Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On Sat, 04 Jun 2005 18:18:15 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote: [big snip] Thanks for all this, Paul. LU seem to have given up putting out any press releases about such incidents, leaving us to depend on the Evening Standard. It used to be the case that whenever there was a serious delay or a slow evacuation, a press release was put out which gave some information to explain what happened and why, and also to apologise and demonstrate concern for its passengers. All good customer service practice. But nowadays, they seem to want to bury the bad news unless it's really bad (derailment etc.) Do stations on the line affected still get printed posters with a message from Tim O'Toole or the line boss, which also used to happen in earlier years? My thoughts / comments are as follows a) I still see posters apologising for poor service. There was certainly one from Tim O'Toole the other Monday when the service in the AM peak was diabolical. He didn't mince his words on the poster IIRC. I guess there may have been a view which said constant apology posters re-inforce a negative view amongst passengers long after a problem has been resolved - this probably ties in with the "severe delays, minor delays, good service" messages that are used instead to tell people what is happening *now* rather than 6 hours ago. It is a delicate balancing act and (IMO) we don't always get it right. b) You can't win with the Evening Standard. They, like many others, will watch the website travel news pages and will also hear via other sources as to what has gone wrong. Engineering Overruns are a favourite subject and the bad press reports cause real headaches in the Infracos - witness the changes within Metronet. The ES will merrily report whatever they want about delays depending on how many column inches are spare IMO. c) There is unrelenting pressure on loads of people to stop these delays happening and to improve everyone's performance. The Infracos do not hesitate to sack people who are not performing and there is that climate of fear for a lot of key people in LU. There are certainly very robust discussions about the delays and underlying problems. My own experience is that some lines are considerably better than before in terms of not having the breakdowns in the first place. Some lines are good at dealing with problems when they do occur but that is often down to the facilities (sidings, crossovers etc) that are available to controllers. However some lines are worse than ever and no matter how accomplished the LU side of the house might be in managing the immediate aftermath of the failure the nature of the failure wrecks the service for hours. Overall it is improving and the causes of failures and improved management processes are being put in place but I fully understand why the passengers are rightly ****ed off both that they are delayed and that the rate of progress is not fast enough. -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Paul Corfield" wrote in message ... I only have partial information and this is put here in good faith. I'm not getting into a slanging match with *anyone* as to the rights and wrongs as I would expect there to be a full investigation. Paul, thanks for that - much appreciated and so much more helpful and informative than certain others. Ian |
#33
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Paul Corfield wrote:
b) You can't win with the Evening Standard. They, like many others, will watch the website travel news pages and will also hear via other sources as to what has gone wrong. Engineering Overruns are a favourite subject and the bad press reports cause real headaches in the Infracos - witness the changes within Metronet. The ES will merrily report whatever they want about delays depending on how many column inches are spare IMO. I have to say that the Evening Standard is one of the worst newspapers I have ever had the misfortune to have to buy. Their unrelenting negativity is soul sapping, it's almost like reading a paper written by children. I am going off topic slightly, but as a newspaper they have no idea about transport policy. That said, neither do I, but I don't claim to speak for London. Old trains are bad, old buses are good, new buses are bad, Oyster is bad, congestion is bad, congestion charge is bad (their admission that the CC was working was so begrudging...), speeding is bad, speed cameras are bad etc. etc. I did wonder briefly if that is why LU stopped the press releases - the ES is going to put its spin on anything anyway, I seem to remember that when the "thetube" website was up and running there were more press releases. Perhaps a TfL decision? |
#34
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
On 4 Jun 2005 17:25:18 -0700, "ONscotland"
