Perils of ignoring Pick Up only at Reading

[whole diary]

[bobm]

We have discussed before the merits and pitfalls of trains advertised as pick up only at Reading.

Anyone on tonight's 19:15 from London Paddington to Swansea may have had a surprise.  As the train left London full and standing it was decided to skip the pick up only stop at Reading.  I don't know if any announcements were made before departure - if not, next stop Swindon!

[LiskeardRich]

Do you know if there were many over carries then?

[bobm]

No I wasn't on the train tonight - but I have seen people alight at Reading from it in the past.

[Kernow Otter]

We have discussed before the merits and pitfalls of trains advertised as pick up only at Reading.

Anyone on tonight's 19:15 from London Paddington to Swansea may have had a surprise.  As the train left London full and standing it was decided to skip the pick up only stop at Reading.  I don't know if any announcements were made before departure - if not, next stop Swindon!

 

More of that I say.

[JayMac]

Having a train that is pick up only on just one day of the week is always likely to catch people out.

That said, there is far too much abuse of nominally 'pick up only' services that call at Reading, by Reading commuters. So, little sympathy for any Reading bound folk who found themselves at Swindon this evening.

[LiskeardRich]

There are at least 6 people ranting on Twitter about it not dropping them off at Reading.
The following has been posted to their Facebook about the overcrowding

Got on the 19.15 Swansea train from Paddington. What a disaster. Paid ^70 to go home to South Wales for the weekend. The train was delayed, when they eventually announced the train platform there was a serge of passengers that not everyone could get on the train. The seats and asiles were so full people couldn't get to their "reserved" seats. People weren't able to get through to go to the toilet and I even witnessed a girl fainting due to the heat and had to prop her up and give her water, to rub it in there was announcements about purchasing tea and coffee, they didn't have anyone trying to organise anything, give out water to fainting people or give us any information what so ever.

[johoare]

I wonder why it was so full tonight? Reading that post on facebook it sounds like the conditions were not ideal..Trains to Swansea appear to run every hour after that so it's not like it was the last one..Unless they are all as busy?

[eightf48544]

Not sure what theproblem was tonight but eveything feom 19:15 to 20:00  on the Down Main was running slowly through Slough.

[chrisr_75]

Hopefully some of the Reading commuters will think again before needlessly filling long distance services!! 

I wonder why it was so full tonight? Reading that post on facebook it sounds like the conditions were not ideal..Trains to Swansea appear to run every hour after that so it's not like it was the last one..Unless they are all as busy?

Most of the Swansea services are pretty stuffed at that time of day, the first quietish one out of PAD^» (Paddington (London) - next trains) is usually the 21:15. Fridays are particularly busy, as with most long distance services - I've seen people standing in aisles & vestibules on either the 18.45 or 19.15 on a Friday until well beyond Swindon and quite possibly a few were standing until Cardiff. A good weather forecast or large public events tend to make matters worse...

 

[TaplowGreen]

Having a train that is pick up only on just one day of the week is always likely to catch people out.

That said, there is far too much abuse of nominally 'pick up only' services that call at Reading, by Reading commuters. So, little sympathy for any Reading bound folk who found themselves at Swindon this evening.

An awful lot of smug self satisfaction on this thread regarding this - I would perhaps suggest its more appropriate to focus on the appallingly overcrowded conditions on the train, and the effect this had on the customers - I spoke to someone who boarded it before it got too crowded and apparently the conditions were dangerous long before it left Paddington and for the whole journey there were people feeling ill, more than one fainted and one poor soul lost control of his bladder as he was unable to get to the toilet - several customers went to platform staff at Paddington before the train left to point out the dangerous overcrowding but were waved away - Health and safety legislation appears not to apply to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) - one of these days there is going to be a tragedy.......no doubt I will now be told "well its the customers fault for acting like sheep and boarding an already busy train" but it is also incumbent on FGW to ensure that they provide a safe environment -  this is known to be a regularly busy service, use boarding controls and/or ticket restrictions, it's not rocket science.......if this means telling people to wait for the next service then do so - in my industry safety comes first, before everything else.

[grahame]

Health and safety legislation appears not to apply to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) - one of these days there is going to be a tragedy.......

My understanding is that it does apply, but the generally accepted methods and rules indeed may lead to us thinking that it doesn't.

no doubt I will now be told "well its the customers fault for acting like sheep and boarding an already busy train" but it is also incumbent on FGW to ensure that they provide a safe environment -  this is known to be a regularly busy service, use boarding controls and/or ticket restrictions, it's not rocket science.......if this means telling people to wait for the next service then do so - in my industry safety comes first, before everything else.

