“Mutiny on the trains”

Trains in south-east London were held up after a passenger pressed the emergency button and got off when their train was held outside a station.

It resulted in several people following suit and jumping onto the tracks near Lewisham station. Passengers reported seeing several people running onto the tracks.

Southeastern Railway said the situation was getting worse “because several people are jumping off trains onto the tracks”, warning that it would only cause further delays.

_{Passengers pressed the button for the emergency door release CREDIT: @AMYTHEGEEK/TWITTER}

Southeastern said on Twitter "All routes through Lewisham are now at a stand after a passenger held on a train outside the station, operated the emergency door release and went onto the track.

“As a precaution, all lines through the station are currently blocked and no trains able to run. Please be patient.”

_{CREDIT: @KEIMAPAYTON/TWITTER}

_{Passengers were letting themselves off Southeastern trains CREDIT: @BILLYQUITH/TWITTER}

The railway operator warned passengers not to try the same thing, saying “it’ll make it far worse for EVERYONE and you won’t get home any quicker”.

The police and fire service were drafted in to help deal with the disruption.

The incident caused power to be switched off on the trains.

“If you’re on a stuck train outside a station and tempted to leave the train. DON’T! We won’t run trains thru the area until we know everyone is off the track - the more people on the track, the longer this’ll take. If you see someone about to do it, TELL THEM NOT TO”, Southeastern tweeted.

_{Many people chose to walk along the tracks rather than remain stuck on their trains CREDIT:@V0IDAL/TWITTER}

A Southeastern spokesman said: "There are currently severe delays to trains in the Lewisham area following a serious trespass incident.

"Several passengers have forced open the doors on a train and disembarked while it was stopped outside of the station.

"We’ve had to turn the power off for safety reasons, and Southeastern staff are currently working closely with Network Rail and the Police to clear the trespassers from the tracks so that we can get trains moving again.

"We completely understand that passengers on delayed and busy trains may be frustrated, but they simply must stay on the train for their own safety.

“These trespassers risk being electrocuted by the ‘third’ rail or hit by other trains. They’re also causing significant further delay for other passengers that our staff are working hard to get home.”

Selfish,selfish people.

Arseholes

Presumably those daft enough to both have taken part and tweeted about it could be prosecuted and fined.

Beautifully put mate. Some people just need to be told about themselves.

Some real princesses on Twitter tonight whining about this I must say.

Over on Reddit:

image1125×541 209 KB

It’s a side note, but I think it’s interesting the way this is being reported with words like “mutiny” or “rebellion”. I think this sort of thing gives an act of criminal trespass and utter selfishness an undeserving glamorous air.

The SE railway twitter account (from what I saw) was really good at responding to things and providing updates. I worry that as consumers, we can all be a bit unsympathetic when we see a crisis. Is waiting on a busy train for an hour really so bad? It’s inconvenient and obviously we’d all want as much info as we can get in such a situation, but it’s not like being locked up in the Bangkok Hilton prison, is it?

Reflecting on it, I’ve felt some cognitive dissonance myself this week - I didn’t expect my boss to demand me in the office, but I’ve expected others to keep working through challenging circumstances.

And obviously there are engineering issues with London trains below a certain temp as a result of decisions made in the 1920’s. But at the end of the day, this happens so rarely that we maybe just need to roll with it.

My friend was on that train and sensibly stayed put. She was rewarded with a message from Luke Skywalker!

image1080×1920 161 KB

I think it’s easy from the comfort of our own armchairs to say they should have stayed on the train and how selfish it was of them to get off. I have read other accounts of what happened and it sounds horrible. If you had been forced to stand squashed up next to other people for 3 hours with no access to a toilet, no way to sit down, on a cold dark train, no idea how long the ordeal would last, with very little communication from train staff and the station in sight just a few feet away, you might do something irrational. For anyone with claustrophobia it must have been hideous. It was an awful situation that shouldn’t have happened in the first place. So I am not going to judge because it wasn’t me who had to endure that.

