Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2014 19:55:30 GMT
hi all I hope to pop up to London on sat 27th dec and was wondering weather the Piccadilly line trains would be going to ealing broadway again like last year ?
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 15, 2014 20:00:56 GMT
Yes they will be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2014 20:03:27 GMT
Are you sure about that superteacher? I think the idea's been dropped.
|
|
|
Post by domh245 on Dec 15, 2014 20:08:02 GMT
I was under the impression that originally there was going to be a Piccadilly service, but that has now been replaced by a District shuttle from Acton.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2014 20:20:19 GMT
From what I understand as of now, the Picc's will run via the local lines but those scheduled for Ealing will be diverted to Northfields.
The TfL website now suggests a District shuttle between Ealing Broadway and Ealing Common.
I guess we will have to wait and see what happens "on the day(s)".
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 15, 2014 20:59:19 GMT
From what I understand as of now, the Picc's will run via the local lines but those scheduled for Ealing will be diverted to Northfields. The TfL website now suggests a District shuttle between Ealing Broadway and Ealing Common. I guess we will have to wait and see what happens "on the day(s)". It will be on the District Line then, but almost any stock could work that section - certainly D, S or 1973 could all do it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2014 21:01:42 GMT
well thanks for all the info.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 15, 2014 21:05:10 GMT
Hmmm very interesting. Why have they dropped the Picc service to Ealing Broadway? It seemed to work OK last year.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2014 21:13:18 GMT
It was good fun last year, it made for a nice change. On the other hand, it is cross line working and requires a District line pilot, which seems like using a sledgehammer to crack a nut to me - quite a palaver, really, given the Central was running and the shuttle service was always an available option. (By the way, I don't know to what extent (if any) these factors are behind the change of plan this year, I'm just chucking my two cents in regarding how it worked last year. It was nice, though, I'm glad it happened.)
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Dec 15, 2014 21:58:04 GMT
This gives one side of the argument: Dispute on Piccadilly Line over cross Line workingTimetables, duty sheets etc. have all been produced with the intention of operating Piccadilly trains down the local to Ealing Broadway. However, as reganorak says a last minute change will see this altered this year.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 15, 2014 22:17:24 GMT
This gives one side of the argument: Dispute on Piccadilly Line over cross Line workingTimetables, duty sheets etc. have all been produced with the intention of operating Piccadilly trains down the local to Ealing Broadway. However, as reganorak says a last minute change will see this altered this year. What is there to dispute? The Picc drivers were given a pilot and as far as I could tell, weren't breaking any safety regulations by working over the District.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2014 23:01:50 GMT
Reading the RMT release, it seems that the dispute is more one of industrial relations than safety concerns. There are long standing agreements about cross line working. Also, I've learned to be a little wary of RMT releases, but if it's true that SPADs on the District line were treated like any other SPAD, that seems a little out of order. Obviously each SPAD must be assessed on a case by case basis, but if I were a Picc Train Op I'm not sure I'd feel all that happy about working over a section I've not been road trained on, knowing that if I have a SPAD on this unfamiliar section, I'll be in trouble. Obviously trainees spend plenty of time driving over unfamiliar sections and you, also, obviously need to be careful on unfamiliar track and they had pilots. But equally, you'd expect it to be taken into account, as - according to RMT - was promised, that you were on an unfamiliar section.
