Great Western Coffee Shop

To add to the weather related issues there is now major disruption due to lineside equipment failure between Paddington and Reading. Multiple track circuit failures at Airport Junction. Cancellations and delays of up to 2 hours and FGW are advising people not to travel unless necessary.

Chiltern Railways, Cross Country, South West Trains, Virgin Trains and London Underground services are conveying passengers via any reasonable route until further notice. Arrangements have been made for First Great Western rail tickets to be accepted for these journeys.

'Contingency Plan Three' from Network Rail and FGW is in place.

See attachment.

Thanks for posting that. Does a summary of it appear anywhere on the FGW website? I'm reminded of the Fog Service that used to be a similar fallback on the Southern Region in the '60s (though real smoggy flogs had mostly gone by then). But it would be publicised so that passengers knew roughly what to expect.

For TV services it used to be 2 tph all stations Reading Paddington.

That contingency plan is what the train operator can operate, a sort of best case scenario, during a situation like this. It should not be taken as gospel as things can and do change and the situation is fluid. Other factors that need to be taken into account are drivers/guards being out of place/out of hours, and displaced rolling stock.

FGW will advise passengers to use their website's 'JourneyCheck' or use National Rail Enquiries.

I posted the contingency plan to give a flavour of what the industry puts in place as quickly as possible in situations such as this. It shouldn't be relied on by passengers to plan their journey.

THanks BNM - in the case of local services (such as Reading to Basingstoke or Newbury) is there a plan which dictates how long it is after these services are suspended that replacment bus services are provided?

Dave

I think the intention is they should be in place as soon as possible but the problem is sometimes finding them.  Bus/coach companies tend not to have vehicles/drivers just sitting around waiting for a call.  The difficulty can be particularly acute at rush hour times when coaches are being used on school/work contracts.  While taxis can be a short term substitute they are not really suitable for mass movement or long distances.

The first attempt by Network Rail to fix the problem at Airport Junction failed. As at 1416 they are saying:

A very bad day for FGW!

Also the Par - Newquay and Liskeard - Looe branches have been suspended due to flooding.

I'm booked to travel via Paddington tomorrow. Hopefully things will be sorted by then. Does anyone know though, that *if* there are problems tomorrow, whether ticket acceptance will be allowed for the following day (Saturday)?

Currently on 1406 from Pad just passing Hanwell very slowly on the down relief.  We stopped at Acton Main Line to pick up some new SSI modules and an S&T man which we are going to drop off at Stockley.  Looks like the trains on the down main  are being turned back to gain access to the DR.

Back on the DM at Dolphin and now proceeding at an increased rate of knots!!!!  ;D ;D ;D

Not ideal for mass movement but can be used for long distances. I was reading on another rail forum about a passenger who was delayed following OHLE problems on the ECML on 17th December. He was heading to London to connect with the Night Riviera Sleeper onward to Plymouth. He missed his connection so East Coast provided a taxi for him from King's Cross to Plymouth!

And it was on the meter:

(http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt68/bignosemac/kgx-ply.jpg)

http://railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=76517&page=2 post #19 et seq.

Nice Christmas bonus for that cabbie!  ;D

In addition to the acceptance of tickets on other operators by reasonable routes, FGW have now lifted time restrictions on walk up tickets for the remainder of the day. Advance Purchase ticket holders can claim full refunds if their service is cancelled, or travel on a later service:

I am on the 16:00 departed 16:10 special  padd to rdg calling at slough maidenhead 16:45 trundeling through ealing Broadway

Have you got to Reading yet?  I am on the 17:15 to Carmarthen, left 17:27, trundling through Ealing Broadway at 17:55  and we are warned that trains ahead are up to an hour and 40 minutes late at Reading :-\

Oh dear - touch and go for a taxi to Melksham....

On 1718 Oxford left Pad on time just passing Slough 1813

Got to Maidenhead at 17:30 .......... (just in time to catch the 17:30 departure non-stop Padd if I had wanted too) but went for the Marlow branch instead 

Arrived Reading 18:47 ... by which time the TransWilts service had left Swindon according to the web.

Train Manager has announced that he's finding out about Cheltenham connections at Swindon, and "various" connections from Newport.  No mention of Melksham, Trowbridge, Westbury or Warminster

However, you can't believe everything you read on the web ... I got to Swindon at 19:18 and the delayed TransWilts service left at 19:25 - now bowling along on the way to Chippenham, wondering if the single line's going to be given to us or the 19:35 Westbury to Swindon.

Delays now expected until Friday midday - oh joy ;)

This is the Slough New Panel again.  I thought this was relatively modern equipment (1990's?).  Why does it keep failing so catastrophically?

Initial paragraph seems odd:  "...and assumes two pairs of lines (ML or RL) available for traffic."

Isn't two pairs of lines the normal situation, and as per the title this plan is for only one pair of lines, ie a two track railway?

Paul

Please... No. :(

Im off 2 Souffend 4 xmas tomoz innit bruv!

Sorry. Couldn't resist! I'm going to Southend tomorrow. Booked an evening train though. Hopefully they'll be no dramas. NRE has told me I should be able to get the 23:15 from London Liverpool Street. Considering I feel like death warmed up right now, the cynic in me is telling me that is very optimistic. The last train from London Liverpool Street is 00:50 so assuming the Paddington train is on time. It won't all go wrong*. Assuming the Paddington is an hour late. That could then be disaster. Whilst I don't mind that, I hope that FGW don't do what has happened previously and send me onto Liverpool Street so as to put it bluntly "Become someone elses problem"

The worst that GreaterAnglia could do assuming I just miss the last service for SOV is send me as far as Shenfield and a taxi from there... But Class 315's**? No. Just. No. :-X

* - Subject to GreaterAnglia or a Third Party not breaking the train set
** - Bonus points if anyone can say why that would be a very bad idea for thetrout... :-X

Estimate of disruption, from internal sources, has now slipped to 1500. This has not yet filtered down to the public information sources.

Has now ...

Owing to signalling problems between Slough and Southall some lines are blocked.
Impact:
Train services running through these stations may be cancelled, delayed by up to 60 mins or revised at short notice. Disruption is expected until 15:00 21/12.
Message Received :21/12/2012 04:12

---

I can't be using the train today.  In my job, I have to be on my customer site, and teaching a class, at the pre-agreed time; no good being late - if a delegate's delayed, it only effects him but if the teacher is late, it effects everyone.  And I have to present myself on site fit to do an excellent day's work, not tired / stressed from an elongated and not-fully-preplanned journey.  Can I get a fifth of my weekly season ticket price back to offset against alternative travel costs, or am I left paying for the consequences of rail industry's failure to provide the advertised services, as well as for a ticket I won't be using as fully as I otherwise would have?  :-\

Submit a claim.

Whilst the Passenger Charter doesn't say what compensation arrangements there are for Weekly Season holders who, because of severe disruption, decide not to travel, I'm fairly sure a claim will be looked at sympathetically. I would expect a pro-rata rate of compensation based on the daily rate. Similar to that offered when a service is delayed or cancelled.

---

FGW have lifted ticket time restrictions on their services this morning. Which is good news for me. I can set out to London somewhat earlier this morning, only paying for Off Peak fares. Every cloud.....

Hope that's not rubbing it in too much, grahame.   ;)

From the Oxford Mail (http://):

The Travel Disruptions page on the FGW website is now saying services to Heathrow have been suspended because of a separate signalling problem.  Although not good news for those trying to get to the airport it will at least help the mainline with yet fewer trains running.

no toilets.

If traveling to exeter from egham this morning, what is best - go via reading as planned and hope for the best in terms of booked train/seat, or consider trying SWT trains via Woking or Clapham?

