Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Where is the battery Class 230 when you need it ?
Don't forget 80x can run on diesel.
Where is the battery Class 230 when you need it ?
Did they really have no idea where the problem lay? I would have thought that neutral sections would allow the problem to be narrowed down quite quickly.As I said, seems like the problem wasn’t isolated until much much later on and after energising several times previously, it tripped all 4 lines Paddington to Maidenhead.
Ticket acceptance is useless if it's not mentioned. Not everyone will even know what local bus routes there are. I wouldn't know off the top of my head even though it's a route I travel on regularly. I'd have to hope I can coerce a journey planner into finding bus alternatives rather than suggesting trains that won't run.What would you suggest? Other that local bus ticket acceptance (which was in place but not mentioned)
Why was no attempt made to run any sort of replacement bus service between the outer stations? Again, those are the ones where there are fewer alternatives but also fewer passengers.and emergency buses (unavailable)
And taxis should absolutely have been authorised. See what SWR do during major disruption - put a message on their website making clear that alternative transport costs will be reimbursed and how to claim for them.and no electric trains allowed, you really do run out of options. The nature of the isolation and the large sections of OLE do not help. You’re basically looking at taxis for people stuck at stations and stranded.
That would still have been a great help for the 3-4 hours that there were no trains. Passenger volumes drop off as the evening goes on, anyway.Even with local buses, they often finish by 2100-2200 in the outer areas. Looks like GWR ran an IET or two on diesel for Slough / Maidenhead / Twyford / Reading
The question is whether that block was justified or whether a less severe measure could have been instituted. As it stands, I can't see why they thought that was a reasonable way of handling the situation.You don’t seem to understand. Network Rail blocked all electric traction Paddington - Reading after the 5th tripping and recovering trains that had been stranded or trapped for 30-60 minutes.
Did they really have no idea where the problem lay? I would have thought that neutral sections would allow the problem to be narrowed down quite quickly.
Then you isolate that section and run a service over the rest of the line until the problem has been fixed. Am I missing something
It needs to be rescued I believe. The actual incident will be resolved before then, but the residual disruption will likely go on beyond that. It’s not just a click of a fingers to go from a contingency plan to booked working when it comes to fleet and crew workings.
Did they really have no idea where the problem lay? I would have thought that neutral sections would allow the problem to be narrowed down quite quickly.
Maidenhead to Paddington (technically Westbourne park for xr) is the distance between neutral sections and the normal feediny area of Kensal Green grid connection.I would have thought neutral sections keep the problematic sections separated anyway, but perhaps I'm mistaken on that point
I've always wanted to know, what is the OHNS at Hayes actually for? Does the old Hayes feeder station from HEX days still feed hayes to heathrow?(excluding HeX)
I would have thought that neutral sections would allow the problem to be narrowed down quite quickly.
Nowhere near the required capacity can be givenWhy does GWR not make add calls at the XR stations during the sort of disruption yesterday.
Why does GWR not make add calls at the XR stations during the sort of disruption yesterday.
I absolutely appreciate that a different company effectively operating another company's service might be confusing for non-railway fans, and indeed I have had to guide a relative through a very similar situation. (Thank you, privatisation.) However, I'm fairly sure that people stranded at intermediate stations don't much care which colour the train is, only that one turns up. Even if it doesn't stop everywhere, it can still be useful - taking my example of the evening peak at Slough when TfL have given up, even if just a single additional Paddington-Didcot train in each direction was specially stopped at Slough, and even if they made no other special stops, it would certainly shift some passengers and get things moving, even if it would be no use to the good people of West Drayton, Iver, Langley, Burnham, Taplow etc.If you can use a 387 then you might as well find a 345, when we do get SSO it causes no end of issues with confused passengers
How is it that during the whole evening they were unable to get staff out to put in place an isolation?
Did they really have no idea where the problem lay? I would have thought that neutral sections would allow the problem to be narrowed down quite quickly.
Did they really have no idea where the problem lay? I would have thought that neutral sections would allow the problem to be narrowed down quite quickly.
Then you isolate that section and run a service over the rest of the line until the problem has been fixed. Am I missing something obvious?
Why was no attempt made to run any sort of replacement bus service between the outer stations? Again, those are the ones where there are fewer alternatives but also fewer passengers.
And taxis should absolutely have been authorised. See what SWR do during major disruption - put a message on their website making clear that alternative transport costs will be reimbursed and how to claim for them.
The question is whether that block was justified or whether a less severe measure could have been instituted. As it stands, I can't see why they thought that was a reasonable way of handling the situation.
