The Tube and DLR are different, as on at least five nights per week they have a period of 4hr or so with no trains at all, other than those supporting engineering work. Even if a Network Rail route only has a couple of trains per hour, that's enough to prevent a line block being taken that's long enough to do very much.
Thank you TSG; that's helpful.
Coordination of any kind is difficult. Something along these lines has been attempted regarding road works- sewers, electrics, gas, IT ...charging for 'lane rental' etc. It's hard to estimate durations, frequencies accurately hence tendencies to overestimate in order to finish on time or early and avoid overruns with the consequential inconveniences, blame attribution, damage to reputations and working relationships, and 'fines'. So no easy 'answer'.
Why not build in 4 hour periods to timetables then? Might this time of reduced demand be a time to at least consider a 'reset' re safety culture?
Granted but big swathes of the network carry no commercial freight and can support 4-6hr windows every night.
Yeah seen this happen a few times but generally infrequently although it did wind me up when we had a tamper on hire plus plant and contractors and often those cancelling the possession were NR mtce who had been diverted for operational reasons but our project had to pick up the bill. The irony was we were doing renewal work for there patch but they weren't responsible for our costs so had no incentive to behave differently and ultimately wasn't the fault of the guys on the ground.
Those lines that aren't used at night probably already have the relevant periods designated in the Engineering Access Statement (Rules of the Route as was). But the busiest routes, that also need the most attention, are most likely to be 24/7 except for Saturday nights or some other arrangement for infrequent access. The report mentions NR's efforts to reduce the need for track access, such as automated inspection and junction lighting that allows manual inspection at night. But there are probably still some jobs that need daylight (or much longer access to set up and dismantle lighting) and night work carries its own risks. Productivity is worse if people and plant can only work for a few hours each night, though the same applies if it can only work in the day for short periods when line blocks are available. And many of the staff would probably not want to work permanent night shifts.
As I say LUL have to do everything in limited night windows and with productivity even more impaired in the deep tube and tunnel sections yet they manage it. OK line speed isn't as high but a derailment in a tunnel is arguable far worse than out on open lines anyhow so on balance they are similar risks being managed. They also have several weekend closures every year on each line where they blitz maintenance and works. NR's problem, illuminated in the RAIB report, is they are perpetuating the way the railways has always been run and that involves, albeit much reduced, still allowing workers to mix it with trains. This fundamental principle is never up for challenge and everything from RIMINI to 019 is designed as means to allow that to be perpetuated. Yes it may cost more to move it to nights but there is also a huge overhead of resources to administer 019 along with all the safety roles. Working under possessions at night time and on longer weekend possessions removes much of this overhead and allows for more productive working so on balance probably the same. There is an argument over the additional risk of working in the dark and that can't be ignored and for spot maintenance tasks my experience is there is room for improvement but generally not an issue for project work.
There is separate course for IWA that is used by those that will never be in charge of a group .
Correct most PTS wont hold COSS but in NR P.Way mtce prevalence will be higher than in labour only supplier.
To clarify I did mean maintenance/renewals workers rather than all PTS holders including drivers/guards/ops etc. In that context, yes, there is a course for IWA but, in practice, who in maintenance/renewals only ever works alone? You need to have almost all the same knowledge as a COSS so why would a manager send anybody on IWA?