|
Post by sudburytown on Sept 25, 2019 14:11:31 GMT
Just had a call from someone who was on the westbound District at Westminster where the train was held for almost 15 minutes due to a person ill on a train at Monument, 6 stops behind. Assuming no one knew how long the delay would be, is it normal to try regulating the service like this so soon after an incident has occurred further back up the line?
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Sept 25, 2019 14:17:58 GMT
Yes, standard practice to hold trains in platforms wherever practicable. You don’t know how long the delay is going to be - fifteen minutes in a platform is far preferable to an hour in the tunnels, which can very easily happen.
|
|
|
Post by sudburytown on Sept 25, 2019 15:13:15 GMT
I appreciate the need to hold the train in the platform instead of a tunnel, but the incident was 6 stops behind the held train, not in front of it. It seems a bit odd to hold a train for so long, especially as the incident could only have happened about 10-15 minutes previously.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,359
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 25, 2019 16:47:28 GMT
10-15 minutes probably means that there was a train at every platform between Monument and Westminster, and possibly some in the tunnels between. The train your friend was on was simply 6th or so in the queue.
I was on a Jubilee line train the other day that was held at London Bridge for an incident at Green Park. This was good because after ~10 minutes I was able to simply get off the train and reroute around the disruption.
|
|
|
Post by peterc on Sept 25, 2019 17:04:06 GMT
I don't think that anybody has addressed the main point which was that the train was travelling AWAY from the incident.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 25, 2019 17:12:34 GMT
I don't think that anybody has addressed the main point which was that the train was travelling AWAY from the incident. They do this to try to keep the gaps as even as possible. Holding a train in such a way reduces the size of the gap.
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Sept 25, 2019 17:32:45 GMT
This ^.
As always, Service Control are looking at the big picture. It might seem nonsensical to you, but it won’t in the larger scheme of things.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 25, 2019 18:56:52 GMT
Monument to Westminster might be 6 stops but it is just 9 minutes, depending on the time of day it could be that the train your friend was on could be the train in front of the "incident" train.
By the time the driver at Monument contacts the control room to let them know there's a problem and then the control room instructs the train ahead to hold it could possibly have reached Westminster.
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Sept 25, 2019 23:08:35 GMT
Monument to Westminster might be 6 stops but it is just 9 minutes, depending on the time of day it could be that the train your friend was on could be the train in front of the "incident" train. By the time the driver at Monument contacts the control room to let them know there's a problem and then the control room instructs the train ahead to hold it could possibly have reached Westminster. Ok, but why would that train ahead be held?
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Sept 25, 2019 23:19:08 GMT
It’s already been pointed out above: to even out the gaps in the service.
Would you prefer to turn up at a station (let’s say St. James’ Park) and wait fifteen minutes because a train has been held ahead of the incident train, or thirty minutes (minimum, perhaps) because it hasn’t?
Once again: service control look at the bigger picture, not one specific train load of people. When disruption happens trains start to run to a headway. Regular, evenly-spaced trains are far better than bunching or big gaps.
