Operational Incident at Blackfriars

[Surreytraveller]

And a massive one at Farringdon also to ensure drivers drop.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 15 Aug 2021 ==



Or to be technically correct instead maybe.

Its all about PR and to be seen to be doing something. The technically correct excuse could have been originally used, and management will still get them to change it

 

[Horizon22]

Its all about PR and to be seen to be doing something. The technically correct excuse could have been originally used, and management will still get them to change it

Well a delay reason needs to be input. Often at the very beginning you only have very vague details so one reason is input and, as more information is known, it is altered accordingly. The fact it was done "within minutes" (according to the quote) seems to be exactly what happened. No need for your bizarre management bashing (who probably were barely involved in that decision).

 

[Surreytraveller]

Well a delay reason needs to be input. Often at the very beginning you only have very vague details so one reason is input and, as more information is known, it is altered accordingly. The fact it was done "within minutes" (according to the quote) seems to be exactly what happened. No need for your bizarre management bashing (who probably were barely involved in that decision).

Is it not a willy-waving competition where you are, then?

 

[Horizon22]

Is it not a willy-waving competition where you are, then?

Not at all, nor have I ever experienced that. Changes are made in accordance to the changing situation, as you would expect.

 

[Bald Rick]

A lot of time management will get them to change the excuse just to stamp their authority and to justify their existence in life

This is nonsense.

 

[Surreytraveller]

This is nonsense.

Are you sure? You cannot speak on behalf of every organisation

 

[Ianno87]

Its all about PR and to be seen to be doing something. The technically correct excuse could have been originally used, and management will still get them to change it

No it isn't. It's accurate recording of the delay cause.

 

[Surreytraveller]

No it isn't. It's accurate recording of the delay cause.

If people want to gang up on me to claim I'm wrong, fair enough. And we'll all continue to live in cloud cuckoo land

 

[Bald Rick]

Are you sure? You cannot speak on behalf of every organisation

Reasons for delays are announced based on what the delay attribution system says.

If there is a train failed without power, and there’s a pantograph on the floor, it will usually go down to a fault with the power supply, (Code I1), or possibly an electrification operational incident under investigation (OI). These will be announced as an issue with the power supply or overhead lines, both by auto announcers and any manual announcements.

After a little investigation, it becomes apparent what happened, and the incident was reallocated to being down to the driver. The delays are reallocated to this code (TG). However, for obvious reasons (same as with SPADs and other driver errors) they are announced as operational incidents.

 

[Horizon22]

If people want to gang up on me to claim I'm wrong, fair enough. And we'll all continue to live in cloud cuckoo land

Well if you're going to insist on stating people who have been in the exact position you mention are wrong, then I would suggest it is more you with your head in the clouds.

 

[jon0844]

Its all about PR and to be seen to be doing something. The technically correct excuse could have been originally used, and management will still get them to change it

Management will be trying to deal with the situation and get things running again, not hassling people who know what they're doing to get them to change the CIS.

 

[Falcon1200]

If people want to gang up on me to claim I'm wrong, fair enough. And we'll all continue to live in cloud cuckoo land

Reasons for delays are announced based on what the delay attribution system says.

Actually I think Surreytraveller has a point, and depending on the system being used delay reasons are not necessarily based on the D/A code. For example, I recall an occasion when a message on the OIS stated delays due to a freight train failure; The Freight Account Manager called and demanded that the word 'freight' be removed !

 

[Surreytraveller]

Management will be trying to deal with the situation and get things running again, not hassling people who know what they're doing to get them to change the CIS.

You get different managers trying to get things moving to the managers involved with public information. With their own separate interests. They are different departments.

 

[JN114]

There isn’t a technological link between delay attribution and industry info systems (I’m aware open data feeds attempt to use TDA output, with varying degrees of success)

Delay reasons will be chosen and input usually by the info team or equivalent in the relevant operator control. It’s why there are essentially customer service staff within the operational control centre, they’re there to translate jargon into a coherent message the public will understand - and yes there are definitely cases within my own experience where “management” have attempted to influence that selection to subtly change the message or the connotations the public may draw from it. These attempts at influence also have varying degrees of success.

There’s also industry guidance on how certain types of incidents can be publicised - for example in my day we would never have used “operating incident” as it can be perceived by the involved party(s) as inferring an allegation before a full investigation has been carried out; and the Union reps would have eaten us on a silver platter for that. We would instead use the loathsome “problem under investigation” for a SPAD for example.

Things may well have changed these days as I’ve side-stepped over to operations these days, but for this, regardless of whether or not pedantically it is overhead conductor rail or wires, it would be “problem with the overhead wires” - it’s factual to the level Joe public cares about, and there’s no allegation the traincrew are at fault before an investigation has been conducted (no trial by CIS).

