Should only the ultra-continent travel by train in bad weather?

[Guest]

My, there are some bad-tempered posters on this thread. Still, carry on... gives the rest of us something to smile about over our morning coffee.

[jonny777]

Given the progress of this thread, I am now fully convinced that any idea of providing a 'public service' on the privatised railway has well and truly vanished. 

 

It would appear that passengers are simply seen as irritants, who just get in the way of running the 12" to 1' train set. 

[Rivercider]

I can see both sides of the argument in this very unfortunate incident.

 

It is clearly highly dangerous and irresponsible for passengers to carry out an unplanned evacuation. I do not condone the action.

 

However I would suggest that with no sign of outside help coming it is inevitable that unplanned evacuation will happen at some point.

As well as the physical conditions of being cold and tired and without toilet facilities there is also the mental problem,

as passengers are closely confined with others who will include people who are agoraphobic, irritated, annoyed, angry, frustrated or a combination of all of those.

It is easy to see disputes breaking out as someone suggests leaving the train while others argue against the idea.

 

I have been on a heavily delayed train, fortunately it was a HST with working toilets, and stood for well over two hours in a hot and crowded vestibule

as we travelled between Exeter and Taunton, delayed due to electrical problems in hot weather. A man stood right next to me was getting increasingly

anxious, and drinking lager, and I could see he was upsetting other passengers with us. Fortunately our train was able to proceed from signal to signal stopping each time for the driver to phone for permission to proceed, we did also get broadcasts from the guard. I chatted to the anxious passenger beside me, explaining where we were, why we were stopping, and how close we were to arriving at Taunton, which I hope helped him keep calmer than he might have been.

 

cheers

[Zomboid]

Its obviously not the drivers fault but the procedure is wrong if people are trapped in those conditions for that long right next to the station.

 

I'm sure the ballast was slippy but its snowing, everywhere is slippy. I imagine that any sane passengers were wearing sensible footware.

Even taking the ice out of the equation, there are many, many things you can trip over in the vicinity of the rails. Frankly it's not somewhere that's particularly safe if you are suitably attired and know what you're doing, and if you're not/don't then it is literally riddled with things that can kill or seriously injure you.

 

As for conductor rail isolations, the control room can do a couple of miles at a time, generally. Smaller sections depend on what local manual switching is provided, and require competent staff to operate them. It may not be possible to do just the affected bit without stopping trains on other routes, which would help no one.

[Trog]

Myself I have for a long time wondered just how long the railway is allowed to insist that people stay on a failed train. It must eventually cross a legal line to illegal imprisonment. Presumably the allowable time delay would be dependent on the balance of risk, what the situation is and where the train is stranded etc. With rescue to a train failed 60'0" off the platform ends at Waterloo having to be delivered quicker than to a train stranded up on the moors in northern Scotland.

 

The Railway has a duty of care to its passengers, and leaving them stranded without heat and services is at some point going to be a failure of that duty, presumably after the point at which a properly resourced and led railway organization should have been able to arrange rescue in the conditions at the time and place of the incident. Once the Railway has failed in its legal duty to its passengers, complaining that the passengers are not respecting the railways rights becomes a bit hypocritical.

[Hesperus]

Even taking the ice out of the equation, there are many, many things you can trip over in the vicinity of the rails. Frankly it's not somewhere that's particularly safe if you are suitably attired and know what you're doing, and if you're not/don't then it is literally riddled with things that can kill or seriously injure you.

 

As for conductor rail isolations, the control room can do a couple of miles at a time, generally. Smaller sections depend on what local manual switching is provided, and require competent staff to operate them. It may not be possible to do just the affected bit without stopping trains on other routes, which would help no one.

 

There is also a fair bit of difference between carefully walking a short distance accross difficult ground and trying to move heavy equipment accross it.  I suggested that they should go in small groups as a crowd on a difficult surface would be dangerous.

 

This country needs more common sense around risk,  I would far rather risk tripping over than be trapped on a freezing train with no food, water or toilet for hours on end.

[Oldddudders]

Myself I have for a long time wondered just how long the railway is allowed to insist that people stay on a failed train. It must eventually cross a legal line to illegal imprisonment. Presumably the allowable time delay would be dependent on the balance of risk, what the situation is and where the train is stranded etc. With rescue to a train failed 60'0" off the platform ends at Waterloo having to be delivered quicker than to a train stranded up on the moors in northern Scotland.

