Coupling trains: which is safest?

[Surreytraveller]

The trouble with waiting until the attachment has been done, is people are liable to become impatient and more likely to force the doors. It is also likely to cause conflict between passengers and staff.

 

[AndrewE]

I remember seeing it done a different way on the Southern Region, I think it was slam door stock too, but can't remember.
1st train arrives and passengers alight/board.
2nd train arrives, ditto... Almost immediately 1st train's doors are closed & it sets back or is driven back from rear cab onto 2nd train, doors re-opened on 1st train if needed
3 all doors closed and right away.
It needed platform staff and competent passengers to work (and it did), but it clearly wasn't the safest way of doing the job.

 

[Andrew S]

I'm speaking as a passenger, with no operating, or "insider" experience of the railways. I regularly travel on some of the Southern routes that divide/join at Haywards Heath.

I think simplicity is the key. Multiple opening/closing of doors seems unnecessarily complicated to passengers.

I've never seen any serious safety risk. A train coming in to an already occupied platform will be slow anyway, so the start-stop-start-couple won't knock people off their feet. An announcement to say hold on can't do any harm though.

The whole process takes maybe 2-3 minutes at the most, so only marginally more than a normal station stop. I've never seen passengers trying to force doors or be aggressive towards staff because coupling is taking place.

This seems like a storm in a teacup.

 

[LowLevel]

You can do either depending on the circumstances. If you're in a hurry for some reason doing it first is faster. If you're not messing about it takes less than 2 minutes.

Trying to stop people boarding because they panic when they see the doors closing is actually more difficult and less safe.

If we have 15 minutes to do it though we allow alighting first as there's no rush and enough time to allow most of the boarding to occur as well.

Also no Network Rail staff at Liverpool Lime Street have any operational competence - they're purely customer service and security employees. Northern (for Northern, TPE, WMR and EMT) and Virgin provide all operational station staff. They are unlikely to have any idea of what you're on about.

 

[theironroad]

Swr desiro attachments usually take place before doors are opened and normally only take a minute or so until the doors can be released. Desiro attachments are generally pretty smooth as are detachments. Sometimes software issues do cause delays when attaching. I've not heard of anyone being injured during a swr desiro attachment, though passengers are advised to remain seated or holding a grab rail as a precaution just as we tell people to be careful on slippery platforms when it rains!!!!

 

[Surreytraveller]

I'm speaking as a passenger, with no operating, or "insider" experience of the railways. I regularly travel on some of the Southern routes that divide/join at Haywards Heath.

I think simplicity is the key. Multiple opening/closing of doors seems unnecessarily complicated to passengers.

I've never seen any serious safety risk. A train coming in to an already occupied platform will be slow anyway, so the start-stop-start-couple won't knock people off their feet. An announcement to say hold on can't do any harm though.

The whole process takes maybe 2-3 minutes at the most, so only marginally more than a normal station stop. I've never seen passengers trying to force doors or be aggressive towards staff because coupling is taking place.

This seems like a storm in a teacup.

That's not how its done on the Southern at Haywards Heath, Horsham, Barnham, Purley, Eastbourne, Redhill etc etc. Passengers are allowed on and off the trains before the attachment. At terminal stations such as Victoria, London Bridge, Brighton etc, where the train terminates, passengers are let off the train first before any marshalling required takes place, then departing passengers are allowed to board. When attaching trains in service, announcements are made after passengers have alighted / boarded to hold on or remain seated, and that doors will be re-released shortly.

 

[tsr]

The trouble with waiting until the attachment has been done, is people are liable to become impatient and more likely to force the doors. It is also likely to cause conflict between passengers and staff.

Indeed. There are plenty of reasons why you don’t want to have someone panicking about making a connection and thus pulling a door egress before the attachment is complete. Frankly, the chaos caused by pulling egresses on a train which is halfway through an attachment would be insane. South of the River, you just wouldn’t get away with either the risk or the ensuing fallout if something did happen.

I'm speaking as a passenger, with no operating, or "insider" experience of the railways. I regularly travel on some of the Southern routes that divide/join at Haywards Heath.

I think simplicity is the key. Multiple opening/closing of doors seems unnecessarily complicated to passengers.