 

[Aictos]

The GN side seems to have had a bit of a meltdown this evening due to a fatality at Stevenage. My neighbour was stuck on a train for nearly 4 hours coming north, and he says someone else was stuck at King’s Cross and essentially told only option was to travel up the Midland side and “see if you can get a friend or relative to pick you up from Luton”.

Some Smart Alec has also managed to put a lovely comment on Twitter about how there was a train in Welwyn platform 3 but no attempt being made to use platform 4. Tempting to put something on there about a little bit of knowledge being a dangerous thing, as judging by the Jxx reporting number the quoted train on platform 3 would be a 12-car 700 thus blocking the relevant points.

There was some Smart Alec complaining that Thameslink was using the term person hit by a train and that they should use another term instead! Probably the same idiot imo!

 

[westcoaster]

It’s wires there old boy.

No it's now a conductor bar, its extends just out side the tunnel mouth (around 50 M in length) starts above Apothecary Street Junction.

 

[Horizon22]

There isn’t a technological link between delay attribution and industry info systems (I’m aware open data feeds attempt to use TDA output, with varying degrees of success)

Delay reasons will be chosen and input usually by the info team or equivalent in the relevant operator control. It’s why there are essentially customer service staff within the operational control centre, they’re there to translate jargon into a coherent message the public will understand - and yes there are definitely cases within my own experience where “management” have attempted to influence that selection to subtly change the message or the connotations the public may draw from it. These attempts at influence also have varying degrees of success.

There’s also industry guidance on how certain types of incidents can be publicised - for example in my day we would never have used “operating incident” as it can be perceived by the involved party(s) as inferring an allegation before a full investigation has been carried out; and the Union reps would have eaten us on a silver platter for that. We would instead use the loathsome “problem under investigation” for a SPAD for example.

Things may well have changed these days as I’ve side-stepped over to operations these days, but for this, regardless of whether or not pedantically it is overhead conductor rail or wires, it would be “problem with the overhead wires” - it’s factual to the level Joe public cares about, and there’s no allegation the traincrew are at fault before an investigation has been conducted (no trial by CIS).

I've never been a fan of "operating incident" or "problem under investigation" (unless its literally just happened) as it just gets people asking more questions than it answers.

 

[Davester50]

I've never been a fan of "operating incident" or "problem under investigation" (unless its literally just happened) as it just gets people asking more questions than it answers.

I don't get the need to know the gory details brigade.
All I need to know is the options to get me to the destination, or when things are getting back to normal.

When I'm flying, I don't care what's wrong other, than if it's covered by EC261 or not.

 

[Bald Rick]

No it's now a conductor bar, its extends just out side the tunnel mouth (around 50 M in length) starts above Apothecary Street Junction.

Well I stand corrected. Apologies.

 

[AM9]

I don't get the need to know the gory details brigade.
All I need to know is the options to get me to the destination, or when things are getting back to normal.

When I'm flying, I don't care what's wrong other, than if it's covered by EC261 or not.

I agree with that, and despite the fact that I would probably be able to appreciate the finer points of technical reasons for delays, I accept that fixing the disruption far outweighs any need to satisfy enthusiasts' obsession with detail. Fuller information usually follws relatively quickly, so those enthusiasts that want to log every minute of their rail travel experience can update their records before the record is filed away for posterity.

 

[bramling]

I agree with that, and despite the fact that I would probably be able to appreciate the finer points of technical reasons for delays, I accept that fixing the disruption far outweighs any need to satisfy enthusiasts' obsession with detail. Fuller information usually follws relatively quickly, so those enthusiasts that want to log every minute of their rail travel experience can update their records before the record is filed away for posterity.

There are, however, good reasons for attempting to give as honest an explanation as possible.

Firstly, most people (with the inevitable exception for the small number of utterly self-important types for whom no explanation is good enough) respond better when they feel they’re being given a reason they can relate too, as opposed to being fobbed off. This in turn reduces the likelihood of frontline staff being on the receiving end of abuse.

Secondly, an honest explanation allows people to make the most informed decision possible on how to go about continuing their journey, which in turn also pacifies people in a stressful situation.

I am 100% subscribed to the idea of giving people as close as possible to the correct reason. Obviously sometimes this isn’t within the industry’s gift to provide such information as quickly as some people would like, but coming up with “customer facing language” doesn’t help.

 

[Horizon22]

I don't get the need to know the gory details brigade.
All I need to know is the options to get me to the destination, or when things are getting back to normal.

When I'm flying, I don't care what's wrong other, than if it's covered by EC261 or not.

But some people do want to know why their train has been cancelled / delayed / not moving (in fact surveys show that’s the majority). You don’t need to know the ins and outs in detail sure, but core information and a general area is well received by many - as well as all the onward travel info you mention. Of course that’s not always possible - immediately you might not yet have a timeframe.

