What makes you say that?Maybe certain staff would be kindly asked if they would like to walk; before the push.
Unfortunately it won't be possible to replace them overnight, so nothing would run for weeks....if not months.In some industries, phrases such as "not fit for purpose" might be banded about.
Maybe certain staff would be kindly asked if they would like to walk; before the push.
Which staff are you looking to push?In some industries, phrases such as "not fit for purpose" might be banded about.
Maybe certain staff would be kindly asked if they would like to walk; before the push.
Having asked drivers who've been at my depot on the WCML if they can remember the last time a signal outage or this magnitude happened, they all said never this bad.Another day, another WCML meltdown, twice in one week...
That thing that doesn't happen, according to some on here, happened again.
Yes this is correct. It is Rugby who control this section.I was under the impression that the WCML from north of Watford to south of Crewe (135 route miles, plus some branches) was controlled from Rugby ROC.
Stoke SCC used to control the Norton Bridge and Colwich areas, but fairly recently was reduced essentially to the old North Staffs lines off the main WCML.
Is this not how the WCML works?
The issue wasn't with Stoke, it was Rugby ROC. And it wasn't a power supply to the ROC issue.I consider it poor planning to put all your eggs in the one basket.
A lot of PSB's are closing to be replaced by ROC's and in cases like Stoke it controls too big an area.
If Stafford was controlled by a different box then most of the WCML would not be affected by an outage at Stoke.
The same if a box Stafford went down then WCML services would divert via Stoke and Colwich
The designers of the SSC would have thought that separate supplies to the Nuneaton, Stafford & Stoke areas meant some trains would still run if the power went down to an area
But they did not take in to account what happens if the power goes down to the signalling centre
Third day in a row now - broken rail somewhere near Penrith, doesn't look like many Euston-Glasgow services are making it through.Another day, another WCML meltdown, twice in one week...
That thing that doesn't happen, according to some on here, happened again.
So why was the Signalling Down in the Norton Bridge to Rugeley/Penkridge area?The issue wasn't with Stoke, it was Rugby ROC. And it wasn't a power supply to the ROC issue.
The area of signalling that was down was Stone to Stafford, North of Stafford to Rugeley and Stafford to Penkridge. Line power was unaffected.
Trains couldn't run via Hixon as signalling was out at Colwich anywa.
I'm confused then. I thought Stoke was out as well. Certainly no trains ran south of Macclesfield. EMR turned round at Blythe Bridge (Caverswall Road crossover preumably) rather than Stoke-on-Trent.The issue wasn't with Stoke, it was Rugby ROC. And it wasn't a power supply to the ROC issue.
The area of signalling that was down was Stone to Stafford, North of Stafford to Rugeley and Stafford to Penkridge. Line power was unaffected.
Trains couldn't run via Hixon as signalling was out at Colwich anywa.
Third day in a row now - broken rail somewhere near Penrith, doesn't look like many Euston-Glasgow services are making it through.
The termination at Crewe was indeed directly related to the track fault south of Penrith.Yep, I was waiting for the 2031 Euston - Preston last night which terminated at Crewe because of this, or so we were told, which is odd because Preston is south of Penrith by some distance. Luckily I was only traveling as far as Tamworth.
But again, another day, another WCML shambles.
This is a typical case of passengers not understanding how a problem miles away could have a weird domino affect and consequently cause problems in a completely different area of the network.
Must be a day with a "y" in itAnd yet another WCML farce this afternoon...
Must be a day with a "y" in it