Signalman problem at Huntly today

[Caleb2010]

Had booked a trip to Aberdeen today, assistance- the lot.

Sadly, I had a call from Huntly Station this morning informing me that there were no trains all morning as the early turn signalman at Huntly hadn’t come into work!

As usual the ScotRail app said the Inverness to Aberdeen line had minor problems but no trains cancelled- not bad seeing as 1/2 the line is closed and the other half was cancelled!

So, never got to sample the delights of either a 158 or a 170, better luck next time, possibly!

I’ve not heard of this before cancelling a complete mornings services because of this, I wonder why there’s no contingency plan or relief signalman available!

Is this a regular occurrence on this line?

 

[PHILIPE]

Had booked a trip to Aberdeen today, assistance- the lot.

Sadly, I had a call from Huntly Station this morning informing me that there were no trains all morning as the early turn signalman at Huntly hadn’t come into work!

As usual the ScotRail app said the Inverness to Aberdeen line had minor problems but no trains cancelled- not bad seeing as 1/2 the line is closed and the other half was cancelled!

So, never got to sample the delights of either a 158 or a 170, better luck next time, possibly!

I’ve not heard of this before cancelling a complete mornings services because of this, I wonder why there’s no contingency plan or relief signalman available!

Is this a regular occurrence on this line?

It's happened on the Marches route several times

 

[Ben.A.98]

As far as I'm aware this is not a regular occurrence, it would be in the best interests of the railway for it not to be.

In theory there should be a relief or a MOM available to cover, may be possible they were working other boxes due to annual leave etc.

 

[Caleb2010]

Ta, it just seemed strange that it’s left like that.

I had visions of somewhere like Three Bridges signalman not turning up and most of Sussex coming to a standstill!!

 

[30907]

There's more than one signaller at TBG I think
It has happened at smaller boxes all over the system but it is rare for a box to be closed for a whole shift. In this case it was possibly comllicated by the resignalling going on round the Elgin area.

DB had a serious staffing issue in 2013 at Mainz, which is rather busier than Huntly (!), and had to operate the station part time IIRC for some weeks.

 

[Sunset route]

There's more than one signaller at TBG I think

Just a few than one on shift at any one time lol but that hasn't stopped a panel being closed out due to a lack of cover, all be it after the close of service through that area of control.

 

[Highlandspring]

Had booked a trip to Aberdeen today, assistance- the lot.

Sadly, I had a call from Huntly Station this morning informing me that there were no trains all morning as the early turn signalman at Huntly hadn’t come into work!

Signaller was unable to attend due to sickness rather than just "hadn't come into work".

I’ve not heard of this before cancelling a complete mornings services because of this, I wonder why there’s no contingency plan or relief signalman available!

Heaven and earth were moved to try to get the shift covered at short notice but there was simply no alternative cover possible until the early afternoon.

Is this a regular occurrence on this line?

No.

 

[47271]

The most surprising part of the story is that you got a call from Huntly station? Exceptional customer service if I may say so!

 

[Caleb2010]

That's OK then, it was relayed to me as 'not come into work'

I have no doubt that cover was attempted, its what would be expected, however the fact that there was no cover for a sick person meant that a complete section of line had no service until 1400.

Its obviously not the fault of the sick signalman, who I hope is feeling better but, with passenger numbers growing, cover of some type should be mandatory to preserve the service, not a spare man for each box, that's clearly not cost effective but a 'floating spare' covering several signal boxes. Some lines have boxes that can be switched out creating longer sections yet maintaining a service.

Difficult, yes but you wouldn't have a spare driver who knew just one route would you!

I'm not ranting at all but it does peeve me when something grinds to a halt when an operator isn't there (Sickness, Holiday, Training Course etc) and no-one can function in their absence. This isn't industry specific, it appears to be a country wide thing.

Yes, I'll agree that trying to find a stand in was attempted on this occasion. Yes, its a pity they weren't able to find anyone and no, i shouldn't think any decision was taken lightly.

 

[Caleb2010]

The most surprising part of the story is that you got a call from Huntly station? Exceptional customer service if I may say so!

They were great, certainly exceptional in that respect yes, very apologetic too.

Obviously they can't call every passenger, they had my number on the Accessible Travel form.

