Boarding as doors are closing

[MrJeeves]

It's important to remember that trains are often held for connections, but a dispatcher alone cannot decide to do this, and it must be agreed by the TOC's control and potentially relayed to the signaller. Sometimes it's just not possible.

 

[TT-ONR-NRN]

So you’re seriously on here now complaining about something that happened 15 years ago!?

It’s nonsense to suggest it’s “customer hostile” attitude. As a long-standing customer of the railway I would rather trains ran on time and weren’t held for connections, other than in some very limited circumstances, as discussed above. That benefits the greatest number of passengers overall - which is the name of the game.

Passengers are supposed to wait for trains, not the other way around!

I really think it's dependant on the route.
If you take a branch line with a long turnaround at the branch terminus, for example, then it's sheer spite for a guard of that to watch the mainline connection pull in and close the branch line train's doors before anyone can get off it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2023 ==

when I pointed out you shouldn't board when the doors are closing he replied with you don't need to tell me

Are you staff? If not, then I'd have responded the same way. Nothing worse than a fellow passenger taking it upon themselves to be a busybody.

 

[3141]

Going back to the OP's questions, I've done this many times mostly on the London Underground, and mostly when I was a lot younger.

I'd still do it today, or attempt to, if missing the train meant an hour's wait, or even half an hour's wait.

Would I still do it on the Underground, where the service is very frequent? Quite possibly, because there can be extended intervals, and if I'm hurrying for the train that's in the platform I'd have to take my attention off what I'm doing in order to check if the next train is one minute away or four, and thus might miss the one that's there.

On the other hand, I might tell myself to relax, I'm too old to hold the doors open, wait for the next one. Not because I'm in awe of hustle alarms and regard them as sacred, but just because it doesn't seem worth the effort.

 

[43066]

I really think it's dependant on the route.
If you take a branch line with a long turnaround at the branch terminus, for example, then it's sheer spite for a guard of that to watch the mainline connection pull in and close the branch line train's doors before anyone can get off it.

It does depend where and there are always going to be some places where it makes sense, and indeed trains are already regularly held for last connections etc.
where practicable (based on requests from control).

However generally the instruction staff are working to is to keep everything on time as far as possible. Holding an East Coast express for a local stopper, as per the example above, is never going to be sensible in terms of overall impact.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2023 ==

On the other hand, I might tell myself to relax, I'm too old to hold the doors open, wait for the next one. Not because I'm in awe of hustle alarms and regard them as sacred, but just because it doesn't seem worth the effort.

A good approach. Sometimes it isn’t worth the stress. Frankly I’d rather miss a train than sprint along the platform and risk tripping/barging someone or falling down the gap. It’s undignified!

 

[Ashley Hill]

What a customer hostile attitude this response shows. Do you really believe that holding a train for an extra minute or so on a route with an hourly service (at that time) would somehow benefit more passengers? Which passengers do you have in mind?

I’ve often found that waiting for one late passenger ends up waiting for another and then another. There has to be a cut off point and that is the departure time. A minute here and another minute there soon adds up and staff get chased up by delay attribution.
If a connection is held without authority from control any delay caused is investigated and the person who made that decision is held responsible,don’t forget that the held connection might affect other trains too and all delays caused will come out of the responsible managers budget. So you can see why we don’t wait that extra minute.
Also is it fair to hold a train and delay the passengers on it who probably have connections of their own to make!

 

[zwk500]

What a customer hostile attitude this response shows. Do you really believe that holding a train for an extra minute or so on a route with an hourly service (at that time) would somehow benefit more passengers? Which passengers do you have in mind? Was there really so little slack in the timetable (viz Crewe-Derby about 10-15 years ago)?

Again, the solution is not to run other trains late but to run the first train on time.

 

[Bevan Price]

The punctuality targets are there to benefit more passengers overall. The people who should feel guilty are the people who behave as you had done which, you seem not to realise, is often the reason for trains running late in the first place.

With respect, I disagree. The punctuality targets are a nonsense idea to benefit rail operators (and accountants) help avoid penalties for late running, and who care s*d all that some passengers might have to wait an hour or more for their next connection. Only a few stations are connection locations, and a single delay of around 15-30 seconds can often be recovered by the final destination. (Especially since "charter time" was added to the final sections of many schedules about 20 years ago.)

 

[Archvile]

If people saw the results of a trap and drag, they'd definitely reconsider. If the train moves, they end up like a spinning top between the train and platform and usually end up asphyxiating to death once the train comes to a stop. It's awful.

 

[zwk500]

With respect, I disagree. The punctuality targets are a nonsense idea to benefit rail operators (and accountants) help avoid penalties for late running, and who care s*d all that some passengers might have to wait an hour or more for their next connection. Only a few stations are connection locations, and a single delay of around 15-30 seconds can often be recovered by the final destination. (Especially since "charter time" was added to the final sections of many schedules about 20 years ago.)

