Passenger "Mutiny" Due To Missed Stop At Swindon

[Bletchleyite]

Lots of stock has the ability for the driver to kick a passcom brake application out. I would be surprised if IETs do not.

However, it isn't meant to be done "just because you think people are mucking about", it is meant to be done to allow the train to be stopped as soon as safely possible, rather than somewhere possibly unsafe like a viaduct or tunnel. If a driver proceeded with the view that he was just going to ignore it each time it was pulled, then that would effectively render it inoperative, which would surely not be acceptable on safety grounds.

 

[Tomnick]

To clear up some of the uncertainties:-

The train had previously been advertised as calling additionally at Swindon (and Chippenham), but those additional stops were withdrawn during the journey. It seems that that message didn’t get through to many/any of the passengers for some reason.

Thanks - it's always good to know the actual facts!

Just one question, which I'll obviously understand if you don't want to answer - were the additional stops taken out after the train left Bristol, or well before then?

 

[JN114]

Just one question, which I'll obviously understand if you don't want to answer - were the additional stops taken out after the train left Bristol, or well before then?

The withdrawal of the stops was undertaken while the train was stopped at Bath.

So to answer the question not directly asked, but inferred, the passengers at least physically had an opportunity to alight from the train after the stops were withdrawn, presuming of course they were aware the stops had been withdrawn in the first place.

I’ll call it clearing up uncertainties; rather than directly challenging anything that’s been put, I was only an observer from the other side of the control office; not directly involved - hence why I won’t comment on why stuff was done as I don’t know the full picture my High Speed colleague was working to.

 

[Taunton]

Are you sure that is actually true? During the recent TV series on GWR, I seem to recall a control room (ironically at Swindon!) staffed by apparently very authoritative controller-type people who had authority to manage situations completely. Surely they can't all be off-duty at weekends?

Well I know it's the standard here to blame everything on the passengers (eg comments above about 'they must have been buried in their phones'), but this sort of non-communication is a shambles. Did control really introduce extra stops, announce them, then withdraw them (but only for the train crew it seems, not for the signaller), all for a train which had already been running for some hours. Likewise the breakdown one (Sunday) evening on the Berks & Hants a while back which took so many hours to resolve. And when it comes to authoritative standards, we mustn't forget the part that Swindon control played in the Southall accident, where prior advice that the AWS was defective was just written down on a Post-It, not passed on to anyone, and then thrown away at the end of shift.

 

[GodAtum]

Twitter has the answer, it seems several pictures of a at least 3 carriages loaded to full standing through the aisles, relating to a train matching the approx time, description and location, from angry passengers aimed at the GWR account.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FAylhK8WUAYS9Px.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FAy7C95XIAAiiVQ.jpg

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/FAzC7FyXEAQc1l5.jpg

I don't know how people can stand up for over an hour and a half. I've purposely not got on long distance trains that have been like that. I'd rather wait with a seat at the station then stand.

 

[robbeech]

The withdrawal of the stops was undertaken while the train was stopped at Bath.

So to answer the question not directly asked, but inferred, the passengers at least physically had an opportunity to alight from the train after the stops were withdrawn, presuming of course they were aware the stops had been withdrawn in the first place.

I am a firm believer that a few passengers might have missed an announcement, or not been listening, or generally not been intelligent enough to comprehend it. I'm an even firmer believer that a train full of passengers will NOT ALL have missed an announcement and in the unlikely event that they did then there has to be a point in which it becomes clear that the communication method isn't fit for purpose.
It certainly isn't for me to say whether the guard made an announcement or not, but i think anyone would have to be daft to assume that a train full just happened to miss it.

Well I know it's the standard here to blame everything on the passengers (eg comments above about 'they must have been buried in their phones'), but this sort of non-communication is a shambles. Did control really introduce extra stops, announce them, then withdraw them (but only for the train crew it seems, not for the signaller), all for a train which had already been running for some hours. Likewise the breakdown one (Sunday) evening on the Berks & Hants a while back which took so many hours to resolve. And when it comes to authoritative standards, we mustn't forget the part that control played in the Southall accident, where prior advice that the AWS was defective was just written down on a Post-It, and then thrown away at the end of shift.

