Holding trains

[Dolive22]

What is the practice with regards to holding trains with broken toilets? I was travelling with someone recently who had a very large cup of tea and then discovered the train had no toilets. We got off at the next stop (they were in actual pain) and I went to the front to ask the driver if he could hold the train as I had heard this was policy. He hadn't heard of such a policy, and despite being sympathetic he left when the Network rail dispatcher dispatched him (repeatedly).

It was FCC running through london and the station was Gatwick.

 

[route:oxford]

What is the practice with regards to holding trains with broken toilets? I was travelling with someone recently who had a very large cup of tea and then discovered the train had no toilets. We got off at the next stop (they were in actual pain) and I went to the front to ask the driver if he could hold the train as I had heard this was policy. He hadn't heard of such a policy, and despite being sympathetic he left when the Network rail dispatcher dispatched him (repeatedly).

It was FCC running through london and the station was Gatwick.

Probably best to complain to the person who you heard from. They clearly lied to you.

 

[asylumxl]

Or blame FCC for running the service using a 319 which should have been used on Luton to Sutton or Eentish Town-to Sevenoaks. Also sucks for anyone whos purchased a First class ticket or has luggage, since they don't have first class or even luggage racks aswell as lacking toilets.

Regular occurence I'm afraid.

 

[TDK]

What is the practice with regards to holding trains with broken toilets? I was travelling with someone recently who had a very large cup of tea and then discovered the train had no toilets. We got off at the next stop (they were in actual pain) and I went to the front to ask the driver if he could hold the train as I had heard this was policy. He hadn't heard of such a policy, and despite being sympathetic he left when the Network rail dispatcher dispatched him (repeatedly).

It was FCC running through london and the station was Gatwick.

When I worked for ATW if the toilest were out of use the Guard would call control and and then get permission to have toilet breaks at stations, if the driver was not informed then he would not have been able to call control and organise a toilet break at the station, that is the problems with DOO I am afraid, at least if there is a guard on the train the message can be easily relayed.

 

[jopsuk]

Also, unless it was the last train of the day, it's a busy line, even more so further north- holding it for a passenger unable to hold it any longer could cause suprinsingly large amounts of network disruption- the needs of the many trump the pressing needs of the few.

 

[trickyvegas]

I have certainly heard announcements on TPE services when this has happened, saying that they should alert the conductor if they need to use the toilet at a station.

 

[Anvil1984]

No hard and fast rule on this I'm afraid, normal advice for someone on a highish frequency route would be to tell you to get off, go to the the loo and get on the next train

 

[ChrisCooper]

I imagine frequency will play a big part. At a station like Gatwick, not only would the person not have to wait long for the next train, but on a busy line like that, it doesn't take much delay and trains are stacking up behind. In some circumstances by the time the person has used the toilet and got back on the train the next train they could have got might already be waiting behind. Oviously at a less well used station someone getting off to use the facilities would have a much longer wait, whilst at the same time holding the train for them would have far less effect on the overall service.

 

[kentuckytony]

What would happen to the train if the person in question stayed on and couldn't hold it, and let loose in the carriage?

Would the train then be halted at the next station? How would the DOO driver know?

(Similar I guess to a "hurling" situation.)
Would everyone just move into another carriage at the next stop?

 

[SS4]

I suspect everyone from the immediate area would quickly vanish but nothing would happen until the train reached the terminus

 

[southerner2174]

The toilets at Gatwick are a good few mins walk from the platform, and since FCC operate a 15 minute frequency (when there are no problems), by the time you had walked to the toilet, used it and walked back you would have only a couple of minutes spare before the following service arrived.
The driver would also have had to have contacted his control.
Generally toilet breaks will be announced if required and announced in advance, not at short notice as in this case.
I can imagine a rather large amount of delay minutes adding up if the train had been held at Gatwick for this reason, all it takes is 5 minutes and you affect at least 10 other services and then further knock ons

 

[Tom B]

No hard and fast rule on this I'm afraid, normal advice for someone on a highish frequency route would be to tell you to get off, go to the the loo and get on the next train

What if a passenger holds an AP ticket...?

 

[ushawk]

Some 319's have First Class on them and it probably wasn't held as the BML has a high frequency of services.

I remember I was on a 377 from Portsmouth to Brighton once and the toilets were broken, so it stopped for 3 minutes at Chichester.

 

[Striker]

At first I thought this was a troll. Certainly, as the station and route in question is Gatwick, imagine if the driver had let them bugger off for 10 mins to go to the toilet? That would be even more ridiculous. A platform getting fuller by the minute. Trains stacked up behind. Reason? "oh, somebody who drank a big cup of tea wanted to use the toilet." Er....OK.