To be fair to Scotrail, I had a journey with a different TOC recently, all booked - assistance, ramp - when it turned up it was DOO, no OBS or guard to be seen, at least today is forgivable, if annoying!

 

[alxndr]

Its obviously not the fault of the sick signalman, who I hope is feeling better but, with passenger numbers growing, cover of some type should be mandatory to preserve the service, not a spare man for each box, that's clearly not cost effective but a 'floating spare' covering several signal boxes. Some lines have boxes that can be switched out creating longer sections yet maintaining a service.

Difficult, yes but you wouldn't have a spare driver who knew just one route would you!

Entirely hypothetical situation: what happens when the spare signaller is already busy covering another box? Does the spare need a spare?

Then you've got to balance how many boxes a spare is passed out on. The more boxes the increased chance they'll be a productive member of staff, but that also increases the risk that they'll be otherwise indisposed when they're needed.

 

[Caleb2010]

Totally agree! I don't have the answer, just ideas and they're probably unworkable!

 

[ComUtoR]

If a Signaller was not available and a panel had to close. Could you treat their panel as a single block, set all the points in a single direction, and send trains through to the next block one at a time ?

Would anything be possible to run a train through an unmanned panel/box ?

 

[Llanigraham]

That's OK then, it was relayed to me as 'not come into work'

I have no doubt that cover was attempted, its what would be expected, however the fact that there was no cover for a sick person meant that a complete section of line had no service until 1400.

Its obviously not the fault of the sick signalman, who I hope is feeling better but, with passenger numbers growing, cover of some type should be mandatory to preserve the service, not a spare man for each box, that's clearly not cost effective but a 'floating spare' covering several signal boxes. Some lines have boxes that can be switched out creating longer sections yet maintaining a service.

Difficult, yes but you wouldn't have a spare driver who knew just one route would you!

I'm not ranting at all but it does peeve me when something grinds to a halt when an operator isn't there (Sickness, Holiday, Training Course etc) and no-one can function in their absence. This isn't industry specific, it appears to be a country wide thing.

Yes, I'll agree that trying to find a stand in was attempted on this occasion. Yes, its a pity they weren't able to find anyone and no, i shouldn't think any decision was taken lightly.

There are "Relief" signallers who cover more than one Box, typically on our line it was 3 to cover 5 Boxes, but if more than 2 signallers are on leave or sick, or have declined to work overtime, then you can be left in the situation that there is no-one available. And not all MOM's now sign all Boxes. As has been said, it has happened on The Marches 3 times that I know of since I left, and it certainly happened a few times when I was there.
As for switching out Boxes, that is often not possible, due to level crossings for example. Plus it can lead to very long sections causing huge delays.

Don't forget there are numerous reports on here that drivers/guards aren't available for some reason, so trains DO get cancelled for the same reason.

 

[Llanigraham]

If a Signaller was not available and a panel had to close. Could you treat their panel as a single block, set all the points in a single direction, and send trains through to the next block one at a time ?

Would anything be possible to run a train through an unmanned panel/box ?

See above.

 

[Tomnick]

That's OK then, it was relayed to me as 'not come into work'

I have no doubt that cover was attempted, its what would be expected, however the fact that there was no cover for a sick person meant that a complete section of line had no service until 1400.

Its obviously not the fault of the sick signalman, who I hope is feeling better but, with passenger numbers growing, cover of some type should be mandatory to preserve the service, not a spare man for each box, that's clearly not cost effective but a 'floating spare' covering several signal boxes. Some lines have boxes that can be switched out creating longer sections yet maintaining a service.

Difficult, yes but you wouldn't have a spare driver who knew just one route would you!

I'm not ranting at all but it does peeve me when something grinds to a halt when an operator isn't there (Sickness, Holiday, Training Course etc) and no-one can function in their absence. This isn't industry specific, it appears to be a country wide thing.

Yes, I'll agree that trying to find a stand in was attempted on this occasion. Yes, its a pity they weren't able to find anyone and no, i shouldn't think any decision was taken lightly.

That's OK then, it was relayed to me as 'not come into work'

I have no doubt that cover was attempted, its what would be expected, however the fact that there was no cover for a sick person meant that a complete section of line had no service until 1400.