And the you get off and stand on a live rail. Still, they got off but what about the other people on other trains who now have to suffer further delay whilst suffering the same conditions?

So this is the time line I have been looking for. 1 hr 10 mins from the initial stop, to the first person getting off.

Due to the first person getting off, the rest of the situation unfolded.
Not sure what the flow of information was like from South Eastern during that first hour, but judging by their twitter feed, I would think not too bad.

I agree it is easy to be an armchair spectator, I know, however had there been any medical emergencies during this time, I am sure LAS HART and LFB would have been happier dealing with a much smaller scale evacuation of a patient.
Unfortunately they were all caught up in a massive effort last night.

Interested to know how many got off due to panic, and how many more got off due to impatience.

A Network Rail spokesperson said: "At 5.35pm this evening, a train came to a stand near Lewisham Station due to ice on the conductor rail.

Our team were on site manually de-icing the rail when at 6.45pm passengers began climbing off the train and onto the tracks.

I don’t really think this is an easy situation to be overly judgemental about unless you were on the train. Of course we all know what the correct behaviour is in that situation and would like to think that’s how we would respond but it was a pretty extreme and awful situation for all those passengers. From photos I have seen it looked like an already overcrowded train - I get mildly claustrophobic standing on crowded trains and on the odd occasions a train has been held up for even say 5-10mins (e.g. waiting outside London Bridge during the refurb) I’ve struggled with a feeling of impending panic attacks / light headedness etc.

Now imagine that situation - overcrowded train, not moving for OVER AN HOUR, no information forthcoming - and throw in no power, freezing temperatures and no access to toilets or drinking water etc. I don’t want to imagine it because it’s literally one of my worst nightmares. I agree that the actions of the people who jumped off is dangerous and selfish, but I couldn’t swear in those circumstances I wouldn’t have reacted the same way once a few people had done it.

I think there’s a wider question of if/when trains should be running. I think Joey H mentioned that the advice was not to travel unless essential - but what does that mean really - is getting to/from work essential? Either the conditions were safe for South Eastern to run the service or they weren’t and from the accounts of the people on board their management of the situation was utterly shambolic.

Subtle change in Southeastern Trains posture in a report on the BBC website.

Southeastern has apologised after Friday night’s train incidents at Lewisham.

“We understand the conditions were extremely difficult for them …”

They also make the point that those passengers who evacuated the trains posed “a significant risk to their safety”.

The independent Rail Accident Investigation Branch will conduct its investigation - hence the change.

Perhaps all judgements should be held in abeyance until the RAIB reports on the facts of the matter and on who did what and to whom.

@Joey_H any idea why the train couldn’t crawl along at half a mile per hour until it reached the platform to let the passengers off?

The RAIB will almost certainly ask that same question.

At least one report says that track engineers attended on site to de-ice the third rail some 80 minutes after the first report.

So for that train, creeping forward probably was not an option whilst track engineers were present.

From what I was reading it had no contact to draw power through. Probably got that wrong, but was the impression I got. The line was live, but the current couldn’t pass into the train.

A lot of the comments above were saying that people getting off the train meant the 3rd rail had to be shut down thereby killing power to the train. But if the train had no electrical contact with the 3rd rail, then already there would’ve been no power inside the train.

Was the issue that it killed power to that train or to other trains behind it on the line? In any case, people on the train (and we armchair commentators) wouldn’t be in a position to know what was chicken and what was egg in terms of denying power to the train, weather or passenger action.

If it is true that engineers were manually de-icing the conductor rail then it seems likely to me the power was isolated already.

I agree that waiting for the accident board investigation report is prudent before drawing conclusions.

Civil disobedience is sometimes justified and sometimes productive. I was in Paris one Friday afternoon, waiting for a train. Regular users of the service were complaining that as usual the train had too few carriages. Several of them got down on the track blocking departure of the train. The station master came and remonstrated with the protesters. The upshot was that an additional carriage was shunted round and fixed to the train. No hysteria, no arrests, no accusations of trespass. Everyone got a seat and the train even managed to make up some of the time from its delayed departure.