The other thing is, I can't imagine Picc line T/Ops are gonna be in the mood to bend over backwards to help out management and it's hard to see the necessity of it. It was a fun novelty last year, but I'm not sure it needs to happen again.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Dec 16, 2014 1:40:59 GMT
Reading the RMT release, it seems that the dispute is more one of industrial relations than safety concerns. There are long standing agreements about cross line working. Also, I've learned to be a little wary of RMT releases, but if it's true that SPADs on the District line were treated like any other SPAD, that seems a little out of order. Obviously each SPAD must be assessed on a case by case basis, but if I were a Picc Train Op I'm not sure I'd feel all that happy about working over a section I've not been road trained on, knowing that if I have a SPAD on this unfamiliar section, I'll be in trouble. Obviously trainees spend plenty of time driving over unfamiliar sections and you, also, obviously need to be careful on unfamiliar track and they had pilots. But equally, you'd expect it to be taken into account, as - according to RMT - was promised, that you were on an unfamiliar section. The other thing is, I can't imagine Picc line T/Ops are gonna be in the mood to bend over backwards to help out management and it's hard to see the necessity of it. It was a fun novelty last year, but I'm not sure it needs to happen again. I can see various elements to the issue. A few thoughts: A SPAD is a SPAD, and is always regarded as a safety-related incident because it has the potential to compromise safety. You can't alter the process. My understanding is all Picc drivers are trained for the local lines, so I can't see this part being the issue. It is the responsibility of both management and individual drivers to ensure route knowledge is up to date. I'm not sure what process applies on the Picc regarding the local lines, but I would *assume* that the route would be discussed by I/Os during training, and covered at least once during training by requesting the train be diverted along the local lines. Once qualified, the Train Operator has the option to request a diversion if they feel they need to refresh their knowledge. Obviously Ealing Broadway is another matter, and for this move I would always expect a pilot to be provided or the driver to be shown the route in advance. Actually, it would be preferable for all Piccadilly drivers to be trained to Ealing Broadway, with a few scheduled empty moves in the timetable to provide training / refresher paths. There is always the possibility of a Picc train reaching the junction signal and being unable to get the North Ealing route, so it would be better for the train to be able to be diverted to Ealing Broadway rather than having to be wrong roaded back to Ealing Common, waiting for a pilot, or the driver "winging it" (in reality it's a simple move, but even simple moves can go pear shaped if something out-of-course happens which can be the start of a slippery slops towards a safety incident). As an example, not all speed limits or speed restrictions are signed, and there's always the possibility the sign could be missing or covered with graffiti. Although gradually phased out over time, many 'T' boards remain which indicate line speed, which the driver knows from their knowledge. From an industrial relations point of view, I'd be tempted to allow the working to Ealing Broadway (with appropriate training or pilots provided), and then use it as an example to demonstrate Train Operator flexibility, a useful tool in any pay negotiation, or in any forthcoming media battle if a "Fit for the Future - Trains" appears. There's a difference between forcing people to move location and asking people to drive down an unusual section of track when required (with appropriate training or mitigation in place, of course). Despite PPP's efforts to break everything up into little business units, we are still one railway!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2014 2:27:53 GMT
Thanks for that North End A SPAD is a SPAD, and is always regarded as a safety-related incident because it has the potential to compromise safety. You can't alter the process. You're right, I mean, I can't really argue with that, I would expect them to be fully investigated and appropriate steps to be taken, as required. But, if the RMT are framing this accurately, I can understand their point of view, in that I would also expect the exceptional circumstances to be taken into account when it came to the disciplinary aspect and probably some consequent clemency. This is particularly true if that was - rightly or wrongly - part of the agreement to operate the service in the first place. If it didn't happen, I know I'd feel a bit nervous and if we chuck the other issues raised by the RMT onto the fire, I'm not sure how 'incentivised' I'd feel to drive an unfamiliar route, with relatively small benefits to the service and with my job on the line if I mess it up. It's gotta be like doing a sweat day over again, hasn't it? From an industrial relations point of view, I'd be tempted to allow the working to Ealing Broadway (with appropriate training or pilots provided), and then use it as an example to demonstrate Train Operator flexibility, a useful tool in any