Closing doors while people are boarding

[Bald Rick]

Not that it really matters.. But in this case I don't think that is true. It's at least four track all the way to East Croydon with what appears to be plenty of capacity. This will be utilised by Thames link upgrade.

a) it is true, that is almost certainly what would have happened.
b) there isn't 'plenty of capacity' at 1630, and certainly not enough to do any out of course overtaking. The order the trains leave London Bridge on the fast line is the order they arrive at Croydon.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Interesting that people have said they should wait for the next one, but there is only one more fcc train and then there is a 2 hour gap, I am not surprised fcc ticket Holders forced themselves on this train...

In my experience, the number of people boarding FCC trains at London Bridge with FCC only tickets is a very small minority.

 

[TimG]

a) it is true, that is almost certainly what would have happened.
b) there isn't 'plenty of capacity' at 1630, and certainly not enough to do any out of course overtaking. The order the trains leave London Bridge on the fast line is the order they arrive at Croydon.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


In my experience, the number of people boarding FCC trains at London Bridge with FCC only tickets is a very small minority.

And what is that small minority supposed to do?

Again it's a moving trains not people. I have never met anyone in a railway who believes they are in the business of providing consumers with a service. I think they need to move away from an army mentality to a waiter mentality!

 

[TheEdge]

And what is that small minority supposed to do?

Again it's a moving trains not people. I have never met anyone in a railway who believes they are in the business of providing consumers with a service. I think they need to move away from an army mentality to a waiter mentality!

So we need to wait for every person to be accommodated "just so" until any train is moved? I can see that approach lasting all of 35 seconds during the peak.

Yes the railways are there to move people and goods but said people need to understand (and behave in a such a way) that due to the operational intricacies of the railway that movement needs to be done on the railways terms. That normally boils down that come to departure time that train needs to leave, regardless of if everyone on the station is on the train it needs to move.

 

[Aictos]

And just get later and later and later? I'm sure the passengers waiting at East Croydon and beyond would really appreciate that, plus all the passengers on the trains stacking behind and their passengers waiting further down the line.

Indeed I totally agree with you on this, why delay the train for the hundreds or so of passengers further down the line just so someone can get onto it at London Bridge when there are plenty more trains they can actually use...

Or people insisting on using one set of doors when there's plenty more doors to use then moan about "late" trains, or all crowd into a single coach forget the fact that a carriage or two further towards front/back might have plenty of seating :roll:

 

[hassaanhc]

It looks like occasionally drivers (I think more likely station staff) have had to push doors shut.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1865131&postcount=2

But then the doors on a Turbo aren't the best! someone might be in the way of it just a tiny bit (there was no space left whatsoever in the train), it was losing a lot of time at every station. In this case driver pushed the door on the leading coach and dispatcher did the last coach. Even allowing for more modern and reliable plug door systems (rather than 25 year + on a 166) I can see why sliding doors are chosen for the new Thameslink stock.

 

[yorkie]

Not that it really matters.. But in this case I don't think that is true. It's at least four track all the way to East Croydon with what appears to be plenty of capacity. This will be utilised by Thames link upgrade.

Yes it's 4 track but the slow line has a stopping service every 5 minutes. The train I linked to uses the fast line. That train waited 3 minutes to let the FCC in front, which is surely around the limit? Any longer and it would probably have been sent out as booked, and the FCC Thameslink service would have been behind it to East Croydon.

 

[TimG]

So we need to wait for every person to be accommodated "just so" until any train is moved? I can see that approach lasting all of 35 seconds during the peak.

Yes the railways are there to move people and goods but said people need to understand (and behave in a such a way) that due to the operational intricacies of the railway that movement needs to be done on the railways terms. That normally boils down that come to departure time that train needs to leave, regardless of if everyone on the station is on the train it needs to move.

No.. But where is the customer service? There should be an announcement saying. Sorry we're not providing a train of the correct length. If you can't board here is a ticket for the next train and compensation. Instead younger shouted at by platform staff to get away from the train as it is "ready to leave". Unbelievably rude!!

 

[yorkie]

...Again it's a moving trains not people....

But is it? Can you answer my question about what most people would prefer?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

....There should be an announcement saying. Sorry we're not providing a train of the correct length...

Yes, of course short formed trains should be advertised. They often are. If it wasn't, that is a separate matter and I'd encourage you to take it up with FCC.

 

[EM2]

No.. But where is the customer service? There should be an announcement saying. Sorry we're not providing a train of the correct length. If you can't board here is a ticket for the next train and compensation. Instead younger shouted at by platform staff to get away from the train as it is "ready to leave". Unbelievably rude!!

If you don't get away from the train when it is ready to leave, you run the risk of falling under it and dying.