I suspect that if JN114 says that is what happened then that will be what happened. The rest of this is likely pushing things way off topic to go into here.

 

[skyhigh]

Well I know it's the standard here to blame everything on the passengers (eg comments above about 'they must have been buried in their phones'), but this sort of non-communication is a shambles. Did control really introduce extra stops, announce them, then withdraw them (but only for the train crew it seems, not for the signaller), all for a train which had already been running for some hours. Likewise the breakdown one (Sunday) evening on the Berks & Hants a while back which took so many hours to resolve. And when it comes to authoritative standards, we mustn't forget the part that Swindon control played in the Southall accident, where prior advice that the AWS was defective was just written down on a Post-It, not passed on to anyone, and then thrown away at the end of shift.

But previously you said there was no senior management on duty on weekends. That's not true in Control for any TOC I've worked for.

 

[Tomnick]

The withdrawal of the stops was undertaken while the train was stopped at Bath.

So to answer the question not directly asked, but inferred, the passengers at least physically had an opportunity to alight from the train after the stops were withdrawn, presuming of course they were aware the stops had been withdrawn in the first place.

I’ll call it clearing up uncertainties; rather than directly challenging anything that’s been put, I was only an observer from the other side of the control office; not directly involved - hence why I won’t comment on why stuff was done as I don’t know the full picture my High Speed colleague was working to.

Thanks (again), and yes, that's the question that I was working towards.

With my traincrew hat on, and acknowledging that there might be something bigger at play, I have to say that it seems rather unwise to withdraw stops from a busy train en-route, having already specially directed passengers for those stops onto that train.

 

[Falcon1200]

The withdrawal of the stops was undertaken while the train was stopped at Bath.

Imposing Special Stops and then later withdrawing them is a recipe for disaster. Could the stops not at least have been left on as set down only ?

Are you sure that is actually true? During the recent TV series on GWR, I seem to recall a control room (ironically at Swindon!) staffed by apparently very authoritative controller-type people who had authority to manage situations completely. Surely they can't all be off-duty at weekends?

Control Rooms are staffed 24/7, and in the case of Network Rail 24/7/365 (or 366); Some TOC or FOC Controls might shut down for a short time over the Christmas period but obviously that did not apply here.

 

[Djgr]

"The train had previously been advertised as calling additionally at Swindon (and Chippenham), but those additional stops were withdrawn during the journey"

I would suggest, in the context of this train, withdrawing stops during a journey is an act of complete desperation or madness.

 

[WelshBluebird]

Sadly I have come to expect nothing else from GWR these days. The number of times I get see / hear misleading or downright incorrect info being passed onto passengers and staff has shot up in number over the last few years. It is now pretty common for onboard staff, station staff, station boards, RTT, GWR Twitter and the GWR app to all disagree with each other in some way during disruption (I had a fun one last week where using RTT I could easily see the train was going to be cancelled, but the GWR app said it was going to be on time, the station boards at Cardiff said it was cancelled and GWR Twitter said it was on time until the time passed when the train was due and then they just said it was delayed).

The withdrawal of the stops was undertaken while the train was stopped at Bath. So to answer the question not directly asked, but inferred, the passengers at least physically had an opportunity to alight from the train after the stops were withdrawn, presuming of course they were aware the stops had been withdrawn in the first place.

How long during the (extended) dwell period at Bath was that decision made? Even if it was communicated to passengers, if that was only communicated to passengers a minute or two before the train departed then I'd argue people didn't have the physical opportunity to alight, especially given how busy it looks based on the photos posted earlier (it would likely have taken at least a couple of mins to fight your way out from the middle of that!).
And to dig deeper, though appreciate you may not be able to or want to answer - why on earth did they remove the additional calls anyway? That is just calling for chaos even if it is communicated well!

 

[JN114]

I’m not trying to be superior or coy - but please remember that these are my direct colleagues, who haven’t the ability to respond or defend themselves to what might be said or inferred about their decision making in a public forum.

