Evening Standard Story: More Dangerous DOO Chaos

[EM2]

Getting as many trains as possible back to running as normally soon as possible will sort out the safety, comfort and well-being of passengers a lot quicker than passengers taking a unilateral decision to detrain.
If they detrain, and it turns out to be ten minutes before services are about to be restored, that service then cannot recommence, because untrained persons on the line means power cannot be switched back on and trains cannot move.

 

[michael769]

Getting as many trains as possible back to running as normally soon as possible will sort out the safety, comfort and well-being of passengers a lot quicker than passengers taking a unilateral decision to detrain.

I agree entirely.

If they detrain, and it turns out to be ten minutes before services are about to be restored, that service then cannot recommence, because untrained persons on the line means power cannot be switched back on and trains cannot move.

So would it nor be better to get help, even just in the form of water and reassurance, and thus prevent that detrain 10 minutes before it gets moving again? Expecting 1-3 traincrew to handle 200 passengers and prevent a detrain on their own in such high stress situations clearly does not work.

Personally if you told me my train was cancelled and I had to wait 90 minutes in order to avoid another train from being delayed by 15 mins I'd be a bit cheesed off. On the other hand if you asked me to wait 90 minutes whilst passengers already trapped for 2 hours were rescued, I'd have no problem doing so. It all about having a little empathy for other people.

Perhaps the people responsible for making the decisions in such incidents should, on the next warm sunny day be put on a 170 and left on a siding with the power off for a few hours, so they can experience exactly what they put their fellow human beings through.

 

[O L Leigh]

*Snipped for brevity*

I understand what you're saying and am broadly in agreement with you, as I believe I have said already.

But this isn't about rigid adherence to the rules to the exclusion of all else. However, the railway is a rules-based industry and, if something goes wrong there will always be an element of the investigation that will centre on whether or not the correct rules were applied and applied correctly. You can't go ignoring them. But where I believe our threads cross is in how you go about achieving them, and that's what I was trying to get across earlier.

The point that I feel I am only slowly getting across to people with regard to break-outs is the impact it has on the attempts to bring speedy relief to the largest number of people. I couldn't give a stuff if a punter wilfully ignores me by going for a stroll and then falling down an open drain. That's entirely his/her concern.

However, I will say it again, people wandering about on the infrastructure will result in a caution at best and more likely a line closure. If there is an attempt to bring up an assisting train this will be thwarted meaning that it takes much longer to resolve the problems. That was certainly the case with this incident, as passenger action certainly delayed the train's eventual movement to Kentish Town and endangered all those standing near the open doors. Had they not taken matters into their own hands they would have got to Kentish Town much sooner.

What concerns me more is that the press coverage that has been accorded to these break-outs is only going to make future break-outs much more likely. Incidents that should be merely inconvenient are quickly going to spiral out of control if passengers start deciding that they know best and acting against the instructions of the traincrew. Lets be under no illusions, no driver or guard wants to be stuck somewhere for hours in a failed train either.

O L Leigh

 

[ryan125hst]

While passengers shouldn't decide to detrain themselves, at the end of the day, in the circumstances, they may feel they have little choice.

Fortunately, I have never been stuck on a failed train without air conditioning or lighting. I have, however, been on the London Underground in summer and that can get very hot when the stations and trains are full of passengers, and the trains down there have ventilation- there is quite a breeze when the train is moving. I dread to think what it would have been like for the passengers on the train.

When passengers are stuck on a train without air conditioning and little ventilation, and have now information, they are bound to decide to get themselves out of the situation as they would be very uncomfortable. It may be against the rules, but surely you wouldn't sit on a hot train with no food, water or information and not at least think of getting out.

I don't see anything wrong with them opening the door. It was next to a wall and the track was electrified by overhead wires wasn't it, not third rail. I don't know why the driver had to shut the door. I could understand it if the train was about to move. Someone might have opened the door to prevent someone from fainting.

 

[EM2]

So would it nor be better to get help, even just in the form of water and reassurance, and thus prevent that detrain 10 minutes before it gets moving again? Expecting 1-3 traincrew to handle 200 passengers and prevent a detrain on their own in such high stress situations clearly does not work.