As a data point, I incurred a 24 minute delay on the 08:08 from Reading which departed pretty much on time and called additionally at Twyford. This was considerably better than the services last night though it was absolutely packed.

Hi,

After not getting home until nearly 10pm last night (2 trains did not run, next one was nearly 1/2-hour late) I had to get the 7:23 from Tilehurst this morning (with extra stops Taplow/Iver/Hanwell/W Ealing) as it was the ONLY peak-time service running. Was standing room only & people being turned away from Slough onwards, yet people still wouldn't squish up to let people on, even though there were no later trains for them to get to work on. I got off at Hayes instead of Southall (I now work in Greenford) to get a bus to free up a space for someone. Couldn't believe there were actually BIKES on board! No wonder people couldn't get on! Surely they could have left bike at station of origin & got bus from destination just for one day??????? Unbelievable!

It seems ridiculous to cancel practically all the stoppers just so the HST's can run. How are people meant to get to work? Would be MUCH better to terminate majority of HST's at Reading and run regular 6-car shuttle service all stations Reading-Paddington. Don't see any reason why stoppers Oxford-Reading were cancelled either - these should not have been affected at all, just turned around at Reading instead.

in short, can't say I am at all impressed with "Contingency Plan 3"! (Maybe plans 1 and 2 were better?)

BTW what exactly is the "problem with lineside equipment"? If it was signal failure/points failure/cable theft, why not be more specific?

6 car shuttle all stations Padd Reading WAS the contingency plan from NSE daysup to 2 tph.

Heard on Radio 4 todays problem is a fire in an equipment room at Padd. Sounds bad!

I'm wondering if FGW are giving priority to long distance services today seeing as it's a big 'getaway' day before Xmas and maybe fewer people are expected to go to work in London? I agree that there should have been much more information about the nature of the problem, the lack of that is probably why the BBC this morning were briefly reporting a "London Paddington station fire" which is of course wrong and might have caused unnecessary anxiety for anyone planning to use FGW today. Incidentally I see on FGW's Twitter timeline that someone called 'DTFC1907' has tweeted: "down here all night having cancelled leave to help build a temporary equipment room & re terminate 1,800 circuits."

EDIT: Slightly OT but it looks like another lineside equipment fire has stopped all trains to and from Brighton today: http://www.theargus.co.uk/news/10122615.Chaos_on_the_trains/?ref=rss

Oh great - am meant to be going there tonight! GRRRRR!

Two thoughts:

a) It take longer to turn a train around than have it call.   Would there have been sufficient capacity?

b) If a high proportion of the stopper traffic usually comes from the east of Reading (?) and is absent, is there any point in running trains as frequently as ususual if they're nearly empty?  Better save the cost of track access charges and the like  ;D

From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20808182):

Most of the passenger traffic on stoppers Oxford-Reading is going to/from Reading, hence why turning around at Reading would make sense allowing shuttles to run regularly Reading-London. Alternatively could have let some run through.




Edit note: Quote marks fixed. CfN.

Ongoing updates from member CJB666 on "London to Reading" - at http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=11737.msg122412#msg122412 .   I have chosen not to merge the threads, as the flurry of posts on that other thread could drown discussions and ongoing data on this one.

The CJB666 thread was locked - this is the reply I tried to post to it:


The big issues - as with every disruption to the GWML are:

1/ lack of management visibility at Paddington inc. BAA or Heathrow Ltd / FGW / Network Rail

2/ conflicting information from station staff who themselves aren't kept informed - this latest disruption was known about at 11.00 Thursday morning - yet no-one bothered to announce that it was a major fire or where - pax at, say Hayes (where I was) at 15.00, were given NO information whatsoever yet the FGW Duty Manager (Mr. Singh) was there on the platform chatting to a friend - he seemed totally unconcerned about anything

3/ complete abandonment by Heathrow Ltd (ex-BAA) of pax for Heathrow, no coaches, no cabs, no real alternatives to get to Heathrow other than the over-crowded Piccadilly Line

Yet this line and Paddington has severe disruptions almost every month from cable thefts, suicides, points failures, signalling failures, etc. YET FGW / HEATHROW (EX-BAA) / NETWORK RAIL ALL SEEM INCAPABLE OF HANDLING THE EMERGENCIES. PATHETIC.

Someone at the FlyerTalk BA Forum has very recently posted the following, if it's true it's not good news:

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/19898718-post14.html (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/19898718-post14.html)

And almost without fail, this results in automatic knee-jerk ranting from CJB, the full time FGW critic of the uk.railway and uk.transport.london usenet groups...

Paul

I'm seriously considering whether to make the call not to travel this evening... On the one hand it would be the best day for me to travel... On the other. risking arriving at Ladyfriend Trouts house at gone 2:00AM would not be well received at all...!


I'm sorry to say... But your spot on... That is the very reason why a 315 would be unsuitable for thetrout :-X :( >:(

Although expressed in a way that is unlikley to endear himself to others, CJB666 has a point.  It is not unusual for 1 pair of lines to be blocked between Padd and Rdg, and it should not be too difficult to have a set of contingency plans available for various scenarios (eg whether RL or ML, and stretch of line affected - there aren't that many crossovers, so you're not talking about too many scenarios).  And I echo 8F's comment that NSE used to have a 2 tph all stations Padd-Rdg as a contingency plan (no doubt complete with traincrew and rolling stock diagrams) which I remember being trotted out on several occassions.

And with modern CIS and communications with CS staff there really is no excuse for not having useful and current information available for passengers.  Someone at Swindon does know what is going on, as he/she will have decided in advance what trains are going to run and any changes to stops, and this info should be passed on to station staff as well as the CIS. 

It is frustrating that everytime there's an incident which blocks a pair of lines out of Padd, passengers perceive that the railway reacts as if it's never seen that situation before.

This does seem to be particularly damning. If the station duty manager was chatting to somebody who appeared to be a friend, then that that is not what they are there for. Whilst anybody coming ' on shift' would not really know the state of play to begin with, even with handover, part of the training in such a situation is surely to get out there and tell the customers what is going on.
Although sadly, upon reflection, it does't happen at Maidenhead either. They usually get the trainee or the managers boy to go and face the music from the customers. These situations will always be fast moving 'live' situations but honestly, hiding behind closed doors helps nobody......
On a positive note, at least the share price has gone up recently....

If his profile is to be believed he registered on December 2009, so his knee hasn't actually jerked on here for three years...

JourneyCheck now reporting disruption until 16.00 on Saturday 22nd.  Wow!

Err - you're certainly NOT quoting me there, Western Enterprise. Where is Hayes?  ;D  And I have deleted the name of the operational staff member involved.

Perhaps the quoted item (from CJB666) assumes the worst of Mr Xxxxx without full backup;  You'll find me appearing unconcerned at times of extreme pressure when at work - doesn't mean I'm not working my darndest.   And you'll find me chatting there with my friends / colleagues - often (in these circumstances) working out the best way to handle the circumstances to the maximum benefit of our customers.

There would seem to be two problem areas Hayes and Acton

Not a fire at Padd, I believe (and this is only speculation on my part) its a problem with signalling power supply point at Hayes, these are containerised units with an electricity supply from the public highway and a diesel generator and a UPS there is space to dump a mobile generator unit (kept at Sudbrook or used to be) next the the containers although if there is a burn out in the change over panel this is a little more difficult to deal with.

The other problem area would seem to be between Acton Main Line and Ealing Broadway on the UM side, there is evidence of  OHLE piling in the area wonder if that has hit cables perhaps in several places, there is also evidence of OHLE piling on the UM side just east of Hayes this may also be the cause.

What ever the cause(s) is it is major and if its two major items NR contingency planning allows for a single major failure in one area, it is not easy to bring teams in from other areas as they will not always know the patch or the equipment although I suspect they will have.   