I’ll say this for them though:-

It was not a decision taken lightly, and was agreed between control and the train crew following a lengthy conversation between them at Bath Spa.

Posters are correct that rescinding an additional stop previously advertised - especially one to cover other cancellations - is at best an unwise decision. That is well known by every single one of my colleagues and will not have been done without a damn good reasoning behind it.

Respectfully to all members, my only input here is only to clear up some of the uncertainties of the sequence of events in the original article and some arising questions. I cannot and will not go down the roads that would lead to apportioning blame, and thus far I’ve gone to great pains NOT to do so - be that on the passengers, train crew or control.

 

[Kite159]

What a great advert for rail travel, cancel a couple trains with another train calling with extra stops added, only for that stop to be ripped out at short notice.

Even if they did hear the announcement and alighted at Bath, how long until the next train towards Swindon would arrive?

Next time those passengers will decide to just drive assuming they have cars.

 

[tommy2215]

If the train was extremely busy and you cancel the additional stops at Chippenham and Swindon literally at the last minute, then its entirely predictable that something like this would happen. As someone has said the train could at least have made a set down only stop. There's no way that someone could not have the foresight to see that in these circumstances it would lead to total chaos.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I’m not trying to be superior or coy - but please remember that these are my direct colleagues, who haven’t the ability to respond or defend themselves to what might be said or inferred about their decision making in a public forum.

I’ll say this for them though:-

It was not a decision taken lightly, and was agreed between control and the train crew following a lengthy conversation between them at Bath Spa.

Posters are correct that rescinding an additional stop previously advertised - especially one to cover other cancellations - is at best an unwise decision. That is well known by every single one of my colleagues and will not have been done without a damn good reasoning behind it.

What was that reasoning?

 

[MotCO]

Did the on-board PIS continue to report the train was going to stop at Swindon? If so, even if the guard or train manager had said something to the contrary, if the PIS continued to show it stopping at Swindon, I would assume that I had misheard. Why wouldn't the PIS be correct? If it couldn't be changed, switch it off.

 

[JN114]

What was that reasoning?

I don’t know, I said it won’t have been done without good reason - IE I know my colleagues well enough that they wouldn’t flip/flop on this as they appear to have done without being forced into it for some very good reason.

That’s subtley different from “it was done for a good reason” which you seem to think I said from your line of questioning.

Sorry that I don’t have an answer for you though.

Did the on-board PIS continue to report the train was going to stop at Swindon? If so, even if the guard or train manager had said something to the contrary, if the PIS continued to show it stopping at Swindon, I would assume that I had misheard. Why wouldn't the PIS be correct? If it couldn't be changed, switch it off.

I’m not au-fait with the intricacies of the IET systems. As I understand it you cannot add stops in at all, not at least without kicking all the reservation data out. On that basis it was likely either already off, or announcing the original (Taunton, Reading, Padd) calling pattern.

 

[jimjim]

What was that reasoning?

I can only guess and I have no idea if these happened in this instance but these have happened to me in the past

Train too full so crew say it is unsafe to go forward so take the additional stops out to reduce the loading.

Traincrew refusing the stop orders as it will occur delay to their booking off time. Or they have agreed to do some overtime to help keep the job going but only if it runs direct.

A train being reinstated so that can clear the passengers instead.

The additional stops causing a driver to exceed their driving hours so will cause multiple cancellations later.

Network Rail refusing to allow the train to stop because it will delay a possession or other services in rear.

Really tight connections will be missed if the stops occur.

Once you've agreed to something you don't recind it unless you really have to but stuff happens!

 

[GodAtum]

I’m not au-fait with the intricacies of the IET systems. As I understand it you cannot add stops in at all, not at least without kicking all the reservation data out. On that basis it was likely either already off, or announcing the original (Taunton, Reading, Padd) calling pattern.

With a service that disrupted and a train that full, reservations are usually a free for all anyway!

 

[MotCO]

I’m not au-fait with the intricacies of the IET systems. As I understand it you cannot add stops in at all, not at least without kicking all the reservation data out. On that basis it was likely either already off, or announcing the original (Taunton, Reading, Padd) calling pattern.