But where is this assistance going to come from? There's not the staff numbers to have them standing by with emergency supplies, and there's not many services on other TOCs that would have more than four staff on board (excluding the driver).
So, seeing as this a thread regarding 'dangerous DOO chaos' and we have a service that has 476 seats plus many standing (say it's at 120% loading - 571 people), how are any extra onboard staff mean to pass the emergency supplies out? I'm not saying there aren't lessons to be learnt, because there obviously are, but it's not as simple as 'have more staff on board'.
If it were possible to safely get food and water to stranded passengers, then it would be possble to safely detrain them.

 

[Richardr]

Yes the driver is in the same cconditions

He though is on his own in a cab, not squashed in tightly stood up, as some passengers clearly are in this train, and so his heat levels and general well being are nowhere near as bad.

 

[TUC]

But where is this assistance going to come from? There's not the staff numbers to have them standing by with emergency supplies, and there's not many services on other TOCs that would have more than four staff on board (excluding the driver).

A key aspect of a major incident plan is that it involves being able to call in off-duty staff at short notice. That's exactly how hospitals and other public services plan to be able to cope with the staffing needs of a major incident. The same principle could just as much apply to rail.

 

[cyclebytrain]

Something bothers me about this incident - as I understand it, it was a double 377, one of which had a damaged pantograph with a branch stuck in it. So what was wrong with the other set, that it lost aircon etc??? It suggests to me that I at least haven't seen all the pertinent facts.

 

[GB]

A key aspect of a major incident plan is that it involves being able to call in off-duty staff at short notice. That's exactly how hospitals and other public services plan to be able to cope with the staffing needs of a major incident. The same principle could just as much apply to rail.

There is no way I can see that working on the railway.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Something bothers me about this incident - as I understand it, it was a double 377, one of which had a damaged pantograph with a branch stuck in it. So what was wrong with the other set, that it lost aircon etc??? It suggests to me that I at least haven't seen all the pertinent facts.

It doesn't matter if it has two pantographs or twenty, if they all take power from the same OLE then when the power is shut off it is shut off to the entire train.

 

[cyclebytrain]

It doesn't matter if it has two pantographs or twenty, if they all take power from the same OLE then when the power is shut off it is shut off to the entire train.

But as I (had) understood it, the power wasn't off for a prolonged period.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
And the power certainly must have been on whilst they were figuring out where the emergency coupler was for the 319 and whilst they were sorting out getting a 4 car 377 to assist

 

[Dr.iver]

He though is on his own in a cab, not squashed in tightly stood up, as some passengers clearly are in this train, and so his heat levels and general well being are nowhere near as bad.

Cabs by nature get very hit very quickly, in fact without air con they very quickly become green houses, Electrical equipment has to by nature produces heat and this heat also penetrates the cab ( put your hand on the back of your pc screen and feel the heat), a 377 has a lot of equipment on board, monitor screens, mitrac computer, csr etc etc to name a few.

Trust me folks the public opinion that we all sit in comfortable conditions is not the case
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Something bothers me about this incident - as I understand it, it was a double 377, one of which had a damaged pantograph with a branch stuck in it. So what was wrong with the other set, that it lost aircon etc??? It suggests to me that I at least haven't seen all the pertinent facts.

The mitrac computer says no, my understanding is that after the initial shorting problems with the ole the whole unit would have shut down and hone into load shed mode, basically a full computer reboot which takes about 45 mins to complete, this is designed to protect the systems on the train but when it happens on the main line it causes major problems

 

[jon0844]

What use is a SPT for passengers. By all accounts passengers on-board were checking FCC twitter, NRE, Jorneycheck and god knows what else to try and find info but within 15-20 mins could no longer get mobile phone signals due to being stuck in the tunnel. Maybe also the drivers PA system failed as well hence the lack of on board info.

Twitter is actually a fantastic way to give people real-time info now, and the advantage is people can check at their convenience - even if they can't hear a PA system, or are stuck on a platform at a remote station where the screens have gone out etc.

So, one good idea might be to speed up the planned process of enabling tunnels and subways for mobile phone coverage, or Wi-Fi. I believe the latter is happening on the tube, and that would really help - assuming the TOCs did a good job of providing information using Twitter, their traditional websites, NRE or even emailing commuters who have signed up for alerts.

This would effectively take a lot of pressure off the driver/guard who may have other things on his/her mind.