Overall though its utterly pathetic - nowhere on FGW's website does "sorry for the inconvenience" appear or an acknowledgement that these constant meltdowns are affecting people's jobs and now likely ruining Christmas plans....how can infrastructure lack the robustness for an incident to practically cripple the system for what looks likely to be 48 hours or more?

And I have to concur with others - in my experience at the first sign of any problems the "Customer Service" staff scuttle off to their crew room - especially at Slough.

From FGW:

Flooding is expected to disrupt services in between Taunton, Exeter St Davids, Plymouth and Penzance from the start of service on Saturday 22nd December until further notice.

Services operating between London Paddington and Bristol Temple Meads towards Exeter St Davids, Plymouth and Penzance will terminate at either Taunton or Tiverton Parkway in both directions.

Services due to operate through to/from Penzance will start/terminate at Exeter St Davids.

Limited road replacement transport will be in operation between Tiverton Parkway, Taunton and Exeter St Davids in both directions.

Customers with non-essential travel plans are advised to make alternative arrangements for their travel.

Tickets will be valid on alternative days.

--------------

http://www.firstgreatwestern.co.uk/disruption

This already posted on "Mass disruption etc" thread.   This thread involves signalling problem Paddington to Reading.

Well... I'm on then 20:43 and we left Bath Spa 1 or 2 minutes late. So far seem to be doing ok. Driver did just use the brakes rather euthisastically around Wotton Bassett. Nice smell of burning brakes in the carriage now!

First Class very lightly loaded. I am sharing the carriage with one other Gent at the opposite end. Quiet carriage has 3 occupants and 5.75 Standard Class carriages with plenty of seats spare.

The Train Manager did just say he isn't sure if we'll get to Paddington for 22:14 and that yesterday it took him on a working 50 minutes to go from Paddington - Airport Junction. Lovely lass in the Buffet also said it was an absolute nightmare as well. Really feel for the staff on the front line at the moment. Nevertheless I am comfortable where I am right now. I'll update as we go on ;D

Left Reading 4 minutes late... Picked up a 3 minute delay at Swindon. Train still practically empty in First Class ;D

Speaking from a hex perspective it isn't abandonment as such but the harsh reality is due to the crossrail work there is now no chance of running a bus replacement service as buses previously used the old taxi road whereas the new one struggles with taxis most of the time.

Also there has been a continual staff presence offering information to customers regarding alternative routes etc and handing out compensation forms. So I'm not sure what a management presence would offer as I'm assuming your referring to senior management then surely putting pressure on network rail to rectify the problem and come up with a robust contingency plan would be a better use of their time.

Sorry but I've discovered that you were the poster on the other Board also.

Welcome to the forum TaplowGreen.  :)

A shame that you've come here following some pretty major disruptions on the FGW network. I understand your frustrations, but I hope that the comprehensive coverage this forum has given to this recent disruption has a least given you some idea of the challenges faced by rail staff. Do stick around though. We may not have the answers at times like this, but we can empathise and discuss.

FGW are doing their best to get people to where they want to be going. I'm neither rail staff or a FGW apologist, but I feel it's only fair to point out that this isn't a problem of their making. The infrastructure had failed, and the responsibility for that lies with Network Rail.

I do however partly agree with your observation that the information given to customers by the operator (FGW) could and should be better. This is a common theme that crops up whenever there is major disruption. Ultimately the train operator is trying its best to get people from A to B and up to the second information on the ground may be lacking. Often times those staff 'at the coalface' may be just as much in the dark as the punters. That said, there isn't really any excuse for staff to be hiding away, and if that really was what was happening at Slough today then you should raise a complaint with FGW.

Disruption is likely to continue into Saturday 22nd December 2012.

From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20808182):


I travelled out of Paddington today (21/12/2012) in the late afternoon peak and was pleasantly surprised at how painless my journey was. I had no problem finding a seat and I was only 20 minutes late into Bristol Temple Meads. I did see evidence though of how few services FGW were running. Old Oak Common was filled with HST, HEx and HC sets at 4pm. Normally at that time on a Friday afternoon the depot would be all but empty.

That does make me wonder....I did ask today and was told that trains being displaced was the reason that they could only find 2 (out of very many carriages that I know are used in the rush hour) to operate the emergency half hour timetable between Reading and Paddington (mid morning today in my case)... ::)

Anecdotally, it did appear to me that priority was being given to long distance HST services to the detriment of Thames Valley services.

Perhaps that explains why, despite the major disruption, I had a relatively trouble free journey home. No doubt, if I'd been heading to Heathrow, Slough or Maidenhead, my journey would've been more fraught.

 

I didn't even bother trying to use the main line going home yesterday (to West Drayton about 19:00) instead taking the Piccadilly line to Heathrow T5 and then a bus. Have to say that the Piccadilly line didn't seem overly busy, people standing but no where near crush conditions in the carriage I was in.

Anyway, the problem is sorted now according the NRE and trains look to be running near normal (though FGW website hasn't caught up yet).

Thanks to all those FGW and NR employees, who I imagine have been doing some very long hours over the past few days.

I'm assuming their line of thought is that shorter journeys can be made by other means without too much inconvenience, whereas someone heading to Bristol, Cardiff or beyond does not get too much choice.

E.g. Heathrow on the Piccadilly Line, Slough on a London Bus and Maidenhead .... well, not at all.

The fault at Acton was a 650V power cable on the DM side that supplies the signalling in the area for the Main Lines, this may have caused the problem with the Hayes PSP.

Normally a simple cable fault is relatively quick to repair it may have caused damage to other cables (signal) in the same route when it went phut

Could they possibly have operated a HST on the local services using SDO at stations with short platforms or would this have caused additional delays?

   ..........thanks for the welcome but I'm sorry the whole picture is pretty appalling - if this was a oneoff it could possibly.....just be understood but in recent weeks the service has been pathetic - we had the farcical situation on 6th December, morning and evening, just because the weather was a bit chilly....as I understand it the chaos in the morning was largely due to insufficient anti-freeze being used.....if it's a Network Rail problem then its incumbent upon FGW to sort that out with them - in the commercial world you never blame your suppliers/subcontractors/partners - as far as customers are concerned its a FGW issue and they are correct to blame them - it's FGW who soak up the ticket revenues and they should be all over Network Rail at all times to make sure the infrastructure is sound....as for staff at stations I used to use Slough all the time and it seems trapped in a timewarp, some of the platform staff seem barely capable of civilised speech never mind being helpful at all.....but that's a side issue......no doubt there will be an A2 poster up at Reading station saying "we realise our service isn't good enough"....but that in itself is not good enough!!!  With airlines you have a choice, they know that and that is why their passengers are treated properly.....FGW and the railways generally have a monopoly, they know it and its reflected in the way people are treated and what they are expected to put up with.....

Edit to clarify quoting - Graham

Would work at Slough, Maidenhead, Twyford and station west of Reading as they have HST peak services.  HST are a bit slow of the mark so its better they don't keep stop starting and the slam door stock would be impossible manage getting to doors closed at Hayes and Ealing Broadway due to the number of passengers the doors would just be held open better to use the 165/6.

It comes down to "flighting" the services which I think was in part achieved Thursday and Friday;  run a couple of fasts (non stop to Reading, followed by a semi fast (Slough then all Stn to Oxford) and then a stopper.  More used could have been made of the Bay at Slough (plat 6) the stoppers could have been turned round there.

Thankfully my travels don't take on the paddington <>reading stretch but on the reading to newbury stretchin my opinion I think it was right to start,for example , some of the Bedwyn services from Reading rather than London paddington

My sympathies go out not only to those trying to travel this weekend but those trying to rectify the travel problems caused by the bad weather.

