Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

[Article] 300 stranded as 'ghost' train departs with single passenger

24

Comments

  • Closed Accounts Posts: 621 ✭✭✭Nostradamus


    daymobrew wrote: »

    I think Iarnrod Eireann did surprisingly well to resolve the situation so that net delay to passengers was only 30 mins. I admit that they were probably lucky that the Cork train was available.

    What if the train had of been the last one out to Limerick that night? IE got very lucky they had a Cork train leaving later. IE managed the situation due to luck and not due to their on-the-fly problem solving abilities.

    Heads need to roll at IE for this fiasco. Only way a message will be sent out and this not happen again.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 621 ✭✭✭Nostradamus


    MOH wrote: »
    Spartans, tonight we dine in he--, oh hang on, the train's gone without us.

    LOL! Anyone out there good with photoshop!


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    MOH wrote: »
    Spartans, tonight we dine in he--, oh hang on, the train's gone without us.
    I'm not sure if much dining done unless they brought an extra snack trolley.
    daymobrew wrote: »
    Think about when you fly - ever had your bags miss your flight or go somewhere else? These bags are barcoded but still the humans moving the bags make mistakes.
    Sure, something under 1% of baggage goes temporarily astray. Not 99.7% of the passengers.:)


  • Registered Users Posts: 5,845 ✭✭✭trellheim


    Yes folks I've the truth here.... this was the promotion test to become an "Iarnrod Eireann Senior Manager"

    and the person responsible passed with flying colours.

    There will be much one-upmanship in the current months to try and outdo this, so hang on to your hats ! ;)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 17,733 ✭✭✭✭corktina


    it's a cock up...they happen...I'm sure the people responsible have had an ear-bashing and have to live with the embaraasment for the rest of theri careers....a bit severe to take away their livliehood over it isnt it? Don't forget, this isnt a mangement cock up, it's a couple of the "other ranks" getting theri wires crossed.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 3 LemmingMuppet


    What if the train had of been the last one out to Limerick that night? IE got very lucky they had a Cork train leaving later. IE managed the situation due to luck and not due to their on-the-fly problem solving abilities.

    It would probably have been more straightforward to bring the errant train back if it was the last one out. These things happen all the time. eg. the diving couple who were left behind at the Great Barrier Reef in Australia, my friend who was left behind in Budapest on the school tour, the time the space shuttle went to the ISS with only the pilot.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    What if the train had of been the last one out to Limerick that night? IE got very lucky they had a Cork train leaving later. IE managed the situation due to luck and not due to their on-the-fly problem solving abilities.

    Heads need to roll at IE for this fiasco. Only way a message will be sent out and this not happen again.

    If it had been the last train, it would have been recalled to Heuston.

    The reason it wasn't was that there were too many other trains going to leave after it, and stopping it and bringing it back would have caused far more disruption, and there was a feasible connection 35 minutes later.

    At the end of the day it should not have happened full stop. But, it was (it would appear) down to an honest mistake that certainly won't happen again! Two people got their wires crossed which can happen in any organisation (private or public), although it doesn't necessarily discommode 300 people albeit temporarily.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 88,978 ✭✭✭✭mike65


    the time the space shuttle went to the ISS with only the pilot.

    I missed that one.

    Mike


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    No doubt the person responsible for all this will get promoted :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭Schuhart


    daymobrew wrote: »
    Maybe we should accept that it was a mistake and that they will put in procedures so that it shouldn't happen again. We've all made mistakes, we're human. I'm quite critical of Iarnrod Eireann but let's not go mad here.
    In fairness, this mistake cost €10,000 in refunds on top of the cost of sending a fully staffed and fueled train to Limerick - and really just should not have happened. That's worth getting annoyed about, as public tolerance for that level of mistake will only lead to more of the same.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    Schuhart wrote: »
    In fairness, this mistake cost €10,000 in refunds on top of the cost of sending a fully staffed and fueled train to Limerick - and really just should not have happened. That's worth getting annoyed about, as public tolerance for that level of mistake will only lead to more of the same.

    Just to point that the train did actually stop at stations all along the route picking passengers up. So it did not travel "empty" for the entire journey.


