Thames Valley signalling problems - big delays - July 2014

[whole diary]

[Worcester_Passenger]

Under these (rather unusual) circumstances, would the best strategy be to use the Underground to Richmond?

[stuving]

Looking at how many trains did run, and ignoring the loss of the Dorking service (backed up via Victoria), why was the station so jammed with people? Did it reach the critical point (the equivalent of gridlock, whatever that's called) where trains set of half full and leaving passengers behind who couldn't reach them? In that case the crowd doesn't get reduced by running trains, and you might be better off going to Clapham, Wimbledon, Richmond etc. Usually this is not viable, as trains are full on arrival. And if too many people (which is not a huge number) do it crowding becomes a problem there.

Going back to Silver's comments earlier on, if you run one of these big stations (and that means NR^» (Network Rail - home page), of course, not FGW^▸ (First Great Western) or SWT^▸ (South West Trains)) you need plans to cope with any level of service or none, and however many waiting passengers that leads to.

SWT had agreement from FGW to take their passengers for (I imagine) RDG^‡(resolve), BSK^▸ (Brake Standard Corridor (carriage)), and points west. They continued to advertise this alternative all evening, with no mention of the lack of FGW trains. And they said their services were severely disrupted (without exceptions), not that WAT was too full of people. That may have seemed like an "equivalent lie", often done in the past, but I don't think it is advisable now. We can now check on what trains are running, so giving advice that is clearly based on wrong information will only lead to people ignoring the advice.

[Worcester_Passenger]

There's a post on http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=103950 that says that the signalling equipment on HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) is well-defended against lightning strikes. Is this right?

[Electric train]

There's a post on http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=103950 that says that the signalling equipment on HS1^▸ (High Speed line 1 - St Pancras to Channel Tunnel) is well-defended against lightning strikes. Is this right?

It is ETCS^▸ (European Train Control System) - in cab signalling, which uses a NRFD track mounted balise (or transponder) GPS and speed measurement to know where the it self is this is fed back to a control centre computer via GSMR (railway cell phone network) this then tells the train the max permitted speed.

If all this fails there fixed block markers which the drive can be talked through.

It is possible that lightening could take out signalling power supplies and junctions but HS1 doesn't have many of those, also the OLE^▸ (Overhead Line Equipment, more often "OHLE") could be struck taking out a substation but HS1 has a complex alternative feed system which providing the lightening hasn't taken out the SCADA^▸ (System Control And Data Acquisition,) that is 

[stuving]

Since people build and operate and operate railways and other infrastructure in places where big lightning bolts are commoner than here, it must be possible to build these to survive. I have come across several reasons why that would be so:

Keeping out lightning surges, like keeping out interference, is mostly in the details of earthing and the like. If it's wrong from the start, you can't add it in later. But despite the inherent susceptibility of modern electronics - small devices on chips can be destroyed by a tiny amount of energy - they can be protected. A lot of chips have some protection built in, then you can add more at board and module level, and most importantly at the cabinet entry point. Power supplies can now cross insulation breaks too, along with signals - a lot of domestic kit contains standard DC^▸ (Direct Current)-DC converters that can withstand several kV.

Axle counters and balises are fixed to the track, but insulated from it, so have a big advantage over track circuits (all of which will go). The Thales AzLM (NR^» (Network Rail - home page)'s main favourite axle counter) can take a 6 kV surge on any interface, and they offer an extra protector for the cabinet entry.

The OHLE is electrically not so different from pole-mounted MV (11 kV and 33 kV) supplies, and they mostly survive lightning using standard methods. The lightning will still enter the ground down one or more stanchions, producing a big voltage difference between nearby earths - hence the importance of insulating cables from earth, using fibre, etc..

So new railways, and newly electrified and resignalled ones like most of the Western Route, ought to do be better than what we have now. But there are limits - most lightning round here has peak currents in the range 5-10 kA. If you get a really big one, like the 100-200 kA  seen in tall buildings and Alps, it may still fry things.

[NickB]

Under these (rather unusual) circumstances, would the best strategy be to use the Underground to Richmond?

District Line was bust too.
Not kidding.

[TaplowGreen]

Going back to Silver's comments earlier on, if you run one of these big stations (and that means NR^» (Network Rail - home page), of course, not FGW^▸ (First Great Western) or SWT^▸ (South West Trains)) you need plans to cope with any level of service or none, and however many waiting passengers that leads to.