wrote: Paul Corfield wrote: b) You can't win with the Evening Standard. They, like many others, will watch the website travel news pages and will also hear via other sources as to what has gone wrong. Engineering Overruns are a favourite subject and the bad press reports cause real headaches in the Infracos - witness the changes within Metronet. The ES will merrily report whatever they want about delays depending on how many column inches are spare IMO. I have to say that the Evening Standard is one of the worst newspapers I have ever had the misfortune to have to buy. Their unrelenting negativity is soul sapping, it's almost like reading a paper written by children. Well possibly but their negativity matches a lot of the public mood if people have experienced awful journeys. They need to sell newspapers so they write in a way that will generate sales. I am going off topic slightly, but as a newspaper they have no idea about transport policy. That said, neither do I, but I don't claim to speak for London. Old trains are bad, old buses are good, new buses are bad, Oyster is bad, congestion is bad, congestion charge is bad (their admission that the CC was working was so begrudging...), speeding is bad, speed cameras are bad etc. etc. Well I have yet to find any newspaper that understands transport and the implications from particular decisions or options. Regrettably that simply matches where transport lies in terms of overall importance to the politicians - i.e. near the bottom of the pile - despite transport affecting everyone's lives in some way. People don't like change which is why you get some of the stories that you do. People also expect every system to work perfectly all the time, every time so when one doesn't it's time to attack. The most glaring "change of heart" is over the congestion charge. The ES had nicely built up a "disaster of biblical proportions" approach to the charge and were obviously hoping for a disaster at the start. The fact there wasn't one, in terms of traffic congestion, wrecked that approach and their response has been muted. I can't begin to imagine how much the Mayor was laughing at their miscalculation. I did wonder briefly if that is why LU stopped the press releases - the ES is going to put its spin on anything anyway, I seem to remember that when the "thetube" website was up and running there were more press releases. Perhaps a TfL decision? All of the press releases - regardless of mode - are now on the TfL part of the website. There are more press releases than every before - they seem to be pouring forth at an alarming rate. http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/press-cent...es/default.asp -- Paul C Admits to working for London Underground! |
#35
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
However, (theres always a but), Boltar is not aware of the other 20+
incidents that occured on the Central line that day that were dealt with quickly with minmal delays. You're right , I wasn't aware. But that doesn't make the big screw-ups any better. You may be surprised to learn that on the Thursday evening, the Victoria line suffered a points failure that left trains in tunnels but prompt action from Managers, Train ops and station staff had all detrained, including bringing trains up behind one another for people to walk through, within 30 minutes. Yes Boltar, thats passing a signal at danger..........which is Kudos to them. So why did it take 90 mins to do it on the central line? If you know its going to take a good length of time to move a train why not just get the passengers out anyway? Passengers should always be the first priority, they are after all the reason the underground exists but unfortunately a lot of LU staff treat us as if we're just a bloody nuisance messing up the smooth running of their lifesize trainset. Obviously some passengers can be a right pain in the arse and I wouldn't want to have to deal with them , but lets not forget that people work for LU out of choice, its not a gulag. And if they don't like it and can't be bothered, they should go get another job. B2003 |
#36
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Its one thing to dismiss the OP's attitude as being needlessly negative
and ignorant of relevant information; quite another to be equally dismissive of those seeking futher information. I'm only negative because I have to use the damn system to get into work every day and literally every week theres some problem on one of the lines I have to use. Last year I ended up working at another office for 6 months which required driving along the north circular during rush hour , and let me tell you it was FAR less stressful than using the tube (not to mention a lot quicker to do an equivalent distance). If I could drive into work now , believe me , I would as I've had a gutful of the underground with its lousy service, ignorant staff and extortionate fares. B2003 |
#37
