Scotrail

[19QOS19]

What happened at Stonehaven was not under a yellow weather warning like Scotrail's recent antics and is not even remotely relevant to any of the challenges facing the network this week (hint: February and August are at opposite ends of the climate year).

Well it is relevant tbh. It was the result of a landslip and they're more likely to happen in the conditions predicted for tomorrow. There were plenty of landslips across the network before Stonehaven but sadly it took people to die before they were a lot more cautious - we had one down this neck of the woods that shut the line for months. Thankfully no one hit it or it would have been a similar disaster if not worse.

Shutting whole services across the board isn't an acceptable action plan in the long term though and Network Rail need to be held accountable and get the infrastructure up to the appropriate standard across the board.

[vikingTON]

8 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

Well it is relevant tbh. It was the result of a landslip and they're more likely to happen in the conditions predicted for tomorrow.

 

No they're not, because the forecasted hazard today is strong winds, caused by a winter storm. 

The Stonehaven landslip was caused by a humongous thunderstorm complex in the middle of summer, that had dumped the town of the same name under a foot of water and counting by the same time that the tragedy happened. 

In terms of risk profiles for catastrophic landslips, they are chalk and cheese. 

Quote

There were plenty of landslips across the network before Stonehaven but sadly it took people to die before they were a lot more cautious - we had one down this neck of the woods that shut the line for months. Thankfully no one hit it or it would have been a similar disaster if not worse.

Shutting down networks/setting restrictions when there is little risk of a significant landslip (today, also Sunday/Monday when nuisance flooding in tunnels was the most that could be experienced from an utterly bog-standard rainy night) is not showing caution though. It is showing irrationality and a failure by management to properly calibrate risk to entirely different scenarios. 

Quote

Shutting whole services across the board isn't an acceptable action plan in the long term though and Network Rail need to be held accountable and get the infrastructure up to the appropriate standard across the board.

Generally, I agree. But the infrastructure has not suddenly gone south over the past 18 months, to the point that every spell of rain or wind necessitates restrictions. 

[Bairnardo]

3 hours ago, virginton said:

 

Generally, I agree. But the infrastructure has not suddenly gone south over the past 18 months, to the point that every spell of rain or wind necessitates restrictions. 

A side effect of the pandemic response maybe, that throwing restrictions into things is now a normalised response to increased risk?

[flyingscot]

12 hours ago, 19QOS19 said:

Shutting whole services across the board isn't an acceptable action plan in the long term though and Network Rail need to be held accountable and get the infrastructure up to the appropriate standard across the board.

But this is specifically an operator decision. Avanti, TPE and others will run and note potential delays and speed restrictions.

Scotrail's response is disproportionate, especially for suburban lower speed services where risk is more easily managed. 

[19QOS19]

Generally, I agree. But the infrastructure has not suddenly gone south over the past 18 months, to the point that every spell of rain or wind necessitates restrictions. 

You're missing my main point here though. The cancellations today are directly related to Stonehaven. Or to put it another way - if Stonehaven hadn't happened, trains would absolutely be running today. As I said earlier, it's taken for people to die before they act more 'cautiously' - (I'm being very diplomatic with my wording here). The infrastructure hasn't suddenly got worse, no. But it was poor/outdated long before Stonehaven and a disaster like that was always going to happen unfortunately. It should have been the wake-up call needed to get things up to standard. In Network Rail's defence, there have been some major work down here in regards to securing sidings and cutting away trees. But there needs to be a lot more done and the whole Network is still below par.

If they ran as normal in weather like this (which they generally did before Stonehaven) and there was another major incident then heads would roll this time, which is why they'll be shutting things down. Again, it's not a long term solution though.

But this is specifically an operator decision. Avanti, TPE and others will run and note potential delays and speed restrictions.
Scotrail's response is disproportionate, especially for suburban lower speed services where risk is more easily managed. 

See above.

[MEADOWXI]

Groups of drunks on trains,

Living in Aberdeen and regular to Edinburgh or Glasgow for sport or family I would take groups of guys just off rigs catching gup on two weeks of sobriety offshore by getting hammered on the way home, football groups, most stag or hen groups but god save me from the worst two groups,

The 40 -60 year presecco drinking birthday party/hen do/ lasses shopping trip who can be the drunkenest, most sexily explicit and rudest groups in humanity,

and rugby wombles going to Murrayfield.