Its obviously not the fault of the sick signalman, who I hope is feeling better but, with passenger numbers growing, cover of some type should be mandatory to preserve the service, not a spare man for each box, that's clearly not cost effective but a 'floating spare' covering several signal boxes. Some lines have boxes that can be switched out creating longer sections yet maintaining a service.

Difficult, yes but you wouldn't have a spare driver who knew just one route would you!

I'm not ranting at all but it does peeve me when something grinds to a halt when an operator isn't there (Sickness, Holiday, Training Course etc) and no-one can function in their absence. This isn't industry specific, it appears to be a country wide thing.

Yes, I'll agree that trying to find a stand in was attempted on this occasion. Yes, its a pity they weren't able to find anyone and no, i shouldn't think any decision was taken lightly.

There’s plenty of contingency, or at least there should be. Relief signalmen should be provided at a ratio of (if I remember correctly!) at least one for every five residents, and they’re usually pretty flexible in terms of what they sign (I had fourteen locations when I was on the relief). MOMs and LOMs should sign the boxes on their patch too, or at least they did where I worked. We also had a few others who’d kept their competency current, and of course there’s always the overtime carrot to be dangled.

It was still barely enough though, sometimes, when we were already short-staffed and/or a lot off sick, the MOM was relatively new and hadn’t signed for all the boxes, the LOM was working another box - sometimes the circumstances just come together...

If a Signaller was not available and a panel had to close. Could you treat their panel as a single block, set all the points in a single direction, and send trains through to the next block one at a time ?

Would anything be possible to run a train through an unmanned panel/box ?

Not really, unless it’s a box with the facility to switch out (relatively few and far between nowadays). I suppose it might be technically possible on a panel with enough auto buttons to set a route right through each way and leave it in auto, or where there’s override switches to put a remote interlocking into auto for through routes, but it’s not really a satisfactory solution as there’s no-one then supervising quite a large amount of route mileage should anything go wrong.

 

[Highlandspring]

Huntly is ScR Tokenless each way and can't switch out (the only ScR Tokenless box that can switch out is Lugton).

 

[ComUtoR]

Thanks guys.

 

[Sunset route]

If a Signaller was not available and a panel had to close. Could you treat their panel as a single block, set all the points in a single direction, and send trains through to the next block one at a time ?

Would anything be possible to run a train through an unmanned panel/box ?

If your talking about a panel and one that's on an approach to a large conurbation especially London then you would be talking about 4 minute headways on a multiple track railway with Junctions some with and without MCB/(OD), CCTV, AHB road crossing and various types of user worked crossings. The signallers either side might not sign that area even if they are located in the same building. The other problem is that the area unmanned would need to be designed to be put into auto working which would limit the amount of routes to basically straight running not a feature that I've seen in any large panel box other a few crossover Junctions between fast and slow lines anything more complicated than that needs signaller intervention, plus auto selective routes where they exist only offer a fraction of possible routes as it basically a dumbed down system to get you out of jail when the primary signalling system has failed to get some trains moving in a limlited way. Then the problem that the migration plan is facing is most panels the workload is around 75-85% of the signallers capacity to allow for purturbaion and failures without causing unsafe work loads, simlply grabbing anouth 10 or so miles of track and adding it to the excisting workload is not going to happen not unless the train service if really thinned out.

Some mechanical signalboxs are equipped with closing out switches whereby the communication via block bells and block instruments by passes (or more to the point passes through) that location extending the block section, only really works on rural double track lines with no public road crossing and no Junction that need to used.

 

[Bromley boy]

MOMs and LOMs should sign the boxes on their patch too, or at least they did where I worked. We also had a few others who’d kept their competency current, and of course there’s always the overtime carrot to be dangled.

It was still barely enough though, sometimes, when we were already short-staffed and/or a lot off sick, the MOM was relatively new and hadn’t signed for all the boxes, the LOM was working another box - sometimes the circumstances just come together...
.

I never realised MOMs could act as signallers. I assume they do a full signallers' rules course during their training?

What grade of signaller are they equivalent to, or does this vary by location?

 

[Sunset route]

I never realised MOMs could act as signallers. I assume they do a full signallers' rules course during their training?

What grade of signaller are they equivalent to, or does this vary by location?

