Storm Corrie, Sunday 30th January 2022

[dk1]

Road bridges where closed & accidents aplenty according to Sally Traffic on Radio 2. Her comments where often "where do I start". It was also showing delays & cancellations at the Scottish Airports I scanned during the day.

 

[dosxuk]

Saturday on RailUK Forums...

LNER saying it’s unlikely that the ECML north of Newcastle will reopen today. Is this true?

Yes, it wasn’t wise to try to operate a service really. Know that wouldn’t have been popular but now there are lumbered with crew & passengers stranded.

And think of the complaints on this and other forums if they had cancelled services as a precaution....

Sunday on RailUK Forums...

Total overkill to curtail a nations rail service. Advising customers to expect disruption would be appropriate - I think people understand a certain degree of disruption, but simply not to bother trying is ridiculous.

 

[najaB]

To those saying it was overkill to shut down for "merely" an amber warning, don't forget that this was the second storm in a weekend. It was likely (and as it has turned out) that already-damaged trees from the first storm would fall in the second.

 

[Meerkat]

To those saying it was overkill to shut down for "merely" an amber warning, don't forget that this was the second storm in a weekend. It was likely (and as it has turned out) that already-damaged trees from the first storm would fall in the second.

Is NR counting all the trees coming down, to help when they have to beg to be allowed to cut them down?
The PR really should be stressing that the trains are being cancelled because of the problem of trees.

 

[John Bishop]

Is NR counting all the trees coming down, to help when they have to beg to be allowed to cut them down?
The PR really should be stressing that the trains are being cancelled because of the problem of trees.

Quite!

Until NR start taking the tree problem seriously, this is going to be the way of things every time there’s a bit of wind.
A quick glance through the ops report for the weekend show a VERY large number of trees fouling lines in Scotland.

 

[QueensCurve]

I’m currently onboard a Virgin Pendolino which is speeding past Lockerbie (been full line speed all the way).

Weather between Carluke and Lamington viaduct was particularly horrific, the rain was very noisy and made looking out the window quite challenging!

I thought West Coast Trains had long since lost their Virginity.

 

[Falcon1200]

It's not a good look when road and air competition manage to keep going,

Except that road, at least, did not manage to keep going; The BBC News website lists various road blockages and also reports, with a picture, lorries blown onto their sides.

Let's also remember the Amber warning is just that - a warning.

Warnings are not issued for no reason, if they are not to be acted on the Met Office shouldn't bother in future.

 

[InOban]

Several high roads in Scotland have snow gates to prevent idiots trying to drive in heavy snow . It's much easier to clear the road when it isn't littered with stuck vehicles.
I'm sure that the emergency services would appreciate the ability to easily stop them driving in high winds and rain also. Pictures of overturned trucks all over the media today. The warnings only apply, it seems, to other people.

 

[driverd]

Except that road, at least, did not manage to keep going; The BBC News website lists various road blockages and also reports, with a picture, lorries blown onto their sides.

Again and for the third time, I'm not saying all services should operate irrespective. They should operate until such a point as they can't, with appropriate speed restrictions in place until such a point. It's how things have been done for years and broadly it works.

I never said road and air operated without disruption and I never said customers wouldn't tolerate such disruption - actually quite the opposite. There is, however, a significant difference between a disrupted service and no service.

Warnings are not issued for no reason, if they are not to be acted on the Met Office shouldn't bother in future.

Well, given the number of people who travelled this weekend (and, let's be honest, during most significant weather), the public expectation is for things to keep moving and operate as best they can, so such weather causes the minimal disruption possible to their lives. I think that's an entirely fair expectation and the way the industry generally operates (and outside of Scotland, operated this weekend).

The warnings give notice of expected disruption - they serve a purpose - but they're not and never have been a ban on travel.

 

[Falcon1200]

They should operate until such a point as they can't, with appropriate speed restrictions in place until such a point. It's how things have been done for years and broadly it works.

I have done that, as a railway employee, started off running a service only for it to utterly disintegrate when the weather hits, leaving stranded trains and staff being sent out to rescue passengers in horrendous conditions. The current procedures are the result of many years experience of disruptive weather events and are not invoked lightly.