 

[LowLevel]

And what is that small minority supposed to do?

Again it's a moving trains not people. I have never met anyone in a railway who believes they are in the business of providing consumers with a service. I think they need to move away from an army mentality to a waiter mentality!

If you wish to have a waiter mentality then I suggest you hire a chauffeur to move you about in a private car.

I see it as being more like a teacher role if anything. I'm polite and friendly to my passengers and I want them to have as pleasant a ride as possible. Providing a decent service is actually very important to me. However I'm also responsible for their safety and wellbeing and also have to take a high level view of the greater good for all. This means I sometimes have to tell the naughty ones off or do things that they don't like. This is because a) if you manage to kill yourself or someone else I could be liable and b) it's a big complicated network which can easily get knotted up.

There's not many industries where paying customers can be arrested and prosecuted for breaking the rules but you have to remember that for everyone's safety public transport is one of them.

 

[hassaanhc]

No.. But where is the customer service?
Instead younger shouted at by platform staff to get away from the train as it is "ready to leave". Unbelievably rude!!

See that's the issue, where do you draw the line with "customer service"? Often people have this mentality that every need of the customer must be pandered to otherwise it is not good customer service.

Doesn't matter if you didn't manage to get on board, this is what delays trains by 5-10 minutes and then passengers demand a reason and out comes the "trains are always late, FCC are incompetent" etc. Shame TOCs can't be honest and say it was due to obstructing doors that trains are delayed, for fear of bad customer service and PR. It is passengers that cause the majority of delays.

 

[SephenWorceste]

> How many people is "we"?

Just me and my partner. Off peak train so only a couple of people per door to get on and off.

> If it's a case of loads of people insisting on using one door, and with other doors not being used, then it seems unreasonable to expect the train to continue waiting.

If I remember a few people got off the train at her doors. The women with the push chair was the only person to get on at those doors. The extra time taken was entirely the time taken to load the push chair.

In my view closing the doors on the push chair was unacceptable. How does that make getting the train away any quicker. The push chair is just part on and part off the train so the train cannot depart. Perhaps the guard, station staff or driver could not see the door. Perhaps they were impatient. Perhaps they felt like intimating the passenger. Which is what happened.

Best wishes, Stephen.



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[455driver]

It looks like occasionally drivers (I think more likely station staff) have had to push doors shut.

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showpost.php?p=1865131&postcount=2

As a driver I have kicked somebodys fat arse into the train when it was preventing the door closing properly, I even made a PA announcement about the reason for the delay as well.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

In my view closing the doors on the push chair was unacceptable.

I agree, but did she start boarding the train when the hustle alarm was sounding?
You are assuming she was halfway in when the close button was pressed and if that is the case she would have had 5 seconds to get in before the doors started to close. How long does it take to get a pushchair on board a train?

Something doesnt sound right about all this!

Edit-
I see the title of this thread is about doors being closed when people are boarding, but the opening post goes on about a short formed train. Would it be unreasonable to assume that the short formed train was already full and there wasnt any more room for anyone else to board?
Meaning the title is misleading because although the passengers wanted to board they couldnt physically get on and so were only serving to delay that train (and probably the ones behind it) due to their own self importance of having to get that train rather than the one behind?

 

[SephenWorceste]

Not sure about the door alarm. I do not remember.

> Something doesnt sound right about all this!

Seems perfectly normal to me. People with luggage, push chairs, bicycles, elderly or disabled may require a little more time to board a train. Happens thousands of times a day.

Closing the doors was not right.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Fincra5]

At the end of the day, you have to go at somepoint. If we waited for every passenger, or those running for it and still trying to board as the doors closed, we'd never leave stations like Victoria, Clapham or East Croydon...

And yes people boarding the train when the hustle alarm sounds... bad idea, as the doors will be closing.

 

[TimG]

As a driver I have kicked somebodys fat arse into the train when it was preventing the door closing properly, I even made a PA announcement about the reason for the delay as well.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I agree, but did she start boarding the train when the hustle alarm was sounding?
You are assuming she was halfway in when the close button was pressed and if that is the case she would have had 5 seconds to get in before the doors started to close. How long does it take to get a pushchair on board a train?

Something doesnt sound right about all this!

Edit-
I see the title of this thread is about doors being closed when people are boarding, but the opening post goes on about a short formed train. Would it be unreasonable to assume that the short formed train was already full and there wasnt any more room for anyone else to board?
Meaning the title is misleading because although the passengers wanted to board they couldnt physically get on and so were only serving to delay that train (and probably the ones behind it) due to their own self importance of having to get that train rather than the one behind?

