How long does it take to change a light bulb?

[Deleted]

Couldn't get a Bakerloo at Paddington this morning (8.15-ish) because all the lights on the platforms had failed.

Got back into town mid-afternoon - SouthEastern trains dealt with a defective cab on one of their trains in only fifteen minutes at Hastings, bless their little hearts, didn't want me using that nasty Southern Railway, after all - and after a coffee at Waterloo what do I find? Still no Bakerloo service at Paddington.

No, I'm not expecting an answer to my question...

[Deleted]

I suspect that it was something a bit more complicated than changing a lightbulb!

[Colin]

Indeed.

Section 12 stations ,such as Paddington, used to be dual fed their power from a local & national power source (in simple terms) - but now only have one source of power. If that source fails, offline battery inverters take over and supply the station with enough lighting & power to carry out an evacuation. There's more to it than that, and I may be slightly wrong as it's been a while since I worked on the station side - but in essence a power failure of any sort will render the station closed.

I'd be tempted to assume that Paddington Bakerloo station had this problem, and that is why you've found it closed.

I would suggest that in future you may want to ask a question in a more positive manner, rather than putting LUL down at the first opportunity and assuming the problem is down to incompetence

[Chris M]

I've just looked at the real time map on the TfL site, and Paddington is highlighted - but only the H&C portion - with comment "Bakerloo Line trains are not stopping due to faulty platform equiptment".

[Tubeboy]

Ah, the humble Olbi. Yes Phil you are right, the olbi kicks in, in the event of a power failure and it is temporary. Olbi's are checked weekly by the supervisor. Going slightly off topic, has these sorts of incidents increased since the closure of Lots road in 2002, We now being at the vagaries of the national grid.

[Colin]

tubeboy said:

Yes Phil you are right

*cough splutter* *clears throat*

AHEM!!
It wasn't Phil - but me!! ;D ;D ;D

[Tubeboy]

Apologies dear boy, will get you a drink at the meet for the mix up. ;D

[Deleted]

Sorry, ... I didn't mean to suggest that it was a question of incompetence, I'll try not to start threads with humourous sarcastic titles in future... I certainly wouldn't want to travel on any sort of railway that didn't put safety first any more than you guys would want to work on one...

Perhaps it's easier to do safety with a smile when you've only an hourly service to run and beautiful Sussex countryside to look at while you're working

[Geoffram]

Colin
I find the tone of your first response slightly odd considering the amount of LUL-knocking that goes on in this site, especially by LU staff. To me, Innocentabroad asked quite a genuine question, i.e if the lights had failed at a major station Paddington at 0815 rendering the station closed, why were they still out in mid-afternoon? Neither can I see that this question implied any LU incompetence: Colin, I suggest you look elsewhere on the site where you'll find real examples of this.

[Deleted]

geoffram said:

Colin
I find the tone of your first response slightly odd considering the amount of LUL-knocking that goes on in this site, especially by LU staff. To me, Innocentabroad asked quite a genuine question, i.e if the lights had failed at a major station Paddington at 0815 rendering the station closed, why were they still out in mid-afternoon? Neither can I see that this question implied any LU incompetence: Colin, I suggest you look elsewhere on the site where you'll find real examples of this.

AND i suggest you read throuygh the whole thread and take the answers in context. The original post, although was asking a question, was making a mockery of LUL, especially the thread name.

If you want an answer to a question, taking the pi$$ wont get it.

In reagrds to your comment about staff taking the pi$$ out of the underground, its done in context. This wasnt.

So on this occasion I give Colin full backing

[mandgc]

LU Staff often have a much wider view of the reasons for delays and incidents like this and the provocative Title understandably put some Staff on the defencive.

This site is often an invaluable source of inside information on the reasons behind LU incidents and I would have no objection to such titles ( more fitted for letters the Evening Standard or Melbourne Herald -Sun ) being
'modified' by the Administrators.

It was probably an oversight but let us not 'bite the hand that feeds us'. :-)

[c5]

The problem was caused by the overnight cessation of power for Operation Bismarck. This is when power is turned off to simulate a power cut and back on to see what systems are affected.

Paddington was one of many sites that had problems, there were many tracks down in the City on the Met/C&H lines and loads of stations had no OPO equipment so staftion staff had to man the platforms. Where I work, a monitor isnt showing full screen and a console button is brighter and warmer thank usual and it shouldnt even be on.

All these faults are then passed to the Infracos or Group Facilities to be resolved.

