Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2005 20:44:29 GMT
I just read a post made elsewhere by central-simon that the Northern Line is closed - i.e. no services AT ALL.
The TfL web site doesn't seem to say much about this at the moment - is a formal press release likely?
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 12, 2005 21:02:32 GMT
According to the text on TV a train ran a red 'un at MHE and the emergency brakes failed. As this has apparently happened 5 times the men have stopped work on safety grounds and who can blame them. Looks like brother Blair's pet PPP scheme is going the same way as the main line firms doesn't it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2005 21:03:06 GMT
Just on Beeb news: Northen Line Closes, Saftey Talks Collapse.
Could this be to do with those dodgy tripcocks...
|
|
|
Post by tom2506 on Oct 12, 2005 21:37:32 GMT
I think its about time some money was spent on the signalling and safety on the Northern!
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 12, 2005 21:46:22 GMT
|
|
|
Post by nutterathome on Oct 12, 2005 21:47:52 GMT
This is the Nonsense LUL are putting out on the Tfl site.
NORTHERN LINE: No service throughout the line due to signalling system problems
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2005 21:51:18 GMT
lol, I smell Spin Doctors!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2005 22:22:14 GMT
This whole thing is unbelievable to someone who grew up with 38ts on the Northern. The equipment may have been technically primitive, but it worked!
I was on a train that did a SPAD leaving Fin Cen, and my word it STOPPED when it hit the tripcock...
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 12, 2005 23:03:10 GMT
I wonder what sort of effect this will have on PPP, the procurement of new stock and even the future of LU in general. Could this unfortunate event with the 1995TS be the straw that breaks the camel's back, and results in the termination of PPP altogether?
|
|
|
Post by piccadillypilot on Oct 12, 2005 23:23:01 GMT
I wonder what sort of effect this will have on PPP, I suspect none. It is (in laymans terms) a technical glitch that is to do with the equipment not with the means of procuring it. Given that the trains predate PPP and have been running with no problem (that I'm aware of) in the tripcock department I'm curious as what has happened to cause the current run of failures.
|
|
|
Post by russe on Oct 13, 2005 0:30:46 GMT
Know what you mean in one sense PP, but tripcocks that may have been perfectly ok once presumably need checking and if necessary adjusting from time to time?
Is it not the lack, actual or perceived, of quality control of such checking and adjustment the nub of this problem?
I agree that it is not in principle a PPP matter, but quality control is a procurement matter, and politicians need no excuse to throw boulders.
It seems to me the question is not who can do up the bolts but who should be paying for it.
Russ
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,359
|
Post by Chris M on Oct 13, 2005 0:44:34 GMT
This is the Nonsense LUL are putting out on the Tfl site. NORTHERN LINE: No service throughout the line due to signalling system problems Previously it has been "Problems connected with the signalling system", which is technically true - although somewhat sanitised (for want of a better term). Whether the current line is true in this fasion is debatable - the problem is with the tripcocks. Are they considered part of the signaling sysem (i.e. they are there to prevent accidents caused by going through red signals) or are they part of the breaking system (i.e. they are there to stop the train)? Whichever way it is management speak for "the system to automatically stop trains that have passed a signal at danger has failed. The staff that run the trains refuse to work because it is unsafe." Although weasily worded, the official line will result in less (or hopefully no) panic and will lead to the quickest return to normality when the problem is fixed. LU must also realise that in this day and age, those people who are interested can find more information online pretty easily. Do a google search for Nothern Line signaling system problems for example.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,309
|
Post by Colin on Oct 13, 2005 1:38:58 GMT
As has been dicussed in this very forum before some things are not meant to be public knowlegde. On here you have an 'advanced interest' in railways and posess more knowledge than the average member of the public - please bear this in mind. LUL and TOC's regularly tell white lies and half truths every day of the week - it's known in the trade as 'keep it short and simple'. If we say to the public: the Northern line has severe delays because of faulty tripcocks - they will be asking themselves what are we on about! Similarly - we'll be held here while the signalman takes a release ( ) or we are suspended because of a track circuit failure. It means nothing to the average punter. As you should all know, the tripcock forms a vital part of the signalling system - so LUL have not lied, they have only told half of the truth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2005 6:36:03 GMT
they should just put due to train safety defects not due to faulty signalling equipment.
but another question is how long as this problem been there i mean them trains have been running for a few years now and they blamed it on the tripcock reset rope they trying to say its a design fault and its always been there ?