I accept that not everyone will have the means to get information this way, nor do I suggest it as an alternative to a driver giving updates, but it's another tool for people to use - and the Dunkirk Spirit usually means that after a while everyone talks to each other, so information WILL be shared around by those who can get it.

 

[cyclebytrain]

The mitrac computer says no, my understanding is that after the initial shorting problems with the ole the whole unit would have shut down and hone into load shed mode, basically a full computer reboot which takes about 45 mins to complete, this is designed to protect the systems on the train but when it happens on the main line it causes major problems

Not disputing what you say; but with my work hat on, how on earth does such a system require that sort of start up time?

 

[OuterDistant]

He though is on his own in a cab, not squashed in tightly stood up, as some passengers clearly are in this train, and so his heat levels and general well being are nowhere near as bad.

He's got two openable windows as well.

 

[jon0844]

IFor commuter trains and DOO trains, this is not a practical proposition so it makes sense to fit these trains with hoppers that unlock remotely. I say unlock, because a latch to retain the window in the closed position would still be provided, so that the windows don't simply drop open when the remote control is operated (this was covered in an earlier posting). The remote control should either be an electro-magnet or a solenoid (shoot-bolt), that de-energises on activation, so that in the event of a power failure (and loss of air con) it operates automatically, enabling passengers to open the windows, presumably after being prompted to do so by the driver over the PA.

This is an excellent idea, and I'm frankly shocked it isn't already the case. Surely a company like Bombardier, making trains throughout the world, are already offering this? If not, why not? Or was it not specified on the purchase order for here?

FCC even has this system in place for when the plunger is used at the gateline at Finsbury Park, to open the emergency side gates. In the case of a power failure, or an emergency, the lock is released and the gates slide open.

It's surely possible to do this with windows, even if you would have to manually close them again afterwards. Not a real safety issue, just one of inconvenience in that the aircon won't work properly until you have.

Edit: It seems the next post suggests that some European stock does. I wonder who makes these? Penny pinching on the part of the people behind the train orders here?

 

[Dr.iver]

Not disputing what you say; but with my work hat on, how on earth does such a system require that sort of start up time?

Sorry but I don't know the answer for sure but I think the computer basically resets then checks every system on board, a bit like undertaking a rolling stock exam ( service) , in a depot it's not a problem but on the main line it is

 

[Richardr]

One other issue that I haven't seen mentioned here is the toilet facilities. Apparently the lack of power meant that at least some of the toilets could not be used, and this was a factor for some of the people who ultimately left the train.

 

[BestWestern]

One other issue that I haven't seen mentioned here is the toilet facilities. Apparently the lack of power meant that at least some of the toilets could not be used, and this was a factor for some of the people who ultimately left the train.

Sorry to be the token 'old fart' type here, but this is sadly an inherent problem of loading trains up with a computer for every function; it's brilliant when it all works, but experience tells us that all too frequently that won't be the case. The trouble is that not only does a computer have to be working correctly to carry out it's function, we then also have to have all of it's associated back up and failsafe facilities, which makes the whole thing massively over-engineered. We know that all it takes is one computer on one unit somewhere to throw a wobbly, and an entire mainline artery can be crippled for a very long time. I think there's a very valid argument that it may be time to rationalise the level of computer-led automation on new stock and reconsider doing some things 'the old way', which appeared generally to work pretty well. In this case, it would at least have allowed toilets to operate, and some good old fashioned hopper vents, accessible by the passengers, would also have gone a lone way to help. Not suggesting we rebuild 'Slammers, but it seems we could well live without the mass of complexity we currently have to put up with.

 

[jon0844]

Hopper vents wouldn't be any good with aircon. I think that at least one batch of 317s has been given aircon (for Stansted Express, before the 379s) and the windows still open. Totally pointless, as the aircon is now trying to heat the train and everything outside the train!

The idea of a window lock that releases when the power is cut, or remotely by the driver/guard, is a very sensible idea. Design the window so they open automatically when released, and then ensure maintenance ensures that the magnetic locking system doesn't break so the windows are always stuck open!

In a plane, there would be a backup computer system - but is there any failsafe on a train that allows you to continue to operate when the main computer goes wrong? And why/how could it take 45 minutes to go through a series of diagnostics. Is the computer too slow, or is the software incredibly badly written? Surely a series of tests could be carried out concurrently to reduce the time? Isn't it Windows based? That can multi-task!