To be fair FGW have been trying not to blame their supplier... ...which is why most people still think its a FGW problem.  Of course FGW also have a monopoly supplier - they can't tel Network Rail that they will take their business elsewhere.  That is why we have a regulated railway and I am sure ORR will have been made aware of the signalling issues.

Of course the flooding that has been the cause of so many of the recent problems cannot be blamed on Network Rail.  Though we do need to think about making the railway more resilient.  


I have posted before about the lack of true customer service attitudes an some (but by no means all) railway staff.  In some things it is still the culture of another age.

I am sorry to say that I somewhat agree with the negative views of our new member.
Of course things go wrong and any reasonable passenger would expect this, but recently we seem to have had one disruption followed by another with limited periods of normal operation in between.


Both FGW and UK railways in general are rapidly becoming fair weather weekday only railways.
Heavy rain, signalling failures, equipment fires, and planned engineering works have caused immense disruption recently. And we have not yet had significant snow nor a strike.

And electrification is coming, which probably means no effective service at holiday periods for 20 years, and of course electric trains dont reliably work in windy weather as the wires come down.
More signalling modernisation is on the way, which whatever other advantages it may bring, also means that a single power failure, fire, cable theft or other breakdown can effectively close a large area to normal operation.

There were at least quite a few peak HSTs making extra stops at Maidenhead and Twyford to ease the crush on the local trains. They were limited to 3 carriages because of short platforms Didcot Parkway-Oxford but putting a 2-car unit out seems stupid.

Not during the middle of morning when I was travelling they weren't.. Just a half hourly 2 carriage service.. I think a Twyford, Maidenhead, Slough stopping HST or even just Slough (I'd have changed there onto it) would have meant that people closer in could actually have got on a train..

"Both FGW and UK railways in general are rapidly becoming fair weather weekday only railways".....a superb description! ....and don't forget that after 9pm-ish during the week you have to get off at Slough/Maidenhead to get a bus between the smaller stations....apparently to allow engineering work to take place...the benefits of which I am sure we all look forward to!!!

Are you somehow doubting that engineering work is necessary for electrification and Crossrail?  If you've got a surefire way of achieving that without closures I'm sure NR will be most interested...

Paul

I did say a peak time service. The more stops you put in though the more delays you cause. Oxford fast services should still have been calling at Slough once an hour. It wasn't a half hourly 2-carriage service either, most were 3, the maximum length they can be. They should all have been 3 really though.

Are fires in equipment cabinets common? If not two on the network on consecutive days (Hayes and Brighton) seems odd.

When we've had major disruptions in the past the stopping services have always been split at Reading with 5/6 between Reading and Padd, not sure what was West Reading but assumme 3 if going through to Oxford. Even 6 got very full after Slough.


One of the problems with engineering work on the Relief Lines between Slough and Reading which seems to hvae been going on for the last 10 years at least is that although Taplow has 4 platforms trains are not allowed to stop on the  mains because the tracks too high. Although I con provide evidence of both HSTs and Turbos stopping so they should have grandfather rights. 

I agree with you it's annoying to have to catch a bus from Slough to Taplow when you know the train could stop. Just be thankful you are not travelling from Reading when it can take 11/2 hours to get from Reading to Taplow as you have to go via Slough and the bus connections are not good.

If trains stopped at Taplow then it makes bus provison for Burham easier You have a bus from Taplow vai Burnham for ex Reading passengers and Burnham London passnegers and teh return caters for London Burnahm and Burnham Reading passengers. 2 buses on circulation would cover the service.
 
Welcome to the forum Taplowgreen good to have another champion of our station. 

Huge mistakes were made.  Funnily enough, the local service out of Paddington was just about spot on in principle given the number of paths available, but several trains were running around as 2-cars.  To suggest that three is the maximum length doesn't cut the mustard with me I'm afraid.  They should all have been 6-car (or 5-car at the very least).  Should Appleford or Culham get in the way then there's time to lock/unlock the other portion at Didcot with no/minimal delay - it happens daily on a couple of scheduled services.  Or cancel the stops at Appleford and Culham and run a shuttle 2-car Turbo service, or buses/taxis. 

The priority is maximising the seating for available paths during disruption like that, and to hell with the likes of Culham and Appleford as a concern - so if you have 6 paths an hour available, you run:

1) Two local services at say xx:27 and xx:57 (all stations PAD-RDG with a 6-car Turbo - extend them to Oxford if you want, or run a RDG-OXF shuttle separately),
2) Hourly PAD-SWA service calling the normal stops and DID. 
3) You run an hourly PAD-BRI service with the normal stops and DID
4) You run an hourly PAD-PLY/PNZ service,
5) You run an hourly PAD-OXF calling at SLO, MAI, RDG and DID (and possibly on to the Cotswolds) using a 6-Car Turbo until Oxford or a HST.

From an LTV crew resourcing perspective you rip up the normal diagrams and get Oxford depot to cover Worcester, Banbury and services as far as Reading.  You get Paddington depot to cover most of the Paddington to Reading services, and you get Reading depot to cover their branch work and the remainder of the Reading to Paddington stuff.  As it was, drivers were all over the place trying to stick to their original diagrams where most of the work was either delayed or cancelled.

Those that said we used to do it better are quite correct - there were more staff on overnight to work out amended service plan for the next day for a start.  The service offered was pathetic.  Whatever happened there would have been mass disruption, but we made it a hell of a lot harder that it could have been for staff and passengers alike.

Serious equipment failure eg major component or cable failing does happen an given the vast number of equipment cabinets and cables on the National network there are actually quite few.  Catastrophic failures where equipment gets destroyed are extremely rare Nationally through genuine faults more often its due to vandalism

Systems are designed to be robust signalling systems supplies working on an N-1 principle and some locations such as large Signal Boxes N-2 is used critical systems will have either battery back up or UPS support; however no matter how well systems are designed and built there are weak points which we work to eliminate through risk analysis but how far to go a 1 in 10 year event, a 1 in 20 year event 1 in 50 1 in 100 as you work that out the cost increases exponentially.  ................. well that part of my day job explained  ;D

Thanks, same cost consideration goes for flooding how far for 1 in 10 year etc - depends on the consequences of flooding. 

But if each event is just once in every "n" years and there are lots of elements, they add together as the reciprocal of the sum of the reciprocals, don't they?  (assuming the failures are independent)

With 100 pieces of equipment / items that can fail along the length of a railway, and with each have a 1 event in 15 year average failure rate, I calculate that there's going to be a failure every 1.8 months.   But change two of those items into things that happen more often - let's say an annual flood at Cowley Bridge and the sea wall giving problems twice a year, and your average failure rate becomes a failure every 1.25 months.   Now add in "person hit by train" somewhere outside London, 6 times a year, and you're going to see a failure to run the normal service every 0.75 of a month.

Investing lots of money into making your 98 items fail just once every 50 years rather than every 15 years, and the 0.75 becomes 1.09;  not a brilliant return for an awful lot of money.

The real gains come in sorting things out quickly, mittigating, and reducing the common occurrences.  You can also add in some more preventative maintenance.  And I'm going to speculate that if a piece of equipment's only going to fail once in 50 years, the people who come to fix it will be so out of practise it will take longer anyway ...

From Christian Wolmar December 22nd, 2012 Times available on his website

Rain Is Feeble Excuse For Rail Chaos (http://www.christianwolmar.co.uk/2012/12/rain-is-feeble-excuse-for-rail-chaos/?utm_source=feedburner&utm_medium=feed&utm_campaign=Feed%3A+feed%2Fchristianwolmar+%28Christian+Wolmar%29)


There are international standards for the water resistance of electrical enclosures IPx1 (light rain) up to IPx8 (permanent immersion under pressure). IP65 (dust proof and resistant to low pressure jets from all directions) is commonly used in my sector. Where does the railway pitch its protection level?

