Metropolitan Line to Cockfosters!!!

[citysig]

Dec 6, 2009 1:31:11 GMT @aspect said:

Perhaps you should pin a healthy chunk of the delay on the Piccadilly then ?

Unfortunately (very unfortunately sometimes ) it's not our job to write up the report and apportion blame etc. We write up a "first line" of an incident and it is then investigated by the local DMT. Even then, as we are all one company, the investigating manager must exercise a fair amount of diplomacy, and cannot steam in with "They're all numpties, I could've done it better / quicker and they should all be sacked!"

There are always lots of factors to consider, and whilst maybe the Picc could maybe have assisted more, who knows how experienced the controller on their side was. Could be a new chap who is not willing to put his career on the line for a "rumour" that A-stock can fit.

Plus of course, the Picc would not have even been involved in this incident without the initial input from the Met signaller and then driver.

[Oracle]

I should like to know why D Stock is in fact banned past Northfields depot as it makes complete sense to permit running to a shunt limit past Boston Manor? Is it a question of track liability?

[happybunny]

Dec 6, 2009 1:31:11 GMT @aspect said:

Dec 5, 2009 17:42:36 GMT @linecontroller66 said:

The Mets can't. The Picc said we couldn't do that due to width and weight restrictions.

Perhaps you should pin a healthy chunk of the delay on the Piccadilly then ?
The List of approved and authorised running routes shows, on Page 23, that A60 and A62 stock are approved to operate between Rayners Lane and Hanger Lane Junction (excluding South Harrow Sidings) in Passenger Service but with a speed restriction of 15mph under bridges D4 (Between South Harrow and Sudbury Hill both roads) , D24 (Between Park Royal and North Ealing boath roads) and D62 (Acton Town Stn w/b fast). Tube Lines are contractually obligated to keep the route maintained accordingly.

No special authority would have been required at all, it exists as standard !!

Poor show by the Piccadilly and much more disruption than there need have been !

You would think so, but there has been two incidents recently of D Stock taking the wrong stick at Hanger Lane, instead of the usual 'sightseeing' trip to South Harrow, causing little delay, both times the job has been shut down for almost an hour doing a WDM... apparently the Picc are not happy any more with us going to S Harrow, they would rather there branch be shut down for an hour whilst a WDM is carried out... of course they don't really give a hoot about the Rayner's Branch anyway

[Chris M]

Why does it take so long for an wrong-direction move to take place?
Is it just the authorisation that takes the time, as I can't imagine it taking an hour to scotch and clip the points, move the train, and then remove the scotching and clipping?

[Harsig]

Dec 6, 2009 12:48:23 GMT Chris M said:

as I can't imagine it taking an hour to scotch and clip the points, move the train, and then remove the scotching and clipping?

I wish I couldn't imagine that

[North End]

Dec 6, 2009 12:48:23 GMT Chris M said:

Why does it take so long for an wrong-direction move to take place?
Is it just the authorisation that takes the time, as I can't imagine it taking an hour to scotch and clip the points, move the train, and then remove the scotching and clipping?

These sorts of things always do take longer than you'd think.

First of all there's the time for the dust to settle, and for everyone to realise what exactly has happened, and then decide on how to deal with it.

Then the appropriate staff have to be contacted, they then have to get their equipment, put on their hi-vi, maybe make arrangements to leave their station unattended if it's a S/S etc. In the case of Hanger Lane Junction it's then a long walk to the site.

Protection then has to be taken for securing the points, which may involve discharging traction current, which itself then requires ensuring there are no other trains stalled between stations.

Then there's the WDM move, having first double-checked with the controller first, and double checked the points have been correctly done. Then the T/Op probably wants a WDM form filled out.

Then you've got to go through the relevant processes and procedures for removing the clips & scotches.

In theory it shouldn't take long, but because - potentially - there's a lot that can go wrong, staff naturally want to make totally sure they're doing everything 100% correct.

The only way to speed these things up is experience.

[North End]

Dec 6, 2009 8:38:50 GMT @citysig said:

Dec 6, 2009 1:31:11 GMT @aspect said:

Perhaps you should pin a healthy chunk of the delay on the Piccadilly then ?

Unfortunately (very unfortunately sometimes ) it's not our job to write up the report and apportion blame etc. We write up a "first line" of an incident and it is then investigated by the local DMT. Even then, as we are all one company, the investigating manager must exercise a fair amount of diplomacy, and cannot steam in with "They're all numpties, I could've done it better / quicker and they should all be sacked!"