 

[driverd]

I have done that, as a railway employee, started off running a service only for it to utterly disintegrate when the weather hits, leaving stranded trains and staff being sent out to rescue passengers in horrendous conditions. The current procedures are the result of many years experience of disruptive weather events and are not invoked lightly.

And thats precisely the right course of action. It gets the bulk of people where they need to be without disrupting their day. Yes, there will be an occasional stranded unit when things hit the fan, but to pre-cancel all of Scotlands service before we even see the real impact of the weather is extreme over-kill. Let's remember, weather forecasts are precisely that - a forecast - not guaranteed by any stretch of the imagination.

It's such a let down to customers to simply pull services at 24 hours notice, with no alternatives put in place. To me, it's partially a strategy to avoid obligations TOCs have to stranded customers - if trains are pre-cancelled, there's no need to provide replacement transport or compensation - and its really quite disgraceful that this behaviour is becoming more commonplace. At a time when the industry can't stop telling us how much we need customers back, we're really failing to live up to expectation.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

And thats precisely the right course of action. It gets the bulk of people where they need to be without disrupting their day. Yes, there will be an occasional stranded unit when things hit the fan, but to pre-cancel all of Scotlands service before we even see the real impact of the weather is extreme over-kill. Let's remember, weather forecasts are precisely that - a forecast - not guaranteed by any stretch of the imagination.

It's such a let down to customers to simply pull services at 24 hours notice, with no alternatives put in place. To me, it's partially a strategy to avoid obligations TOCs have to stranded customers - if trains are pre-cancelled, there's no need to provide replacement transport or compensation - and its really quite disgraceful that this behaviour is becoming more commonplace. At a time when the industry can't stop telling us how much we need customers back, we're really failing to live up to expectation.

I totally agree with all your posts above but as I said in my #19 the industry is withered by the media whenever it leaves passengers stranded in bad weather that its been reduced this sort of response. It will need political leadership to challenge it which won't materialise until the media have been rechipped to treat the industry with more respect for what it actually achieves the majority of the time rather than just turning up and pointing the finger when things don't go as planned.

Certain routes not operating tomorrow morning due to track inspections.

https://twitter.com/ScotRail/status/1487903824023011333?s=20&t=8zSWfAlb8LhdeuMxbAdKDg

Looks like the decision to shut the network was a good one. Got a feeling there may be more closures in the morning.

No need to worry local bus operators were able to step in to keep people moving.......

NR Scotland really need to look at every blockage and ask the question whether the tree blocking the line could have been removed but was left.



From NR Scotland earlier https://twitter.com/NetworkRailSCOT/status/1488087976236261378/photo/2

 

[John Bishop]

I totally agree with all your posts above but as I said in my #19 the industry is withered by the media whenever it leaves passengers stranded in bad weather that its been reduced this sort of response. It will need political leadership to challenge it which won't materialise until the media have been rechipped to treat the industry with more respect for what it actually achieves the majority of the time rather than just turning up and pointing the finger when things don't go as planned.

No need to worry local bus operators were able to step in to keep people moving.......

NR Scotland really need to look at every blockage and ask the question whether the tree blocking the line could have been removed but was left.

View attachment 109598

From NR Scotland earlier https://twitter.com/NetworkRailSCOT/status/1488087976236261378/photo/2

Yep, all those trees pictured within the railway boundary. NR really need to get a grip on the situation.

 

[driverd]

I totally agree with all your posts above but as I said in my #19 the industry is withered by the media whenever it leaves passengers stranded in bad weather that its been reduced this sort of response. It will need political leadership to challenge it which won't materialise until the media have been rechipped to treat the industry with more respect for what it actually achieves the majority of the time rather than just turning up and pointing the finger when things don't go as planned.

I can't help but feel the sentiment is perfectly embodied in a scene from Yes, Minister - where Hacker berates a journalist for only ever reporting bad news stories and highlighting the pitfalls of British business.

Unfortunately, the media is unlikely to change (unless govt. link the coverage of rail news to licence fees), so I do feel a really good place to start would be for rail operators to really be their own biggest cheerleaders and really champion the good news stories, which quite often they don't. There's often a lot to celebrate within our system, and all too often we seem to acknowledge our issues, without the balance of our successes.