Thanks. But if I was a passenger on the affected train, and saw that the PIS was still saying calling at Swindon, I would assume it was still calling at Swindon. Why wouldn't I?

(PS - I hope it doesn't come across as though I'm having a go at you. I think you have been very open and helpful in explaining some of the background - it's just a question/observation to put out there.)

 

[seagull]

Thanks. But if I was a passenger on the affected train, and saw that the PIS was still saying calling at Swindon, I would assume it was still calling at Swindon. Why wouldn't I?

The PIS would not have been displaying Swindon as it was not originally a calling point for the train, is I think what he was saying. It would have been blank or showing only the original stopping pattern.

 

[JN114]

Thanks. But if I was a passenger on the affected train, and saw that the PIS was still saying calling at Swindon, I would assume it was still calling at Swindon. Why wouldn't I?

(PS - I hope it doesn't come across as though I'm having a go at you. I think you have been very open and helpful in explaining some of the background - it's just a question/observation to put out there.)

Agreed if it was still saying Swindon it would be confusing - my point which I don’t think I got across well was:

I don’t think the screens or announcements *in the train* will ever have said Swindon as a calling point, at any time. The overcrowding photos on Twitter show red lights above the seats, which means the train has reservation data still. As I don’t think you can add stops without kicking out the reservation data, that would imply that the system is still in its original calling pattern.

And no I don’t think anyone is having a go, so don’t worry!

 

[43066]

"The train had previously been advertised as calling additionally at Swindon (and Chippenham), but those additional stops were withdrawn during the journey"

I would suggest, in the context of this train, withdrawing stops during a journey is an act of complete desperation or madness.

I don’t know, I said it won’t have been done without good reason - IE I know my colleagues well enough that they wouldn’t flip/flop on this as they appear to have done without being forced into it for some very good reason.

At a pinch - physically unable to platform due to infrastructure issues (points failure or similar)? I don’t know the locations but that’s the kind of thing that could result in this kind of thing happening.

 

[Djgr]

I’m not trying to be superior or coy - but please remember that these are my direct colleagues, who haven’t the ability to respond or defend themselves to what might be said or inferred about their decision making in a public forum.

I’ll say this for them though:-

It was not a decision taken lightly, and was agreed between control and the train crew following a lengthy conversation between them at Bath Spa.

Posters are correct that rescinding an additional stop previously advertised - especially one to cover other cancellations - is at best an unwise decision. That is well known by every single one of my colleagues and will not have been done without a damn good reasoning behind it.

Respectfully to all members, my only input here is only to clear up some of the uncertainties of the sequence of events in the original article and some arising questions. I cannot and will not go down the roads that would lead to apportioning blame, and thus far I’ve gone to great pains NOT to do so - be that on the passengers, train crew or control.

It didn't go well though

 

[JN114]

It didn't go well though

I don’t think I said it did did I?

 

[74A]

The PIS would not be showing Swindon. You can't add stops with the system as it is.

Also a lot of people use earphone to watch content listen to music etc. If you are going to remove stops then you are going to get a lot of people who won't know.

 

[Djgr]

I don’t think I said it did did I?

So it is reasonable to look back and critique whether or not the correct decision was made. And if not what could be done to stop its reoccurrence.

 

[davews]

Reminds me of a Reading train I caught at Waterloo which left pretty late. After we had all got on and left, with the departure boards still showing all stops, they decided to make it non-stop to Staines. But the PA in our carriage was dicky and we couldn't make out what the guard was saying. Some very upset passengers got off at Staines to catch a train back... Fortunately no PIS that time.

 

[Ianno87]

So it is reasonable to look back and critique whether or not the correct decision was made. And if not what could be done to stop its reoccurrence.

Only if you've got all the information on knowledge available that was available to the control staff at the time. Which we don't.

 

[TUC]

Whatever the causes of the situation, I do wonder why some rail staff seem to treat clear communication as an optional extra rather than a core part of the job.