 

The Railway has a duty of care to its passengers, and leaving them stranded without heat and services is at some point going to be a failure of that duty, presumably after the point at which a properly resourced and led railway organization should have been able to arrange rescue in the conditions at the time and place of the incident. Once the Railway has failed in its legal duty to its passengers, complaining that the passengers are not respecting the railways rights becomes a bit hypocritical.

Sadly, as I pointed out earlier, there is no such thing as The Railway. There is simply a contractual matrix among innumerable firms to jointly make the system work. No-one is in overall charge, so no-one has ultimate responsibility. Edited March 4, 2018 by Oldddudders

[locoholic]

...a rag-tag mob...

 

...The real problem lies in train design - in particular the clot who came up with the idea of toilet-less trains...

 

...It is completely unreasonable to expect rail staff to put their necks on the block (in terms of criminal liability) by authorising actions that might sound fine in theory but are fraught with unquantifiable hazards in practice. 

 

 

Whilst I sympathise with the sentiments expressed, I would add the following:

 

"rag-tag mob" is an unfortunate way of describing the fare-paying passengers, and might betray a less than respectful attitude.

 

Toilet-less trains have been present on the railways since railways were invented. It was the trains with toilets that were the innovation.

 

Running a train service is and has always been always fraught with unquantifiable hazards. What has changed is the railway's ability to deal with those hazards. If current trends continue, travelling by train in anything other than the mildest of weather will be an act of the greatest optimism if, indeed, the rail companies are willing to run trains when it is snowing, raining heavily or hot and sunny.

 

After all, the safest railway is one where no trains are running!

[scouser]

Its obviously not the drivers fault but the procedure is wrong if people are trapped in those conditions for that long right next to the station.

 

I'm sure the ballast was slippy but its snowing, everywhere is slippy. I imagine that any sane passengers were wearing sensible footware.

Sensible footwear? I presume you mean high heels or leather soled shoes, because that is probably what most were wearing. I watched a woman trying to walk in snow yesterday in "killer heels". Never was an item of clothing better named.

There were people trapped in their car near Cardiff, in a seventeen foot snow drift. One of them was

wearing pyjamas! Contrary to what a lot of people think, rules were developed for the safety of passengers not to inconvenience them.

Edited March 4, 2018 by scouser

[scouser]

Oh, rest assured as soon as one or more people are killed there will be "lessons to be learned".

As for angry posters on this thread, we are talking about people's lives, surely this should be a passionate topic?

[Arun Sharma]

Sadly, as I pointed out earlier, there is no such thing as The Railway. There is simply a contractual matrix among innumerable firms to jointly make the system work. No-one is in overall charge, so no-one has ultimate responsibility.

No, that's not true. The Railway is still technically nationalised and wholly the property of the State. The fact is that the rolling stock and train staff working them are hired [i.e., franchised/empowered] by the State to perform well-defined functions on state property and on behalf of the state.

Responsibility for overall provision of the service that is being paid for by passengers rests with the Secretary of State for Transport and his boss, Mrs May.

No more and no less.

Edited March 4, 2018 by ted675

[Rugd1022]

In an effort to lighten the thread up a little....try sitting in a goods loop in the middle of nowhere in the snow for fourteen hours with no food or drink, desperate to execute a number two, with no communication between you and the signalman....! 

 

The idea of sending passengers down the cess in groups of five is sensible enough on its own if prevailing conditions allow it, but suppose this takes place in the middle of nowhere in deep snow, once they're down on the ground out of sight of the train crew anything can happen, if one or more slip and fall how are the emergency services supposed to get there if the roads (if there are any close by) are closed due to snow? In deep snow you can't see what lies beneath it.

 

 

[APOLLO]

Watch from 33.08. A bit gruesome but this is what rail staff have always had to put up with. The incident and passenger evacuation was seemingly well managed in this case.

 

The whole film is worth watching. in many ways the modern railway has improved, but perhaps not in every area. I'm sure most railway staff on the front line these days do there very best. The world has indeed changed.