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Oct 13, 2005 17:29:52 GMT
I agree with Chris and Colin above that the tone taken by nutterathome is less than professional in such an area as this.
Aetearlscourt, I think that signalling system problems gives a much more general view of what is happening. The public, as has been said, do not need to know all of the details, as incorrect conclusions can be made.
To say a train has "safety defects" conjures up images of trains which are "unsafe" which is not true.
This is another one of those threads where I feel caution should be shown by those who think they know.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 13, 2005 18:02:01 GMT
I agree- in this case the half-truth (NOT A LIE) is fully appropriate as far as the public are concerned. The trains are NOT unsafe (if driven properly) and that is all that matters
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 13, 2005 18:19:31 GMT
Although it doesn't help when the general public aren't given a full and unbias reason for the shutdown, hence the number of 'bloody drivers and their meddling union' comments that various people have heard today.
Would the average man (or woman) climb onboard a jumbo jet, knowing full well that an essential safety system isn't working to 100% of it's potential? On NR, if the AWS/TPWS develops a fault, then the train is taken out of service immediately - what's the difference in this case?
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 13, 2005 18:41:33 GMT
On NR, if the AWS/TPWS develops a fault, then the train is taken out of service immediately - what's the difference in this case? Not always- that's exactly how Southall happened: no AWS, driver error, passengers dead and injured.
|
|
|
Post by graham on Oct 13, 2005 18:49:02 GMT
What does irritate me is the use of this to either bash the unions or vice versa to bash PPP. I'm not particularly pro or anti PPP if the contracts are worded properly.
People seem to forget that problems, mistakes and accidents happened long before privatisation and will continue to happen for as long as fallable human beings are involved and I've never met an infallable human being. All we can do is try to build in a second line of defence like tripcocks or smoke detectors etc and then when these ocasionaly fail, as they will because you can never forsee every interaction in a system, you do your best to fix the problem and, if you have to, you change something in the short term. In this case what has changed in the short term is shutting the Northern line.
There are of course situations where there is negligence either through strategic cost cutting, or as seems to be the case with most of the railtrack incidents just pure incompetance or local cost cutting and these are unaccepatable but the result of these highly publicised cases is the false idea fostered by the media that there is such a thing as zero risk rather than carefully managed and reduced risk. End of rant.
|
|
|
Post by nutterathome on Oct 13, 2005 19:49:18 GMT
I don't believe what I wrote was 'less than professional' at all, I was purely stating my opinion which I stand by 100%.
If LU had said 'The Northern Line is suspended because the emergency braking system didn't work' I wouldn't have a problem with that, Joe Public could then ask (if interested) for more information something LU are always pushing it's Staff on.........be honest and open.
As it happens, Joe Public don't seem to give a damn about the safety issue, 'Train Drivers are being greedy' or 'A lazy bunch of tossers looking for more time off' just two of the quotes that have come my way.
Prior to Chancery Lane, there were 3 instances of Traction Motors falling on to the Track, did LU tell the Public.......NO. did LU know about this problem.....YES. Did they tell the Operating Staff.....NO. Could Chancery Lane have been avoided.........YES.
Would LU have told the Public that a train could pass a Signal at Danger and carry on........NO. Maybe it was assessed as a problem being addressed and the risk worth taking as closing the Line is an expensive business. BR. Railtrack & NR all resisted an emergency braking system........until too many people died in crashes.
I respect the comment made by Colin 'posses more knowledge than the average member of the public' so at this stage at least will comment no more.