I've never seen any serious safety risk. A train coming in to an already occupied platform will be slow anyway, so the start-stop-start-couple won't knock people off their feet. An announcement to say hold on can't do any harm though.

The whole process takes maybe 2-3 minutes at the most, so only marginally more than a normal station stop. I've never seen passengers trying to force doors or be aggressive towards staff because coupling is taking place.

This seems like a storm in a teacup.

All Southern services release doors on both portions before coupling, so that’ll be why you’ll have never seen anyone try to force the doors, although it still occasionally happens even if people are allowed a few moments to alight first.

Releasing the doors on some units after attachments can be fairly complex, too, as not all units are simple beasts, and some (377s/387s especially) take time to configure the door controls, which is only permitted from the “new” leading cab. In exceptional circumstances it can take up to 3-4 minutes just to set up the cab, including door release, if there’s a problem.

There are factors with coupling which do mean some force can be necessary. The amount of force can vary depending on anything from gradient to length of the two portions. I’ve been on countless trains where I’ve not felt anything much, but a few where I’ve nearly gone flying, and that’s with the ability to understand exactly what is about to happen.

 

[Ken H]

'Releasing the doors on some units after attachments can be fairly complex, too, as not all units are simple beasts, and some (377s/387s especially) take time to configure the door controls, which is only permitted from the “new” leading cab. In exceptional circumstances it can take up to 3-4 minutes just to set up the cab, including door release, if there’s a problem.'

if you cant couple up in 2 minutes because of software, then the software is defective. WTF is the program doing to take 3-4 minutes?

 

[tsr]

'Releasing the doors on some units after attachments can be fairly complex, too, as not all units are simple beasts, and some (377s/387s especially) take time to configure the door controls, which is only permitted from the “new” leading cab. In exceptional circumstances it can take up to 3-4 minutes just to set up the cab, including door release, if there’s a problem.'

if you cant couple up in 2 minutes because of software, then the software is defective. WTF is the program doing to take 3-4 minutes?

I said “in exceptional circumstances”! But still possible.

It’s not normal, and yes, it would imply something has gone kaput.

Electrostars (as were being commented on) have a nasty habit of forgetting how long they are, and occasionally where they are, so you may need to perform a manual SDO door release, which is a time-consuming nuisance.

Most of the time you’re OK, although it still takes a few moments.

PS - Please use the ”+ Quote” button when quoting posts!

 

[DanDaDriver]

South of the River, you just wouldn’t get away with either the risk or the ensuing fallout if something did happen.

South of the river you stop and you hold everything....

 

[Llanigraham]

Like I said
It was my opinion only

And railway works are telling you your opinion is incorrect.

The 185s have CCTV so the guard should have seen his train had standing passengers and considered the safer option to let them off first!

CCTV records the internal activities. It does not allow the guard to watch it.

If you have different rules for whenever it suits,then expect accidents!

I see no record of any such accidents on the RAIB site, so I don't see why we should expect any.

I am not saying it was dangerous,but it was the less safe of the two.
If the railways took safety as seriously as they claim,they wouldn't do things less safe would they,and I wouldn't be told to move on when they didn't like my enquiry as to why they chose less safe!

But you have said it is dangerous.
And all of us can assure you that the railway do take safety very seriously!

 

[Chris217]

Nice replies all...
Thank you.

This subject is clearly a divider
but for a service that went ecs
after arrival,made me wonder
why the safer option in
that circumstance wasn't considered,and
whilst passengers were already standing!
Perhaps politics dictate...again!

And to NR/customer service/platform staff who don't like my enquiries and
only care to fob me off with their
unhelpful comments suggesting I don't
know what I am talking about just because
they dont want to hear the question or more likely,have no valid answer to it!

The coupling of trains is NOT
timetabled into terminating services.
Only AFTER it has terminated,so time should be allocated for that purpose once all passengers have alighted.
Thus allowing everyone off to continue
their journey with connections etc as per the timetable.
I know it's a different story for services that divide or pair up mid journey. Time is allowed in the timetable for that.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Nice replies all...
Thank you.

This subject is clearly a divider
but for a service that went ecs
after arrival,made me wonder
why the safer option in
that circumstance wasn't considered,and
whilst passengers were already standing!
Perhaps politics dictate...again!

