Nigel Harris
Comment
Please don’t flinch, Sir Roy!
Rail’s pride and perversity demand radical action
The railway’s behaviour over this past couple
of weeks has been as extreme as the weather -
and consequently, commentary about the rail-
way has been about as extreme as I’ve seen it.
The sad thing is that what appears to have
been a generally creditable job (yes, really) in
trying to keep a service going in genuinely
extreme conditions has been overshadowed
by the incompetence and arrogance of some
of those who run and speak for the railway.
We should be wary about jumping on the
‘railway gave up and let us down’ tabloid
bandwagon because it just isn’t that simple.
The weather really has been extreme - and I’m
not talking so much about snow as incredibly
low temperatures over many days. I’ve been
driving diesel cars on and off for 20 years, and
December 6 was the first day I’ve ever noticed
a lack of power which may have been fuel on
the verge of freezing, despite additives. As
diesel doesn’t freeze until the mercury falls
to minus 9.5 degrees Celsius this highlights
the severity of the winter. EMT Class 158s suf-
fered similar difficulties, I understand. Also,
from Platform 2 at Peterborough at 0650 on
December 7, I was taken aback by the strength
of electrical arcing from the pantographs of
the FCC EMUs and EC ‘91s’ as they ploughed
through encrusted ice on the contact wires.
They looked and sounded like powerful weld-
ing arcs (which is effectively what they are)
but 25kv trains cope much better with this
phenomenon than 750vDC third rail electric
trains, with their lightweight pick-up skates
and finnicky software, which shut down.
And it’s simply absurd to trot out the tired
old criticisms about our not being prepared
for this funny white stuff, and how well they
manage in other countries. If we were to
maintain large fleets of snow and ice clearing
equipment, which stand idle in plant yards for
111⁄2 months of the year, to cope with a couple
of weeks of ice, then those same commenta-
tors who sneer at winter problems would be
riding their high horses about the waste of all
that cash, tied up in kit that rarely moves. Oh,
and by the way they DO have problems like
this in other European countries, as anyone
who watches international news will know.
And I got really fed up of hearing avia-
tion people whining about the 150,000
tons of snow they’d cleared,
using enormous boys’ toys, from
Gatwick’s nice flat runways - which
nevertheless remained closed for two
days! How many tons of the white
Subscribe at railmagazine.com
nigel.harris@bauermedia.co.uk
stuff do they think covered Network Rail’s
22,000 track miles - and our train depots? And
how do those who can’t get out of their own
driveways think that train drivers get to their
train depots on those same frozen mornings?
Over the first week or so in December I
travelled to King’s Cross a half-dozen times
and York once, and while even East Coast’s
contingency service was running late – it was
running. I allowed a bit more time, I cut the
railway some slack, and generally my busi-
ness continued thanks to East Coast railway-
men and women at the sharp end who, like
colleagues across the country in TOCs and at
Network Rail, genuinely did their best. No one
can expect more. Of course, there were doubt-
less other routes where maybe more effort
could (and should) have been made - but in
general terms, from what I saw, main lines at
least kept going where other modes failed. The
fact that East Coast carried 34% more passen-
gers than last year, snatched from the airlines,
during the first week of the worst disruption,
says a lot, so let’s be wary of blanket criticism
of all rail operators.
“I was astonished to hear
that the Train Service
Database... cannot be
updated later than 1500 for
the next day’s services.”
What a pity, sadly, that we cannot say the
same for some of those who claim to manage
railways – and as for some of those who claim
to speak on its behalf... they need a re-think.
Because where the railway failed was in
terms of basic planning on the one hand and
information on the other. That Network Rail
should admit that no ice scraping vans were
in service anywhere on the iced-up third rail
system ‘because they were in for maintenance’
was pathetic maintenance planning. I hope
whoever was responsible doesn’t plan engi-
neering possessions too! On the other hand,
today’s EMUs need constant, clean power, so
it’s good to know that NR experiments with
heating conductor rails are going well.
But there were major information cock-ups.
In an age when the internet, Twitter, Facebook
– even good old-fashioned texting - amid the
massed ranks of social networking opportuni-
ties and mobile phone technology ensures that
we are more connected than ever, the railway
too often failed to make even the most basic
information widely available. I was aston-
ished to hear that the Train Service Database,
from which all online sites take information,
cannot be updated later than 1500 for the next
day’s services. That needs to change.
It’s crucial to use the best technology to keep
passengers informed - yet too often the rail-
way remains mired in analogue angst when
digital dexterity is demanded. I truly felt for
those out on the front line, battling to provide
a train service and who were so horribly let
down by the incompetence of those whose job
it is to inform and explain - quickly.
Yet again we suffered the buttock-clenching
embarrassment of watching a Secretary of
State tell the industry to ‘man-up’ and deliver
its most basic responsibility. I thought it
regrettable, however, that Philip Hammond’s
open letter to the industry of December 2,
while mentioning ORR’s review, failed to pay
due credit to the really excellent report by
Passenger Focus on passenger information
during disruption, published only a couple
of days before. Hammond noted that “ORR
are undertaking a review of communications
performance during the (winter) disruption”
- but overlooked the PF report which actu-
ally tells him exactly what he needs to know
about passenger requirements, based as it is
on a survey involving 1,000 real passengers
over an extended period! ”My message to
the train operators is clear,” said Hammond”
“Passengers must be informed.” The PF report
could have added evidence-based factual
data to his otherwise general comments, and
it’s odd that he chose not to use this superb
ammunition to bolster his point. PF continues
to provide quality information that shows both
what passengers want and whether, therefore,
the industry (and Government policy) are
working and delivering. You’d think the DfT
would use this fantastic resource rather more.
Because a regrettable arrogance still lurks
among owners or operators, as represented
through the Association of Train Operating
Companies. Its dire and provocative PR per-
formance on rail fare increases immediately
before the cold snap effectively stuck a huge
‘kick me’ sign on the railway’s backside, an
invitation which the national media was
only too pleased to accept when the ice came.
ATOC’s PR about fares, presumably agreed by
Continued on page 79
December 15-December 28 2010 RAIL 659 3