There's a paradox in that the rail industry goes beyond other means of transport to look after the safety of its passengers, to the extent that the injuries / deaths per mile are way below those of road travel.  And yet we do, indeed, pack 'em in.  I'm sure there's a risk assessment out there somewhere.   

For sure, one of these days someone's going to pass away on an overcrowded train ... but perhaps that person could equally pass away on a quiet train?  I agree that it's more likely on the busy service - but I'm not sure how much that's due to the busyness, and how much it's simply due to there being more people on the train, so more chances?

I am, by the way, asking the questions / putting the points here rather than suggesting any view or answers.  I would love to see a limit to loading of 150% on HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train), and on class 153 and 158 units.

[bobm]

this is known to be a regularly busy service, use boarding controls and/or ticket restrictions, it's not rocket science.......

There is an element of this on the 19:15 on a Friday as it is not advertised as having a Reading stop.  However there is a presumption by many that ALL HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train) stop at Reading.  Further up the thread it was posted that six had reported on Twitter being overcarried.  Now I don't know what the percentage of those affected who would take to Twitter is, but say it is 10% - that means 60 people were on the train who shouldn't have been and would have eased the overcrowding.

It would be interesting to see what the loadings are like next Friday.

[John R]

When told that it was a late decision to pull the call at Reading, one of the posters on twitter complained why it hadn't been taken off the board at Paddington. But I suspect this was a presumption on his/hers part that it was on there in the first place.

Whether or not the train is stopping there, I would put clear signage at Paddington to say "First set down, Swindon. Reading passengers may not board this train", and repeat that with on board announcements prior to departure. Then excess anyone who ignored it. Harsh maybe, but the purpose is to stop people from Reading using the train to make space for longer distance travellers, and you sometimes need a stick as well as a carrot. 

[ellendune]

Health and safety legislation appears not to apply to FGW^▸ (First Great Western) - one of these days there is going to be a tragedy.......

My understanding is that it does apply, but the generally accepted methods and rules indeed may lead to us thinking that it doesn't.

no doubt I will now be told "well its the customers fault for acting like sheep and boarding an already busy train" but it is also incumbent on FGW to ensure that they provide a safe environment -  this is known to be a regularly busy service, use boarding controls and/or ticket restrictions, it's not rocket science.......if this means telling people to wait for the next service then do so - in my industry safety comes first, before everything else.

There's a paradox in that the rail industry goes beyond other means of transport to look after the safety of its passengers, to the extent that the injuries / deaths per mile are way below those of road travel.  And yet we do, indeed, pack 'em in.  I'm sure there's a risk assessment out there somewhere.   

For sure, one of these days someone's going to pass away on an overcrowded train ... but perhaps that person could equally pass away on a quiet train?  I agree that it's more likely on the busy service - but I'm not sure how much that's due to the busyness, and how much it's simply due to there being more people on the train, so more chances?

I am, by the way, asking the questions / putting the points here rather than suggesting any view or answers.  I would love to see a limit to loading of 150% on HSTs^▸ (High Speed Train), and on class 153 and 158 units.

I was once on an HST at Paddington following disruption when the a train was so full that they announced that it would not leave unless some people to get off.  They asked Passengers for Reading to use a specified alternative train (also an HST for Plymouth if I recall).  Needless to say none did.  So we waited quite a time and the Reading train went first.

That was a case where they should just have announced that the train would not call at Reading and that there was an alternative train waiting at Platform x.  

Provided FGW clearly announce on the train that it is not stopping at Reading (and in my experience they do routinely anyway) then Reading passengers are trying to abuse the system and if they get carried over they must face the inconvenience.

The removal of the stop at Reading is designed to prevent the overcrowding that does occur. There are many fast trains an hour to Reading and only 1 an hour to Swansea.  Standing as far as Reading is not good. This is one way FGW try to manage this for its longer distance passengers who, incidentally, pay much more per mile  than the Reading passengers on a like for like ticket (anytime single 55p per mile for Reading, Swindon 78p, Bristol Parkway 84p, Cardiff 67p, Swansea 8070p).  They should perhaps, therefore have some priority for seats.  

Modified to correct the maths

[bobm]

I wonder if those who were over carried last night were excessed from Swindon to Reading. I doubt it - it would be on social media by now if so.