Current project I am working on has to risk for 1 in 50 year, 1 in 120 and 1 in 500 year flooding its not how to prevent them its more the level in ingress and the what is damaged; if a piece of kit can be moved to reduce the risk without effecting normal operation then it is.


The key is to reduce the amount of maintenance an item requires, with an item that has a 1 in 50 year failure rate it should have been renewed.  All assets have an expected life most electrification and plant items have a 35 year life expectancy however items, some components within a system my be replaced 2 or 3 times in the full life of the major item they are part of. 

There is a complex matrix used for renewals a lot of it is condition based and there is also route classification, all this has to be agreed with the ORR who underwrite Network Rails B^30 deficit 

In my sector key electrical equipment in flood risk areas that is not water resistant to an appropriate has to be sited above the 1 in 200 year flood level.

Why not 5 or 6 though? Or are there stations along the way that can't take that length train?

Some of the stations Didcot Parkway-Oxford can only take 3 carriages. If the service was split at Reading though more capacity could be provided on the stopping services which I guess was much needed. There are other solutions that Industry Insider mentioned above as well.

Difficult to do in tunnels and deep cuttings.  Some equipment like AWS / TPWS transponders, point machines can only go at track level, track circuits and the connections boxes are by default at rail level there are maximum lead lengths for all these from the relays driving them.

This equipment is IP56 rated to go to IP67 or 68 puts a disproportional cost on the equipment and the skill levels and costs in maintaining the higher IP levels.

Where there a known risk of flooding of an area flooding equipment is located above or away as best it can be, the problem with many parts of the UK railway network it was built at the bottom of river valleys, this was the easiest engineering solution 150 / 200 years ago.

More bad news I am afraid.Just heard live on Radio Devon as I type that the booms erected across the tracks at Cowley Bridge have given way under the weight of rising flood waters and the track and ballast is now again being washed away.The Environment Agency said that the river Exe was due to peak at 09.00 this morning.With further landslips at Teiegnmouth yesterday this is very bad news for the southwests long suffereng rail users.

The engineering aspect is interesting but it seems that our railways can't cope with rain (extreme flooding notwithstanding), ice, snow, hot weather, cold weather, leaves etc etc.....basically nature.

There are no effective contingency plans.....it just seems to take one signal failure or other routine event and everything grinds to a halt and stranded passengers are treated with at best indifference, at worst contempt......organisations from FGW down to the lowliest member of staff could benefit from learning from the airlines rather than wallowing in their comfortable monopoly......I have seen people literally weeping with frustration at stations over the last few days and I personally know of people whose employers are losing patience with their late/non arrivals through no fault of their own.

Information is scant and easier obtained by checking websites rather than speaking to the member of staff at the station/on the platform (if one can be found).

There is no excuse for this failure in one of the wealthiest nations on Earth.....God knows what Brunel would think....the point that other nations with much harder conditions run a reliable railway is well made.

Rail is a basic part of national infrastructure and it seems we cannot cope.

I suspect that IKB, if alive, would be chuffed to see his railway still doing sterling service...

Just heard one of the two booms erected at Cowley Bridge by Network rail deflated and gave way but the other is still in place at the moment but its still more bad news sadly.

Also IKB did not always produce the most reliable bits of kit his locomotive were not reliable at all

He would probably be chuffed to see so many trains and so fast.  Looking at London to Bristol, in 1895 there were around 12 trains - from 135 minutes (for a nonstop service that went on to Cornwall). In 1949 there were 14 trains ranging from around 135 minutes for the journey upwards. There are now 33, many of them taking 100 minutes. By 2020, there should be nearly 60 trains, and there's an estimated journey time of 80 minutes.

Victorian Railways had their fair share of accidents, crises and the like - there are tales of station lockouts when too many people showed up for the trains the first time that the Derby was run after the opening of a station at Epsom, for example, so I suspect that IKB wouldn't have let a few problems like the ones we've had in the last week stop his quest.  But I do suspect he would have asked "how can we prevent this problem next time"?  And - yes - some of the early locos were distinctly naff;  that's what comes from being at the (b)leeding edge of technology.

Maybe (b)bleeding edge then - State of the Ark now.

Some of the kit being installed now is leading edge or at least very modern, have you seen the new LED tilt over signals being installed on the main running lines through Ealing and Acton,  all the new trough routes being installed around Maidenhead to Hayes if for resignalling which will support ETRMS level 2

..............so why can't all this "leading edge" technology cope with the vagaries of weather? I don't mean floods, no-one can legislate for that, I just mean a bit of frost, heat, snow, ice or leaves?

Personally I think Brunel would be very disappointed that over a 100 years later we still can't cope with the basics, with all the technology we have available, that he could only dream of....then again he was a real engineer.

The airlines don't cope any better at times.  I had the misfortune to be attempting to fly out of Heathrow last February when the snow arrived.  British Airways just gave up, cancelling over 95% of their flights from terminal 5 which looked more like a refugee camp than an air terminal.  Thankfully someone else was sorting out my flights and I finally flew out with United on a half empty plane 7^ after my scheduled departure.  If it had been left to BA I would not have left that day and would have missed the boat (literally) at New York.

I don't claim to be an expert but I suspect that there are some weather related issues which may be difficult to address

I remember (I think it was 2003) the temperatures here in the uk the tracks got so hot they expanded and services were disrupted as a result. I know this has happened at least once since but given that metal has this habit of expanding when heated this could be a bit difficult to sort

On my recent journeys, when it has been very cold, the services have had problems with "rail head adhesion". The experts out there may be able to offer hope on this one but as of nowim not aware of a solution.

As a frequent traveller I am (sadly) resigned to the fact there are a couple of months a year when train travel can be problematic but I don't remember it being ths bad before.

Heat - Australian Railways seem to manage OK..."very cold....rail head adhesion".....ever heard of the Trans Siberian?

Neither of which operate the traffic densities of the GWML.

There have been 2 major incidents one on top of the other, the equipment failure in the Acton and Hayes area I will try to find out what the post mortem is on this when I get back to work in the New Year; the other is flooding which is Force Majeure the floods have also effected many many local roads in the same area.

The Railway system is very complex a system that gets going every morning literally from a standing start at 04:30 and within 2 hours is operating one of the most intense service in the world.   The Railway system is both technological and human, the human interaction is complex.  The Railway system is risk adverse which means a small thing will cause it to stop it is this way to prevent us killing people.

Every Railwayman and Railwaywomen I ever come across whether they are TOC FOC NR or contractor; front of house or behind the scenes are very dedicated to what they do and work very hard to reduce failures and to improve reliability.

+1

As others have pointed out, safety is paramount. It's only 25 years since 4 people died when a bridge collapsed on the Heart of Wales line as a train was going over a very swollen river ( a couple of days after the hurricane). 

As with most things in life, there's a trade off between the additional expense in engineering things to deal with the most extreme of conditions, and the inconvenience of when those conditions happen. (The best example of this is the criticism when it snows that Sweden is geared up to cope with such conditions, so why can't we be,forgetting that in Sweden it's the norm, so the expensive equipment is more easily justified.  And it's not only the state that makes such decisions. At a personal level, how many of us buy and fit winter tyres or snow chains?)

However, I've no doubt that recent events will result in a reconsideration of some clear weak points given the apparent increase in flooding related incidents across the country in recent years.

Funny how the adverts on TV and in the papers from last year for snow tyres have gone away this year when severe winter snowfall starts to seem a distant memory again.

Indeed (with apologies to IndustryInsider for quoting part of his post only). I would still really like to know (from someone with inside knowledge?), where the rest of the trains/carriages were that could have been forming longer trains during the disruption? Displaced trains (which I was told) just makes no sense knowing how many 5 or 6 carriage trains run up and down that line during peak times.. This was off peak after all..  ::) ::)

There were no shortage of sets stabled in Reading fuel point as I went past around noon on Friday - probably about ten at a guess.  Not all would have been available for use, but I bet a fair few of them would have been.