And to NR/customer service/platform staff who don't like my enquiries and
only care to fob me off with their
unhelpful comments suggesting I don't
know what I am talking about just because
they dont want to hear the question or more likely,have no valid answer to it!

The coupling of trains is NOT
timetabled into terminating services.
Only AFTER it has terminated,so time should be allocated for that purpose once all passengers have alighted.
Thus allowing everyone off to continue
their journey with connections etc as per the timetable.
I know it's a different story for services that divide or pair up mid journey. Time is allowed in the timetable for that.

That's a very valid point. What happens if a train arrives 14 minutes late, and therefore you are not entitled to Delay Repay, but you are then not allowed off the train for a further two or three minutes so it takes your arrival over the threshold - what happens then?

 

[Gems]

Nice replies all...
Thank you.

This subject is clearly a divider
but for a service that went ecs
after arrival,made me wonder
why the safer option in
that circumstance wasn't considered,and
whilst passengers were already standing!
Perhaps politics dictate...again!

And to NR/customer service/platform staff who don't like my enquiries and
only care to fob me off with their
unhelpful comments suggesting I don't
know what I am talking about just because
they dont want to hear the question or more likely,have no valid answer to it!

The coupling of trains is NOT
timetabled into terminating services.
Only AFTER it has terminated,so time should be allocated for that purpose once all passengers have alighted.
Thus allowing everyone off to continue
their journey with connections etc as per the timetable.
I know it's a different story for services that divide or pair up mid journey. Time is allowed in the timetable for that.

Crew dockets read as a example.

Leeds 12.25
Dispose
AP

That means arrive, let people get off, dispose of the unit, and then assist in attaching portion.

That is the way it is, that is the way they want it, that is the way it will work for me.

 

[Intermodal]

The coupling of trains is NOT
timetabled into terminating services.
Only AFTER it has terminated,so time should be allocated for that purpose once all passengers have alighted.
Thus allowing everyone off to continue
their journey with connections etc as per the timetable.

I see now that after realising that your original point has no legs that you are trying to argue from a different angle.

The fact is that coupling with passengers on, even those standing, is not unsafe. If you would like to present some evidence that coupling with passengers on board is unsafe then I would be delighted to read it. Yes, you are correct that it is safer, however that is irrelevant. It is safer for me to always wear a hard hat, safety goggles and full motorcycle leathers whilst walking down the street - however I do not do that because the alternative of not wearing that kit is not unsafe.

Your argument consists of saying that "nobody can tell me why it is safe" - well, actually, the rail industry has been going for a little while now and there is a good general consensus from decades of experience of what is within tolerances and what isn't. The onus is on YOU as the person suggesting contrary to widely accepted consensus to prove your point - we don't have to prove you wrong, you have to prove yourself right.

I eagerly await details of your research regarding the unsafe nature of coupling with passengers on.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Surely AP should come before dispose? Dispose means key off. You need to do the attachment first!

 

[Intermodal]

Surely AP should come before dispose? Dispose means key off. You need to do the attachment first!

Dispose means differently on a guard's diagram. It means to close doors, check for baggage, secure the unit, etc.

 

[Jonfun]

Funnily enough this came up in conversation at work the other day.

My view is quite simple, we shouldn't be faffing around doing coupling etc on the passengers' time. Train arrives, allows passengers to alight, close doors and couple up is much better for the passengers as they're not unnecessarily delayed, and aren't at risk of falling over etc from the jolts. Keeping passengers locked inside a train at their station is just asking for egresses to start being pulled.

The argument always comes down to, well it's quicker to do it by going straight on - well, that might be true, but we should account for the increased dwell time in the timetable. If the coupling goes wrong, I've seen us sit in the platform for over five minutes whilst they pull away and try again repeatedly.

 

[Intermodal]

My view is quite simple, we shouldn't be faffing around doing coupling etc on the passengers' time. Train arrives, allows passengers to alight, close doors and couple up is much better for the passengers as they're not unnecessarily delayed, and aren't at risk of falling over etc from the jolts. Keeping passengers locked inside a train at their station is just asking for egresses to start being pulled.