Ah, French Résistance.

Lucky Londoners don’t get on the tracks every time we get a bit miffed - no trains would get anywhere - although I wouldn’t blame drivers for giving it a try (I can tolerate a bumpy ride).

Yep. Without condoning it I can see how it happened. I tried to board one of those trains at London Bridge but couldn’t squash on. Thank goodness. They were packed like sardines. Must have been very distressing.

An actual account from a passenger, which explains in great detail what happened inside the carriages.

That’s a sobering read. And contradicts the Southeasten timeline that suggests just over an hour between the train stopping and the passengers breaking out.

It’s also a somewhat political read, with several mentions of classic anti-privatisation cliches like “fat cat bonuses” - which makes me somewhat suspicious of the author’s bias.

Someone’s experience can be real even if their politics don’t chime with yours, Chris. And it’s a paranoid world you live in if you assume that such reports will inevitably be skewed to the point of falsehood. I’m assuming you wouldn’t have made such a comment if the political bias had agreed with your own.

I’d assume there are several hundreds of other passengers plus the emergency services who will be able to corroborate this account when the time cones.

The author starts his post with:

So Southeastern rail has infiltrated the major media companies and has manipulated all their reports?

That sounds a bit paranoid to me.

I would suggest that there will always be an element of such language in any story, especially one written in the wake of such an emotional experience.

While I don’t agree with the actions taken that evening, I respect anyone choosing to express themselves. Disagreement with the language used, doesn’t make what happened any less real.

@anon5422159 Fair point, but the level of specific detail in this report is easily verifiable. I started out reading it with an open mind (that opening phrase also made me wary) but the reminder of the actual physical challenges of being confined in those conditions for so long was what really struck a chord with me. I don’t care who owns Southeastern, those people should have been evacuated sooner.

It would have been great if they had. But they are the victims of situation exacerbated by people who forced open doors and stepped out onto the track, causing all power to be shut off.

I’m sure the fire brigade attended as quickly as the could, but in a situation like the last few days where everyone is struggling to get to work, and to get around London, I can completely understand why it took several hours.

I don’t think we know yet if that is the entire story. That was the point of my comment about timelines. If the first passengers broke out after an hour, why was the evacuation not started for a further two hours? We do not know.

In any case, the point of my comment was that the account was sobering in terms of what people were experiencing. Can we at least agree on that?

Having tried and failed to get onto one of those overcrowded trains at London Bridge, and seen with my own eyes how tightly packed everyone standing was, I can complete understand how people reacted irrationally.

A very telling account.

I do not know how an RAIB will contact potential passenger witnesses (or even if they do) but I trust the author Robin Clarke’s evidence will be heard. It is very relevant.

But what I do know is the RAIB will check:

Networks Rails incident reporting system which will have recorded what trains stopped where, when and for how long. It will also report on when the power was isolated and most importantly for what reason.

It will examine Southeastern’s records. This will include, at least from the more modern train a record of the quality of the power supply and any evidence of interruption of that supply. It will also examine the communications logs between its driver’s and them.

It will examine the infrastructure maintainer’s logs - when were they instructed to attend on site and what actions did they undertake.

Then the first responders’ logs will be checked.

They will then draw up a master time-line and cross-check timings to ensure they have an accurate picture.

The author refers to the poor quality of responses by Southeastern on Twitter during the incident - that will be a very significant point in the investigation.

Investigator’s will not be impressed by its evident quality or the nature and language employed. The operator is obliged to maintain and operate good communications with all parties involved in an incident.

As was said in earlier post - let the RAIB do its job. We will then have an accurate picture of the incidents.

That question needs to be directed at a combination of Network Rail, the Fire Brigade and Southeastern Rail. All of which, I’m sure, were stretched to breaking point that day, with a shortage rather than surplus of staff.