There was room on the train but difficult to board. Given another minute and a little encouragement to get people down the aisles and plenty more could have got on. I get the argument that ultimately you have to draw a line.. but if this is the case then it should be dealt with differently.

"I'm sorry this train had to leave before you could all get on, someone will be hanging out forms to claim compensation..." would have been fine.

Your signature says it all! Terrible attitude to the people who pay your wages!

 

[455driver]

Your signature says it all! Terrible attitude to the people who pay your wages!

Or it means I have got a sense of humour unlike some people! :roll:

Oh just so you know, on my way to work last week I helped a musician with his 3 musical instruments and assorted paraphernalia off the train, across the bridge and outside the station where he was going to be picked up, I didnt have to but I did because its the right thing to do. But hey what is written in a signature is soooo much more accurate isnt it!
You dont have a clue about me or how the railways have to work and what you write makes it sound like you want us lowly railway staff to stop what we are doing and doff our caps to you as you walk past.

 

[BestWestern]

There was room on the train but difficult to board. Given another minute and a little encouragement to get people down the aisles and plenty more could have got on. I get the argument that ultimately you have to draw a line.. but if this is the case then it should be dealt with differently.

"I'm sorry this train had to leave before you could all get on, someone will be hanging out forms to claim compensation..." would have been fine.

Your signature says it all! Terrible attitude to the people who pay your wages!

Oh dear oh dear...

A busy rush hour train simply does not have the luxury of 'another minute' in a station while passengers are encouraged to move into the available space inside. This is the real issue, the reluctance of so many travellers to allow a train to be fully loaded and let their fellow passengers on. "Room but difficult to board" translates to 'lots of people crowding around the doorways rather than moving further into the carriages despite it being very obvious there are lots more people attempting to board'. It's quite eye opening to see the attitude of many comnuters who will push and shove to board a packed train but then very quickly turn against those attempting to board afterwards. If there are large gaps where people could easily stand in the middle of the coach but the exisiting passengers simply chose to ignore the pleas to use that space, then who is at fault - the railway or those passengers?!

 

[TimG]

Or it means I have got a sense of humour unlike some people! :roll:

Oh just so you know, on my way to work last week I helped a musician with his 3 musical instruments and assorted paraphernalia off the train, across the bridge and outside the station where he was going to be picked up, I didnt have to but I did because its the right thing to do. But hey what is written in a signature is soooo much more accurate isnt it!
You dont have a clue about me or how the railways have to work and what you write makes it sound like you want us lowly railway staff to stop what we are doing and doff our caps to you as you walk past.

Calm down.. I'm not saying you're a bad person.. just that railway staff don't see the consumer as central to what they do.. they see them as an unfortunate obstacle to moving trains around the country.

 

[455driver]

Calm down.. I'm not saying you're a bad person.. just that railway staff don't see the consumer as central to what they do.. they see them as an unfortunate obstacle to moving trains around the country.

I lost any interest in any of the drivel you write when you posted the usual "I pay your wages" crap above (post 76).
TTFN
(doffs cap)

I think you will find it is the passenger/customer/consumer/woteva cowmanure title they have this week, that cant see past the one (full) train sat in the platform delaying everything else behind it and probably cause delays to other trains further down the line at junctions etc.

 

[swj99]

I don't think anyone is disputing the need for train doors to be closed so that the train can get moving. But a valid point has been raised regarding whether or not it is acceptable, safe or ok to close the train doors while people are still boarding.

From a safety perspective, there are numerous incidents each year which illustrate how safe, or otherwise it is for doors to be closed while people are still boarding.

.........If there isn't enough time.. then change the timetable not close the doors!..................

I suggested something similar in a previous thread.

See that's the issue, where do you draw the line with "customer service"? Often people have this mentality that every need of the customer must be pandered to otherwise it is not good customer service.

The customer needs to be able to board the train they are waiting for. Facilitating this rather than refusing to let them board, is hardly pandering to their needs.. While there are still passengers waiting to get on or off a train, it is clearly not ready to leave the station. To close the doors in circumstances such as these is just as wrong and unacceptable as it would be if someone deliberately closed any other door (railway related or not) when someone was either going through it, or attempting to go through it.

 

[455driver]

So you want trains to wait in the platforms while the passengers slowly board do you?
Which trains are you going to remove from the timetable so the remaining trains can have this extra dwell time?
How much longer will each journey need to be if each train is going to wait an extra minute or 2 at every station?
What effect will this have on stock working if the train arrives at the destination after its presently booked return working should have left?

 

[Cherry_Picker]

Calm down.. I'm not saying you're a bad person.. just that railway staff don't see the consumer as central to what they do.. they see them as an unfortunate obstacle to moving trains around the country.