[KingRocketman II]

15 hours ago, Jon the Oxbow lake said:

I left behind the bus & Train in 1996 when I won my full UK driving licence.   

 

[KingRocketman II]

14 hours ago, Jon the Oxbow lake said:

I left Kia behind in 2015.  

I drive a Volvo XC90. 

 

[D.V.T.]

Yellow warning for snow and wind has extended to the Central Belt.

Staff night out as well on Friday and I bet the trains are off.

[Caledonian1]

5 hours ago, virginton said:

No they're not, because the forecasted hazard today is strong winds, caused by a winter storm. 

The Stonehaven landslip was caused by a humongous thunderstorm complex in the middle of summer, that had dumped the town of the same name under a foot of water and counting by the same time that the tragedy happened. 

In terms of risk profiles for catastrophic landslips, they are chalk and cheese. 

Shutting down networks/setting restrictions when there is little risk of a significant landslip (today, also Sunday/Monday when nuisance flooding in tunnels was the most that could be experienced from an utterly bog-standard rainy night) is not showing caution though. It is showing irrationality and a failure by management to properly calibrate risk to entirely different scenarios. 

Generally, I agree. But the infrastructure has not suddenly gone south over the past 18 months, to the point that every spell of rain or wind necessitates restrictions. 

^^ Never happy unless there is something to moan about (see Covid thread for near two years)

The previous storms: Arwen, Malik and Corrie were pretty much three, fifty year storms in a two month period - the devastation to forests, esp in the North East, has to be seen to be believed....I still can't drive my preferred route into Aberdeen as the road is still closed as they clear more unsafe / over-hanging fallen trees.  Arwen was a Red warning and Malik and Corrie should have been the same - incredibly dangerous situations for pretty much all modes of transport.  I think Scotrail are right in their caution.  You want a skeleton service - falling trees / landslips could happen and whether you have 5 trains running or 555 the consequences could be catastrophic (the Stonie crash claimed the lives of only three but imagine if we were not effectively in lokdown at the time - I often took the 6.55am train from Stonie to Glasgow on a Wednesday and it was always pretty busy)

Considerable numbers now work from home or at least have the ability to work from home so I cant see the issue with the forewarning given out.

Try and cheer yourself up by returning to the Covid thread and spreading your positivity there.........

[HeWhoWalksBehindTheRows]

1 hour ago, KingRocketman II said:

 

Collective term Volvi.

[vikingTON]

1 hour ago, 19QOS19 said:

 

 

 

You're missing my main point here though. The cancellations today are directly related to Stonehaven. Or to put it another way - if Stonehaven hadn't happened, trains would absolutely be running today. As I said earlier, it's taken for people to die before they act more 'cautiously' - (I'm being very diplomatic with my wording here). The infrastructure hasn't suddenly got worse, no. But it was poor/outdated long before Stonehaven and a disaster like that was always going to happen unfortunately. It should have been the wake-up call needed to get things up to standard. In Network Rail's defence, there have been some major work down here in regards to securing sidings and cutting away trees. But there needs to be a lot more done and the whole Network is still below par.

If they ran as normal in weather like this (which they generally did before Stonehaven) and there was another major incident then heads would roll this time, which is why they'll be shutting things down. Again, it's not a long term solution though.

See above.

 

 

There is no significant risk of a Stonehaven type incident, caused by a windstorm.

It is not 'extra caution' then: it is an irrational comparison of apples and oranges. 

[vikingTON]

1 hour ago, Caledonian1 said:

^^ Never happy unless there is something to moan about (see Covid thread for near two years)The previous storms: Arwen, Malik and Corrie were pretty much three, fifty year storms in a two month period - the devastation to forests, esp in the North East, has to be seen to be believed....I still can't drive my preferred route into Aberdeen as the road is still closed as they clear more unsafe / over-hanging fallen trees.  Arwen was a Red warning and Malik and Corrie should have been the same - incredibly dangerous situations for pretty much all modes of transport

Two of three were not 50 year storms and did not merit a higher category of warning. The Met Office have a publically available matrix to determine their importance - and they did not pass that test.