Like I posted above, Jo, they certainly weren't running during the morning peak either!

BTW I did (eventually) manage to get to Brighton on Friday - Southern was managed a lot better than FGW with informative announcements on trains & at stations about which trains/connections to get, stopping shuttles to Brighton, services held for connecting trains, even a chatty driver who suggested that if we were interested we could look out of the window now so we could see the damage which had caused all the disruption! (Apparently it was thought to be arson).

Take a trip to Worcester one day and I'll show you 19th century technology in operation.
Firstly is the railway system risk averse or risk obsessed (not necessarily the industry's fault I add)?
Take for instance axle counters - which appear to cause various problems - when was the last time a train left a section with an axle missing?
If contractors are dedicated to safe railways exactly why is so much "debris" left beside the track after work has been completed almost enticing the mindless twerps who are intent on vandalism?

I agree one axle is unlikely, but it enables a check to be made that every vehicle has successfully passed from one section to the next. There have been very ocassional instances of trains separating, even with modern rolling stock, so it's a reasonable check.

Agree with your point regarding debris being left by the track though. I would have thought it easy for NR to build it into contracts with contractors. 

Axle counters are just another means of train detection other than the more widely used track circuits.

Forgot to update how the journey actually went. Well Point - Point on the railway: Bath Spa - Southend Victoria I actually arrived 90 seconds early!

The HST I was on was travelling through the Slough and Hayes areas around 40 - 50 MPH according to the GPS based Speed App on my iPhone. Despite all the disruption we arrived into Paddington no later than 10 minutes behind schedule. (Think the actual number was 8 minutes). Which considering the circumstances I thought was very good indeed. Even an off duty Driver sat in the seat behind me was impressed at how painless the journey was.

Moving onto the Circle Line for Liverpool Street went without drama also. I was able to board my suggested connection onto Souffend without any troubles and dispite having to wade through piles of puke all over the floor (Nothing unusual on GreaterAnglia trains after 23:00 on Friday and Saturday nights sadly). We arrived at SOV about 90 seconds early ;D so personally despite my expectations to be very, very late, travelling 160 miles, I would call that a result.

I think it was despite my earlier post. A very good call to travel on the Friday and not Saturday!

My only real gripe with the journey. Once I got to SOV the taxi I had booked got pinched which I wasn't too happy about. Even less happy that by the time I actually managed to get another one, I could have walked the 2.7 miles to ladyfriend trouts house >:( Looks like the Southend Cabbies were getting very nice Christmas Bonuses that day. Some people had waited even longer than me to do less than a mile!

And you were travelling in first, right?  (My adding of bold in answer to your quote).  Perhaps he was riding "on the cushions" midshift, and had to arrive fresh to continue his driving from Paddington?

Yes was seated in a rather empty (Passenger-wise) coach H. Perhaps off-duty was the wrong term. I was more leaning towards that he wasn't driving the train! (Which from Coach H you'd hope he wasn't :P )

He could've been mid shift so riding "on the cushions" as I've seen an awful lot of drivers take a pugh in First Class over the years when wearing Driver Uniform. I was under the impression that Drivers got First Class travel as a perk of the job anyway!

Going completely off topic. Back in 2009 when I was courting my ex. We were both at Residential College and I travelled up to see her during Half Term. On route back from her house on a CrossCountry 170 working a Birmingham New Street - Cardiff Central service which I decided to take as far as Cheltenham Spa. (For no other reason than to try a recently refurbished Class 170). Sat in First Class was a young lass probably no older than 18 and certainly didn't appear the "type" to be seated in First <- and I'll come to that statement at the end as it may seem very out of context!

Well when the Train Manager came to check tickets they seemed to perhaps be thinking that this lass shouldn't have been there either. Well when she produced a Dependant Travel Pass the TM's face was a picture! Turns out her dad was indeed a Train Driver! But not only a train driver. Driving the very train we were all sat on! :o :D ;)

---

What I mean by the "type" (and under such context is a word I hate!). When you've been travelling First for as long as I have. You begin to learn who should be in there and who shouldn't.

swrural made a very interesting point in my 1C97 thread a while ago and I have to agree in that it is not all about Class nowadays. But I think the seasoned travellers begin to know who has the ticket and who doesn't. Personally, I would never dream of approaching someone and saying to them "You do know this is First Class". I used to get that all the time and it used to drive my absolutely nuts! Even to this day I still get those comments. However I tend to just brush it to one side with the answer of "Are you railway staff?"  "No" "Then what ticket I've/tickets we've got with all due respect is nothing to do with you, lets leave it that shall we?" Rude? Well yes I quite agree, but that's for an (Under the NRCoC) "Authorised Person" to ask and I perhaps find being asked by a person without authority even more rude but hey, that's my opinion.

But to the point. I think and it's perfectly natural as Humans are generally very nosey, You may think it, but personally I would never say anything. Because you never know the full story behind the counter. I have too many times thought it and been wrong, which is much less embarrassing than saying something about it and being wrong! That wouldn't stop me however, from giving an honest answer if a passenger asked me if the section/carriage was First Class. The answer may not be the one that is being sought. But is generally well received nonetheless.

................. and the pre Christmas troubles continue

This latest problem is also at Airport Junction and the possession overrun is related to the Crossrail project. Does anyone know whether the overrun is also related to the major S&T failure before Christmas?

To compound the issue there are constraints at Reading, where services are currently terminating/starting, ewhere engineering work is taking place leaving fewer platforms available.

The Crossrail works is effecting the Relief Lines the pre Christmas S & T faults effected the Main Lines so it is possible that is having an effect.  I know the Crossrail works involves OHLE structures that span all lines at Acton West if this also involved OHL re-registration on the Mains or crossovers if it involves work on any Headspan that support OHLE on the Mains then there is a reluctance to work on these when lines are open to traffic.

Could be wrong it may be something completely different.   I suspect NR GW Route Managing Director will be holding Court this morning he was Route Director at the time the shenanigans during the famous Christmas Liverpool Street blockade happened; he lead some major changes in the way NR projects planned and executed their works during blockades when he was a Project Director before moving to GW.

......and now today - all this after the recent farcical service....it goes on and on....utterly pathetic......quote on NR website "...this will continue until further notice....." - how long will we wait until even a half decent service is restored?

 >:(

(FGW own website of course reports that service is expected to start around 1100, and Network Rail's departure boards from Taplow show pretty much everything running on time, so we've got 3 different versions to choose from)

If my company repeatedly failed in this manner, we would lose business,Directors would be sacked and the rest of us would be looking over our shoulders - no doubt however in this parallel universe we will get a load of flannel about "lessons being learned" and the whole show will roll on as usual - including bonuses.

Here's an idea - how about FGW Directors salaries being reduced by the % of trains which arrive late? ie if the current appalling 82% arrive on time, they only get 82% of their salary?

Well here we go again!

^$%^& unbelievable!

NO announcements on train whatsoever about the fact we were terminating at Slough or what to do when we got there (which turned out to be go to Windsor and transfer to SW trains at Windsor ER).

if they'd said that was what was going to happen at Reading, would have got off there & got on Waterloo train then, but NOTHING!!!!!!

And on the website, it says the problem is at Maidenhead, but how can it be when trains were running between Reading & Slough but not further in?

Grrrrr!!!

Although not as negative as yourself, I am partialy in agreement.
It seems a long time since a normal service was achieved for a whole week, and we have not yet any significant snow, nor an industrial dispute.
In my more cynical moods I have been known to remark that no one should expect a normal service following engineering work.