This is an argument I can get behind. Perhaps OP was really irritated about this but wanted to dramatise the whole thing by claiming it was a safety issue?

 

[Gems]

I see now that after realising that your original point has no legs that you are trying to argue from a different angle.

The fact is that coupling with passengers on, even those standing, is not unsafe. If you would like to present some evidence that coupling with passengers on board is unsafe then I would be delighted to read it. Yes, you are correct that it is safer, however that is irrelevant. It is safer for me to always wear a hard hat, safety goggles and full motorcycle leathers whilst walking down the street - however I do not do that because the alternative of not wearing that kit is not unsafe.

Your argument consists of saying that "nobody can tell me why it is safe" - well, actually, the rail industry has been going for a little while now and there is a good general consensus from decades of experience of what is within tolerances and what isn't. The onus is on YOU as the person suggesting contrary to widely accepted consensus to prove your point - we don't have to prove you wrong, you have to prove yourself right.

I eagerly await details of your research regarding the unsafe nature of coupling with passengers on.

From where I am reading he is coming from the right angle. Nobody is saying it is unsafe, it is not unsafe, but it is a hell of a lot safer when people who might be desperate to get off for connections etc have been allowed to. Why on earth would you want a train full off irritated people? What if the coupling takes longer than expected?, what if the brakes don't come off?, what if the pull test fails?, what are the passengers going to do when the drivers gets off to check the coupling height leaving them stood there?
It is not in the Northern rail standards to do this. No wonder the guard didn't want to speak to him. Making it all up as they go along so they might have a few minutes longer break.
Did the driver check the coupling height? Or did he just think, "I'll take a risk?" Time is allowed to do this properly, so do it properly is my take.

 

[hooverboy]

For terminating trains at Euston they do tip out before coupling up (partly because it's a little safer, but also because it's more respectful of passenger time by letting them off before pratting about coupling up). At Northampton they don't.

It's a bit easier to tip out at Euston, though, as all the stock has porter buttons to allow a coach at a time to be emptied and locked out. Never understood why you didn't get those outside of the South East.

it should be a fairly straightforward procedure:
basically in order.
1) station announcer at "coupling station" says ....this will be the xxxx to wherever.PLEASE DO NOT BOARD THE TRAIN AT THIS TIME.
FURTHER ANNOUNCEMENTS WILL SAY WHEN YOU MAY DO SO
2)train pulls into station
3)doors open...alighting (not all)passengers disembark. Driver over PA says please do not board at this time.

4)driver announces" the doors will now be closing,passengers to take seats/hold on as this train will shortly be coupling.
5)doors close
6)couple up
7)open doors
8)station announcer says "this is the xxxx to wherever.You may now board the train.


that's actually a lot stricter than it used to be!...twas a very regular occurrence getting a bit of a jolt from a loco attatching to a rake of mk1's without any notice!

 

[Intermodal]

From where I am reading he is coming from the right angle. Nobody is saying it is unsafe, it is not unsafe, but it is a hell of a lot safer when people who might be desperate to get off for connections etc have been allowed to. Why on earth would you want a train full off irritated people? What if the coupling takes longer than expected?, what if the brakes don't come off?, what if the pull test fails?, what are the passengers going to do when the drivers gets off to check the coupling height leaving them stood there?

I can totally understand the point about customer care, to be honest, and I think it is a very good one. Jonfun articulated the point very well above and I have experienced the frustration myself of waiting for a connection whilst being forcibly coupled with no choice but to wait.

Part of the OPs query is wondering why rail staff are responding poorly to him. Frankly, I imagine how they have addressed them has not been as simple as "I think it'd be a good idea if they let passengers off first - can you pass it on?". I expect that they went in all guns blazing claiming that the proceedure just used was "not as safe" as the alternative and such a rail staff member who is perhaps thinking about duties etc will only hear "unsafe practices" and immediately be defensive as they don't want to be involved in a potential incident that never involved them anyway - a very reasonable response.

If the OP had come in here and simply suggested it was uncourtious for coupling to be done in this manner I would've never disagreed with them - however to bring safety into something where it frankly isn't (in my book) a safety issue is silly and dramatic.

 

[ComUtoR]

but it is a hell of a lot safer when people who might be desperate to get off for connections etc have been allowed to.