Many more significant storms have happened before and will happen again. Unless Scotrail's managers plan on relocating the entire country to the Dordogne, it is their job to deal with that effectively. 

Indeed the rail services operated just fine in the western half of the country during all three storms that you mention. 

Quote

You want a skeleton service - falling trees / landslips could happen and whether you have 5 trains running or 555 the consequences could be catastrophic

As would be the consequences of a road accident, or a plane crash. We do not shut down road systems and airports though, just because a company executive decides nah that's too much risk for today. 

A skeleton service is absolutely essential to get members of the public who do have to travel to where they need to be. That is the actual responsibility of a company that claims to be concerned above all else with keeping people safe. Instead they have ditched them and failed to secure any alternative transport whatsoever. 

Quote

Considerable numbers now work from home or at least have the ability to work from home so I cant see the issue with the forewarning given out.

Try and cheer yourself up by returning to the Covid thread and spreading your positivity there.........

Your gormless cheerleading for Third World-esque public services in Scotland and I'm alright Jack attitudes were certainly prominent on that thread too.

Edited February 16, 2022 by vikingTON

[19QOS19]

There is no significant risk of a Stonehaven type incident, caused by a windstorm.
It is not 'extra caution' then: it is an irrational comparison of apples and oranges. 

If Stonehaven hadn't happened, trains would have been running today is what I'm saying. Take from that statement of fact what you will.

[DiegoDiego]

If Stonehaven hadn't happened, trains would have been running today is what I'm saying. Take from that statement of fact what you will.

That's not a fact though.

[mac.i]

2 hours ago, virginton said:

There is no significant risk of a Stonehaven type incident, caused by a windstorm.

It is not 'extra caution' then: it is an irrational comparison of apples and oranges. 

Stonehaven was a derailment, trees on the line can cause a derailment.......... 

Derailment can cause death or injury. 

The trains in the Central belt are now mainly electric powered which adds its own fun in the wind. Trees on the overheads, trees taking down the overheads, overheads oscillating in the wind and a train bringing them down. Which leads to all sorts of issues with trains stuck outside stations and such like. Not as extreme as the worst case above but could also need already stretched emergency services to attend and assist. 

I tend to agree that there is possibly a bit too much caution but as I've said I understand why they make the decision. It's not until you have experienced someone passing away "on your watch" that you know the feeling. I was lucky "mine" turned out to be a medical cause but the days until I heard were horrific. 

Driver Brett McCullough, 45, conductor Donald Dinnie, 58, and passenger Christopher Stuchbury, 62, were just going about their normal day....... 

[Jim McLean's Ghost]

3 minutes ago, mac.i said:

Stonehaven was a derailment, trees on the line can cause a derailment.......... 

Derailment can cause death or injury. 

The trains in the Central belt are now mainly electric powered which adds its own fun in the wind. Trees on the overheads, trees taking down the overheads, overheads oscillating in the wind and a train bringing them down. Which leads to all sorts of issues with trains stuck outside stations and such like. Not as extreme as the worst case above but could also need already stretched emergency services to attend and assist. 

I tend to agree that there is possibly a bit too much caution but as I've said I understand why they make the decision. It's not until you have experienced someone passing away "on your watch" that you know the feeling. I was lucky "mine" turned out to be a medical cause but the days until I heard were horrific. 

Driver Brett McCullough, 45, conductor Donald Dinnie, 58, and passenger Christopher Stuchbury, 62, were just going about their normal day....... 

It isn't even that windy mate.

Planes are still flying. Cancelling trains today for a yellow warning is a complete joke

[19QOS19]

That's not a fact though.

You choose to believe that if you want.

[Todd_is_God]

11 minutes ago, mac.i said:

Derailment can cause death or injury. 

Lots of things can cause a derailment.

The solution, clearly, is just to ban trains.

[mac.i]

7 minutes ago, Jim McLean's Ghost said:

It isn't even that windy mate.

Planes are still flying. Cancelling trains today for a yellow warning is a complete joke

So far I'm in agreement.... unfortunately they make decisions on the forecasts so folks don't end up standing in a station wondering if/ when there will be a train.