Any reasonable person would expect disruption in extreme weather or other exceptional events, but on FGW disruption seems to be the norm now with the odd day of near normal services.

And we have electrification and new signalling to look forward to.
Electrification though an excellent idea in theory, tends to mean no service in windy weather as the wires come down, and speed restrictions in hot weather as they stretch and sag.
New signalling tends to mean more centralised control with the result that a single power failure, fire, flood, cable theft or other problem disrupts or closes down services over a much wider area.

Elswhere on these forums I have already made clear my concerns regarding new, shorter, commuter stlye trains replacing HSTs.

Is not progress wonderfull !

The "live departures" indicator for Taunton seems to suggest that trains are running normaly into Paddington, though from other reports this is clearly not the case.
I presume that full weekday/rush hour fares are payable for this worse than a Sunday service.

I got to Twyford at about 0710 for the 0724 (I got there earlier to renew my annual season ticket so at least FGW are ^3621 better off today). The train was initially shown on the board as going to Paddington but it soon changed to Slough so at least I knew what was happening before I attempted to board it. There were about 100 people on the platform (including passengers from the Henley train) so it was certainly busy. The advice given over the station PA was to either travel via Reading and Waterloo (next train to Reading not expected until 0756) or to go to Slough for 'maybe' a bus or to travel via Windsor. I decided to give up and work from home, not really ideal though as all my other team colleagues are on leave today thus we have no-one on duty on site. Hopefully not a problem today!

BBC are saying it's due to an electrical fault, nothing to do with Crossrail - guess it's maybe the same problem as last week?

Whatever, it's appalling......I was due in London today and am in Reading tomorrow - if there's no trains I will get a cab and send FGW the bill.

Off peak fares valid on all trains until Jan 2nd as I understand it. Ceartainly all my early morning journeys are available on off peak tickets.

Whilst it may make you feel better to do so, it is highly unlikely that FGW will refund you. Compensation for delays to your journey or a refund of your ticket if you decide not to travel by train is the limit to their liability.

There may be alternative transport arranged, and in some cases this may be a taxi, but will most likely be travel via an alternate route where possible, replacement road transport or ticket acceptance on local buses.

The Ticket Restrictions on all FGW services "are lifted from 22 December 2012 to 1 January 2013 inclusive" - See FGW's Christmas and New Year booklet.

From the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20849711):

Off Peak Fares at ALL Times until 1st Jan (normal fares from 2nd), which means that Weekend First is available and therefore a trolley service will be provided (subject to staff) on a weekday.

Just a reminder that the disruption being experienced this morning is Network Rails Responsibility (well actually subcontractors).

The live departure boards are what they say "Live", they are correct until a decision is made to amend a service. So looking at Taunton at around 0900 (or the post was as 1000 approx), trains would have been shown as going to London as the Line was always estimated to reopen this morning at 1100.

I think the FGW team have worked extremely hard over the past few weeks with disruption happening permantly... Not to say that this acceptable but just from my sources, I would like you all to know that, there are only 3 people in the control room that provide all the info to both internal and external sources (websites, news, stations etc...). They also have to order and cooridnate replacement bus services, taxis and an array of other jobs. Yes they will be supported by managament, but when there are so many incidents it is very very hard to actually keep on top of so many service alterations.

They work very hard to get the info out, unfortunately there are still a number of railway staff across the UK that choose to ignore or dont understand how to deal with disruption, when it comes to informing the Customer/Passenger, whether it be a simple PA or just passing the info to someone else like the ticket office.

The actual cause of the over-run today was due to an electrical issue when engineers tried to test the system in the early hours, due to lack of diagrams (electrical ones) they were unable to complete testing, they also had some earthing faults. This basically meant that the signalling could not be restored in the Hayes area.

Info I have recieved from a Source. There were actually other issues as well which delayed the handing back of the overall project.

a) 8178b points run through have been initially looked at and have bent drivers and stretchers and the switch is also crippled.
It is possible that the damage appears worse than it is due to the bent drivers and stretchers. This was caused by an engineering train being allowed to move by someone when the points were not set.

b) Main line work expected to be handed back in Item 18 on time though the Relief Lines may overrun until 0800 due to difficulties getting power to the Locations due Transformer issues. This was the major issue which actuall kept ALL lines shut


c) Whilst removing a road railer vehicle from the Up Main at Hayes, the railhead has become damaged. Welders en route to attempt to grind out damage.  Just something else for them to sort.

Personally looks like the whole area was a bit of a shambles..... Oh well it is open now.

15 Buses on the day after the Xmas break, that isnt bad as they were all on hand from around 0830 approx. Do people actually think there is a place where hundreds of buses just sit waiting in case the railway need them....????

No diagrams.  This is 1990's work have they been lost or were they never completed? Is this some underlying fault that was part of the previous problems or was the whole original installation a botch job?


Hats off to them they have not had an easy time. However its that customer service culture that keeps coming up.  Some staff do get it but others are stuck in a different age.



I assume there will be some sort of a full and frank exchange of views on these issues.

I think the sad part of this will be that all the senior people will sit around a table in the New Year and someone will get shouted at, there will probably be a press release saying sorry and that it wont happen again..... However 99% of people reading this just know that aint true.

These kind of incidents will always happen, I suppose it is just how the incident is handled from the customer/passengers point of view??

A key feature of this morning's problems is that someone somewhere based all the announcements around a problem at Maidenhead.  Why might this have been?  Misunderstanding when someone said the problem route was 'London to Reading via Maidenhead' perhaps?

Another own goal seems to be to do with the way they try and keep people up to date using twitter - again, someone decided that an appropriate hashtag for this problem would be '#maidenhead'.  Oddly enough that was already in use for all sorts of other random subjects.  I suppose anyone who uses twitter regularly will already be aware of this limitation though...

Paul

There is now severe overcrowding at Reading as at 1249, 27/12. So much so that the station is exit only until further notice.

An update, from the BBC (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-20849711):

Insider - of course people don't think that....what they think, and have every right to expect, is a greater than 50/50 chance of being able to get to work in the morning, via the train for which we pay thousands of ^ per year....sadly over the last month this hasn't been the case.

We have the most expensive, and least robust and reliable system in Europe, its a disgrace.

As later posts have revealed, this latest farce was down to sheer incompetence/sloppy workmanship on several levels....will anyone be held accountable? I doubt it.



Edit note: Quote marks fixed. CfN.

Where is you factual evidence?

If appropriate Individuals and contractors will be held accountable (this does happen it is not published to the public)

To be fair to the staff (if that is not in itself a sort of oxymoron), they will indeed be held accountable for their actions, or apparent lack of them: I've seen it. :-X

To counter the bad news on here I'm pleased to report that I had a very easy journey today. I got the 0724 Turbo stopper from Twyford and changed at Maidenhead onto the following 0738 departure, an HST from Great Malvern, which whisked me quickly and comfortably to Paddington for an on-time arrival at 0808, some 15 minutes earlier than if I'd stayed on the Turbo. Hopefully I'm not tempting fate by reporting this and my journey home will be equally good tonight!  :)

And that's the problem.  There aren't enough people in Control to control things when they go wrong, so with a weak link at the very top of the information structure what chance does the rest of the chain stand?

Here's an example:  I was on a train the other day to Hereford from London chatting to the crew and we got delayed at Hanborough by about 20 minutes because someone got stuck in the disabled toilet.  We had a fair few people on board wanting to make a 15-minute connection to Gloucester and Cheltenham at Worcester (their original train via Swindon had been cancelled I think).  The train crew managed to get on to Control after a fair while and an agreement was made to hold the connection.  The TM then made an announcement to everyone on board saying that the train would be held.  A great example of good customer service.