 

 

Brit15

[Trog]

In an effort to lighten the thread up a little....try sitting in a goods loop in the middle of nowhere in the snow for fourteen hours with no food or drink, desperate to execute a number two, with no communication between you and the signalman....! 

 

 

Time to make a guards parcel?  Something even the Daily Mail is just about fit for.

[Oldddudders]

Responsibility for overall provision of the service that is being paid for by passengers rests with the Secretary of State for Transport and his boss, Mrs May.

No more and no less.

And the chances of any holder of either of those posts, now or in future, taking any responsibility if a ghastly tragedy followed such an evacuation, are slightly less than those of a snowball in a flushing cistern.

[corneliuslundie]

On a more general note, should we be planning for more frequent weather of the type we are currently experiencing, with the Gulf Stream having moved away from the UK? If so, do we need to look at countries such as Sweden and Switzerland to see how they cope?

Jonathan

[phil-b259]

Its obviously not the drivers fault but the procedure is wrong if people are trapped in those conditions for that long right next to the station.

 

 

A very sensible analysis and one which Lociholic should have done rather than insinuating its all the fault of 'jobswoths' or staff hibernating while passengers suffer.

 

Ordinarily I have very little doubt organising an evacuation would be relatively easy - Staff would be found relatively quickly (they wouldn't all be busy trying to deal with lots of other incidents) they would be able to get to site relatively quickly (road conditions), the underfoot conditions for passengers would be far more conducive to letting them walk along the track cess (however short the distance). However this past week has not been ordinary....

 

One thing that has to be considered for example is the effect a isolation in cold weather will have on all the OTHER trains at the time. There is a well known phenomenon on roads that if a traffic jam builds up in snow / ice - it not only stops gritters actually getting to the most dangerous sections, the grit itself is far less effective just sitting on top of the snow / ice - to be effective it needs to be 'worked' as it were by passing traffic. To a degree the same holds true with conductor rail - if the temperature is low enough / conditions that bad then holding trains static for any length of time increases the chance that they too will end up in difficulty. It wouldn't take much to get the railway equivalent of what we have seen on some of our motorways this past week with lorrys stuck all over the place.

 

Given the publicity both the Lewisham and the overnight stranding in Dorset, I'm sure that once things are back to normal persons with the TOCs concerned will review their winter precautions - just as the industry did for hot weather situations where a Thameslink train failure near Kentish Town led to mass trespass by passengers seeking to escape their overcrowded train. Be aware however unless you all want to pay a lot more for your winter season ticket to have vast fleets of 4x4s and qualified staff sitting round 'just in case' of bad weather such a review could well see TOCs shutting down / thinning out services even more than they have done this week.

[Arun Sharma]

And the chances of any holder of either of those posts, now or in future, taking any responsibility if a ghastly tragedy followed such an evacuation, are slightly less than those of a snowball in a flushing cistern.

Fortunately that is why we have independant Coroners who are encouraged to speak for those who no longer have a voice to speak for themselves. Have more faith. 

[phil-b259]

Myself I have for a long time wondered just how long the railway is allowed to insist that people stay on a failed train. It must eventually cross a legal line to illegal imprisonment. Presumably the allowable time delay would be dependent on the balance of risk, what the situation is and where the train is stranded etc. With rescue to a train failed 60'0" off the platform ends at Waterloo having to be delivered quicker than to a train stranded up on the moors in northern Scotland.

 

The Railway has a duty of care to its passengers, and leaving them stranded without heat and services is at some point going to be a failure of that duty, presumably after the point at which a properly resourced and led railway organization should have been able to arrange rescue in the conditions at the time and place of the incident. Once the Railway has failed in its legal duty to its passengers, complaining that the passengers are not respecting the railways rights becomes a bit hypocritical.

 

If we are going to start invoking legal stuff (which is partly why the country is in such a mess in my view) we need to remember the 'force majeure' clause. Thus while it is not 'right' to leave passengers on a train with no heating or working toilets for hours on end, if you have the Met office giving out weather warnings, extensive problems on the roads and not enough resources (staff, lighting, etc) on hand to achieve a sucessfull outcome then a TOC can quite legally defer an evacuation for as long as it is necessary to obtain suitable resources. In the case of the stranded SWR service in Dorset that was something close to 10 hours IIRC - and while they may have suffered certain hardships, at least inside the train they were out of the wind (Which has been really cold over the past few days) and they weren't going to hurt themselves tripping over stuff trying to walk back along the tracks.