I absolutely appreciate that a different company effectively operating another company's service might be confusing for non-railway fans, and indeed I have had to guide a relative through a very similar situation. (Thank you, privatisation.) However, I'm fairly sure that people stranded at intermediate stations don't much care which colour the train is, only that one turns up. Even if it doesn't stop everywhere, it can still be useful - taking my example of the evening peak at Slough when TfL have given up, even if just a single additional Paddington-Didcot train in each direction was specially stopped at Slough, and even if they made no other special stops, it would certainly shift some passengers and get things moving, even if it would be no use to the good people of West Drayton, Iver, Langley, Burnham, Taplow etc.
They can’t seem to make up their mind, when I passed it just after 12 it had both Pantographs up with fitters onboard, there was a plan to rescue it with an 800 but then there was an “issue with train crew” that prevented that, they kept saying the 57 is coming but I don’t think it ever left Reading. It had an ADD but then couldn’t get either pantograph to raise, they didn’t want to send another 387 as they didn’t want the fault to transfer but I assume it’s all sorted now, poor driver had been there ages and well over their day
A rather "interesting" design decision... Did nobody think through how disruptive any faults would therefore be?As others have said, there is effectively only one neutral section, and (currently) no remote switching available. If it goes off it’s all off until you get people out on the ground
Absolutely but for local services to be completely withdrawn for 5/6 hours doesn't exactly give off a great impression. Surely it would have been possible to get a basic service running in that time?And when you do get people out, to isolate it safely it needs at least two, and probably more switches to be pulled (big mechanical switches), and earths put up every mile or so. That takes time, clearly.
A rather "interesting" design decision... Did nobody think through how disruptive any faults would therefore be?
Between Paddington and Heathrow yes, but surely it would have made sense to introduce at least one neutral section where the extension to Reading & beyond joined the existing writing?When it was designed, there were only 4 electric services each eay an hour.
(Be assurred that the issue is being corrected, but eill be quite disruptive to implement).
Sorry, I confess I've drifted off-topic a bit and was talking in general, with a nod to a situation I remember from a short while back that bears some similarities to the disruption caused by the broken-down train today. I apologise.In this case electric traction had been stopped, and as mentioned 800s cannot stop at many of the stations - believe this is due to either camera configuration or staffing requirements.
When the relevant contingency plan is initiated, GWR Didcot Parkway trains also terminate at Reading. These are agreed plans with Network Rail and running extra trains just destroys reliability on the reduced infrastructure. So TfL are not “giving up” as you so succinctly put it - they are essentially told what to run. This may change in the next timetable change.
Three of those were within 20 minutes from 1655 to 1715. The third one caused 9H70 (1624 Abbey Wood to Heathrow Airport Terminal 4) to be stuck between West Ealing and Hanwell for about 25 minutes, while movement on the Down Relief only was stopped for longer to allow that line to be investigated in more detail (according to the driver of the train behind, which I was on).The OLE tripped six times over 6 hours, four of those within a 2 hour period. There was simply no confidence that it wouldn’t fail and strand trains outside stations for long periods of time which arguably brings bigger risks.
Between Paddington and Heathrow yes, but surely it would have made sense to introduce at least one neutral section where the extension to Reading & beyond joined the existing writing?
It’s seem utterly remarkable that the ole wasn’t improved for the Elizabeth line to build in resilience on such a prime route? Is this being corrected under Operation Brunel or Old Oak Common Stn project?When it was designed, there were only 4 electric services each eay an hour.
(Be assurred that the issue is being corrected, but eill be quite disruptive to implement).
It’s seem utterly remarkable that the ole wasn’t improved for the Elizabeth line to build in resilience on such a prime route? Is this being corrected under Operation Brunel or Old Oak Common Stn project?
About time Liz line ran shuttles in disruption time. Ie reading too eailing etc
I heard that remote switching was descoped from GWEP for (obviously) cost overrun reasons.A rather "interesting" design decision... Did nobody think through how disruptive any faults would therefore be?
You know how much moaning goes on about gold plating.Between Paddington and Heathrow yes, but surely it would have made sense to introduce at least one neutral section where the extension to Reading & beyond joined the existing writing?
Its quite often 3 days in a row for those of us who travel daily3 days in a row is taking the pi___s
I'd second that, and I'm sure there is an explanation for it. It seems to generally be two or three months of nothing, then a week of total chaos, then a few months of nothing, and repeat. Or maybe I only remember the ones where it was three days in a row...Its quite often 3 days in a row for those of us who travel daily
It’s seem utterly remarkable that the ole wasn’t improved for the Elizabeth line to build in resilience on such a prime route? Is this being corrected under Operation Brunel or Old Oak Common Stn project?
Definitely not the former which is mainly just track / Pway work (although the name has since changed) and don’t think so under the latter. As @Bald Rick alludes, it’s quite invasive work I believe.
Exactly . There should be scope to run Liz line trains old oak to reading if problem is at Paddington etc