NR Scotland really need to look at every blockage and ask the question whether the tree blocking the line could have been removed but was left.

View attachment 109598

From NR Scotland earlier https://twitter.com/NetworkRailSCOT/status/1488087976236261378/photo/2

Just to re-enforce my point further - an earlier poster noted how 30 trees were found fallen across the Scotrail network. I note 3 of those trees are within this picture. 10% of the disruption, which closed far in excess of 1000 miles of railway, is located within 100 metres.

Do I need to say anymore?

 

[Falcon1200]

Yes, there will be an occasional stranded unit when things hit the fan,

An occasional stranded unit ? How about multiple trains stranded in the middle of nowhere, electric trains with the OLE tangled around their pans and others simply trapped in dead sections, how about not just many, many trees (and not only from inside the railway boundary) on the line but trampolines caught in the OLE and garden sheds blocking the line, how about tree branches striking trains and piercing passenger areas, how about cab windscreens being smashed by branches; All things that have occurred. That is the reality of trying to run trains in extreme weather. Promising the public a train service when it is known full well in advance that sooner or later it will become impossible is not only crazy but also dangerous, to passengers, traincrew and the staff told to go out in horrendous conditions.

 

[Ex-controller]

An occasional stranded unit ? How about multiple trains stranded in the middle of nowhere, electric trains with the OLE tangled around their pans and others simply trapped in dead sections, how about not just many, many trees (and not only from inside the railway boundary) on the line but trampolines caught in the OLE and garden sheds blocking the line, how about tree branches striking trains and piercing passenger areas, how about cab windscreens being smashed by branches; All things that have occurred. That is the reality of trying to run trains in extreme weather. Promising the public a train service when it is known full well in advance that sooner or later it will become impossible is not only crazy but also dangerous, to passengers, traincrew and the staff told to go out in horrendous conditions.

Exactly. Been in a control office during major windstorms on many an occasion and it has come as a relief when the decision to curtail the service has come. Continuing to run in those circumstances is begging for a serious incident and potentially serious injuries.

If we know the risks of continuing to operate in those conditions then it makes sense to have a shut down.

 

[InOban]

I can't help but feel the sentiment is perfectly embodied in a scene from Yes, Minister - where Hacker berates a journalist for only ever reporting bad news stories and highlighting the pitfalls of British business.

Unfortunately, the media is unlikely to change (unless govt. link the coverage of rail news to licence fees), so I do feel a really good place to start would be for rail operators to really be their own biggest cheerleaders and really champion the good news stories, which quite often they don't. There's often a lot to celebrate within our system, and all too often we seem to acknowledge our issues, without the balance of our successes.



Just to re-enforce my point further - an earlier poster noted how 30 trees were found fallen across the Scotrail network. I note 3 of those trees are within this picture. 10% of the disruption, which closed far in excess of 1000 miles of railway, is located within 100 metres.

Do I need to say anymore?

I think that my earlier suggestion of about 30 referred to 30 locations, not just 30 trees, and anyway was the result of the first storm. The pictures yesterday were from Corrie.

The HML has reopened this morning after specialist forestry contractors were brought in to remove a 60ft tree near Newtonmore. I suggest that a tree that height is unlikely to be within the railway boundary - it will date back to the days of steam when sparks regularly cleared the route.

Suggestions that the service should have continued until it, predictably, collapsed are astonishing to read on this forum.

 

[driverd]

An occasional stranded unit ? How about multiple trains stranded in the middle of nowhere, electric trains with the OLE tangled around their pans and others simply trapped in dead sections, how about not just many, many trees (and not only from inside the railway boundary) on the line but trampolines caught in the OLE and garden sheds blocking the line, how about tree branches striking trains and piercing passenger areas, how about cab windscreens being smashed by branches; All things that have occurred.

Lovely hyperbole but can you actually give me an example where all of the above has occurred during the same weather incident?

This weekend, at my TOC, we had 3 EMUs stranded (and a necessary curtailment of service on that route whilst the issue was dealt with). All units recovered by the end of day. More than enough staff and units to deal with the recovery, because once stranded, there was no service on that route.

The issue was created due to a falling tree. This would have happened if trains ran or otherwise.