But they do. Hundreds of times a day. They might not see the late running customer as central to what they do, but to suggest that means the entire system needs tearing down and rebuilding is quite frankly absurd.

It seems to me you are either really annoyed about missing a train by a few seconds once because you were late onto a platform or that you really think trains should sit and wait forever until there are no more people remotely interested in catching them at that particular station. What happens then? You start a thread complaining that journey times have increased by 15-20% across the board and ToCs really should look at speeding things up?

 

[Pumbaa]

But they do. Hundreds of times a day. They might not see the late running customer as central to what they do, but to suggest that means the entire system needs tearing down and rebuilding is quite frankly absurd.

I would argue that by and large the 'service' delivered to customers on the railway wouldn't count as 'good customer service' in any other industry. I accept the argument that we have a unique structure that we have to abide by, but other industries (ie airline) can balance the needs of safety, time efficiency and making enough money much better than we can.

My personal opinion is that this attitude prevails from a long standing sense of higher being and righteousness ("the railway is different to everything else") that still persists years after the industry accepted the need to become more customer focussed, and until there is a massive culture change, perhaps even a large number of staff changes, and an acceptance that what we deliver on a daily basis is at best, ordinary, then I fear nothing will change.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
With regard to this specific incident, I would have hoped that platform staff would have given greater consideration to the fact it was short formed and allowed a longer dwell, not to mention it is one of the last trains on that route for a considerable period of time. And I will argue against those advocating that by and large those passengers don't need to be on that specific train, there will be some that need to be/have planned to be, and it is those passengers that we should be thinking of.

 

[talldave]

Surely the issue was that the train was inadequate for the task because of a lack of rolling stock. That's the cause of the problem and that's the area that needs to be fixed. Without knowing why half the train was missing we can only speculate. But newer, more reliable rolling stock would surely help.

 

[EM2]

With regard to this specific incident, I would have hoped that platform staff would have given greater consideration to the fact it was short formed and allowed a longer dwell, not to mention it is one of the last trains on that route for a considerable period of time.

It has already been shown in post #12 that this train had a dwell of 135 seconds, against a planned dwell of 60.

 

[bb21]

There was room on the train but difficult to board. Given another minute and a little encouragement to get people down the aisles and plenty more could have got on. I get the argument that ultimately you have to draw a line.. but if this is the case then it should be dealt with differently.

"I'm sorry this train had to leave before you could all get on, someone will be hanging out forms to claim compensation..." would have been fine.

You are clearly not getting the argument.

Your signature says it all! Terrible attitude to the people who pay your wages!

The moment this line is put out, you instantly lose the argument.

Calm down.. I'm not saying you're a bad person.. just that railway staff don't see the consumer as central to what they do.. they see them as an unfortunate obstacle to moving trains around the country.

This is getting rather tired and tedious.

There are things I believe can be done to make things better, such as advertising in real-time how many coaches there are and advising passengers to spread out, but ultimately there is only so much that can be achieved. Given the constraints at London Bridge, many thing which can perhaps be accommodated at quieter stations are simply not practical.

In my recent travels, I witnessed just how big an impact a 15-minute delay to a Valleys service had on loads of trains operating out of Cardiff Central during the afternoon peak. London Bridge is more intensely worked in that respect, and a few minutes here and there will soon add up.

Doing the right thing for the great majority is exactly what customer service is about in my book, if not everyone's needs can be met.

 

[Pumbaa]

It has already been shown in post #12 that this train had a dwell of 135 seconds, against a planned dwell of 60.

Then if they have done so, nothing more can be done! Apologies - I must have missed that. My earlier points still stand, and if the platform staff have compensated for as much as possible, then we'd be best off trying to avoid that situation in the first place. And obviously letting passengers know who are going to be delayed what their next options are.

 

[TheEdge]

There was room on the train but difficult to board. Given another minute and a little encouragement to get people down the aisles and plenty more could have got on. I get the argument that ultimately you have to draw a line.. but if this is the case then it should be dealt with differently.

There is a line drawn, its called the timetable. As someone earlier pointed out if that trains waits an extra minute it will loose its path and it will be waiting and get later and later. Which of course you will then complain about.

The railways simply can't win. If we leave on time we leave people people, if we leave late we delay people. If a train is full its too short, if a train is too empty its a waste of money. Repeat ad nauseam.

 

[bb21]

Then if they have done so, nothing more can be done! Apologies - I must have missed that. My earlier points still stand, and if the platform staff have compensated for as much as possible, then we'd be best off trying to avoid that situation in the first place. And obviously letting passengers know who are going to be delayed what their next options are.

Absolutely. What the TOC does in terms of advice when someone has missed their train can make a big difference in these situations.