The Theory is sound, but unfortunately Delay attribution is not always resourced as it was meant to be so people can get away with playing silly games to shift targets around the spreadsheet.

As ever, the problem is not targets per se, but poor management of them - spreadsheet exclusive-analysis is a very bad habit many large companies fall into.

 

[43066]

With respect, I disagree. The punctuality targets are a nonsense idea to benefit rail operators (and accountants) help avoid penalties for late running, and who care s*d all that some passengers might have to wait an hour or more for their next connection.

The whole point of the targets and penalties is to incentivise punctual running where possible - ie aligning the financial interests of TOCs with those of (most) passengers.

Only a few stations are connection locations, and a single delay of around 15-30 seconds can often be recovered by the final destination. (Especially since "charter time" was added to the final sections of many schedules about 20 years ago.)

As above - it’s never a matter of 15-30 seconds in practice. And 15-30 seconds here or there soon adds up. Especially on longer distance services which can then pick up further delay later in the journey.

 

[Ashley Hill]

People always moan when a train is late but seem happy to delay it for themselves?

 

[ainsworth74]

If people saw the results of a trap and drag, they'd definitely reconsider. If the train moves, they end up like a spinning top between the train and platform and usually end up asphyxiating to death once the train comes to a stop. It's awful.

But the problem is that I doubt most people fully realise that if you stick your hand in the doorway whilst the doors are closing they won't just stop they'll try and close on you. These are, probably, the only automatic doors people are ever likely to come in contact with where that is the behaviour. Absolutely people shouldn't be doing it and, clearly, most people do not. But I would bet 50p that if did a survey of passengers most wouldn't realise that once train crew instruct train doors to close, they will close unless you're very actively trying to hold them open. Just getting in the way like you might with a lift door or similar will not do the job.

 

[norbitonflyer]

And why should east coast pay if their train was on time? Why should their passengers be delayed for 70 runners of a late connecting service?

As always people on here fail to see the bigger picture.

Who's not seeing the bigger picture?

Those 70 people are as much, if not more, their passengers as the other TOC's. (Return ticket, bought at Kings Cross - and 88% of the journey, and therefore revenue, goes to them) Stop blaming the victim

 

[zwk500]

But the problem is that I doubt most people fully realise that if you stick your hand in the doorway whilst the doors are closing they won't just stop they'll try and close on you. These are, probably, the only automatic doors people are ever likely to come in contact with where that is the behaviour. Absolutely people shouldn't be doing it and, clearly, most people do not. But I would bet 50p that if did a survey of passengers most wouldn't realise that once train crew instruct train doors to close, they will close unless you're very actively trying to hold them open. Just getting in the way like you might with a lift door or similar will not do the job.

This is a key point - many people will assume the lift safety device or something like it is fitted to train doors. It's so ubiquitous that it's just taken for granted.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If people saw the results of a trap and drag, they'd definitely reconsider. If the train moves, they end up like a spinning top between the train and platform and usually end up asphyxiating to death once the train comes to a stop. It's awful.

Severity: high
Likelihood: low

People do it all the time. Hardly any are trapped and dragged.

Video of a fiery plane crash doesn't put me off flying.

 

[zwk500]

Severity: high
Likelihood: low

People do it all the time. Hardly any are trapped and dragged.

Video of a fiery plane crash doesn't put me off flying.

Issue of the trade-off though. Deciding to let the train go: have a 30- or 60-minute wait for the next train. Deciding not to fly: can't go where you're going, or requires a much more expensive and slower travel via boat or combination of trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Issue of the trade-off though. Deciding to let the train go: have a 30- or 60-minute wait for the next train. Deciding not to fly: can't go where you're going, or requires a much more expensive and slower travel via boat or combination of trains.

The thing staff on here often don't get is that rail staff are (rightly) indoctrinated from day one to basically ignore "likelhood" when assessing risk. The rest of the world doesn't. Thus to most people it definitely is worth it to save waiting even a few minutes.

I willingly do lots of stuff that's far higher likelihood of a high severity risk than board a train at the last second. Crikey, we're not talking slamdoor days when people boarded moving trains.

 

[zwk500]

The thing staff on here often don't get is that rail staff are (rightly) indoctrinated from day one to basically ignore "likelhood" when assessing risk.

This is not entirely accurate. It's just that when the railway assesses it, they're doing so on the basis of however many thousands of passengers will face that likelihood. The law of large numbers comes into it.

The rest of the world doesn't. Thus to most people it definitely is worth it to save waiting even a few minutes.

Agree, every man considers himself an island.

I willingly do lots of stuff that's far higher likelihood of a high severity risk than board a train at the last second.

Most of the things I do that are more likely to happen and still carry a fatal risk (that is unlikely to be stopped) are because I have little practical choice, like driving past Luton on the M1.

Crikey, we're not talking slamdoor days when people boarded moving trains.

And plenty of people used to get injured jumping on and off. But getting trapped was rarer because they didn't have central locking (which led to other issues, of course).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Agree, every man considers himself an island.