 

What is or is not acceptable under law would thus depends greatly on the situation on the ground at the time, and why any 'maximum' time limit would be rejected.

[Ashcombe]

Carry an empty plastic milk carton with you in your duty rucksack.

 

Once used, it will also double as a hand warmer for a reasonable amount of time!

 

Also useful to have one in the car if you get stuck in a jam, especially in bad weather.

During my enforced confinement in my car for more than six hours on the A31 through Thursday night into Friday morning, I was greatly relieved (pardon the pun) to have with me a purpose built receptacle of which to make use. One should indeed beware of yellow snow....!

 

Edit: My husband (Olddudders) found it amusing to remark that I am now on the continent.......sigh!!

Edited March 4, 2018 by Ashcombe

[phil-b259]

On a more general note, should we be planning for more frequent weather of the type we are currently experiencing, with the Gulf Stream having moved away from the UK? If so, do we need to look at countries such as Sweden and Switzerland to see how they cope?

Jonathan

 

A big part of the reason they 'cope' is the simple reason that they get significant Ice and snow EVERY winter. It therefore makes economic sense to ensure that all railway operations are configured accordingly because they are used every year.

 

I also urge you to compare the situations on the UKs roads where drivers were getting into all sorts of problems with widespread collisions / vehicles in ditches because winter grade tyres were not fitted and gritting was not effective in some areas.

 

By contrast the last really big (and disruptive) snowfall we got in the UK before last week was around 2010 & 2011 - and before then it was as far back as 1991!

 

In recent decades the UK has generally had mild winters with very little snow and ice - certainly compared to Scandinavia or central / eastern Europe, this makes it hard to financially justify having lots of people or equipment sitting round 'just in case'

[Reorte]

Responsibility for overall provision of the service that is being paid for by passengers rests with the Secretary of State for Transport and his boss, Mrs May.

No more and no less.

Maybe that's part of the problem then, it's rather far removed from the day to day operation. Ultimately answering to the Secretary of State and responsibilty for the railway aren't quite the same thing in my eyes.

Edited March 4, 2018 by Reorte

[Hesperus]

Would it have helped in this situation if all trains had a standardised coupling?

 

As the 3rd rail was still live why couldn't the train behind have pushed it into the station?

[phil-b259]

Please note that:-

 

(i) British Transport Police have issued a warning urging passengers to stay on board stranded trains, where they are "far safer".

(ii) Southeastern and Network Rail have hired an independent investigator to review the matter.

(iii) The incident has been referred to the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB).

 

also that the BTP are just as much a Police force as any other and when they say:-

 

"Self-evacuating from trains is never a good idea as it places you and others at significant risk.

"You are risking your life trespassing on live tracks."

 

Both the public and indeed railway staff (who are in no way immune from investigation / prosecution by said police) are wise to heed their advice.

 

source:- http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-43270403

[forest2807]

Do you go round insulting everyone else you encounter? Quite frankly its your attitude to railway staff that makes me dismiss the public as selfish twats.

 

The safest place to be during a train brakedon IS ON THAT TRAIN! and not strolling about the lineside. I know because I was out in it and even with some decent work books the ballast was like a skating rink - your average commuter was in very real danger of doing themselves an injury

 

Please note that those stranded on the Weymouth bound service stayed put all night even though the toilets and heating failed.

 

During hot weather the railway industry has very good contingency plans in place - but then its relatively easy for staff to get about by road and deliver water, asses underfoot conditions and put in place a controlled evacuation during a sunny day. With the country at large grinding to a halt through icy roads, etc its doesn't take a genius to work out and the railways suffering accordingly its no real surprise that organising a response took time - there were plenty of other incidents going on at the time.

 

I assume that in your brain you reckon the driver should have told folk " the stations only a few yards away why don't you clamber down and make your own way there" and sod the consequences. Well there is a little thing called 'THE LEGAL SYSTEM' an I don't see why railway staff should open themselves up to litigation by going against procedure.

Just because the ‘procedure’ you cite is so clearly unfit for purpose in these circumstances, that does not make the passenger (yes, passenger, not customer) a ‘’. Blame the procedure, not the poor people who suffer because of it.