I had a look at his facebook profile and there is only one politician or political organisation in his list of likes. There is no reason to doubt the truth of what this individual has said, or the anger he feels towards the people he feels are responsible for his inhumane treatment.

Yup, definitely some paranoid thinking

Indeed, and when I said the timeline of this report contradicted that of Southeastern, I didn’t say it made liars out of the company, nor the opposite, that the blog report is in some way fraudulent. What the blog report does is tell us the experience in the train, and the assumptions passengers made based on the information they had. That is naturally a limited perspective. That does not, I repeat, negate the human sympathy I feel for people in that situation and my reaction to your first comment to me was made in that light.

But if I read the blog correctly this passenger is suggesting the power was switched off well before the prison break so that rail staff could manually de-ice the line. By this point they were about 2hrs into the delay and with the power off had no light or heat. So South Eastern’s line of “the passengers forced us to turn the power off” seems like at best it might be a somewhat disingenuous attempt to deflect blame and at worst a deliberate smear.

Let’s hope the truth will come out and most importantly that no passengers are ever subjected to an experience even remotely close to this in future.

Earlier, passengers forced their way out the train onto the tracks, causing power to be turned off as a precaution - but some passengers remained on the train - and on subsequent trains. I think the author of this blog post was one of those people.

Imagine for a moment this scenario - Southeastern suggests they all disembark after power is deactivated, and then in the dark, in the panic, on icy tracks, one member of the public slips and breaks their wrist, or worse. Suddenly, Southeastern is responsible for this injury.

In modern litigious times, companies have to be cautious - over-cautious IMO. And passengers are sometimes the victims.

It sounded like a truly no-win scenerio on these trains for both the passengers and the rail company.

That’s why I objected to the blog author being opportunistic and trying to score some political points.

His blog, his prerogative. Who are we to say he is not allowed to reflect how his experience chimes with his politics?

In any case, what you said earlier was that his political framing of his post made you doubt its veracity. That’s a very different statement.

Moving away from the “was it political or not” discussion and back to the matter at hand…

Going back off topic for a moment, the blogger claims to have been on the train, therefore is a “real life” account, any other suggestions or comments from those not on the train would be conjecture.
Making a couple of fat cat comments doesn’t make something political to me, it instead echos frustrations of someone who had a bad time, and is a way to very, rather than blaming the staff involved.

Oh, don’t get me wrong, the politicking still makes the author’s account feel less plausible (although I’m not suggesting it’s entirely untrue).

Why? Because those who want to nationalise the rails will naturally talk up any failure of a privatised system. Like Corbyn did with his allegedly staged social media posts sitting on the floor in a Virgin train.

Some really interesting observations about historical detraining incidents in this blog post; just saw it on Twitter so can’t vouch for the info, but the author certainly seems knowledgeable:

@jonfrewin a very timely article, that:

I have to say, the idea of privatisation didn’t even enter my mind when following this story. Nor politics for that matter.
Sometimes comments are made which could be considered political, with no political intentions whatsoever. Sometimes it is as simple as frustration and expression.

Not sure how this has somehow become based on a persons politics. I simply read an account from someone very frustrated with what they had just endured, with a couple of vague snipes at the older stock which they were told should have been updated.

@anon30031319 I was responding to Rachael

I get that. On a public forum, so I commented.
Seems a few comments had been made re political stance adding or detracting to the validity of someones accounts. I disagree.

Yes, you made that point twice already.

Indeed, and in the second reply I went into more detail as to why I held those beliefs, based on posts after mine.
Lets not start the “you had your say” stuff again please.

I disagree with you, that is ok, you say it has political motivation, I don’t agree.

Shall we get back on with the topic now?

As this has become a political topic…

I find the use of a) fat cat bonuses and b) distrust of our TOCs fairly politically agnostic. The use of a) can be found numerous times in the headlines of media of colourful hues including the deep blue titles like the Daily Telegraph. Discussion on b) is fairly consistent from both left and right.

