plastictaffy
Member
NOthing wrong with any of those. I once apologised for passengers having to travel to Birmingham and told them they had my deepest sympathy for having to go there. Didn't go down too well, that one.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
"Operational Incident", Wembley Down Slow
- Thread starter QueensCurve
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Minilad
Established Member
The problem I have found with explaining things in any detail is that firstly the vast majority of "normal" passengers really don't care and don't understand. So you end up feeling you have wasted your time. Occasionally someone who clearly does know a little asks a question and I have answered with as much detail as necessary.
You therefore find lumping everyone into the same boat is generally easier and quicker.
There will always be a few "special snowflakes" who feel the world revolves around them and want chapter and verse. Unfortunately spending time with such people when you are already involved in a potentially stressful situation isn't always the best use of your time.
Of course the people on here have a more than passing interest in the railway and how it works so I can perhaps understand the desire to know what has happened but in my experience most passengers are OK with certain terms such as "operational incident" as long as you keep them in the loop with expected timings of the delay.
As a driver I know that if I had had a "operational incident" the last thing I would want whilst trying to sort it out is everyone on the train knowing exactly what had happened. Too many armchair experts, know it alls and know nothings chattering on twitter and the like would be extremely embarrassing to see and hear.
I'm afraid I don't agree with people who think the railway is being deliberately obtuse by using these terms. It's more to do with using catch all reasons in the name of brevity.
I am really not aware of any train crew that hold passengers in contempt. We all try to do the best we can but when the brown stuff hits the fan the priority is usually getting things moving again and that can sometimes be to the detriment of supply of information.
You therefore find lumping everyone into the same boat is generally easier and quicker.
There will always be a few "special snowflakes" who feel the world revolves around them and want chapter and verse. Unfortunately spending time with such people when you are already involved in a potentially stressful situation isn't always the best use of your time.
Of course the people on here have a more than passing interest in the railway and how it works so I can perhaps understand the desire to know what has happened but in my experience most passengers are OK with certain terms such as "operational incident" as long as you keep them in the loop with expected timings of the delay.
As a driver I know that if I had had a "operational incident" the last thing I would want whilst trying to sort it out is everyone on the train knowing exactly what had happened. Too many armchair experts, know it alls and know nothings chattering on twitter and the like would be extremely embarrassing to see and hear.
I'm afraid I don't agree with people who think the railway is being deliberately obtuse by using these terms. It's more to do with using catch all reasons in the name of brevity.
I am really not aware of any train crew that hold passengers in contempt. We all try to do the best we can but when the brown stuff hits the fan the priority is usually getting things moving again and that can sometimes be to the detriment of supply of information.
Those are good example but for whats it worth from the standard list of reasons none of those would be even close to operational incident.
1 would either be "due to congestion" or "adverse weather conditions". 2 and 3 would be "due to late running services". Neither of those are hiding anything and are plenty for 95% of passengers.
I found that most of the type who would ask for a proper explanation would listen for all of two seconds before telling me they didn't care or huffing about it, thus my general reluctance to give much more than the brief overall reasons. And, no, Mr ApplePie, I don't have contempt for customers, I do however have experience with them...
A few more examples that would be classed as operating incidents or "a problem currently under investigation":
And yes, all of those have really happened...
- Train Planning team have pathed a train through the middle of a possession...and Network Rail gave them the path
- Signaller trying to fit 11 coaches into a 10 coach platform
- Rear part of a train in one platform, front part the other side of the station due to a unit swap taking place and the signaller forgetting
- Signaller "caught short" and managed to get locked out of the box
- Amended schedules for engineering work, and nobody rostered to work a given train
And yes, all of those have really happened...
And nothing there that you couldn't tell the public.
It will not hurt the railway to just tell people these things.
I am no longer a 'normal passenger' as described by someone further up this thread but in my first few months of commuting daily to Uni via train, I was. Wasn't on this forum then, couldn't tell a 150 from a 155, had no idea what a SPAD was. Even then, 'operating incident' didn't wash.
It may not be the case in London where everything seems to be different, but travelling around West Yorkshire, if we stopped unexpectedly it genuinely did help to know why.
Even in the case of waiting on a TPE 185 one time before Morley tunnel because 'a driver on an earlier service thought he spotted something in the tunnel, so the train in front of us is going through slowly to make sure everything is okay' - we may not have known exactly how long it would take, but at least we understood what was happening.
It's not necessarily about having exact details, or timings. It's simply about being kept informed; people panic if they don't know what's happening. I've had it so many times - if you hear a general excuse such as 'operating incident' people's imaginations run wild and they start speculating even more bizarrely than on here; you can feel them getting agitated.
It may not be the case in London where everything seems to be different, but travelling around West Yorkshire, if we stopped unexpectedly it genuinely did help to know why.
Even in the case of waiting on a TPE 185 one time before Morley tunnel because 'a driver on an earlier service thought he spotted something in the tunnel, so the train in front of us is going through slowly to make sure everything is okay' - we may not have known exactly how long it would take, but at least we understood what was happening.