pay negotiation, or in any forthcoming media battle if a "Fit for the Future - Trains" appears. There's a difference between forcing people to move location and asking people to drive down an unusual section of track when required (with appropriate training or mitigation in place, of course). Despite PPP's efforts to break everything up into little business units, we are still one railway! Hmmmm, I suppose it's a matter of tactics, really. I kind of understand the RMT's fears on this one, the agreement about cross line working is, I gather, an old one, and an understandable one, as it's obviously important that you're fully trained up and practised if you're gonna be regularly working over a line (and ideal that this is true even for occasional workings) and it's understandable that the unions don't want to have the situation where drivers are having to be trained on all kinds of irregular routes which they rarely drive over (with potential for drivers to become rusty because of lack of practise). It's equally understandable that the unions wouldn't want to get into a situation where drivers are no longer confined to one line, but 'sign' several lines, at least unless they get a pay rise to go with the additional training, knowledge, etc. required. Also, you are obviously involved in fit for the future and stuff personally, whereas I'm just an armchair apologist, but I can certainly understand why the unions would not want to show just how flexible T/Ops can be with the Piccadilly line upgrade and fit for the future on the horizon, precisely because of how easily liberties could be taken. Reading the blogs of Messrs Shrugged and Auxsetreq and some of the comments on the former, one comes away with the impression that there is a sentiment that management takes, but it does not give, it demands its back be scratched, but it deigns to do no scratching. I struggle to doubt this so I can understand the frustration of the RMT and its membership. There again others are happy to be a little less hardline about it. I'm not involved, I can only say I appreciate the position of the RMT, based on what little I can see from afar. Others will feel differently, but I suppose, in this case, it seems the sentiment is strong enough for the special working to've been cancelled. I sympathise entirely and I don't think it's gonna spoil anybody's Christmas, but my current relative confidence that the RMT's tactics aren't too far off the mark may soon be proven wrong when the upgrade of the Picc begins.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Dec 16, 2014 3:20:23 GMT
Thanks for that North End A SPAD is a SPAD, and is always regarded as a safety-related incident because it has the potential to compromise safety. You can't alter the process. You're right, I mean, I can't really argue with that, I would expect them to be fully investigated and appropriate steps to be taken, as required. But, if the RMT are framing this accurately, I can understand their point of view, in that I would also expect the exceptional circumstances to be taken into account when it came to the disciplinary aspect and probably some consequent clemency. This is particularly true if that was - rightly or wrongly - part of the agreement to operate the service in the first place. If it didn't happen, I know I'd feel a bit nervous and if we chuck the other issues raised by the RMT onto the fire, I'm not sure how 'incentivised' I'd feel to drive an unfamiliar route, with relatively small benefits to the service and with my job on the line if I mess it up. It's gotta be like doing a sweat day over again, hasn't it? From an industrial relations point of view, I'd be tempted to allow the working to Ealing Broadway (with appropriate training or pilots provided), and then use it as an example to demonstrate Train Operator flexibility, a useful tool in any pay negotiation, or in any forthcoming media battle if a "Fit for the Future - Trains" appears. There's a difference between forcing people to move location and asking people to drive down an unusual section of track when required (with appropriate training or mitigation in place, of course). Despite PPP's efforts to break everything up into little business units, we are still one railway! Hmmmm, I suppose it's a matter of tactics, really. I kind of understand the RMT's fears on this one, the agreement about cross line working is, I gather, an old one, and an understandable one, as it's obviously important that you're fully trained up and practised if you're gonna be regularly working over a line (and ideal that this is true even for occasional workings) and it's understandable that the unions don't want to have the situation where drivers are having to be trained on all kinds of irregular routes which they rarely drive over (with potential for drivers to become rusty because of lack of practise). It's equally understandable that the unions wouldn't want to get into a situation where drivers are no longer confined to one line, but 'sign' several lines, at least unless they get a pay rise to go with the additional training, knowledge, etc. required. Also, you are obviously involved in fit for the future and stuff personally, whereas I'm just an armchair apologist, but I can certainly understand why the unions would not want to show just how flexible T/Ops can be with