Before any one says antything about not bothering to fix things, there were many extra staff on in the Fault Reporting Centres and Infraco staff were on site at "key locations".

I just hope i'm not on nights next year for it

Further to add that the problem at Paddington was actually with the OPO equipment and contractors were not able to fix it until Engineering Hours because ladders would be needed.

[connextrain]

ahh that explains that, and it wasnt a lightbulb

[Geoffram]

What's interesting to me, as an 'outsider', i.e. someone who works in another industry which is also on public display, and therefore subject to criticism or 'taking the pi$$' as
Metapprentice eloquently puts it, is this very defensive feeling that Mandgc mentions the moment anything vaguely critical is implied by non-LU staff. I have actually looked very carefully at all the answers on this thread and in the body of his original letter, Innocentabroad didn't implicate anybody in any incompetence, neither was he 'putting LUL down at the first opportunity' as claimed by Colin. He just asked why it took so long for the Power to be restored at a major Underground station.
We're not the Evening Standard: we all read this site because of a genuine informed interest in London Underground and I don't see why we can't ask these questions without someone jumping down our throats for daring to make a joke.
In actual fact, this question has thrown up some very interesting points and I hope the supreme irony was not lost in the very informative (and attitude-free) reply that C5 gave: that a simulation exercise to check the effects of a Power Cut resulted in at least one major underground station being out of commission all the next day. Interesting name they chose for the exercise, too. Wasn't the Bismarck the German battleship that was sunk during World War 2 with a loss of 3600 lives?

[CSLR]

The important point here is that this was the result of a number of emergency trials that take place, usually without any public recognition of the fact. It is admirable that they are happening and it is a credit to the system that they are so rarely heard about - it means that things were either working correctly or that the issues they threw up were dealt with in a timely fashion.
Does it really matter if one station is out of action for a day? Surely it would be a lot worse if these tests did not take place and the first indication of a problem of any sort was during public traffic hours?
We all hope that there will never be another emergency or major incident, but just in case there is, we should support whatever preparation or testing is necessary. On those rare occasions that something like this happens to the detriment of the service, we know that the problem has been spotted and is being dealt with. That surely is much better for everyone?

[Phil]

So it's back once again to the old adage: it doesn't matter how big the holdup/problem is, the punters are quite happy PROVIDED someone tells them what's happening.

As soon as C5 told us what had actually happened, and why, this thread changed tone completely.

Now, if C5 had been in charge of the notice boards at stations, innocentabroad would have not posted in the way he did (and seeing Metronet's performance recently it COULD have been another of their screw-ups) and others would not have had to leap to the defence of LU.

To all the Senior LU staff who we know read this forum: PLEASE get proper information relayed to the public as soon as it's available.

[Chris M]

Indeed, had the noticeboard read "Bakerloo line trains not stopping at Paddington due to failure of safety-critical platform equipment during planned testing. Repair expected tonight." then there wouldn't have been any misunderstanding. The infamous London newspaper might have had something to say about it, but all LU/TfL/Metronet would need to have said was "This is why we do these tests" to take the wind out of their sails.

[Deleted]

awkward42 said:

Indeed, had the noticeboard read "Bakerloo line trains not stopping at Paddington due to failure of safety-critical platform equipment during planned testing. Repair expected tonight." then there wouldn't have been any misunderstanding. The infamous London newspaper might have had something to say about it, but all LU/TfL/Metronet would need to have said was "This is why we do these tests" to take the wind out of their sails.

Absolutely.

And once again may I apologise for any offence given by the thread title... and for the record I most definitely am not an Evening Standard reader - perish the thought

[Colin]

Folks - having re read my comments today, I agree that I did 'jump the gun' with my first reaction to the orignal post. For that I apologise.

It perhaps goes to show that sometimes we all need to think about the way we word things when posting.

[Oracle]

You all know that the EVENING STANDARD gobbled up the rival EVENING NEWS years ago though they did have a go at re-launching it again. However, does anyone remember whether the 'News was 'tube partisan' as well? I used to prefer it to the 'Standard when I used to commute on my beloved Piccadilly Line 1973-81.

[agoodcuppa]

All the newspapers used to be very balanced in their reporting of events. It's only in the last twenty to twenty-five years or so that the present hysteria has developed.

[c5]

I hope you all don't think i'm defending Metromess.

There were this morning about 50 stations without OPO equipment because Initial (the sub-contractors) have run out, so LUL station staf were still out on the platforms despatching trains.