We had a second, shorter issue with the OHLE on a different route due to plastic becoming wrapped around the wires. Again, curtailed until removed and service then resumed. No units stranded in this case, just an electrical switch off and then back on in due course.

I've never known both skins of a saloon window pierced in my whole career, aside from when bricked. An example where the wind has done so would be great.

Windscreens can be an issue but the mitigation is a blanket ESR. A modern unit will be able to stop easily within 200m from 40mph - with modern headlights, that's pretty much your line of sight distance.

That is the reality of trying to run trains in extreme weather. Promising the public a train service when it is known full well in advance that sooner or later it will become impossible is not only crazy but also dangerous, to passengers, traincrew and the staff told to go out in horrendous conditions.

Yet the public still want to travel, aviation cracks on, road continues. The public have the right to expect a resilient rail service.

Suggestions that the service should have continued until it, predictably, collapsed are astonishing to read on this forum.

Why? As above - blanket ESR is instilled and until such a point as trees (or anything else) are reported on the line and service continues. After such point service shuttles to either side of obstruction and buses operate in the middle, where this is possible.

A little like how the rest of the country operated this weekend...

 

[najaB]

Yet the public still want to travel, aviation cracks on, road continues. The public have the right to expect a resilient rail service.

I agree that the public has the right to expect a resilient rail service, but NR Scotland made the determination that they weren't going to be able to deliver it so chose to pre-emptively cancel rather than risk having people stuck in bad weather. Which doesn't just mean stuck onboard trains but also waiting at/stuck on the way to stations for trains that weren't going to arrive.

Was it the right call? That depends entirely on your viewpoint. Some people prefer the certainty of knowing the day before that there won't be a train, some people prefer that the train operator "gives it a try" (though many of those people are also the ones who are going to complain the loudest if they end up stuck somewhere other than where they want to go).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Was it the right call? That depends entirely on your viewpoint. Some people prefer the certainty of knowing the day before that there won't be a train, some people prefer that the train operator "gives it a try" (though many of those people are also the ones who are going to complain the loudest if they end up stuck somewhere other than where they want to go).

To some, the cancellations will be useful. People will feel pressured to travel unless they physically can't, as they'll be told off by some employers if they don't, or they'll lose a non-refundable/non-changeable hotel reservation or somesuch. The cancellations help in making a decision.

I do wonder if there's something we can learn from COVID here, though. If there is a genuine danger to life, then perhaps it should be possible for some statutory body or other to declare a "bad weather lockdown" or somesuch. By this I don't mean the more illiberal aspects of COVID lockdowns like not hugging your Nan or not leaving your house at all, but what I mean is essentially declaring an additional period of public holiday, which could legally require employers not to disadvantage employees who don't choose to travel, for non-essential businesses to close, and for non-changeable bookings to things (Advances included) to be mandatorily changeable, thus essentially removing the need to travel for the vast majority of people. Some would choose to travel anyway, but far fewer than now. Doesn't the US, well-used to this sort of thing and far more severely than us, have this kind of "state of emergency" concept for forecast severe storms? The state could act as an insurer, providing financial assistance to ensure nobody is disadvantaged.

 

[najaB]

If there is a genuine danger to life, then perhaps it should be possible for some statutory body or other to declare a "bad weather lockdown" or somesuch. By this I don't mean the more illiberal aspects of COVID lockdowns like not hugging your Nan or not leaving your house at all, but what I mean is essentially declaring an additional period of public holiday, which could legally require employers not to disadvantage employees who don't choose to travel, for non-essential businesses to close, and for non-changeable bookings to things (Advances included) to be mandatorily changeable, thus essentially removing the need to travel for the vast majority of people.

To my mind, that should be the default position when Red warnings are issued.

 

[RT4038]

To some, the cancellations will be useful. People will feel pressured to travel unless they physically can't, as they'll be told off by some employers if they don't, or they'll lose a non-refundable/non-changeable hotel reservation or somesuch. The cancellations help in making a decision.

