Worcester trains fiasco - apparently

[DarloRich]

I take it the above was not taken from the press release of the TOC's public relations department...

That is a very peculiar attitude DarloRich. 'A few delays' 'Deal with it'?? Privatisation was brought in to 'deliver a World Class Railway' but 150 minutes late for several trains are just a few delays?

What it is a plea for some sense of perspective. Three trains were late on a rural line. It isn’t of the same magnitude of a peak hour break down on the way into Euston.

It doesn’t detract in anyway from what the passengers feel or the inconvenience or disruption they are subject to. I was also taking issue with the suggestion of a farce of fiasco, when it wasn’t. What it was was a broken down train that took some time to fix. I gave an example of why that might have been the case.

I was also asking people to show how they might make things better for passengers. So far the silence has been deafening......

 

[Monkey Magic]

The irony was that the problematic powercar was the one named 'First: transforming travel'

 

[D1009]

No, what we're looking at here is a broken piece of equipment in the brake system, which meant the brake pipe could not be pressurised. So that train was going nowhere, whether it was privatised or nationalised, until a fitter came and sorted it out - or did BR issue drivers with a magic wand?

No, BR was so wonderful this sort of thing never happened in the first place.

 

[Aictos]

Control* take over an hour to decide if they want tea or coffee, ask them a serious question about the operational railway and they go into full arse covering mode and just leave the crews on the trains/stations to take all the abuse!


* using the word very loosely indeed.

Every incident I have been involved in has been extended imensely because "control" wont listen to the people on the ground, I appreciate that we can only see our little bit of the big picture but even a simple/obvious decision takes an inordinate amount of time to get permission for.

I've had first hand experience of this, mostly caused by control not speaking to each other :roll:

 

[Goatboy]

What it is a plea for some sense of perspective. Three trains were late on a rural line.

Hmm, the line itself is rural but the places it serves less so. The rural part links the capital with three seperate Cities (Not towns or villages, actual cities).

Much of the West Coast Main Line is 'rural'.... whilst the Cotswold Line isn't quite the WCML it's a bit disingenuos to refer to it as 'rural' just because some of the intermediate stations are rural and its single track in places. The trains involved were not 153's on the Cambrian Coast line they were 8 coach Intercity services linking cities with the capital...

 

[jimm]

What it is a plea for some sense of perspective. Three trains were late on a rural line. It isn’t of the same magnitude of a peak hour break down on the way into Euston.

It doesn’t detract in anyway from what the passengers feel or the inconvenience or disruption they are subject to. I was also taking issue with the suggestion of a farce of fiasco, when it wasn’t. What it was was a broken down train that took some time to fix. I gave an example of why that might have been the case.

I was also asking people to show how they might make things better for passengers. So far the silence has been deafening......

You want perspective, do you?

Well here's some. Most of the morning peak servicefrom the route into Oxford, Reading and London (all three being key commuting/business/education destinations for the North Cotswolds and points west) was destroyed. Both the HSTs are near-full approaching Oxford, the stopping service usually has the best part of 140 people on board arriving at Oxford. Both HSTs are key elements of the fast service between Oxford and London at that time of day - so overcrowding on other services towards Reading and London resulted.

And it wasn't just three trains. The 08.26 from Worcester was held at Moreton-in-Marsh for 70 minutes behind the first three trains, the 08.58 from Oxford to Moreton-in-Marsh was cancelled, and its 09.50 return working only ran from Oxford to London. There was disruption to other services between London, Oxford and on up the Cotswold Line all the way to Hereford until mid-afternoon, due to stock and staff being out of place/out of hours.

No, it's not like a train sitting down and dying on the WCML but in an area with less than fantastic roads (with Oxford and Worcester's choked road systems at either end) and where the railway is the only public transport available to make many journeys, it was a very serious problem.

What is your bright idea for "making things better for passengers"? The train was going nowhere without a fitter's attention and, as I explained back up the thread, there just aren't any buses, coaches or taxis to be had out in the Cotswolds at that time of the day most of the year, due to the demands of school contracts. Trying to get people in place to reverse trains back to Moreton and then to work wrong line with a pilot past the blockage would probably have taken almost as long as waiting for the fitter.