All I know is that MOMs and going back a little in time FMs in my area have never been passed qualified to work as a signaller in signalboxes or ASCs. The nearest they get to play trains is acting as slave panel operators in really rooms operating under the controlling signallers instructions.

 

[contrad!ction]

I never realised MOMs could act as signallers. I assume they do a full signallers' rules course during their training?

What grade of signaller are they equivalent to, or does this vary by location?

The standard MOMs course is (I think) 7 weeks and is very different from the signallers rules course (they mainly focus on PTS/TBW/level crossing attendant/SLW/pilot working etc...)

I think that any MOMs required to work a signal box then go back and do the full signallers rules course in addition.

I've never known MOMs work the larger boxes (ASCs/IECCs), but they can be passed competent to work the smaller boxes on a location specific basis in exceptional circumstances.

MOMs earn the equivalent of a signaller grade 6 or 7, depending on the location/complexity of the area.

 

[Llanigraham]

MOM's have no "grade" and if able will only work the Boxes they are trained to, although I have known them work similar Boxes in an emergency.
I'm not sure whether someone "off the street" taking a MOM job would work any Box. All the MOM's in my area were ex-signallers.

 

[Bromley boy]

Thanks chaps.

Makes sense for simple boxes in rural locations, I guess.

Is signaller to MOM a common career move? I’d imagine a higher grade signaller would be on quite a bit more money (accepting that money isn’t everything).

EDIT: also do you get many ex drivers in the signalling grade? I’m aware of one or two ex bobbies who’ve moved to the footplate.

 

[Highlandspring]

It varies by area as to whether MOMs work boxes or not. I know a few MOMs who are passed on and work IECC workstations.. MOMs who are competent to work boxes follow the same continuous assessment process as signallers, though there is also a "Signalling for Non-Signallers" competence management program for managers and 'contingent signallers'. Newly appointed MOMs in areas where they are expected to work boxes are sent to signalling school if they haven't already been a signaller before.

The duties of MOMs vary wildly nationally and it's a real mess that Network Rail has never managed to sort out. You have MOMs who work boxes and ones who don't, you have MOMs who only ever respond to incidents and do nothing else, others who assist with admin, some who carry out signallers competence assessments for the LOMS, some who carry out supervisory visits for the LOMs and some who don't, some who cross cover other areas, some who do possession support roles at the weekend... it's a mess.

 

[Llanigraham]

That is an understatement!!

 

[farleigh]

It surely is time that signalling was automated to avoid this sort of problem. Clearly it is the type of low-skill job that a computer could have managed 40 years ago.

 

[Llanigraham]

I'm intrigued to know why you think that signalling is a low skill job?
Do you actually know anything about the job and what it entails?

Somehow I suspect not!!

 

[Marklund]

It surely is time that signalling was automated to avoid this sort of problem. Clearly it is the type of low-skill job that a computer could have managed 40 years ago.

SSI only came in to service in mid 80s.
That sums up how accurate the rest of your post is...

 

[Sunset route]

It surely is time that signalling was automated to avoid this sort of problem. Clearly it is the type of low-skill job that a computer could have managed 40 years ago.

Here we are in the late 2017s and the TMS computer is still having problems working out the multiple calculations for dealing with multiple overlapping junctions so badly that we (our little area of the railway) are not going to see it this year or the next, in fact it's having problems even matching the human brain. They are currently slowing down our RRI (route relay interlocking) so that TMS (Train Managerment System) via ARS (Automatic Route Setting) can even attempt to work, beacuase it can't match the human speed. But the boffins will get there one day, because they always do, just the matter of cost.

Not to mention signalling doesn't come cheap whatever variety you go for especially if you want all the bells and whistles linked into ARS and TMS. Then you still need a signaller watching it because you not going to convert all of the user worked crossings around the country into fully interlocked with the signalling, so someone is going to need to answer that call and protect the line, deal with failures, protect engineering work.

Then your back to how much railway can one human safely supervise when (a) everything is working ok and (b) when there is a failure or degraded working or (c) the railway is having a really bad day and there are multiple failures and severe degraded working.

I don't think your ever going to get away with no human supervision and if you've got a human watching the system then that job will still need to be covered by a base roster and by holiday/sicknes cover, which still leaves you open to someone not being rostered when they should of been or someone going sick at the last minute, just now you even more railway that you can't run on until staff are found.