Back to why Paddington Bakerloo platforms were closed, as one of our computers was broken (due to Bismarck) I don't know what it was put out as; power failure, defective safety equipment, or lighting?

I don't really want to go into the "politics" of delays and naming closures that go out to the public on the forum, I'll save that for the meet.

[cdr113]

c5 said:

Before any one says antything about not bothering to fix things, there were many extra staff on in the Fault Reporting Centres and Infraco staff were on site at key locations.

Was Paddington one of the 'key locations' and was there a specific reason why this fairly major interchange between tube and National Rail didn't have its problems rectified during engineering hours? I know they couldn't fix the problem during business hours the next day, reason stated earlier in the thread, just curious why it couldn't be fixed on the night...

[c5]

The simple answer to that is I don't know.
I was a bit vague in my "key locations" and was mainly refering to line control centres and signalling equipment, critical communications equipment.

Yes, Paddington is a key interchange, and would be prioritised accordingly, however only only the Bakerloo Line platforms were closed and this was because to fix the problem involved using ladders and scaffolding which would not be possible until Engineering Hours on Sunday night.

The purpose of this annual excerise is to find out what the problems are (though they seem to vary each year ) and work to resolve the issues, so that if there is an unexpected power interuption between the National Grid and LULs Bulk Supply Points and we are working from the Emergency Power Station, what systems have problems functioning.

Sorry if i'm being like Blair and dodged your question

[c5]

[quote author=rbruce1314 board=bakerloo thread=1150655511 post=1150714404
To all the Senior LU staff who we know read this forum: PLEASE get proper information relayed to the public as soon as it's available.[/quote]

It's not really down to Senior Staff. Its down to Service Control staff to pass it to network control and station staff and then onto customers. Unfortunatly, because where I work the equipment is from 1756 it is very difficult to pass information to customers directly. Though management have invested in a large number of projects like TrackerNet, Manual Electronic Logging, One 2 Many phone systems, One Nine (recorded voicemail service information), plus for customers the Rainbow (line Info LCD display) Boards, and Expected Train Arrival Displays for locations where Dot-Matrix is impossible at the moment (like the Hammersmith H&C branch).

[mandgc]

"One Station out for a day"

Perhaps they should concentrate on an alternative feed for stations like Paddington ( "it was ONLY Kings X, Victoria that was closed for the day") and shut down Mornington Crescent or Covent Garden if neccesary to achieve this !.

[c5]

All stations still recieve their non LU Regional Electricity Company Supply (usually 25%) and indeed some stations no longer have any LU fed supplies, following the Power edfPowerlink PFI



The purpose of the power cessation excercise is to find out what systems don't function properly after being changed to . On one station one of their chocolate machines wasn't working, but the other was. I button on my display console that I have never seen illuminated was very bright and warm and on of our four VDUs wasn't in full screen. I don't have the foggiest idea why/how they did it. Jobs were put out to Metronet.

[Chris M]

c5 said:

Yes, Paddington is a key interchange, and would be prioritised accordingly, however only only the Bakerloo Line platforms were closed and this was because to fix the problem involved using ladders and scaffolding which would not be possible until Engineering Hours on Sunday night.

Would it not have been possible to suspend and elecrically isolate the line between say Baker Street and Queen's Park (or wherever suitable reversing points are)? While this would have resulted in more stations not being served, in theory at least a full service could have resumed sooner?

[c5]

That could have been one solution, trains would also have to be used as "protection" but the time taken to do that in my opinion would not be worth it. I don't know how long it would have taken to fix. There are other routes available at Paddington, So the Bakerloo Line Service Manager would have weighed up all these options. It may have been a different decision on a Monday morning, I don't know.

awkward42 said:

c5 said:

Yes, Paddington is a key interchange, and would be prioritised accordingly, however only only the Bakerloo Line platforms were closed and this was because to fix the problem involved using ladders and scaffolding which would not be possible until Engineering Hours on Sunday night.

Would it not have been possible to suspend and elecrically isolate the line between say Baker Street and Queen's Park (or wherever suitable reversing points are)? While this would have resulted in more stations not being served, in theory at least a full service could have resumed sooner?

[prjb]

tubeboy said:

Going slightly off topic, has these sorts of incidents increased since the closure of Lots road in 2002

I was under the impression that, following it's mothballing, Lots Road is now back to full operation on Ken's instructions.