It's not necessarily about having exact details, or timings. It's simply about being kept informed; people panic if they don't know what's happening. I've had it so many times - if you hear a general excuse such as 'operating incident' people's imaginations run wild and they start speculating even more bizarrely than on here; you can feel them getting agitated.
It does ? does not mean anyone has cocked up anywhere ! BUT then again it could well be someone has !
So by assuming the first, we are blaming an individual for no reason at all
Relatively frequently on the fast train we are held up behind a late running stopping train and this causes annoyance to crew and passengers. We fairly often get announcements to the effect that we are yet again following the stopping train and will follow them to X and therefore be 10 minutes late.
Occasionally we get a more colourful explanation
"We are yet again stuck behind the stopping train, once he bu**ers off out the way we will be able to get a move on and hopefully make up time. Sorry you are yet again held up"
The other day a guard was telling us a great reason for a train being held up. They were coming out of the depot, train and crew all present. Guard wonders why they are not moving, drivers wonders why he has been given the correct lights to go. After a while the driver realises he is in the wrong end of the train, as he should be going out the northern end of the depot not the southern! We concluded he would have the michael taken out of him on his return to depot later!
Mintona
Established Member
If you tell passengers that the train has gone past a red light, there will be some on board who will probably never travel by train again.
Passengers don't need to know stuff like that. With other delays it's best to be as open and honest as possible, but with an operating incident it's best just to leave it at that. Knowing what the incident is won't assist you in any way, other than to judge the driver.
Passengers don't need to know stuff like that. With other delays it's best to be as open and honest as possible, but with an operating incident it's best just to leave it at that. Knowing what the incident is won't assist you in any way, other than to judge the driver.
Nobody is saying that you should tell passengers the train went past a red light.
So whats this thread all about then?:roll:
So, what do you use for a SPAD? If you can't say passed a red light or operational incident?
Sorry for the delay to your journey. The train has passed a signal that was not showing either green, yellow or white. This maybe down to a fault with the train, a fault with the driver, a fault with the signaller, a fault with the infrastructure, a fault with the S&T or an emergency.:roll:
Yes I know that was rather facetious.
Yes I know that was rather facetious.
Last edited:
Going round in circles this is. Some people in here are never gonna be happy on here unless their 'right' to know is satisfied. I mean the one earlier on who said he was lied to about a slow train being in front, but opentrainmap or whatever it is said different. That same thing once told me my train was in platform 7 at Euston when it was actually still at Queens Park. But hey, computers NEVER lie do they?
Like was said earlier, it's all about the knowing 'da gen'. and it gets up your nose that the info won't be shared.
Like was said earlier, it's all about the knowing 'da gen'. and it gets up your nose that the info won't be shared.
deltic
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 3,714
Having done some work on transparency in the rail industry (the report was never published!) I tend to be of the view the more information provided the better as long as that information is provided in a way that is accessible and understandable to its audience. Lack of information at times of disruption is one of the biggest passenger bugbears and few operators seem to be able to deal with it.
An announcement along the lines that "Sorry for the delay to your journey. The train's failsafe systems have been activated bringing us to a halt. There will be delay of approximately x minutes while we carry out checks and ensure that it is safe for us to continue. I will update you when I have any further information. Once again apologies for the delay but your safety is our priority.
An announcement along the lines that "Sorry for the delay to your journey. The train's failsafe systems have been activated bringing us to a halt. There will be delay of approximately x minutes while we carry out checks and ensure that it is safe for us to continue. I will update you when I have any further information. Once again apologies for the delay but your safety is our priority.
To me that is just a long winded "operational incident". Also, its extremely hard to give an X number of minutes for a lot of cases.
No, the TOC should have completely redesigned Twitter to keep the obsessives up to date with precisely what happened
In my experience, guards on the train make similar announcements (without the the delay guesstimate) or the bit about safety being the priority.
Station announcements/PIS displays tend to be more detail-averse.
You should say that the train was brought to a halt by a safety device, and that the cause is being investigated. We are all perfectly safe on board and we will let you know when we are likely to move again. Thank you for your patience.
It is only a modicum more transparent than operational incident. I don't know why you all get so defensive about it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
It is a standard railway delay explanation so the point is moot.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Depressingly poor attitudes on this thread. So defensive!
Nobody is arguing for a forensic explanation of what happened! Or any gen. There are lots of people, like me, who care more about customer experience than knowing which driver is getting hauled off a train because of a SPAR.
The railway should be literally as honest and open as possible without compromising:
- safety
- confidentiality
- customer sentiment
plastictaffy
Member
That was typed with my tongue very firmly in my cheek, purely for the benefit of applepie who has now gone very quiet.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
Honestly, most people (that is average passengers rather than "knowledgeable" spotters) wont care about the technical explanation. I promise you they will not.