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Schuhart wrote: »
    In fairness, this mistake cost €10,000 in refunds on top of the cost of sending a fully staffed and fueled train to Limerick - and really just should not have happened. That's worth getting annoyed about, as public tolerance for that level of mistake will only lead to more of the same.
    The real cost should be quite modest. They won't have to run any extra trains, so the cost won't increase. Income will be slightly dented by the vouchers they will issue (assumming people ask and they are given). But they are vouchers, not cash, you can only spend them with IÉ.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    Victor wrote: »
    The real cost should be quite modest. They won't have to run any extra trains, so the cost won't increase. Income will be slightly dented by the vouchers they will issue (assumming people ask and they are given). But they are e50 vouchers, not cash, you can only spend them with IÉ.
    CIE will no doubt gain from this, like Ryanair who also thrives on publicity whether its good or bad. Those vouchers must be used and many who have them may of had no intention of travelling on the train after that journey and will be stuck with them but feel obliged to make use of them.

    For those that are computer illiterate a voucher may not get you very far as you are usually ripped off at the station when buying a ticket so you will be handing more money over to CIE. and they might want to bring their missus with them thats another ticket!

    There is probably an expiry date on them. It is only 300 seats that they are "loosing" on, how many "free" seats dose Mr. O' Leary give away? These people will of buying additional snacks and will be hanging around mainline stations all day spending cash.

    CIE could have been in a far worse scenario, Imagine if they had to fork out on several coaches and taxies or an additional train. Worse has been done before. They got out of this one handy and they are not as stupid as you think.


  • Registered Users Posts: 78,218 ✭✭✭✭Victor


    Its not €50, its 50% of the one-way fare. Not sure how they'll work out the one-way fare though. :)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 20,009 ✭✭✭✭Run_to_da_hills


    Victor wrote: »
    Its not €50, its 50% of the one-way fare. Not sure how they'll work out the one-way fare though. :)
    Thats worse, that would just about pay for the price of a coffee on board :eek:


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Zynks


    If only the driver was not too busy with his sudoku and got off his excessively elegant derriere, he might have noticed something unusual. I don't think he should be fired, but a desk job might be more appropriate for such an observant individual.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭Ham'nd'egger


    CIE could have been in a far worse scenario, Imagine if they had to fork out on several coaches and taxies or an additional train. Worse has been done before. They got out of this one handy and they are not as stupid as you think.

    There was two other services to Limerick that evening; the 19:10 to Tralee stopped at Limerick Junction while the 19:25 Limerick. To their credit, IE did well to sort passengers out after this in such short notice and get them to Limerick as soon as possible; it would have been all to easy to put them on later trains and then pack them out.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 1,835 ✭✭✭Schuhart


    KC61 wrote: »
    Just to point that the train did actually stop at stations all along the route picking passengers up. So it did not travel "empty" for the entire journey.
    Fair point - but at the same time I don't think we should be making excuses for IE. I'd also frankly wonder how many passengers were picked up during the journey - does it actually make a material difference?
    Victor wrote: »
    The real cost should be quite modest. They won't have to run any extra trains, so the cost won't increase. Income will be slightly dented by the vouchers they will issue (assumming people ask and they are given). But they are vouchers, not cash, you can only spend them with IÉ.
    I think we're running the risk of being too understanding. If the train runs largely empty, then it simply is a waste of resource. Put another way, if the Cork train could accommodate them every Sunday then surely they should cancel the Limerick service. (Troll elimination statement: I am, clearly, not advocating cancelling the Limerick service.)

    As to the vouchers, if claimed and used they simply do mean there is a loss of €10,000. The fact they can only be redeemed by IE makes them less liquid - but still lost revenue. (I don't see the point of acknowledging that an unredeemed voucher won't cause a loss, as I think we should let IE rubbish their own offer.)


  • Site Banned Posts: 5,904 ✭✭✭parsi


    Zynks wrote: »
    If only the driver was not too busy with his sudoku and got off his excessively elegant derriere, he might have noticed something unusual. I don't think he should be fired, but a desk job might be more appropriate for such an observant individual.

    He was given the right away and went away. He didn't pass a signal at danger.

    Is he supposed to walk down the train and check that there are people on it ?


  • Site Banned Posts: 5,904 ✭✭✭parsi


    deRanged wrote: »
    I've gotten on more than one train that went in the opposite direction..

    What do you mean ?

    You were standing on a platform. A train pulled in. You got on and it went back the way it came ? Sort of like the way the Cork train arrives in Heuston, empties its load, takes on new folk and then goes back in the opposite direction ?


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    Schuhart wrote: »
    Fair point - but at the same time I don't think we should be making excuses for IE. I'd also frankly wonder how many passengers were picked up during the journey - does it actually make a material difference?I think we're running the risk of being too understanding. If the train runs largely empty, then it simply is a waste of resource. Put another way, if the Cork train could accommodate them every Sunday then surely they should cancel the Limerick service. (Troll elimination statement: I am, clearly, not advocating cancelling the Limerick service.)