Indeed. For this type of incident, the DMT would probably be looking at no more than "The Piccadilly Line Service Manager informs me that the train could not run to South Harrow because ... " It's then for others to decide if they went to take things further, or not.

Of course there's nothing to stop the DMT adding a few lines to the IRF "In the opinion of the investigating DMT ... ", but it's not really their remit.

[happybunny]

And on the first instance that I was talking about, it took apparently 15 mins to get hold of Ealing Cmmn SS.. then when he arrived at the train he didn't have the form, so had to go back to the station to get it.

[Chris M]

Would it not make sense for copies of these forms to be carried in driving cabs? After all, you can't make a WDM without a train.
I don't know how long these forms are, but you should need a maximum of two to be carried (one to be used and one spare in case of mistakes) at any one time so the storage requirement shouldn't be onerous. And if for any reason a form wasn't on the train when it should be, then you've lost nothing compared with the scenario outlined by happybunny above.

[rincew1nd]

Wasn't there a RAIB report where rather then using a WDM from it was written on the nearest bit of paper (possibly a WTT cover?) That didn't go down so well.

[North End]

Dec 6, 2009 16:12:04 GMT rincew1nd said:

Wasn't there a RAIB report where rather then using a WDM from it was written on the nearest bit of paper (possibly a WTT cover?) That didn't go down so well.

If the WDM is being done the traditional way, with a Person In Charge appointed, then the form is a must. No WDM form = No WDM. Or at least that's what *should* happen.

Nowadays, WDMs can be authorised by secure radio (where the procedure states there's no Person In Charge and no form), and this has caused things to become slightly blurred. However, my understanding is that if points need to be manually secured, the secure radio method cannot be used, therefore a form is a necessity.

[North End]

Dec 6, 2009 15:48:51 GMT Chris M said:

Would it not make sense for copies of these forms to be carried in driving cabs? After all, you can't make a WDM without a train.
I don't know how long these forms are, but you should need a maximum of two to be carried (one to be used and one spare in case of mistakes) at any one time so the storage requirement shouldn't be onerous. And if for any reason a form wasn't on the train when it should be, then you've lost nothing compared with the scenario outlined by happybunny above.

Yes it would make sense. However, every Supervisor or Duty Manager should know that if they're going to be authorising a WDM, then they will need the appropriate equipment, i.e. a form.

I carry a few round with me just in case, certainly the "Passing signals at danger known to have failed" form has come in handy on a couple of occasions.

[happybunny]

Dec 6, 2009 16:21:35 GMT North End said:

Dec 6, 2009 16:12:04 GMT rincew1nd said:

Nowadays, WDMs can be authorised by secure radio (where the procedure states there's no Person In Charge and no form), and this has caused things to become slightly blurred. However, my understanding is that if points need to be manually secured, the secure radio method cannot be used, therefore a form is a necessity.

We had a debate about this after the most recent Wrong Stick taken at Hanger Lane just over a week ago, and my DMT informs me that the 'WDM via Secure radio' procedure, is in-fact NOT operational yet... a form is still required in ALL situations.

[rincew1nd]

Dec 6, 2009 16:12:04 GMT rincew1nd said:

Wasn't there a RAIB report where rather then using a WDM from it was written on the nearest bit of paper (possibly a WTT cover?) That didn't go down so well.

It was the Traffic Circular, RAIB Report 19/2007

(With bonus gricing for signalling fans.)

[North End]

Dec 6, 2009 17:29:50 GMT @happybunny said:

Dec 6, 2009 16:21:35 GMT North End said:

Dec 6, 2009 16:12:04 GMT rincew1nd said:

Nowadays, WDMs can be authorised by secure radio (where the procedure states there's no Person In Charge and no form), and this has caused things to become slightly blurred. However, my understanding is that if points need to be manually secured, the secure radio method cannot be used, therefore a form is a necessity.

We had a debate about this after the most recent Wrong Stick taken at Hanger Lane just over a week ago, and my DMT informs me that the 'WDM via Secure radio' procedure, is in-fact NOT operational yet... a form is still required in ALL situations.

Might be the case on the D&P, however on the Northern Line this procedure has been in place for some time.

[Deleted]

Dec 6, 2009 17:29:50 GMT @happybunny said:

Dec 6, 2009 16:21:35 GMT North End said:

Dec 6, 2009 16:12:04 GMT rincew1nd said:

Nowadays, WDMs can be authorised by secure radio (where the procedure states there's no Person In Charge and no form), and this has caused things to become slightly blurred. However, my understanding is that if points need to be manually secured, the secure radio method cannot be used, therefore a form is a necessity.