Damned if we do, damned if we don’t.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 26, 2019 0:07:20 GMT
Monument to Westminster might be 6 stops but it is just 9 minutes, depending on the time of day it could be that the train your friend was on could be the train in front of the "incident" train. By the time the driver at Monument contacts the control room to let them know there's a problem and then the control room instructs the train ahead to hold it could possibly have reached Westminster. Ok, but why would that train ahead be held? Duuuuuuhhhhh. The train ahead carries on as normal, the "incident" train is stuck at Monument for 10-15 minutes. When the incident train finally gets moving there have been no trains for 10-15 minutes to the stations between it and the train in front. So ask yourself how busy are those platforms going to be? Those platforms are going to be packed so the "incident" train is going to be delayed even more while passengers are trying to get on and off and the trains behind it are going more delayed, whereas if you have a train (or two) in front then it is going it take some of that congestion. Are you really that stupid? Christ on a fecking bike. This is why Tube staff get frustrated with punters. Omly 8 years 3 months 13 days until I retire and I no longer give a rat's bottom
|
|
|
Post by greggygreggygreg on Sept 26, 2019 5:41:14 GMT
Ok, but why would that train ahead be held? Duuuuuuhhhhh. The train ahead carries on as normal, the "incident" train is stuck at Monument for 10-15 minutes. When the incident train finally gets moving there have been no trains for 10-15 minutes to the stations between it and the train in front. So ask yourself how busy are those platforms going to be? Those platforms are going to be packed so the "incident" train is going to be delayed even more while passengers are trying to get on and off and the trains behind it are going more delayed, whereas if you have a train (or two) in front then it is going it take some of that congestion. Are you really that stupid? Christ on a fecking bike. This is why Tube staff get frustrated with punters. Omly 8 years 3 months 13 days until I retire and I no longer give a rat's bottom 😂 A punter on a train only cares about themselves and the train they're on. They're incapable of seeing the bigger picture, whereas if they were on the incident train, they'd be complaining about the platforms being too busy and delaying them further
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 26, 2019 6:30:00 GMT
And the delay could be even longer if the incident train has to be taken out of service and run "empty to depot" past all those waiting passengers. At least if you are held at a station the passengers can get off and travel onwards by other means (even another Tube line if it's at Westminster)
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Sept 26, 2019 13:57:28 GMT
Ok, but why would that train ahead be held? Duuuuuuhhhhh. The train ahead carries on as normal, the "incident" train is stuck at Monument for 10-15 minutes. When the incident train finally gets moving there have been no trains for 10-15 minutes to the stations between it and the train in front. So ask yourself how busy are those platforms going to be? Those platforms are going to be packed so the "incident" train is going to be delayed even more while passengers are trying to get on and off and the trains behind it are going more delayed, whereas if you have a train (or two) in front then it is going it take some of that congestion. Are you really that stupid? Christ on a fecking bike. This is why Tube staff get frustrated with punters. Omly 8 years 3 months 13 days until I retire and I no longer give a rat's bottom If we could do without the insults, that explanation is useful. I am just a punter, and don’t have the benefit of your experience in dealing with service disruption. Therefore what is obvious to you is not to me. What does puzzle me in this set up is how you decide to handle the build up of crowds at the various stations affected so as to stop that delay due to overcrowding then affecting a whole series of trains. That, however, would require experience I lack and mathematical modelling beyond my limited powers.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,359
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 26, 2019 15:17:53 GMT
I too am just a punter, but I expect there is no single right answer as to which trains are held where. I would expect it to be a judgement call based on the location of the incident, anticipated length of delay, time of day, etc. I would imagine that for an incident on the south side of the circle line that District controllers would not be holding any trains in through platforms west of Barking, so as to cause the least disruption to H&C services, but that trains in Plaistow bay and West Ham siding ready to head west as soon as they can would be decidedly useful. However if the incident is stopping all trains through Bow Road then moving a train forward from Stepney Green to Mile End and holding it there would be more useful than leaving it (and the people on it) at Stepney Green.
Controllers will also need to be aware of driver hours - if the operator of the train at say Upton Park is near their maximum driving time it may be better to bring the train forward to Barking (station or sidings) if possible rather than have it shut down in the way of other services, even if that means a massive gap when services can resume.
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Sept 26, 2019 15:27:00 GMT
Exactly that. There’s not much ‘science’ to handling disruption from an operational, service control perspective - no matter what some commentators might say.
It is very much experience and knowledge driven - you learn the best way to deal with things, and you can often tell very early on how an incident is going to pan out (at least in terms of a vague framework - every incident is different and there’s often usual ways of dealing with them).
There’s a reason why controller training is long and complex, and why many don’t make the grade. Playing trains on paper is nothing like running a railway.