    As to the vouchers, if claimed and used they simply do mean there is a loss of €10,000. The fact they can only be redeemed by IE makes them less liquid - but still lost revenue. (I don't see the point of acknowledging that an unredeemed voucher won't cause a loss, as I think we should let IE rubbish their own offer.)

    I would imagine that the train would pick up quite a few pax en route as it calls at every Intercity station en route between Dublin and Thurles bar Newbridge. It is the principal evening service from these stations to Limerick and provides a connection at Thurles for passengers from intermediate stations travelling to Cork and Kerry. It would therefore accomodate students returning to UL, UCC, etc.


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    Zynks wrote: »
    If only the driver was not too busy with his sudoku and got off his excessively elegant derriere, he might have noticed something unusual. I don't think he should be fired, but a desk job might be more appropriate for such an observant individual.

    This was not the driver's fault as he was given the signal to depart and he (as per the rule book) accepted that.

    The problem was that one of the platform staff apparently gave the all clear signal to the ticket checkers at the platform gate. The signal was the same as that given to the guard when the train is cleared to depart, and he interpreted it as that. That was the mistake.

    The incorrect signal was given, possibly by a junior member of staff and the rule book was followed. Now, the guard probably should have been aware of the fact that no pax had boarded (bar one), but he is not obliged to watch pax boarding the train.

    At the end of the day it should never have happened, but I suspect it was down to a junior member of staff giving the incorrect signal.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Zynks


    KC61 wrote: »
    .... Now, the guard probably should have been aware of the fact that no pax had boarded (bar one), but he is not obliged to watch pax boarding the train....

    That's exactly my point. The guy is transporting people, not bags of patatos. He may not be obliged to watch (though he should be) if not for the purpose of ensuring all is well, at least to be personally satisfied that there is no major risk in moving the train.

    I know it is a terrible comparison, but this is the same kind of justification used by the two police officers in the UK who watched a child drown and did nothing because it would have been against health & safety regulations to jump into the lake.

    Where the hell did common sense and decency go to? :confused:


  • Registered Users Posts: 666 ✭✭✭pigeonbutler


    KC61 wrote: »
    This was not the driver's fault as he was given the signal to depart and he (as per the rule book) accepted that.

    The problem was that one of the platform staff apparently gave the all clear signal to the ticket checkers at the platform gate. The signal was the same as that given to the guard when the train is cleared to depart, and he interpreted it as that. That was the mistake.

    The incorrect signal was given, possibly by a junior member of staff and the rule book was followed. Now, the guard probably should have been aware of the fact that no pax had boarded (bar one), but he is not obliged to watch pax boarding the train.

    At the end of the day it should never have happened, but I suspect it was down to a junior member of staff giving the incorrect signal.

    Surely the guard should have been aware that there were people waiting to board the train? Someone said the driver can't be expected to walk the train before departing. Of course he shouldn't, but it's the guard that gives the train the signal to go (unless of course its 22000 class trains running on Limerick line now). The guard would have had to have been signalled to close the doors, and then signalled the all clear, and then waved the green flag for the driver, all the while looking back down the length of the train.

    Surely in that sequence of events it becomes very difficult for someone to ignore 300 hundred people queued up at the platform gate?

    If it was in fact a railcar then none of this applies!


  • Registered Users Posts: 4,316 ✭✭✭KC61


    Surely the guard should have been aware that there were people waiting to board the train? Someone said the driver can't be expected to walk the train before departing. Of course he shouldn't, but it's the guard that gives the train the signal to go (unless of course its 22000 class trains running on Limerick line now). The guard would have had to have been signalled to close the doors, and then signalled the all clear, and then waved the green flag for the driver, all the while looking back down the length of the train.

    Surely in that sequence of events it becomes very difficult for someone to ignore 300 hundred people queued up at the platform gate?

    If it was in fact a railcar then none of this applies!

    It was operated by a Mark 3 set, not a railcar.

    The guard would have been in his van which is adjacent to the locomotive, so it would actually be very difficult for him to see the queue given that he is at the very far end of the platform.

    He got a signal to go from the station staff, and he gave the away to the driver.

    The error was that of the platform staff who gave the incorrect signal, and who obviously did not react quickly enough once the doors started closing. I would suspect the whole episode happened quite quickly and by the time someone tried to stop the train it was actually moving, and by then it would be too late as the driver would be looking ahead.

    I am certainly not excusing the event, but I can see how it might have happened. The company need to review the dispatch procedures and ensure that all staff are reminded of what the various hand signals mean to avoid a repeat of this sort of nonsense.