 

[DarloRich]

What is your bright idea for "making things better for passengers"? The train was going nowhere without a fitter's attention and, as I explained back up the thread, there just aren't any buses, coaches or taxis to be had out in the Cotswolds at that time of the day most of the year, due to the demands of school contracts. Trying to get people in place to reverse trains back to Moreton and then to work wrong line with a pilot past the blockage would probably have taken almost as long as waiting for the fitter.

I think that is the point is was making! If you look at post #16 you might see that. There was a suggestion that it took to long to fix things, that it was a farce or fiasco, rather than trying to get things sorted out as quickly as possible.

People are very quick to chuck out criticism but seem to have few ideas how to make things better. I am asking the "experts" how they propose to improve things.

As for replacement buses it is the same all over the country. You wont get many in a emergency situation before 10am due to school transport contracts.

 

[martybabes]

But it is not down to the experts to say how things could be done better. Criticism of a service that went disastrously wrong is fully justified - there is no requirement on those affected by it to have to come up with a solution. That responsibility rests with those who are paid to manage the service (or, as some would have it, those who mis-manage the service).

 

[edwin_m]

If non-experts suggest solutions on here, they usually get shot down by experts who explain (patiently or otherwise) why the suggestions are impractical.

In this case it sounds very much as if Control could have shortened the delay by having access to rolling stock experts who could have confirmed whether the solution suggested by the traincrew was safe, talked them through an alternative fix, or gained an understanding of the problem beforehand if it was necessary to send someone out. I've read of other TOCs having "traction helplines" for drivers to call - lesson for FGW?

 

[Greenback]

But it is not down to the experts to say how things could be done better. Criticism of a service that went disastrously wrong is fully justified - there is no requirement on those affected by it to have to come up with a solution. That responsibility rests with those who are paid to manage the service (or, as some would have it, those who mis-manage the service).

Believe me, in any organisation (railway or otherwise), when things go wrong there is an internal inquiry and lessons are learnt. In most cases, situations that arise are one offs as the situation is rarely identical in terms of fault, location, availability of staff and other factors.

There is no industry handbook that outlines the ebst way of dealing with every incident that can occur in every possible scenario in every possible situation. It can't be done like that. So every time something happens it will be managed in the way that seems most appropriate at the time with regard to the bigger picture as well as health and safety and other safe operating procedures.

The decisions that are taken on the spot may not turn out to be the best decision with hindisght. Sometimes, what seems to be a good decision will be undermined by a further development, or a further failure. Sometimes, the decision may have been made without full knowledge of all the facts. The point is that the lessons learnt will be applied to future incidents. Unfortunately, the chances of soemthing identical happening in the same set of circumstances is rather small.

If non-experts suggest solutions on here, they usually get shot down by experts who explain (patiently or otherwise) why the suggestions are impractical.

In this case it sounds very much as if Control could have shortened the delay by having access to rolling stock experts who could have confirmed whether the solution suggested by the traincrew was safe, talked them through an alternative fix, or gained an understanding of the problem beforehand if it was necessary to send someone out. I've read of other TOCs having "traction helplines" for drivers to call - lesson for FGW?

It may well be something that FGW should have, and it may be something that they will introduce. No doubt such an innovations has already been discussed by people within the company, but these events may prompt a rethink. Or they may decide it still isn't a good idea. It is a decision for the senior managers as to how worthwhile it would be.

Maybe it was considered, from the information available, that the best course of action was to send someone out to look at the fault, rather than rely on second hand descriptions of what was happening. I don't know.

As I said above, FGW will be aware that the delays caused were unacceptable, and will analyse what happened in great detail.

 

[quarella]

Hindsight is a wonderful thing. FGW certainly used to have traction people in Control. We are not aware of the full facts. Was this one amongst a number of failures? Had the rostered person gone sick and someone called in from home? Was permission from a more senior level of on call management required who was not answering their phone?
Drivers and guards with a low opinion of control -As in all jobs there are people who perhaps do not meet our expectations in their job. Please remember Control can be all or nothing. While your train is important it may be one of a number of incidents and while many traincrew put themselves out at times of disruption there are some who are not as proactive as they could be in enabling an incident to be dealt with quickly and time is wasted dealing with those. TOC control also has to deal with Network Rail time in which a five minute estimate will be half an hour. One hour will be two minimum etc.

 

[jimm]

I think that is the point is was making! If you look at post #16 you might see that. There was a suggestion that it took to long to fix things, that it was a farce or fiasco, rather than trying to get things sorted out as quickly as possible.