How do i know? I ask people I know who have no interest in railways being my friends and family. Almost all of them said what they want to know is how long the issue will last, how they will get home and how long it will take to get home not what caused the issue and certainly not a detailed technical explanation.
I maintain that throwing in stuff about safety systems bringing the train to a stop will simply cause confusion and worry to many.
EDIT: Do not take my disagreement over technicalities as indicating the "railway" is good at communicating. It often is not.
Last edited:
I have not said passengers should get a technical explanation! Of course they shouldn't. They won't care.
What they do care about is the nature of what has happened, and that despite the delay things will be fine. It helps people feel informed, cared about, and eases the tension. Transparency is really important. Speaking about safety systems doesn't cause panic on other modes of transport, so there is no need to wrap railway passengers in cotton wool and give them a bland "operating incident" explanation. It explains nothing, provides no context, or assistance, or reassurance, or empathy. It's bad bad bad communications.
The latest NPS showed that the way railway companies deal with delays fell four percentage points. It is unlikely that the railway has got worse at handling delays. More likely is that passenger expectations are moving upwards and the railway is failing to match this.
The longer the railway sits still, the greater the pressure to move upwards.
DarloRich
Veteran Member
I can not stress enough how normal people do not want detailed information about why the train has stopped. They want to know when they will get home at least in my opinion based on the information available to me
Of course communication needs to improve, I simply disagree that the detailed technical explanation (and talking about SPADS or SPARS or AWS etc IS a technical explanation) you seem to want or expect is not the way forward. We need to get basic communications right before we try to be clever about messages!
However what many of the normal customers want is something they can not be given: An exact delay notification from minute 1.
Last edited:
philthetube
Established Member
- Joined
- 5 Jan 2016
- Messages
- 4,181
It is very easy to spook people without intending. Working on the railways you tend to think things are obvious, when the the lay person they are not.
I have avoided using the words "signal failure" since in conversation with friends I realised many of them were no aware that signal fail safe and that phrase worried them.
Telling people they are in no danger is another one which is often misinterpreted, why would they tell us that if everything was ok? is the way that statement is percieved.
I have avoided using the words "signal failure" since in conversation with friends I realised many of them were no aware that signal fail safe and that phrase worried them.
Telling people they are in no danger is another one which is often misinterpreted, why would they tell us that if everything was ok? is the way that statement is percieved.
At no point have I said anything about a SPAR or SPAD or AWS or GSMR or any piece of jargon.
Tell people why the train has stopped without using jargon. It is not hard. It is not getting clever with messaging. It is simply informing the paying customer about the present situation.
Saying "we've stopped, be under way in an hour" as you seem to be advocating is a completely unacceptable way to communicate with customers. And, if no delay length is known, your message would be "we've stopped."
There is a massive appetite for transparency and openness.
Passengers are already telling the railway that the handling of delays is unsatisfactory. Entrenching the current position is not going to help.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
Telling people that they are in no danger, in a calm way, is not unhelpful. It is fine. 99% of the time the person delivering the message is on the same train as the passenger.
Last edited:
zn1
Member
- Joined
- 3 Sep 2011
- Messages
- 435
you dont have to be told anything...the train is delayed due to operational reasons - thats all the punters need to know..simple...joe public dont need to know or want to know...u tell them it can cause panic...300 people in a sealed tube panic easily and you dont need 300 odd punters running around the operational lines at wembley where average speeds are 70+ odd mph.....it can cause a mess and more delays
Absolute nonsense, and "you don't have to be told anything" is a poor and self-focused attitude.
Why not take a look at Twitter and see the appetite from Joe Public for finding out why trains might be running late?
Your industry is evidentially shown to be well behind the customer's expectation in this area, and it took a massive drop last year.
Time for a rethink, not entrenching "it's always been done this way".
Minilad
Established Member
I don't believe anyone is saying passengers shouldn't be kept informed but in my experience, on the ground during incidents, is that people really just want to know how long the disruption will last. They do not, in the vast majority of cases, want to know the ins and outs of what has happened over and above a brush strokes answer. In fact too much technical jargon puts them off as they don't really understand what you mean anyway and can make two and two equal five. The old adage of a little knowledge is a dangerous thing comes into play.
Keep the passengers up to date with expected delay timings and they are, mostly, happy with that. Some people really do acknowledge that sometime things do go wrong. Others of course think the world revolves around them and will want to know everything. But they are in the massive majority in my experience.
Enthusiasts by their nature are more inquisitive about the details but even then I do not believe they have any right to know about details of anything that could involve disciplinary procedures.
Keep the passengers up to date with expected delay timings and they are, mostly, happy with that. Some people really do acknowledge that sometime things do go wrong. Others of course think the world revolves around them and will want to know everything. But they are in the massive majority in my experience.
Enthusiasts by their nature are more inquisitive about the details but even then I do not believe they have any right to know about details of anything that could involve disciplinary procedures.
- Status