 

[Davester50]

I'd be fairly sure, (but obviously can't prove it as I haven't seen your data from the surveys you've quoted), that getting home/to work/where ever is priority number one.

Do I need to know it's a signal passed at danger? No.
Will it change anything if I do? No.

I'm fifty something lapsed teenage spotter, who now uses the railway for business a lot, (at least until March 2020). I just need to know when, and how to get where I'm going.
IMHO the ones who want to know the detail are very much at the niche end, spotter level.

 

[DerekC]

The only delay reason that really annoys me is " .... due to late arrival of the incoming service" - a Waterloo favourite. OK - so why was that, then?

 

[jon0844]

I think people want information so they can make an educated guess as to how long it might take to resolve, and the more regular passengers can work out the likely impact of service recovery based on what went wrong.

A SPAD won't be quite as disruptive as a one under, where you're looking at 90 minutes minimum plus a high chance that services will be messed up after for a fair while.

I also want to know what's going on with a late flight too, even if I can't really do much about it. If I know my plane hasn't left another country yet, I can work out how long I am likely to be waiting than just going by a periodic announcement with a prediction that could be very inaccurate.

Easyjet used to (maybe still do) give a lot of detailed explanations, although perhaps how you can get more info from the many flight tracking apps?

 

[bramling]

I'd be fairly sure, (but obviously can't prove it as I haven't seen your data from the surveys you've quoted), that getting home/to work/where ever is priority number one.

Do I need to know it's a signal passed at danger? No.
Will it change anything if I do? No.

I'm fifty something lapsed teenage spotter, who now uses the railway for business a lot, (at least until March 2020). I just need to know when, and how to get where I'm going.
IMHO the ones who want to know the detail are very much at the niche end, spotter level.

This is where things go wrong, IMV. You say you don’t want detail, but you also say getting where you want to go is the priority. A big source of conflict is when people want to know how long a delay is likely to last, which is something staff often cannot answer, in the absence of a crystal ball. Worse is if a member of staff tries to be helpful and gives an estimate, and it turns out to be wrong, this is one sure-fire way to aggrieve many.

Best give as much detail as to what’s going on, which equips people to make an informed judgement on their options, the more regular users will have experience and be able to factor this in to their decision. Information empowers people to take ownership of a bad situation, it makes them feel more in control of the situation, which is better all round.

It’s also worth adding that for those on the autistic spectrum, even quite minor disruption can quickly cause overload to happen. Again information if presented in the most accessible manner possible can go some way to calming this. By contrast, short fob-offs are likely to make things worse.

 

[Davester50]

You say you don’t want detail,

Not wanting, and not needing are two different things. The ire that is generated when catch all phrases are used bemuses me.

A big source of conflict is when people want to know how long a delay is likely to last, which is something staff often cannot answer, in the absence of a crystal ball. Worse is if a member of staff tries to be helpful and gives an estimate, and it turns out to be wrong, this is one sure-fire way to aggrieve many.

That's what I'd like to see improved, rather than wasting resources finding and distributing the cause. Perhaps GBR will address this better...

Best give as much detail as to what’s going on, which equips people to make an informed judgement on their options, the more regular users will have experience and be able to factor this in to their decision. Information empowers people to take ownership of a bad situation, it makes them feel more in control of the situation, which is better all round.

I'd rather the focus, and effort was put in to onward movement. As you say, it's a big source of conflict. Not the nth degree of failure.

It’s also worth adding that for those on the autistic spectrum, even quite minor disruption can quickly cause overload to happen. Again information if presented in the most accessible manner possible can go some way to calming this. By contrast, short fob-offs are likely to make things worse.

Which is fair comment.

I also want to know what's going on with a late flight too, even if I can't really do much about it. If I know my plane hasn't left another country yet, I can work out how long I am likely to be waiting than just going by a periodic announcement with a prediction that could be very inaccurate.

That all falls in to the need to know how I'm getting there bracket.
I don't care if it's an avionics fault, compressor, or a problem with the tug. What matters is whether it's the airlines problem, or weather/ATC for purposes of compensation due.

 

[WelshBluebird]

The only delay reason that really annoys me is " .... due to late arrival of the incoming service" - a Waterloo favourite. OK - so why was that, then?

Na the worst is what I heard at Bristol Parkway yesterday. Something to the effect of "due to a short notice change to the timetable". Well yes. But no mention of the real reason (overrunning engineering works).

 

[43066]

Na the worst is what I heard at Bristol Parkway yesterday. Something to the effect of "due to a short notice change to the timetable". Well yes. But no mention of the real reason (overrunning engineering works).

The District Line today was citing “delays due to train cancellations”, which is a non statement similar to your example. The actual reason (I would imagine) was lack of train crew.

 

[swt_passenger]

The only delay reason that really annoys me is " .... due to late arrival of the incoming service" - a Waterloo favourite. OK - so why was that, then?

Late departure of a previous previous service, obvs…