People are very quick to chuck out criticism but seem to have few ideas how to make things better. I am asking the "experts" how they propose to improve things.

As for replacement buses it is the same all over the country. You wont get many in a emergency situation before 10am due to school transport contracts.

Apologies if I misunderstood your point about 'improvements' but in terms of perspective this was a major incident for this part of the railway - one of the worst I can think of in years.

Not that I believe for one moment there was some quick fix - for the train or alternative ways of moving the passengers.

Why are people still posting about there being some other way of tackling this other than sending a fitter to do a repair? A component in a compressor fractured. As a result, the air system could not be pressurised, the train could not be moved until the repair was done.

Assuming the fitter was sent from Oxford, the traffic at that time of day would likely have made it, as MonkeyMagic said way up the thread (post 21), a 45-minute journey just to get there, never mind do any work on the train. And presumably the crew's attempts to fix it took a while before they and the engineer on the phone talking to them admitted defeat - yes, edwin_m, FGW have thought of that - so a lot of time would already have elapsed before actual hands-on repairs began.

My reading of MonkeyMagic's account was simply that control were slower than they might have been to make up their minds as to what to do once the driver and fitter confirmed that the brakes were working again and the train could move. Whether to unload the passengers and send the train empty to a depot or was it fit to carry on in passenger service at least as far as Oxford, or all the way to London? Not making a snap judgment is perhaps understandable with all the factors that would need to be weighed up.

 

[HowardGWR]

I am sure what the Mod wrote about an internal inquiry will be correct. One certainly would hope so and not with any sense of seeking blame (where it seems to me none exists really - some understandable indecision being the worst levelled so far).

I don't think you need to be an expert to be able to see what caused the dreadful successive delays. In the old days (pre 1960s), the line was double throughout. There were several goods depots along the route inside whose tracks a pannier tank or a tender goods would be shunting, ready to be used in emergency. At Oxford, a main line engine station pilot would simmering, ready to go. Note the motive power in each case was 'stand alone', the coaches separate. There would be crossover points all along the line enabling succeeding trains to pass a stricken service wrong line under special procedures.

No, we don't have that now, but we can hope that the Oxford improvements will enable early redoubling of the line to Charlburyfrom Wolvercote Jcn and perhaps some extra crossovers could be inserted and bidirectional signalling made available. All such measures cost but I imagine the post mortem people will be able to consider these measures. The Cotswold line is an inter city line that has suffered branch line infrastructure, now being corrected, and that is the problem. One does not need to be an 'expert' to be able to understand that. The point is, as I see it, is the Cost / Benefit analysis outcomes of dealing with it.

 

[DarloRich]

But it is not down to the experts to say how things could be done better. Criticism of a service that went disastrously wrong is fully justified - there is no requirement on those affected by it to have to come up with a solution. That responsibility rests with those who are paid to manage the service (or, as some would have it, those who mis-manage the service).

That is fine. Everyone is entitled to criticise and that is a good thing. There is also the opportunity to make suggestions that may improve things. You dont want to do that for whatever reason. The concept of constructive criticism appears to escape you.

Furthermore your criticism appears to be that something went wrong and wasn't fixed instantly. A touch of realism would be of benefit.

If non-experts suggest solutions on here, they usually get shot down by experts who explain (patiently or otherwise) why the suggestions are impractical.

Not by me they wont! Just because you happen to be an accountant or doctor or electrician doesn't mean there isn't something in your trade that can transfer to another trade to make things better. If we dont suggest things nothing ever changes. To reject ideas that could improve things is really quite stupid!

Business and process improvement should be a key goal of any company

In this case it sounds very much as if Control could have shortened the delay by having access to rolling stock experts who could have confirmed whether the solution suggested by the traincrew was safe, talked them through an alternative fix, or gained an understanding of the problem beforehand if it was necessary to send someone out. I've read of other TOCs having "traction helplines" for drivers to call - lesson for FGW?

There you go - proposal! That didn't hurt did it!

 

[edwin_m]

Not by me they wont! Just because you happen to be an accountant or doctor or electrician doesn't mean there isn't something in your trade that can transfer to another trade to make things better. If we dont suggest things nothing ever changes. To reject ideas that could improve things is really quite stupid!