We had a debate about this after the most recent Wrong Stick taken at Hanger Lane just over a week ago, and my DMT informs me that the 'WDM via Secure radio' procedure, is in-fact NOT operational yet... a form is still required in ALL situations.

I think your DMT should go and read his or her rule books and keep up to date with rule changes. We have done several WDM's over the radio, none of which have involved points. I wasn't too happy with this being pushed onto us, as well as route cards, but provided the correct protection is put in place, and the T/Op fully understands the limit of the move, there shouldn't be any problems.

[Ben]

That report by the RAIB states in paragraph 81 that

"ED173 is mounted to the left hand side of westbound tracks. Upon arrival at the signal
the batteries in the Station Supervisor - Days’ lamp failed. He was left with no means
of communication and standing in the dark. The only illumination was provided by the
lights of the train. The nearest rail was the positive conductor rail charged at 630 volts.
Fortunately he managed to return to the train without mishap and advised the Train
Operator what had happened."

Surely this is incorrect? The nominal voltage in the +ve rail is +420v mostly?

Actually further to this, the report states in para. 118 that "From time to time, Duty Station Managers are called upon to cover duties in areas other
than their own. When special train moves such as a WDM are required, the lack of local
knowledge is a serious limitation on their ability to manage the situation. To undertake
those duties properly the knowledge gap needs to be supplemented, eg either by the use of
information from the control room, or from documented guidance available at a station."; surely the most obvious method is some form of prior first hand experience of the area?

[Deleted]

Dec 6, 2009 17:29:50 GMT @happybunny said:

Dec 6, 2009 16:21:35 GMT North End said:

Dec 6, 2009 16:12:04 GMT rincew1nd said:

Nowadays, WDMs can be authorised by secure radio (where the procedure states there's no Person In Charge and no form), and this has caused things to become slightly blurred. However, my understanding is that if points need to be manually secured, the secure radio method cannot be used, therefore a form is a necessity.

We had a debate about this after the most recent Wrong Stick taken at Hanger Lane just over a week ago, and my DMT informs me that the 'WDM via Secure radio' procedure, is in-fact NOT operational yet... a form is still required in ALL situations.

Unless you are on the Central Line where WDM over points are done over the train radio, and have been for many years now and even before 'Connect'. Its been a very very long time since these forms were used.

[Deleted]

It must be 100 years since the junction was put in at Rayners Lane. Sufficient time, you would think, for a procedure, should a train be in sent the wrong direction, to have been worked out and documented, rather than having to devise something on the spot.

[Deleted]

Dec 7, 2009 13:54:49 GMT @diana said:

It must be 100 years since the junction was put in at Rayners Lane. Sufficient time, you would think, for a procedure, should a train be in sent the wrong direction, to have been worked out and documented, rather than having to devise something on the spot.

The procedure was there all ready to use. The first option, to continue to South Harrow and reverse was blocked by the Picc due to width restrictions on A stock in that particular area. Then, as the incident train was in the vicinity of numerous sets of points, it had to be confirmed by a member of staff on the ground as to the exact position of the train in relation to all the pointwork, especially as one end of one set of points involved were spring toggles. Taking 5 or 10 minutes longer is better than having a train on the deck and the service suspended for the next 24-36 hours, not including the detrainment along the tracks etc etc.

[Deleted]

Dec 7, 2009 15:00:57 GMT @linecontroller66 said:

The procedure was there all ready to use. The first option, to continue to South Harrow and reverse was blocked by the Picc due to width restrictions on A stock in that particular area.....

I'm having a bit of difficulty with this one. So there was a procedure all in place which said "Continue to South Harrow" when the train involved (of the only type which has been capable of being misrouted here for the last 45 years) was out of gauge .....

[Deleted]

The Picc refused to accept the train as far as South Harrow and as that's their railway, it's up to them what they do on it. The next course of action was then the WDM, which involved securing points, holding other trains etc.

[citysig]

Dec 7, 2009 15:22:42 GMT @diana said:

Dec 7, 2009 15:00:57 GMT @linecontroller66 said:

The procedure was there all ready to use. The first option, to continue to South Harrow and reverse was blocked by the Picc due to width restrictions on A stock in that particular area.....

I'm having a bit of difficulty with this one. So there was a procedure all in place which said "Continue to South Harrow" when the train involved (of the only type which has been capable of being misrouted here for the last 45 years) was out of gauge .....

If you notice my colleagues response, you will note he began that possibility with the term "Option 1." Every incident has numerous options and ways in which things can be brought to a successful conclusion. This is all dependant on the individual incident and the detailed circumstances surrounding the event.