I think you are overstating. The safety difference is negligible and very debatable. I attach and detach quite frequently and feel a lot safer where there is nobody on the platform or near the unit when it is moving. I would argue that it was safer to keep the passengers onboard because train movements where passengers are on a platform walking beside a moving train where they may assume that this is their train is the greater risk. I genuinely hate attaching where there are passengers at the platform edge. I'm not even required to carry out the train safety check before the movement so there could easily be someone trying to board.

 

[Gems]

I can totally understand the point about customer care, to be honest, and I think it is a very good one. Jonfun articulated the point very well above and I have experienced the frustration myself of waiting for a connection whilst being forcibly coupled with no choice but to wait.

Part of the OPs query is wondering why rail staff are responding poorly to him. Frankly, I imagine how they have addressed them has not been as simple as "I think it'd be a good idea if they let passengers off first - can you pass it on?". I expect that they went in all guns blazing claiming that the proceedure just used was "not as safe" as the alternative and such a rail staff member who is perhaps thinking about duties etc will only hear "unsafe practices" and immediately be defensive as they don't want to be involved in a potential incident that never involved them anyway - a very reasonable response.

If the OP had come in here and simply suggested it was uncourtious for coupling to be done in this manner I would've never disagreed with them - however to bring safety into something where it frankly isn't (in my book) a safety issue is silly and dramatic.

I can see where you are coming from. But again, are we assuming he went in all guns blazing? From my experience when staff cut corners they become defensive when challenged no matter how polite. And this was a blatant abuse of Northern Rail standards.

 

[Ianno87]

The same happens at Cambridge as well, at least with the GN services from Kings Lynn. Whenever I've travelled from Kings Lynn back towards Hitchin, which for most of the day requires a change at Cambridge, I've always been able to alight from the train before it is coupled up to the unit already at the station to form the non-stop service to Kings Cross.

Yep - and people remain on the King's Lynn attaching bit throughout...with standees in the peak too. A simple announcement to remain seated/hold on.

At least not 365s anymore... they required a proper good slamming of the two units together every now and again.

 

[Gems]

I think you are overstating. The safety difference is negligible and very debatable. I attach and detach quite frequently and feel a lot safer where there is nobody on the platform or near the unit when it is moving. I would argue that it was safer to keep the passengers onboard because train movements where passengers are on a platform walking beside a moving train where they may assume that this is their train is the greater risk. I genuinely hate attaching where there are passengers at the platform edge. I'm not even required to carry out the train safety check before the movement so there could easily be someone trying to board.

Yes but at Leeds you would never attach a portion again if this was the case. We simply cannot budget for every potential eventuality. If in doubt fine don't do it. But not allowing people off doesn't make the platform empty.

 

[Intermodal]

I can see where you are coming from. But again, are we assuming he went in all guns blazing? From my experience when staff cut corners they become defensive when challenged no matter how polite. And this was a blatant abuse of Northern Rail standards.

I am assuming - you are correct - I recognise the flaws in assumption but in an online forum like this there will always be some speculation and we will never know the truth as we weren't there.

With respect, Northern Rail standards don't come into this as it was a TPE service. My understanding of Northern policy is that coupling with passengers on is in fact allowed, whilst uncommon. Of course if the diagram says to dispose first then disposal first should be how it is done.

 

[Gems]

I am assuming - you are correct - I recognise the flaws in assumption but in an online forum like this there will always be some speculation and we will never know the truth as we weren't there.

With respect, Northern Rail standards don't come into this as it was a TPE service. My understanding of Northern policy is that coupling with passengers on is in fact allowed, whilst uncommon. Of course if the diagram says to dispose first then disposal first should be how it is done.

Well he wrote NR staff in a earlier thread, so I stand corrected. I assumed it was Northern based on that.

 

[Intermodal]

With respect, Northern Rail standards don't come into this as it was a TPE service.

I just realised he didn't specifically state TPE - was it Northern? I skim read the thread again but couldn't find it. I assumed because it was a 185.

 

[Intermodal]

Well he wrote NR staff in a earlier thread, so I stand corrected. I assumed it was Northern based on that.

I think he was referring to Network Rail staff at Lime St, but I may be wrong.