Business and process improvement should be a key goal of any company

No, not by you, and +1 to your views!

 

[martybabes]

That is fine. Everyone is entitled to criticise and that is a good thing. There is also the opportunity to make suggestions that may improve things. You dont want to do that for whatever reason. The concept of constructive criticism appears to escape you.

Furthermore your criticism appears to be that something went wrong and wasn't fixed instantly. A touch of realism would be of benefit.

I assume by your use of the term "you" it is not intended to mean me personally but forum readers generally. You will note that I have made neither criticisms nor suggestions, although I am very well aware of what is meant by constructive criticism.

My calling is not related in any way to the railway industry but, notwithstanding, and as an occasional passenger, I feel I am entitled to make a contribution here in relation to my railway travelling experience whether or not it is one that is satisfactory. That comment may well be critical if the service demands it or complimentary, again if the service demands it.

 

[jimm]

There you go - proposal! That didn't hurt did it!

Originally Posted by edwin_m
In this case it sounds very much as if Control could have shortened the delay by having access to rolling stock experts who could have confirmed whether the solution suggested by the traincrew was safe, talked them through an alternative fix, or gained an understanding of the problem beforehand if it was necessary to send someone out. I've read of other TOCs having "traction helplines" for drivers to call - lesson for FGW?

There you go - proposal! That didn't hurt did it!

Except that, as I have already noted, FGW do have traction engineers on hand at the end of a phone to assist train crews in just such a situation as last Monday. And on this occasion presumably helping them to reach the conclusion that a fitter would be needed to make a repair once the root of the problem was tracked down.

 

[DarloRich]

Except that, as I have already noted, FGW do have traction engineers on hand at the end of a phone to assist train crews in just such a situation as last Monday. And on this occasion presumably helping them to reach the conclusion that a fitter would be needed to make a repair once the root of the problem was tracked down.

of course they do - but I simply used that example to illustrate a point.

 

[jimm]

I am sure what the Mod wrote about an internal inquiry will be correct. One certainly would hope so and not with any sense of seeking blame (where it seems to me none exists really - some understandable indecision being the worst levelled so far).

I don't think you need to be an expert to be able to see what caused the dreadful successive delays. In the old days (pre 1960s), the line was double throughout. There were several goods depots along the route inside whose tracks a pannier tank or a tender goods would be shunting, ready to be used in emergency. At Oxford, a main line engine station pilot would simmering, ready to go. Note the motive power in each case was 'stand alone', the coaches separate. There would be crossover points all along the line enabling succeeding trains to pass a stricken service wrong line under special procedures.

No, we don't have that now, but we can hope that the Oxford improvements will enable early redoubling of the line to Charlburyfrom Wolvercote Jcn and perhaps some extra crossovers could be inserted and bidirectional signalling made available. All such measures cost but I imagine the post mortem people will be able to consider these measures. The Cotswold line is an inter city line that has suffered branch line infrastructure, now being corrected, and that is the problem. One does not need to be an 'expert' to be able to understand that. The point is, as I see it, is the Cost / Benefit analysis outcomes of dealing with it.

I don't believe blame has anything to do it, unless you blame the person who put an alarm handle in the toilet when the train was designed (apparently this was where the system was activated by a passenger). The unfortunate consequence of that action was that a brake system component broke, when on most other occasions I suspect it would probably have been fine.

We're not in the 1960s and even then wrong-line pilot working would have taken time to set up, although you would have had more locally-based staff to do things like protect level crossings, and be a time-consuming process, as almost all the crossovers were trailing ones, so lots of reversing required. I doubt bidirectional signalling would be worth it for the Cotswold Line on any rational cost-benefit analysis and the only extra crossovers likely to be installed under further redoubling would be to allow trains to continue to turn back at Charlbury towards Oxford and at Evesham to return to Worcester.

 

[Greenback]

I doubt that there will be any blame attached to anyone. In my experience in various occupations, an inquiry is an exercise in seeing, with hindight, naturally, what decision were made, whether they were correct in the end, and how things can be improved for 'next time'.

The likely outcome would be that some procedures may be rewritten or clarified, upgrades may be considered for communication systems and IT systems, or there may be tweaks to the maintenance processes to try and avoid such failures in the first place.

But it is all specualtion, and we will probably never find out what, if anything, came out of any review!