Sure, if it's a rural line in Wales or something. Not on one of the busiest lines in the country and at one of the busiest stations! I personally would have been embarrassed to ask.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

The trouble with Gatwick is that it is a good two minute walk to the toilets from any platforms, I suppose you could cut that down to 25 seconds if you were reeeeeeally desperate . i think this should only be applied to trains/services where the onboard toilet is broken, see SimonPoole's thread in the Stories forum. Never in a million years could you do that at any point on the Brighton-Bedford run, but you should be OK on lines such as the S&C, GSW etc, and to be fair anywhere where you can be gauranteed there isn't a train 5 mins behind you.

 

[MCR247]

If I was in this situation and held an AP, would a guard write on my ticket stating the toilet(s) were OOU?

 

[Dolive22]

I wasn't actually complaining, although the driver suggested I make a formal complaint before he left. I can understand why he didn't wait. As we waited for the next stop I was contemplating how much it would cost FCC in delay payments if they had to hold a train in the platform at Gatwick.

The train did have toilets, but they were both out of order. The driver said they just didn't fill them with water. Is that right?

 

[scotsman]

The train did have toilets, but they were both out of order. The driver said they just didn't fill them with water. Is that right?

Yup, if they haven't been tanked then (obviously) it can't flush and it can't get pretty nasty in there

 

[Tom B]

Yup, if they haven't been tanked then (obviously) it can't flush and it can't get pretty nasty in there

Now, I know this is the privatised railway but... if someone notices that a train has gone out of the depot in the morning without being filled with water, is it such a difficult task for someone to fill it up at the terminus?!

 

[scotsman]

Now, I know this is the privatised railway but... if someone notices that a train has gone out of the depot in the morning without being filled with water, is it such a difficult task for someone to fill it up at the terminus?!

Depends on the turnarounds...if someone gave a TrainCare team a heads up, they could at least get one tanked in a 15 minute turnaround. However, there is the problem (on newer stock) that retention tanks are full - as far as I know, this can only be emptied at the depot.

 

[Dolive22]

Yup, if they haven't been tanked then (obviously) it can't flush and it can't get pretty nasty in there

I knew they need water, I just wasn't sure they would send a train out with both toilets shut off as out of order instead of put some water in.

 

[northwichcat]

Northern use to run Blackpool-Buxton services (almost 2.5 hour duration) using 150s without working toilets and never arranged extended toilet stops. Operators are a lot more concerned about getting fined for late running than passenger comfort.

 

[Greenback]

It happened in BR days as well! I was on a 158 fronm Manchester to Cardiff in 1993 with no working toilets! I had to get off at Shrewsbury and wait an hour for the next train! It never even crossed my mind to ask for the train to be held.

 

[driver9000]

Now, I know this is the privatised railway but... if someone notices that a train has gone out of the depot in the morning without being filled with water, is it such a difficult task for someone to fill it up at the terminus?!

There would need to be proper watering facilities at the terminus in order to tank the toilets. The filler points are often located on the vehicle ends or below the solebar which requires going on the track to fit the hoses which is not easy in a crowded and busy station with regular train movements. Not all stations - even large ones have watering points these days leaving just depots with the ability to fill toilet water tanks.

It might not be the case that the tank wasn't filled, older trains are prone to the tanks leaking or if the tank is below the solebar and air drawn they develop air leaks or locks meaning the water isn't being drawn up. A problem we faced in the recent cold weather was frozen pipes and the water freezing in the tank.

 

[Dolive22]

The driver eckoned they just hadn't been filled.

Incidentally, what is the solebar? I came across the word somewhere (Rulebook?) but couldn't find out what it was.

I don't think it was that old. Being near London where they keep all the civil servants and ministers we tend not to get the worst stock (serving City Thameslink helps as well) so probably no older than a 321.

 

[driver9000]

Even a 321 is 20 years old, 319s are slightly older both will have the older style flush toilet with a roof mounted water tank unless they have since been fitted with CET vacuum toilets. Are the new 377s used on the FCC Thameslink services?

The solebar is where the bottom of the body meets the frame.

 

[ChrisCooper]

319s have retention tanks, as they are needed for the tunnels through London.

 

[MCR247]

Are the new 377s used on the FCC Thameslink services?

Yes

 

[driver9000]

I thought they would have retention tanks, I imagine they'll be in a similar style to Northerns 158s which retained the water tanks.

 

[Dolive22]

Wuld this be a good time to ask the question:
Why exactly must we not flush in the station?