I do wonder if there's something we can learn from COVID here, though. If there is a genuine danger to life, then perhaps it should be possible for some statutory body or other to declare a "bad weather lockdown" or somesuch. By this I don't mean the more illiberal aspects of COVID lockdowns like not hugging your Nan or not leaving your house at all, but what I mean is essentially declaring an additional period of public holiday, which could legally require employers not to disadvantage employees who don't choose to travel, for non-essential businesses to close, and for non-changeable bookings to things (Advances included) to be mandatorily changeable, thus essentially removing the need to travel for the vast majority of people. Some would choose to travel anyway, but far fewer than now. Doesn't the US, well-used to this sort of thing and far more severely than us, have this kind of "state of emergency" concept for forecast severe storms? The state could act as an insurer, providing financial assistance to ensure nobody is disadvantaged.

How is that going to work then? If employers are legally required not to disadvantage employees who choose not to travel, then presumably public transport staff will not go to work (and a whole host of other employees to food shops, hospitals etc). Or are you suggesting more legislation to start defining some employee roles as different to others - those who must go to work no matter what and those who can have a paid day off (extra or taken out of leave allocation? but why should someone be 'disadvantaged' by having to take some of their leave???)

How often do these things happen, and how often are you as an individual going to be affected by them? Is the state going to be so intrusive into peoples' lives and finances that every 'disaster' causing anybody financial disadvantage is going to be made up? I suggest a bit of self insurance and common sense. Some you will win and some you lose. Where would this end?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Feb 2022 ==

To my mind, that should be the default position when Red warnings are issued.

The result being more and more pressure on the Government to declare red warnings ('for peoples' safety', of course)

 

[Bletchleyite]

How is that going to work then?

I am making a suggestion, not producing a White Paper. But I would suggest looking at countries where this does happen, e.g. parts of the US. (I love the way people on here so often rubbish things that actually are done in some places).

If employers are legally required not to disadvantage employees who choose not to travel, then presumably public transport staff will not go to work (and a whole host of other employees to food shops, hospitals etc). Or are you suggesting more legislation to start defining some employee roles as different to others - those who must go to work no matter what and those who can have a paid day off (extra or taken out of leave allocation? but why should someone be 'disadvantaged' by having to take some of their leave???)

As it's not for a prolonged period, rather a day or so or possibly even half a day, it wouldn't be hard to come up with a list of basic services which are genuinely essential and providing for them to continue. Again look at the US when a severe storm is forecast - Tesco wouldn't be open. You're talking about keeping electricity, gas, water, TV and radio going (with the latter mostly on automatic play) plus emergency services and NHS urgent care. Your GP appointment or elective surgery can be rescheduled.

 

[RT4038]

I am making a suggestion, not producing a White Paper. But I would suggest looking at countries where this does happen, e.g. parts of the US. (I love the way people on here so often rubbish things that actually are done in some places).



As it's not for a prolonged period, rather a day or so or possibly even half a day, it wouldn't be hard to come up with a list of basic services which are genuinely essential and providing for them to continue. Again look at the US when a severe storm is forecast - Tesco wouldn't be open. You're talking about keeping electricity, gas, water, TV and radio going (with the latter mostly on automatic play) plus emergency services and NHS urgent care. Your GP appointment or elective surgery can be rescheduled.

We don't generally have Tornados and 'white-outs' here. Sure some stormy weather, but very, very rarely anything like those conditions. If we had the equivalence of state insured red warnings the media would be whipping up expectation that one is declared every time there is a bit of wind and rain, and pressurising government not to put peoples' safety at risk. I am more concerned about the financial disadvantage I may suffer if I'm sick, rather than the occasional weather condition.

 

[philthetube]

And thats precisely the right course of action. It gets the bulk of people where they need to be without disrupting their day. Yes, there will be an occasional stranded unit when things hit the fan, but to pre-cancel all of Scotlands service before we even see the real impact of the weather is extreme over-kill. Let's remember, weather forecasts are precisely that - a forecast - not guaranteed by any stretch of the imagination.

It's such a let down to customers to simply pull services at 24 hours notice, with no alternatives put in place. To me, it's partially a strategy to avoid obligations TOCs have to stranded customers - if trains are pre-cancelled, there's no need to provide replacement transport or compensation - and its really quite disgraceful that this behaviour is becoming more commonplace. At a time when the industry can't stop telling us how much we need customers back, we're really failing to live up to expectation.

I

This weekend, at my TOC, we had 3 EMUs stranded (and a necessary curtailment of service on that route whilst the issue was dealt with). All units recovered by the end of day. More than enough staff and units to deal with the recovery, because once stranded, there was no service on that route.