  • Registered Users Posts: 6,475 ✭✭✭daymobrew


    Zynks wrote: »
    That's exactly my point. The guy is transporting people, not bags of patatos. He may not be obliged to watch (though he should be) if not for the purpose of ensuring all is well, at least to be personally satisfied that there is no major risk in moving the train.
    Maybe the driver was checking dials etc in the cabin, like pilots do before departure (I realise that it is probably less complicated).
    His check about 'no major risk' might be looking out the window as he is given the 'go' from the guard and someone on the platform.
    Schuhart wrote:
    In fairness, this mistake cost €10,000 in refunds on top of the cost of sending a fully staffed and fueled train to Limerick - and really just should not have happened. That's worth getting annoyed about, as public tolerance for that level of mistake will only lead to more of the same.
    The train was going to Limerick anyway so no cost there. The Cork train was going anyway so no cost there. There was a cost for the shuttle train from Limerick Junction.
    The spokesperson from Irish Rail said that the cost would be considerably less than the 10k figure claimed.

    Yes, we should get annoyed but not irrational or we'll end up sounding like hysterical journalists for the Northside People rather than rational people.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Zynks


    Are these the guys that wanted more money to drive longer trains???
    daymobrew wrote: »
    Maybe the driver was checking dials etc in the cabin, like pilots do before departure (I realise that it is probably less complicated).
    Have you noticed that pilots always get out of the plane for a quick inspection before take off? And, as you pointed out, their cabin work is far more complex than in a train.
    daymobrew wrote: »
    His check about 'no major risk' might be looking out the window as he is given the 'go' from the guard and someone on the platform.
    ...and he failed to spot 300 people standing on the platform right beside the train while doing it :rolleyes:

    DESK JOB FOR HIM!

    I've observed train drivers in other countries and in busy stations they frequently step out of the train and check what's going on. It takes only a few seconds. Not a big deal, and rather sensible. The mad part is that in Ireland it probably has to be written in their contract that they have to do it.


  • Registered Users Posts: 3,025 ✭✭✭Ham'nd'egger


    Zynks wrote: »
    Have you noticed that pilots always get out of the plane for a quick inspection before take off? And, as you pointed out, their cabin work is far more complex than in a train.

    I take it that you have driven a train and plane to qualify said statement, Zynks.


  • Registered Users Posts: 1,693 ✭✭✭Zynks


    Hamndegger wrote: »
    I take it that you have driven a train and plane to qualify said statement, Zynks.

    Well, not really. I have a mechanical engineering background, but I didn't even get very technical in my thinking to make that statement with a high degree of confidence :D

    But if you prefer I can put it in another way: Have you noticed that pilots always get out of the plane for a quick inspection before take off? And, they have a muuuuch longer distance to walk and climb that a train driver to step out of the train.

    I didn't measure the distance, but I am sure it can be done if really necessary.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 1,857 ✭✭✭Bogger77


    Zynks wrote: »
    Well, not really. I have a mechanical engineering background, but I didn't even get very technical in my thinking to make that statement with a high degree of confidence :D

    But if you prefer I can put it in another way: Have you noticed that pilots always get out of the plane for a quick inspection before take off? And, they have a muuuuch longer distance to walk and climb that a train driver to step out of the train.

    I didn't measure the distance, but I am sure it can be done if really necessary.
    The driver checked the train, got in his cab, and waited for the signal to go, not all different from what happened last time I flew. Bluntly speaking, driver drives train, and is responsible for the mechanical aspects of driving, guard and ticket checker are responsible, between them, for the safety and comfort of passengers. The concourse staff tell the guard when all passengers are aboard, and they're happy for the train to leave station. The guard is responsible for closing the doors, and informing the driver that the doors are locked, and train is ready to go. The signal controller, tells the driver it's ready to go. This is very similar to passenger aircraft procedures. Pilot checks exterior, gets into cockpit, performs checklist. The gate staff check tickets, and then tell the cabin crew all pax are aboard. The cabin crew check the doors, check the passengers and the inform then the pilot that plane is ready. The pilot checks with any ground crew, that the area round plane is clear, he then asks air traffic for permission to leave gate.

    It's all very similar, in this case, a member of concourse staff instead of giving the open the gates signal to the gate staff, gave the go signal to guard. It's happened in airports too, many times.

    As for the guard or driver seeing 300 people queing, in Hueston on Friday's and Sunday's that's not an uncommon sight, esp with late running services. Many times, u'll have a queue for Cork, waiting for the Galway train to depart, so that the Cork train can come to platform. Do you expect the driver to walk down the line, asking if anyones left to board his train? Anyone there for the last few seats to Limerick, do you a good deal, boss


Advertisement