Whilst I agree there’s probably no need for the language used (I leave it to my fellow mods to give judgement as I’m very much involved in this thread) I can fully understand Aslefshrugged’s exasperation. Its already been pointed out, time and again on multiple threads, that there is always a reason for things, and that reason involves the bigger picture. Those reasons may not be apparent to the public, sure, but there’s also no need for them to be - they’ll get where they need to go in the most efficient way possible. Some of us are extremely fed up of enthusiasts constantly second guessing how we do our jobs or thinking they can somehow do it better. This forum has a lot of knowledgable Tube staff, and we’re very lucky for that, but that will only stay whilst they are respected. I’ve see a few threads recently where I’m not sure that’s happening.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 26, 2019 18:13:04 GMT
MOD COMMENT: As MoreToJack alluded to above, can we make sure that all posts are respectful to other members. By all means disagree, but do so nicely. 😋
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 26, 2019 19:17:21 GMT
Also ASLEF shrugged had a rest day today so last night he went to the pub after he'd finished his shift, drank far more than perhaps was wise and then did the regrettable thing of going online.
Thankfully I didn't go on eBay otherwise I might be paying a lot of money for something I didn't actually want.
But even when I am sober punters have little understanding of how railways actually work and until 1997 I was a 9-5 M-F punter. After about three months on the job you start to develop a "railway brain" and things that were previously inexplicable make sense.
My apologies to anyone who was offended by my drunken ranting (although this was tame compared to what I said about Boris on Facebook and losing 4-0 to Oxford Utd on the West Ham forum).
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Sept 26, 2019 19:39:36 GMT
Also ASLEF shrugged had a rest day today so last night he went to the pub after he'd finished his shift, drank far more than perhaps was wise and then did the regrettable thing of going online. Thankfully I didn't go on eBay otherwise I might be paying a lot of money for something I didn't actually want. But even when I am sober punters have little understanding of how railways actually work and until 1997 I was a 9-5 M-F punter. After about three months on the job you start to develop a "railway brain" and things that were previously inexplicable make sense. My apologies to anyone who was offended by my drunken ranting (although this was tame compared to what I said about Boris on Facebook and losing 4-0 to Oxford Utd on the West Ham forum). We've all been there, and as for WHU............
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Sept 26, 2019 20:13:37 GMT
interesting and enlightening...
maybe what is needed is some sort of PR charm measure to attempt to inform the travelling public?
to paraphrase: although such delays are rare the London Underground line controllers can draw from over 100 years of experience to mitigate any delays as best is possible and ensure that as soon as possible trains will start moving again in a way that benefits to the maximum number of passengers
then go on to explain about halting trains in stations (rather than between stations) and include the information in this thread which explains why even a train in front of the delayed train might be halted at a station, for a while.
I suggest this 'public informational' because I am sure that I am not the only passenger (or transport enthusiast) who knew nothing about the holding of trains in front of the delay (because it can help clear crowded station platforms in advance of the train at the scene of the delay). The concept behind this action sounds great - I suspect that if clearly explained (by a professional scriptwriter!) many people will understand. It *might* even help reduce the grumbling!
Also perhaps worthwhile to point out is how to claim delay compensation and what to do if the journey time limit is breached on an Oyster PAYG journey - contactless etc is different because the financial aspect does not come in to play immediately - instead its overnight and therefore a passenger is less likely to find themselves stranded somewhere with a card that no longer works because they have been charged a maximum fare
What perhaps should not be said is a comparison with the mainline railway who typically make delayed trains run 'fast' for several stations (re: the intermediate stations, running trains non-stop in this way is something that passengers wanting to alight at them or waiting for trains at them find extremely infuriating). Erm, why not? LU do likewise on the Met, especially where there is a choice of non-stop or 'all stations' tracks.
Also, please, Please, PLEASE ... avoid the word 'customer' as that is like a red flag to a bull. Railways have human *passengers*.