The issue was created due to a falling tree. This would have happened if trains ran or otherwise.

Far better for people to be stranded at home than at a station.

Did the people on the route in question get a better service by arriving at the station to be told that they were going nowhere or by stopping in the relative safety of their homes.

 

[InOban]

I think that some people on this forum don't realise how wild the weather can be, and was, in parts of Scotland. If you visit the BBC Scotland news pages you will see pictures of a whole woodland in the NE completely flattened.

There's lots of evidence that what puts people off using public transport is lack of information and uncertainty. By announcing in advance that they were shutting down, and when, everyone knew. I don't hear complaints from the general public.

 

[najaB]

The result being more and more pressure on the Government to declare red warnings ('for peoples' safety', of course)

The government doesn't issue weather warnings, the Met Office does.

We don't generally have Tornados and 'white-outs' here. Sure some stormy weather, but very, very rarely anything like those conditions.

The kind of weather emergencies that @Bletchleyite is referring to wouldn't apply to tornadic weather as those systems are highly dynamic and form and dissipate in minutes/hours rather than days in advance. However many parts of the US are affected by cyclonic systems much like we are - be it hurricanes on the south and east or winter cyclones on the west. These can generally be forecast with a reasonable degree of accuracy a few days out. It isn't uncommon to see transportation systems shut down in advance of such weather systems in the US as well.

As an example, the New York subway was shut down several hours in advance of Hurricane Sandy as they expected (and received) enough rain to flood many of the tunnels.

 

[Ex-controller]

To my mind, that should be the default position when Red warnings are issued.

In fact this is what effectively happened in the Central Belt for the Feb/March 2018 snowstorm.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 1 Feb 2022 ==

I think that some people on this forum don't realise how wild the weather can be, and was, in parts of Scotland. If you visit the BBC Scotland news pages you will see pictures of a whole woodland in the NE completely flattened.

There's lots of evidence that what puts people off using public transport is lack of information and uncertainty. By announcing in advance that they were shutting down, and when, everyone knew. I don't hear complaints from the general public.

Exactly, and how remote certain routes can be.

During a recent storm some passengers were trapped on a train near Huntly overnight. I can we’ll understand why NR Scotland didn’t want to provoke a similar incident.

 

[800001]

All this talk of trees needing to be felled when near the line, didn’t Transport minister put a stop to network rail doing that? Following complaints from woodlands trusts and Nimbys?

 

[nw1]

To some, the cancellations will be useful. People will feel pressured to travel unless they physically can't, as they'll be told off by some employers if they don't, or they'll lose a non-refundable/non-changeable hotel reservation or somesuch. The cancellations help in making a decision.

I do wonder if there's something we can learn from COVID here, though. If there is a genuine danger to life, then perhaps it should be possible for some statutory body or other to declare a "bad weather lockdown" or somesuch. By this I don't mean the more illiberal aspects of COVID lockdowns like not hugging your Nan or not leaving your house at all, but what I mean is essentially declaring an additional period of public holiday, which could legally require employers not to disadvantage employees who don't choose to travel, for non-essential businesses to close, and for non-changeable bookings to things (Advances included) to be mandatorily changeable, thus essentially removing the need to travel for the vast majority of people. Some would choose to travel anyway, but far fewer than now. Doesn't the US, well-used to this sort of thing and far more severely than us, have this kind of "state of emergency" concept for forecast severe storms? The state could act as an insurer, providing financial assistance to ensure nobody is disadvantaged.

Some good ideas there (an extra public holiday, legal protection for people unable to travel to work) but a blanket closure of non-essential business would be a step too far. (Should people be prevented from walking 10 minutes to their local pub, in a case where staff also live locally to the pub and do not need to travel? It should be about a 'no disadvantage' concept if people do not wish to work, or to open their business, but businesses should not be legally forced to close if their owners and employees are still willing to go into work).

Also, such things would have to be restricted to the area where the bad weather is occurring. Down here in the south we completely missed these storms, we barely got even a few drops of rain from them: the weather has been very benign indeed for the past few weeks, so normal life should not stop as a result of something going on hundreds of miles away.