............and that sums it up in a nutshell - "you need plans" - even if in extremis that means closing the station until such time it is safe and practicable to operate a service which allows the numbers leaving the station to reduce the numbers waiting, even if in extremis it means calling in the Met Police to help with crowd control if FGW/NR/BTP^▸ (British Transport Police) are not capable of doing so (as they patently were not last week), even if in extremis it means being honest enough to tell people that there is no point waiting as there will be no trains for the foreseeable future, even if in extremis advising customers to seek their own alternatives which will be refunded.......................basically it means exercising a duty of care to customers/the public.

[stuving]

...if you run one of these big stations (and that means NR^» (Network Rail - home page), of course, not FGW^▸ (First Great Western) or SWT^▸ (South West Trains))...

Is that an issue in itself?

If Network Rail manages the station, but most of the staff who work there work for a TOC^▸ (Train Operating Company) (or for BTP^▸ (British Transport Police)) which is not a subcontractor to NR, whose responsibility is safety and crowd control? If it's been written into contracts, that usually has good points (ensures the subject has been thought about and responsibility allocated somewhere) and bad (if it wasn't thought about, or incompletely, everyone may duck it; management is made far more complex, and cooperation with a third party can't realistically be required in a contract).

[ChrisB]

I think it is.

IT doesn't sound as if any agreement other than standard station working has been entered into by Network Rail and the TOCs^▸ (Train Operating Company) using their major stations - so when it comes to Meltdown, the TYOCs are trying to organise their crews & stock, while NR^» (Network Rail - home page) alone are left to man their station. And fail, because they need a connect (and probably a better, more detailed one that under standard conditions) with the TOC.

This latter connect to me is mainly missing....

[TaplowGreen]

I went through Reading station this morning at about 0745 and bearing in mind the woeful level of staffing in evidence on Friday during the meltdown I thought I would have a quick scout around to see what was in evidence this morning.

On each of the main London bound platforms there were 3 train dispatch staff in hi vis, there were at least one or two on all the other operational platforms, together with a load of Ribena in the gateline/concourse areas as well as the gateline staff, additionally there were one or two on the footbridge.

My question therefore would be.............why was it in the height of Friday's chaos that there only appeared to be a handful of staff anywhere attempting to help customers (and believe me I looked for them) - few if any on platforms, no Ribena, and only 2 on the footbridge who by the looks of it would have earned a VC by close of play.

Were they hiding in crew rooms? Or is there another explanation?

Leaving aside the Customer Service implications...........what about Health and Safety? Station evacuation with the area much busier than usual? How would that be manafged? How would disabled customers be assisted?

[NickB]

At Maidenhead on Friday it amused me greatly that the only two staff present on the platforms had located themselves on Platform 1, which for anyone unfamiliar with Maidenhead is the only platform that passengers weren't on as it is only used for about two trains per day.

[IndustryInsider]

Hiding out of the way on a quiet platform, or was a HST^▸ (High Speed Train) due soon for despatch, or were they doing one of these security checks that happens at the larger stations?

[NickB]

They were on Platform 1 for the best part of an hour whilst I was on Platform 2/3 with a couple of hundred other passengers.
HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s were coming in to Platform 1 and being held at signal in the platform for about 10mins a time before going onwards towards Twyford.  The doors remained locked throughout and there was no chance of a disembark on Platform 1.

[BBM]

They were on Platform 1 for the best part of an hour whilst I was on Platform 2/3 with a couple of hundred other passengers.
HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s were coming in to Platform 1 and being held at signal in the platform for about 10mins a time before going onwards towards Twyford.  The doors remained locked throughout and there was no chance of a disembark on Platform 1.

One of the friends with whom I shared the taxi on Friday says that one of her colleagues is adamant that a train picked her up at Maidenhead "sometime after 17.30" and she was able to alight at Twyford. According to RTT^» (Real Time Trains - website) there appears to have been no Down stoppers from MAI^▸ (Maidenhead station) between 1644 and 2106. Did by any chance one of those HSTs open its doors there and at TWY^▸ (Twyford station) I wonder?

[NickB]

Well I was on platform 2 staring at platform 1 from 16.00 until 17.30.  I'm not going to call anyone a liar, but to the best of my knowledge no one got on or off those HST^▸ (High Speed Train)'s.  The unlock/lock would have been audible to me.