the Piccadilly line upgrade and fit for the future on the horizon, precisely because of how easily liberties could be taken. Reading the blogs of Messrs Shrugged and Auxsetreq and some of the comments on the former, one comes away with the impression that there is a sentiment that management takes, but it does not give, it demands its back be scratched, but it deigns to do no scratching. I struggle to doubt this so I can understand the frustration of the RMT and its membership. There again others are happy to be a little less hardline about it. I'm not involved, I can only say I appreciate the position of the RMT, based on what little I can see from afar. Others will feel differently, but I suppose, in this case, it seems the sentiment is strong enough for the special working to've been cancelled. I sympathise entirely and I don't think it's gonna spoil anybody's Christmas, but my current relative confidence that the RMT's tactics aren't too far off the mark may soon be proven wrong when the upgrade of the Picc begins. The thing is, we don't 'discipline' over SPADs unless a procedure has been deliberately violated or the driver has done something seriously unsafe like not followed the correct follow-up procedure. A SPAD will be investigated and normally the driver will receive an action plan to address any shortcomings. It will be recorded as a safety-related incident, and if the driver accrues 4 of those within 2 years then the driver's record will be considered formally which could lead to being removed from driving duties. Part of the company's justification for taking this approach is that SPADs are considered unsafe, so it's hypocritical to then say that it's not such a safety issue just because the driver was carrying out a move he wasn't properly trained to carry out. That's why this situation should never arise, any driver should always be properly trained and familiar with the route and move they are driving over -- always. I can see the point about cross-line working, but in the current climate where changes to many grades are certainly under consideration, any extra feather in the cap is a good thing, and anything which creates extra work for a grade of staff is good. More route knowledge means more time training, which potentially means more drivers! So long as the driver starts and finishes at their home depot, and is fully trained on any routes and stock they will drive, I can't see any issue. Up until now the different stocks have tended not to make it worthwhile, but I don't see what difference it would make to, say, a Barking driver whether they worked an H&C train or a District train on a particular shift. Issues surrounding movements and book on/off locations are a completely separate issue as far as I am concerned. (PS - I feel I should add these are my personal views, and I'm certainly not part of any Fit For The Future team!) ;-)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 16, 2014 4:31:23 GMT
Points very much taken The thing is, we don't 'discipline' over SPADs unless a procedure has been deliberately violated or the driver has done something seriously unsafe like not followed the correct follow-up procedure. A SPAD will be investigated and normally the driver will receive an action plan to address any shortcomings. It will be recorded as a safety-related incident, and if the driver accrues 4 of those within 2 years then the driver's record will be considered formally which could lead to being removed from driving duties. Part of the company's justification for taking this approach is that SPADs are considered unsafe, so it's hypocritical to then say that it's not such a safety issue just because the driver was carrying out a move he wasn't properly trained to carry out. That's why this situation should never arise, any driver should always be properly trained and familiar with the route and move they are driving over -- always. Fair enough, I'm inclined to soften my view in the light of this. I knew it could get to the point where you could be removed from driving duties, but I had thought it was a little easier to get to that stage, perhaps I was unduly influenced by the old Network Rail (or whoever it was, possibly even BR actually) policy of three strikes and you're out. (PS - I feel I should add these are my personal views, and I'm certainly not part of any Fit For The Future team!) ;-) No indeed! I'm just aware that I'm in a much more comfortable and disinterested position, since no part of my future is in any way influenced by the tactics of the RMT at this juncture
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 16, 2014 11:42:16 GMT
Will the shuttle really run from Ealing Common? I'd have thought reversal would have been easier at Acton Town - and there would be better connections to central London there too.
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Dec 16, 2014 11:54:32 GMT
Will the shuttle really run from Ealing Common? I'd have thought reversal would have been easier at Acton Town - and there would be better connections to central London there too. This has yet to be decided! With all the Piccadilly Line trains having to use pfm.1 and pfm.4 at Acton Town every 3mins it would be difficult to squeeze an unplanned District Line train into it, unless pfm.2 and pfm.3 were used by them to access the east sidings.