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,309
|
Post by Colin on Oct 13, 2005 20:17:49 GMT
On NR, if the AWS/TPWS develops a fault, then the train is taken out of service immediately - what's the difference in this case? And if the tripcock fails a test it goes out of service. By test, I mean every train is checked at least once on every trip to check it is present and in gauge. The difference here is that the tripcocks are in place and are in gauge. The only time it becomes a fault condition is when the [Northern line] trains trip at slow speed (-15mph). Whats actually happening is that the tripcock arm in many cases is not going fully back and locking in place or taking out all three pressure switches. As the arm goes back to it's normal position, no activation is registered - and potentially that train in front is getting too close for comfort. LUL tried to get round the unions by double manning the trains - but, sensibly IMHO, they told LUL to get it sorted or their members would take the action they subsequentlly have.
|
|
|
Post by citysig on Oct 14, 2005 8:54:21 GMT
Nutterathome, whatever your feelings towards your employer are, this really isn't the place to start airing them in such a fashion. I'm sorry but that does smack of being less than professional.
I would have thought that the reason we tell the public what we tell them was obvious. Lots of phrases have changed, more often than not due to incidents occuring on NR. For example, the term points failure is used very little since Potters Bar. Track failure is not used since Hatfield.
This whole thread would make alarm bells ring if the wrong person read it. It is making LU out to be hiding the facts, when actually they are all here to be seen.
Read in a calm and full manner, it is easy to see what the full story is. But we have to relay a message to the public in a clear manner that is not open to interpretation. That way, when we fix the problem, they come back and use us.
|
|
|
Post by londontube on Oct 14, 2005 9:30:40 GMT
Quick note - It seems like a lot of the passengers up on the High Barnet branch are using the local bus route from Mill Hill East and Finchley Central. The main one is route 382, Mill Hill East - Southgate and back, which are only single floored and run every 15mins. The replacement buses are NOT operating at FC or MHE so most people are taking the 382 to Arnos Grove, which is also taking a lot more passengers than usual. These buses were still over-crowded at 10am! The replacement buses seem to be running fine, but roadworks between Finchley and Southgate will pro-long your journey! I know this because I went to Finchley, Arnos and Southgate today and the 382 is a local bus route
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2005 16:33:06 GMT
Not always- that's exactly how Southall happened: no AWS, driver error, passengers dead and injured. IIRC if your AWS / TPWS is defective, the train has to be tipped out as soon as possible, and then run double manned to the depot. (hope thats right!) I_D bangs the nail on the head, no safety system, no driver. Its all very well saying that drivers shouldnt go past red signals, but what must be remembered here is that everyone is human and can make mistakes. Not one of us out there is perfect, which is why SPADs / overruns and the like do happen.
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 14, 2005 18:02:25 GMT
Not always- that's exactly how Southall happened: no AWS, driver error, passengers dead and injured. IIRC if your AWS / TPWS is defective, the train has to be tipped out as soon as possible, and then run double manned to the depot. (hope thats right!) Maybe now- you could be right, but Southall driver (and I know the inspector who passed him out) was told if he didn't take train without AWS (AND no second man available) he would be suspended without pay there and then (at Swansea). Seriously, MA I hope you ARE right that this appalling nonsense has been stopped by GW trains since then. I have no current contacts in that area.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2005 18:10:11 GMT
MA I hope you ARE right that this appalling nonsense has been stopped by GW trains since then. I have no current contacts in that area. Well i checked before i posted with my FGW correspondant, so im 3/4 of the way there!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2005 18:44:54 GMT
The BBC local news tonight had a pretty good explanation of the tripcock system and they filmed a Northern line train being tripped in the depot. Now all our passengers will know what a tripcock is!
|
|
|
Post by q8 on Oct 14, 2005 18:57:33 GMT
By the way I thought tha 92/95/96 stocks were all pretty much of a muchness. Now I know that 92's have no trip but 96's do so why are the northern ones diffrent from those?
(and WHAT exactly is the problem?)
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 14, 2005 18:58:34 GMT
Why not just say in the press release what a tripcock is and what it does, it's hardly a long winded explination...
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 14, 2005 19:10:00 GMT
MA I hope you ARE right that this appalling nonsense has been stopped by GW trains since then. I have no current contacts in that area. Well i checked before i posted with my FGW correspondant, so im 3/4 of the way there! Thank God for some common sense on FGW at last- as also seems to be the case dropping the disciplinaries for the 'Northern four' who first refused over the tripcock issue.
|
|