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() Boltar wrote: However, (theres always a but), Boltar is not aware of the other 20+ incidents that occured on the Central line that day that were dealt with quickly with minmal delays. You're right , I wasn't aware. But that doesn't make the big screw-ups any better. You may be surprised to learn that on the Thursday evening, the Victoria line suffered a points failure that left trains in tunnels but prompt action from Managers, Train ops and station staff had all detrained, including bringing trains up behind one another for people to walk through, within 30 minutes. Yes Boltar, thats passing a signal at danger..........which is Kudos to them. So why did it take 90 mins to do it on the central line? If you know its going to take a good length of time to move a train why not just get the passengers out anyway? From what Paul said I thought they thought they could get the service back within less time but it ended up taking 90 minutes because a couple of bodge attempts didn't work. Presumably - if the bodge attempts had worked it would have been quicker to bodge and continue than getting everyone off, checking for people, bodging then restarting the service. One hopes that in very hot weather and crush packed trains the attitude would have been different. Out of interest - on a D stock train (has a red button but no mic. or speaker) how would someone having a panic attack / becoming dehydrated get assistance if the train was stopped in a tunnel? What would the driver do if the button was pressed? How would (s)he know what the problem was? |
#38
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
09.26 - Marble Arch - Points Failure, passengers stuck on stalled
train. The failure of 3702 points to normalise at Marble Arch eastbound caused the Central Line to be suspended between White City and Holborn from 09.26 until 12.18. Initially, three eastbound trains were stalled in section between Lancaster Gate and Marble Arch. To try to clear the fault, a train in Marble Arch platform was worked in and out of the sidings, however when the failure persisted, traction current was discharged to allow the Station Supervisor to secure the points for through running. The London Ambulance Service was advised and an ambulance sent to Marble Arch as a precautionary measure The first stalled train (No 33), was authorised to work forward under failure conditions into the platform at Marble Arch. Passengers having been on the train between stations for 25 minutes. At 10.01, train 33 was authorised to move forward, and the Train Operator reported a loud bang whilst traversing the points, when in the platform at Marble Arch. The following train, (No 5) when authorised through, stopped short of the points reporting that they had been secured in the wrong position [just as a suggested can happen in the "Why does LU take so long to deal with a signal failure thread] This train and a further two trains were then queued in the tunnel and at 10.16 BT Police were advised. Formal Incident Management (Na100) was declared with DSM Sparrow appointed Silver Control. A special service was introduced west of White City and east of Holborn to all destinations. With technical staff assessing the damage to the points, two of the three trains 3 and 42 were authorised to work back to Lancaster Gate, Approximately 1000 passengers were detrained to the platform by 10.45. Once the points were re-secured the remaining train was worked forward into Marble Arch platform, detraining 500 passengers at 11.08. Subsequently 20 passengers were reported to have been attended to by ambulance crews. One female having fainted aboard a train was advised to go to hospital but decided to continue her journey following water refreshment. The service remained suspended whilst technical staff made temporary repairs to the points and track circuits. Signalling code was re-established and services resumed to severe delays at 12.18, with a temporary speed restriction in place over the damaged point work. The special service pattern was withdrawn at 13.25 and timetable recovery commenced, with only 2 cancellations at the 15.00 snapshot. A good serviced was restored at 15.40, and a full service offered for the evening peak. Engineer's train 570 was cancelled in consequence as staff worked on the points (3702) during engineering hours. |
#39
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#40
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
In message , Paul Terry
writes At 10.01, train 33 was authorised to move forward, and the Train Operator reported a loud bang whilst traversing the points, when in the platform at Marble Arch. The following train, (No 5) when authorised through, stopped short of the points reporting that they had been secured in the wrong position But here we reach the critical matter. Who made this mistake? Were they supervised or checked? Did anyone realise that if this procedure went wrong (which it did) then matters could escalate to critical? Question: If the points had been initially secured in the wrong position (which I find hard to believe), why did the Train Operator of Train 33 not notice this before traversing them? Surely he'd have been travelling at a speed where he could stop short if they weren't. Presumably, given the description, the trains were moving over them in a trailing direction, so his train running through the points probably did them no good whatsoever. -- Daniel (a.k.a Spyke) Address is valid, but messages are treated as junk. Replace the bit before the @ with 'daniel' to get through. The opinions expressed in this post do not necessarily reflect those of the educational institution from which I post. |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
Jubilee line - broken again | London Transport | |||
Oxford Street trams - again - again | London Transport | |||
Circle Line up the spout again | London Transport | |||
Central Line To Close (again) | London Transport | |||
Northern Line - again! | London Transport |