BUT... We came over Norton Junction and what was waiting at the signal to come the other way?  Their connecting train.  Which had left Shrub Hill on time.  A phone call from the TM to Shrub Hill station revealed that nobody had told Shrub Hill staff to hold the train so they let it go on time.  Cue a very embarrassing announcement from the TM and a whole heap of angry passengers.

Out of interest is it really prudent to block the single line because someone is stuck in the toilet?

I assume that if the person was disabled then they would be met by somebody. Why not allow their partner to travel with them (at no cost) until the person was released then both return on the next train (assuming not the last train of the day)?

Sometimes "the needs of the many outweigh the needs of the one" as long as First catered fully for the person.

Re II's report on the missed connection at Worcester Shrub Hill, platform space may also have been a problem had the message got through.  Often trains to Gloucester use the same platform (1) as incoming trains from London.  If platform 2 happened not to be free at the time, it may have been necessary to let the connection go anyway.  If, however, the Gloucester train had started its journey at Great Malvern, it could have been held at Henwick.

The non receipt of information is nothing new.  Way back in about the 1980s, I was returning from a day out in Bournemouth, only to find that my train to Basingstoke was cancelled.  As this meant that I would miss my last train of the day from Reading back to the Cotswold Line, I saw the station supervisor, who, very helpfully, suggested that I should catch the sleeper train, which was still running at the time.  This was booked to arrive at Oxford just 3 minutes after the Cotswold Line train was due to depart.  He rang Oxford station and asked then to arrange for the CL train to move to the end of platform 2 so that the train from Bournemouth could run in behind it.  As we approached Oxford, I noticed that we had the calling on signal instead of the usual one, so I assumed that the arrangement had worked.  Wrong.  The connection had just left and it took me about 90 minutes to convince the supervisor there that my story was true.  Apparently staff at both Bournemouth and Oxford had changed over at 2200 and the message had not been passed on.  They did eventually provide me with a taxi home.

In this case they'd pulled the emergency chord in the toilet, so until the staff could gain access they couldn't reset it and the brakes were stuck on.


Whilst it might be a problem some of the time, the Gloucester train was booked off of the up platform at 12:54 having arrived from Worcester Foregate Street at 12:42 (so it had a 12-minute layover), and could have waited at the end of that platform, as the only other train (besides the train I was on) was a LM arrival which was then heading back towards Birmingham, so that could have been accommodated at the other end of the platform.

I've had the same thing happened where Control could not contact Station staff to tell them.  I always think though, that Control could then contact the appropriate Signal Panel and tell them not to give that train "the road" as it needs to be held for a late inward - too obvious?  Probably  :-X

Signalmen are Networkrail and Station Staff TOC's.

Yes, but in FGW's case, their Controllers are in the same room as Network Rail's in Swindon.  They can easily communicate with one another.

Yet both are reluctant to make to commercial decision, if the TOC says hold train xyz there are delay cost to other services (TOC on self or other TOC or FOC) they would have to bare (TOC on self NR gets some of its other delay mins on that route written off), if NR takes the decision then NR gets the hit on delay costs.

The decision to hold a train for a connection rests with the TOC if its a connection with another TOC then the 2 TOC's have to come to an agreement and which one picks up the tab.

Delay attribution is not as bad as it used to be but it still exists and is for real money

The manning levels in FGW's Control are a FGW commercial decision.  They may have decided (and I'm not knocking this in principle) that 3 people are sufficient for most of the time, and it's not worth rostering Control resources that may be under-utilised if the railway is running fine.  So FGW will accept that when things go really bad they won't be able to manage the situation as well as if more Control resources were available.   And maybe because of FGW's staff cuts (and, again, I'm not knocking this in principle) there are only a limited number of properly trained and experienced Controllers on the payroll anyway, so they couldn't even bring them in when required if they wanted to.

Maybe, with the GWML being extensively remodelled, electrified, modernised etc, FGW (or its successor) will need to accept disruptions and overrunning engineering works will become more common, and that Control needs to be better (ie quantity and quality) resourced for the next few years.

I would suggest that there are ways to provide more staff during periods of disruption, with little overall increases in cost.  There are no shortage of other FGW staff working at (or near) Swindon, you could have a pool of them trained to become assistants at times when there is service disruption - i.e. they get pulled from their normal duties to help out answering telephone calls, or updating the website for example (getting through to someone is one of the major bug bears of staff). 

Be they a combination of office workers (not ideal when the disruption is outside of office hours), or station staff (barrier staff - if it's bad enough just leave the gates open at Swindon or Didcot for a few hours and get those staff up in Control answering telephones), or even agency staff (could some kind of dual roles be created where security/cleaning/car park staff are trained up to help?).  I'm not talking about real decision making roles - that should stay with the 'three in charge' currently, but just some admin support which is desperately needed.

Also, perhaps an agreement with NR that decisions can be devolved more locally during times of disruption without everything having to go through Control.  For example, the AOM's at the out stations could allocate drivers like the previous Train Crew Supervisors at those locations used to do (editing Genius themselves so that everyone knows what everyone is doing), or the Duty Manager being able to issue a stop order for small locations such as Appleford?

I wholeheartedly agree with your suggestions, but I wonder whether they fit in with the First culture.  My perception is that First is very much a "command and control" type of organisation, a long way from a Quaility Through People culture we had in the last days of BR.  This is not necessarily a bad thing, but a consequence is that staff may feel less valued and less empowered.

And my understanding is that, far from devolving decision-making, First is drawing this back to Swindon, and even to Scotland for some issues that may in the past have been dealt with locally (eg SPAD incidents).

So I wonder how many staff would feel they want to "help out" by getting into Swindon Control at 5 am at short notice on a Monday morning to deal with an engineering overrun.  If they were told to they would because they may be worried by the consequences if they didn't, but would they willingly volunteer because they thought their contribution would be appreciated by their employer?

Sorry if this is a bit heavy for the holiday season, but I did spend some years working in a QTP culture and understand how effective it can be in motivating and empowering people.   

I would imagine some form of sweetener in the form of a bonus payment or possibly a couple of extra days leave would be enough to get the interest levels up.  Also, bearing in mind that some of the staff I mentioned are involved in quite menial tasks on a day-to-day basis, so some might enjoy the change?

Long time ago, I once had to make a tight (but valid) connection at Exeter St David's for an Axminster Train... FGW service to Exeter was 28 down leaving me 1 minute to get the connection at EXD. The TM onboard simply said. I'm not going to bother phoning to get the SWT service held as they'll never wait for us. (He wasn't wrong >:( ) Would they give me a Taxi from EXD to Axminster... When there was no train for just over 2 hours? Would they hell!!

I didn't overly encourage them actually after the initial "No." As I then knew excess of 2 hour delay was a refund on the ticket. Considering the ticket I had at the time was a considerable amount and I knew I had to make a journey in the peak fairly soon, I didn't force the issue. Real kick in the teeth was that Peak train to London was nearly 3 hours late on April Fools Day as NR knocked over a signal gantry! (Karma at it's worst >:( )

I don't know what the SWT limit is (XC is 2 hours unsurprisingly), but if there is no FGW option for over an hour and there was a missed connection, then alternative transport must be provided  ??? ???

Here we go again.
Significant number of cancellations and trains serving only a part of the usual journey.
Snow, train faults, and signalling problems.
Did I not state recently that we had not yet had significant snow nor an industrial dispute. Well it is snowing now, and more forecast.

It must be said that FGW seem to be coping better than some TOCs, whether due to better staff and management, or due to older rolling stock and infrastructure I dont know.

The advice on the BBC news website, is yet again not to travel.

It is just a shame that many employers insist of staff still making their way into work.

I am fortunate that my employer allows flexible working - and as one of IT team that implements the remote working solutions I have a vested interest in it being fully operational!