goes on Twitter (as a number of commuters do, in militant style) or some other medium, to make an allegation?

As it happens, we've potentially avoided a false allegation in this thread.

Now we could go for a heavy handed approach, by removing times/places and saying how they shouldn't say anything that could get someone into trouble and therefore we need to cover it all up or whatever, but is there not a risk that the person might think along the lines "sod this, I'm going straight to the TOC and relevant bodies to report this" and wasting time (or worse) getting something investigated that wouldn't have been, had it been explained to them on here?

It's a fact that some people will think that something has been done incorrectly when there is nothing incorrect at all. I believe when this happens the best thing to do to satisfy their concerns is to educate them and explain that the correct procedures were, in fact, followed.

An awful lot is picked up via twitter and drivers have already been pulled up for non-reporting of incidents which is deemed more serious in some instances than the incident itself. However you do get some spurious ones at least/malicious at worst.

I personally don't have an issue with a someone raising an issue on here regarding a potential mistake or incident, but I do think that posting a train time or headcode has a lot of potential fallout and could be very unpleasant for the driver, even if subsequent investigation finds that they carried out their duties correctly. Times or headcodes are something that can be sent to the TOC by the complainant should they wish to take it further. I am very uncomfortable with open discussions about identifiable services.

I accept that in this case people were able to establish from the time and location posted that the formation meant that some carriages would have been off the platform, but perhaps pm facilities could be used to establish some key facts in future? I'm sure there are enough people on here who in response to a fairly loose question could say "OK pm me the time of the service and I'll tell you the formation". The question could be resolved right there and then, alternatively the discussion could be advanced with the formation known, but the time or headcode only known to the OP and the PM respondent and the discussion can advance without it feeling like an open jury. As stated, if something clearly is revealed to be amiss then the OP is perfectly entitled to approach the TOC.

If I were a member of the public, once I knew the facts, my own thought process would be - am I reporting this because someone could have been seriously injured and my input may prevent this happening again? Or am I about to report someone whose actions weren't wilful but they made an error in their job the fallout of which is likely to be far more serious than in most other professions? One of these considerations clearly far outweighs the other, but if the greatest weight is on the latter then I would feel rather uncomfortable with myself. If the weight is on the former then I would feel duty bound to report it.

 

[FOH]

As a person who doesn't know operations, my assumption would be it doesn't matter how many coaches were off the platform but only where the driver's cab is relative to the Stop sign on the platform (or the appropriate number of carriages Stop sign if there are multiple). Is it as simple as this or is there more to it?