 

[WestCountry]

Isn't it Windows based?

I certainly hope not - awful, bloated, unstable OS. UNIX-like systems are so much better!

 

[BestWestern]

Hopper vents wouldn't be any good with aircon. I think that at least one batch of 317s has been given aircon (for Stansted Express, before the 379s) and the windows still open. Totally pointless, as the aircon is now trying to heat the train and everything outside the train!

The idea of a window lock that releases when the power is cut, or remotely by the driver/guard, is a very sensible idea. Design the window so they open automatically when released, and then ensure maintenance ensures that the magnetic locking system doesn't break so the windows are always stuck open!

In a plane, there would be a backup computer system - but is there any failsafe on a train that allows you to continue to operate when the main computer goes wrong? And why/how could it take 45 minutes to go through a series of diagnostics. Is the computer too slow, or is the software incredibly badly written? Surely a series of tests could be carried out concurrently to reduce the time? Isn't it Windows based? That can multi-task!

Perhaps there is an argument for restricting air-con systems to longer distance stock? On a hot day, I'd chose to travel in a well-ventilated Class 150 with hopper vents than a 158 with average air-con. It's a little noisier, but well worth the pay-off. The latest systems are better, but not when they fail!

I recall various stories of the Electrostar units on Southern causing issues when brand new, with instances of computers failing on one set and then 'transferring' the defect to the unit sent to rescue it, and so on. There were many issues due to varying traction current voltage, which didn't ever bother the simple 'Slammer stock. Obviously we need modern trains, but there must be a workable compromise somewhere?

 

[cyclebytrain]

I certainly hope not - awful, bloated, unstable OS. UNIX-like systems are so much better!

Fun to say, but not actually true. Much easier to qualify GUI software based on windows embedded than on a uClibc/Glibc system.

 

[jon0844]

Perhaps there is an argument for restricting air-con systems to longer distance stock? On a hot day, I'd chose to travel in a well-ventilated Class 150 with hopper vents than a 158 with average air-con. It's a little noisier, but well worth the pay-off. The latest systems are better, but not when they fail!

Yes and no. A train sitting in a depot all afternoon then brought into King's Cross will be roasting.. and it will be some distance with all the windows open before it begins to get comfortable. If the train stops for any time, it heats up.. windows open or not.

Plus the windows on some trains really make it incredibly noisy at speed. A 365 doing 100mph isn't nice with the windows open, as it's noisy and blows everything - and (as said on the thread about this very thing) affects people sitting away from the person with the open window. Travel on a 317 at speed and if it starts to rain, you'll soon know about it.

Oh, and there's the issue of your ears popping when going into the many tunnels on a train that isn't sealed.

I'd therefore prefer aircon, but accept there HAS to be a fall-back to traditional ventilation so people can breathe if stuck for a long time. The fact is, an open window is just drawing in the warm air so it won't cool like air conditioning that cools, and hopefully filters, the air.

Naturally, you need a decent system that works and doesn't break down regularly. Regular maintenance should ensure aircon is not something you need to worry too much about. It's on a large number of trains now, so I'm assuming that overall it is pretty reliable and not an issue.

 

[IanXC]

I remember reading some time ago a thread all about a TOC musing over employing commuters as guards. To me doing this as a regular roster wouldn't be workable for all the reasons discussed in that thread, but I think there could be a role here.

Accredit volunteers so that in a situation like is being described the driver could call for any "reserve guards" to come to their cab. They could then be issued with a T-key to operate hopper windows and access other stock such as the earlier idea of emergency water supplies being kept on board. They could also be given training to operate and supervise a door being opened to allow ventilation.

I'm sure there are other tasks for which training could be provided, without knowing the number of staff required etc, would it be realistic to make provision for these people being involved with an organised de-training if required?

I'd hope that the TOCs would pay an amount for the training time, and then for each event - perhaps (although theres plenty of pitfalls to overcome) on a performance related basis. The TOC should see passengers not being so dissatisfied in such situations, and hopefully avoid further delays and closure of lines.

Thoughts?

 

[142094]

I wouldn't want to be giving T-keys out to anyone apart from those employed by the railway itself (then again they are apparently easy enough to pick up on eBay etc).

What is needed is a better plan for when trains are stuck between stations. That POSA idea sounds like what is needed.