With regard to your point about the junction being there for 100 years, that is irrelevant. If it was, then we could also suggest that as the junction has been there so long, how come a train accepted the wrong route at all, but that would also be ridiculous. Everyone is human, and a combination of human errors came together to produce this once in a while scenario.

If you attempted to write a procedure for every single eventuality, not only would you still be writing them for the next 100 years or so, but you will still no doubt have missed one. For example, did this train stop in exactly the same position as the last one to make the same error (whenever that may have been.) Therefore, we have laid down procedures which have to be adapted and used for each eventuality, and in order that they are adapted correctly and safely, extra time may be taken to avoid any error.

What should be perfectly clear to everyone though is the fact that, once it happened, there was never any risk of injury to anybody, and the incident was brought to a very safe conclusion, without damage to either assets or people. If that kind of outcome takes a few minutes more to achieve, then so be it.

[Deleted]

Dec 6, 2009 12:41:26 GMT @happybunny said:

You would think so, but there has been two incidents recently of D Stock taking the wrong stick at Hanger Lane, instead of the usual 'sightseeing' trip to South Harrow, causing little delay, both times the job has been shut down for almost an hour doing a WDM... apparently the Picc are not happy any more with us going to S Harrow, they would rather there branch be shut down for an hour whilst a WDM is carried out... of course they don't really give a hoot about the Rayner's Branch anyway

This, again, is a matter of what is authorised to run where. A60, A62, C69 and C77 stock are authorised, as standard, to run between Acton Town and Uxbridge via South Harrow. However D stock is not and requires various special authorisations (which point may or may not have been overlooked in the past). None the less D stock is fully in guage for the route with the same restrictions as A and C stocks. (D stock's authority over much of the network was restricted due to "issues" with "stiff primarary suspension" requring tracks to be maintained to higher tollerances. However D stock does not still have that suspension and it no longer presents an issue requiring route restrictions for that reason.) There is a process undergoing "due process" to update the list of permitted routes which will restore formal D stock authority over this and numerous other track sections including the whole of the Metropolitan (except Harrow siding - where there is a guage issue). In the mean time they have decided to WDM any wayward D's at Hangar Lane until the paperwork catches up with actuality !

[Oracle]

May I ask if there is any suggestion that D Stock, and even C Stock for that matter will be allowed to a limit of shunt west of Boston Manor as part of the appraisal?

[Deleted]

Dec 6, 2009 17:29:50 GMT @happybunny said:

We had a debate about this after the most recent Wrong Stick taken at Hanger Lane just over a week ago, and my DMT informs me that the 'WDM via Secure radio' procedure, is in-fact NOT operational yet... a form is still required in ALL situations.

Tusk! I can also confirm, from a District Line specific position, that, as stated by linecontroller66, the said DMT is absolutely wrong!!
WDMs can indeed be authorised by secure connect radio, (The District LSM did remind all DMTs and Instructors of this by e-mail some months ago) however the rules are such that these WDMs can only be over plain track, not over points in which circumstance the usual form with associated scotching and clipping is required.

[happybunny]

Maybe this procedure needs to be briefed to staff, as I have said before, as many many T/Op's don't know that you can carry out WDM via Connect Radio.... I am not saying if it is right , or wrong, I am just saying it as it is !

[Deleted]

Dec 8, 2009 16:27:26 GMT @happybunny said:

Maybe this procedure needs to be briefed to staff, as I have said before, as many many T/Op's don't know that you can carry out WDM via Connect Radio.... I am not saying if it is right , or wrong, I am just saying it as it is !

It's all in the Rule books that everyone was (or should have been) issued.

[citysig]

Not to mention a fair amount of discussion and separate publicity. Even this site publicised it - and although it's not an official source of information (or is it ) it is strange that other subjects brought up on here quickly enter the mess-room / office discussion. Surely word of the procedure would have got around, and at least one person could have queried it with a manager?

The Met drivers that I have used the procedure with (2 so far) have never questioned whether they could carry it out through me via the radio.

[happybunny]

Dec 8, 2009 18:35:30 GMT @linecontroller66 said:

Dec 8, 2009 16:27:26 GMT @happybunny said:

Maybe this procedure needs to be briefed to staff, as I have said before, as many many T/Op's don't know that you can carry out WDM via Connect Radio.... I am not saying if it is right , or wrong, I am just saying it as it is !

It's all in the Rule books that everyone was (or should have been) issued.

Yes and on the re-issue of the rule book, was it realistic to expect every single driver to read the whole thing cover to cover?