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 16, 2014 12:37:48 GMT
With all the Piccadilly Line trains having to use pfm.1 and pfm.4 at Acton Town every 3mins it would be difficult to squeeze an unplanned District Line train into it, unless pfm.2 and pfm.3 were used by them to access the east sidings. Looking at Carto Metro, this would look to be the easiest way to do it, reversing in the sidings between the e/b and w/b tracks east of the station. No conflict at all with Picadilly trains which, as you say, would have to use platforms 1/4 anyway, e/b trains from Heathrow passing under the tracks lines to/from Ealing Common . Reversing at EC would appear to require reversal in the depot, with trains emerging from it conflicting with eastbound Piccadilly trains heading for Acton Town.
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Dec 19, 2014 8:58:51 GMT
A further update is that the District Line shuttle to Ealing Broadway will now be from only Ealing Common, except 2 very early trains from Acton Town. These trains will have to be double-staffed with two Operators in the leading cab.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Dec 19, 2014 10:19:06 GMT
Sorry to demonstrate such woeful ignorance, but what is this all about - i.e. what is at the root of it all?
I've tried Googling and specifically the tfl website but I can't see any reason for anything anomalous regarding Ealing on the 27th - and I gather from the OP that whatever it is that is or is not happening, also happened on the 27th last year.
What am I missing?
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Dec 19, 2014 10:43:02 GMT
What is at the root of it all is that there is track replacement work at Earls Court and Victoria, resulting in there being no District Line services west of Embankment between Christmas and Dec 30th. Buses will replace the Wimbledon branch and provide a connection from Turnham Green to Gunnersbury (bus all the way to Richmond on Boxing Day when the Overground is closed) However for intermediate stations between Hammersmith and Acton Town, there will not be a replacement bus service - there will be a replacement train service: the Piccy will serve those stations. Last year, when there was a simlar closure, Ealng Broadway was served by diverting some Picadilly trains there, but this year a shuttle will run from Ealing Common instead.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Dec 19, 2014 11:08:41 GMT
Thanks, NF.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 19, 2014 15:03:37 GMT
These trains will have to be double-staffed with two Operators in the leading cab. Why's that? :S see if you can think of a reason!) Dstock7080
|
|
|
Post by rummer on Dec 19, 2014 18:02:19 GMT
Because Picc line drivers normally use the fast line, although trained for the local line if a driver has not done that move in the last 6 months he needs a pilot driver who knows the line and signals. May seem mad but there was a lot of SPADS last Christmas on the local line.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Dec 20, 2014 0:48:37 GMT
Because Picc line drivers normally use the fast line, although trained for the local line if a driver has not done that move in the last 6 months he needs a pilot driver who knows the line and signals. May seem mad but there was a lot of SPADS last Christmas on the local line. The train I was on forgot to stop at Chiswick Park. The driver apologised, saying that he's so used to going through, he forgot to stop! However, the Picc trains were only double crewed from Ealing Common to Ealing Broadway last year, not over the local lines from Hammersmith to Acton.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2014 23:37:40 GMT
This double manning is presumably due to the highly suspect, compared to piloting the timetabled 1973 stock trains to Ealing Broadway, notion of running a D stock only between Ealing Common and Ealing Broadway when such operation does not pass a tripcock tester in either direction as required by the rules. Its also far less customer focused!
|
|
|
christmas
Dec 24, 2014 5:51:12 GMT
via mobile
Post by Dstock7080 on Dec 24, 2014 5:51:12 GMT
This double manning is presumably due to the highly suspect, compared to piloting the timetabled 1973 stock trains to Ealing Broadway, notion of running a D stock only between Ealing Common and Ealing Broadway when such operation does not pass a tripcock tester in either direction as required by the rules. Its also far less customer focused! That's it aspect! No tripcock tester available so District trains will need to be operated with two qualified drivers in the leading cab.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 24, 2014 14:48:12 GMT
Ooooh, I didn't notice the up-thread challenge I, personally, certainly wouldn't have sussed it out though! Thanks for the info - one of many things that have to be taken into account to run a safe service that can easily go unnoticed.
|
|