And when it comes to their personal safety they are.

You cannot expect individuals to consider the railway's overall casualty figures.

 

[Bertie the bus]

Again, the solution is not to run other trains late but to run the first train on time.

Sorry you missed your connection by seconds due to your train being delayed but you should have caught it because it should have run on time is not a solution. The problem is somebody is stuck waiting at a station for the next train and telling them they shouldn't be because their previous train should have been on time doesn't resolve the problem.

 

[43066]

Who's not seeing the bigger picture?

Those 70 people are as much, if not more, their passengers as the other TOC's. (Return ticket, bought at Kings Cross - and 88% of the journey, and therefore revenue, goes to them)

For the millionth time. Waiting for 70 people (which seems high) is all very well, but what about several hundred people already on the train, and the train behind that which gets delayed etc.

If East Coast’s train was on time, that is what determines whether it pays a penalty or not. The operator who has is responsible for the delay pays the compensation.

Stop blaming the victim

Hyperbole. Victim blaming indeed. We are talking about people who have missed a train, not victims of domestic violence or sexual abuse.

The problem is somebody is stuck waiting at a station for the next train and telling them they shouldn't be because their previous train should have been on time doesn't resolve the problem.

And delaying hundreds or potentially thousands of other people for a few people who have missed a connection doesn’t solve the problem either. It just creates a bigger one, although armchair experts fail to see this.

 

[Horizon22]

Doors start to close on connecting train as doors on incoming train across the platform open. I've seen it happen. (Crush loaded 153, so probably 70 people wanting to make the connection - and the next train would not be for an hour). Highly irresponsible bahaviour by the dispatcher, who should not have been allowed anywhere near the public.

Right I see. Yes holding for just 30 seconds is ideal in such a situation.

 

[Jimini]

It works both ways at Newark, in my experience. I've caught many a taxi to Lincoln over the years because EMR (and their predecessors) haven't waited for a late running ECML service.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Hyperbole. Victim blaming indeed. We are talking about people who have missed a train, not victims of domestic violence or sexual abuse.

Miss the last train and spend the night on the street in a major city and you could well end up being assaulted, robbed or worse.

 

[Bertie the bus]

And delaying hundreds or potentially thousands of other people for a few people who have missed a connection doesn’t solve the problem either. It just creates a bigger one, although armchair experts fail to see this.

Delaying thousands of people? Where do you live, India? This often repeated assertion of a single train being held for 1 or 2 minutes bringing the whole network crashing down is a fantasy. Trains run late all day, every day for a whole variety of reasons and the system doesn't collapse.

 

[yorkie]

People always moan when a train is late but seem happy to delay it for themselves?

You can word it how you want, but in places like Switzerland (and others) they do maintain and wait for connections wherever practicable and I've not seen any evidence people moan about it. I've not heard of anyone moaning on those rare occasions a train is held in the UK either.

I think some people would benefit from seeing how railways are run in certain other places that do a much better job - in this area at least - than we do in the UK.

 

[43066]

Miss the last train and spend the night on the street in a major city and you could well end up being assaulted, robbed or worse.

That isn’t the example being talked about. In any case people missing a train shouldn't ever mean they have to spend the night “on the street” - again that’s typical hyperbole.

Delaying thousands of people? Where do you live, India? This often repeated assertion of a single train bringing the whole network crashing down is a fantasy. Trains run late all day, every day for a whole variety of reasons and the system doesn't collapse.

No, I don’t live in India, but I can count. If (say) six trains each carrying 500 people are delayed, that’s thousands of people delayed, is it not? Nobody said anything about the system collapsing.

but in Switzerland they do maintain and wait for connections wherever practicable

As we do in the UK. There just aren’t that many situations where it is practicable given our network (which isn’t the same as the Swiss network), as has been explored above. Hence it shouldn’t ever be a general policy.

I've not heard of anyone moaning on those rare occasions a train is held in the UK either.

Yet people regularly moan about trains being delayed, whether that’s due to connections being held or for other reasons.

 

[Edsmith]

Train getting delayed for 30 seconds, delaying everyone else's journey doesn't count as a problem to you? Remember on the tube, there's probably another train just behind so you're likely delaying that train too, as well as causing a longer gap between trains at all stations further down the line.

Who said anything about trains being delayed by 30 seconds? That's not been my experience.

 

[Ashley Hill]

You can word it how you want, but in places like Switzerland (and others) they do maintain and wait for connections wherever practicable

Sensible connections are often held and are agreed by all concerned.

 

[yorkie]

As we do in the UK.

Not to anywhere near the same extent; it's also interesting to see the arguments made against doing this by some people in this thread, when by your own admission it does still happen in the UK.

Yet people regularly moan about trains being delayed, whether that’s due to connections being held or for other reasons.

I've never heard of any such moans for trains being held for connections but if your experience differs, then so be it!

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 10 May 2023 ==

Sensible connections are often held and are agreed by all concerned.

And also often not, as I've observed many times.