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,222
|
Post by rincew1nd on Sept 26, 2019 21:17:04 GMT
Also, please, Please, PLEASE ... avoid the word 'customer' as that is like a red flag to a bull. Railways have human *passengers*. Customers pay to receive a product or a service. In this case transportation; it's only the proverbial "red flag" to those who care about such things. At my work all my patients are customers, but not all my customers are patients.
|
|
|
Post by zbang on Sept 26, 2019 21:34:10 GMT
Customers pay to receive a product or a service. In this case transportation; it's only the proverbial "red flag" to those who care about such things. Also in transportation, a traveler on a public or private conveyance other than the driver, pilot, or crew is known as a passenger (whether or not they're paying for the transport).
I'll be a passenger when I'm on the train/metro/bus/plane/etc. I'll be a customer when buying something at the shop.
At least this isn't as bad as some large retailers calling their employees associates and the shoppers guests (which irks me because you never ask a guest to pay for something (hotels and the like excepted).)
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 27, 2019 7:31:12 GMT
I understand the reasoning behind calling the travelling public customers instead of passengers (customer is always right, etc, together with the meaning of "passenger" as someone not making a positive contribution to an enterprise ) but to me it has always seemed insincere, and suggests the company sees them primarily as a source of revenue, with the desire to get somewhere a secondary consideration. (Never more so than when empty trains run past crowded platforms with no explanation other than that the train has to get to the end of the line on time)
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Sept 27, 2019 7:32:54 GMT
I was in a supermarket, and I was confused about some prices. A sign said something along the lines of 'In Doubt? Ask a Colleague'. So I rang work, and asked Chris the mechanic. He couldn't work it out either.
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Sept 27, 2019 9:47:21 GMT
I understand the reasoning behind calling the travelling public customers instead of passengers (customer is always right, etc, together with the meaning of "passenger" as someone not making a positive contribution to an enterprise ) but to me it has always seemed insincere, and suggests the company sees them primarily as a source of revenue, with the desire to get somewhere a secondary consideration. (Never more so than when empty trains run past crowded platforms with no explanation other than that the train has to get to the end of the line on time) Conversely, I prefer to be referred to as a “customer”, because it acknowledges that I have paid for my travel, and have the rights accorded to a customer. “Passenger” is a passive term - cattle on a truck are also passengers - and denies my agency.
|
|
|
Post by sudburytown on Sept 27, 2019 16:23:56 GMT
Well, my original post certainly sparked some lively discussion! Thanks for the explanation about holding the train, it's actually what I thought may have been the reason before I posted. The thing that impresses me about this particular situation though is the speed of response. Its been pointed out that the incident train would have only been about 9 minutes behind the held train. Assuming that it would have taken the train op on the incident train a couple of minutes or so to confirm there was a problem that could cause delay, service controllers didn't have long to decide to hold trains. Is there some sort of standard "hold all trains" response to events like this or is it always in the hands of the controllers?
|
|
|
Post by commuter on Sept 27, 2019 21:41:37 GMT
Well, my original post certainly sparked some lively discussion! Thanks for the explanation about holding the train, it's actually what I thought may have been the reason before I posted. The thing that impresses me about this particular situation though is the speed of response. Its been pointed out that the incident train would have only been about 9 minutes behind the held train. Assuming that it would have taken the train op on the incident train a couple of minutes or so to confirm there was a problem that could cause delay, service controllers didn't have long to decide to hold trains. Is there some sort of standard "hold all trains" response to events like this or is it always in the hands of the controllers? It’s up to the control team on duty. Different lines work in different ways, on the modern lines they may use the signaling system, others might ask all trains between certain locations to hold, others might ring up individual trains, others might get the signaller to do it on controlled signals. Trains ahead of the incident might be asked to hold for an extra couple of minutes and then if the incident is prolonged asked to remain until the all clear is given.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Sept 27, 2019 23:18:27 GMT
Let’s end the passenger vs customer debate in this thread to avoid thread drift. I’m sure it’s been discussed elsewhere before. Thanks.
|
|