I’m sure there will be many who will make political ammunition of this, and are doing so already. Though if this is down to negligent activity and bad management of this issue then I would hope that this transcends politics and that people on all sides of the spectrum seek for a better solution to our transport crisis.

Totally agree with you @starman - this incident is about management, sheer bad luck and terrible circumstances on the day and has nothing to do with politics, “fat cat bonuses” or what Chris Grayling had for dinner.

Agreed - for those who wish to explore any political contributors or consequences of this event, I would politely remind you that @general_politics is that-a-way

Given the thousands of people who were caught up in this, I would love to see how many more have shared their experiences online. The one above certainly caught the headlines, but there must be more.

Will be interested to see the official word when the preliminary investigation is completed, and how it compares with the reports and rumours from the other side.

Either way, lets hope a huge lesson is learned from all of this.

Is there an formal investigation?

You would have to assume so. Something like that can’t happen and just be swept under the carpet.
@anon51837532 mentioned the RAIB earlier in the thread. Any further knowledge of that John?

Poor old SouthEastern really are struggling at the moment.

That said, there are reports from all over regarding their rolling stock.

Apart from early press reports and some industry specific blogs about the fact that an RAIB had been instigated there has been no official acknowledgement on the GOV.UK site.

Process dictates that Network Rail, Southeastern Trains and BTP have to report a de-training incident of this gravity.

RAIB then decide what action to take.

They come pre-prepared with powers to enter all properties and seize all records related to the incident(s).

In another authorised de-training incident in London, where the supervising staff realised the 3rd rail had not been fully isolated before the evac had commenced and passengers were already on the track, in November 2017, the RAIB preliminary report was published only weeks later in December 2017.

These incidents are treated very seriously.

Round 2 !!

Update however from SE

That Evening Standard article has been corrected.

Thanks for pointing it out, SE got some angry responses because of that.

So… they can’t check whether you were on the train… right?

lol I would guess it would be for those who touched in AND out only.

This is conversation I had with colleague this morning who lives out in Chelmsford. She has a season ticket. Claimed as her trains were cancelled. Didn’t travel into work later (as more cancelled or delayed etc) and we were allowed to work from home. Already has money in account. Wouldn’t make up for lost wages as only £58 if had less flexible job but helps towards huge season ticket cost. But didnt have to prove was at station (Which I believe wasnt)
Aware different train company not SouthEastern but interesting how different companies dealing with it.

I may be wrong, butting seems to me that if you have a season ticket you are paying in advance for service for that period whether you use it or not. If service is unavailable, then the compensation is technically a refund on part of the price of the season ticket. Whether you actually intended to travel on that day is irrelevant. You’ve already paid for the possibility that you might.

I’ve read all your comments, all valid in their own way.
I heard I think on the news that an old train in front of the one that was stuck had lost power because of the ice etc, so couldn’t proceed any further, so held the train behind up. I also heard that a young man on the train had a panic attack, wanted to get off & subsequently spooked the other passengers. I can’t say I blame them for wanting to get off, apart from it being cramped, cold, dark, they must have been also very tired & frustrated. Surely the fire brigade & NR could have got there sooner to release them.
Also on the above point I have a friend who will not go anywhere near a packed train, or go on tubes at certain times as she knows she will get in a panic, so if she had been on there as she just had no other means of getting home that night, she would have done exactly the same thing. I like to think she just wouldn’t have got on the train when it wasn’t so packed, but these situations just can’t always be avoided when you are tired, cold & just want to get home.

I am exactly the same, not a nice feeling at all.

Full of admiration for those on the train who managed to remain as calm as they did for as long as they did.

In the 80’s I was involved in a shunt at Kensal Rise.

I was on a local train which ran into and over the back carriage of a stationary underground train. Some of you may remember the rather dramatic pictures.

Many lives were saved that day by the prescience of the underground guard who had walked back up the track and spotted the oncoming train, ran back to his unit and rapidly evacuated everyone as far forward as he was able.

But back on topic - it took me more than a year to re-learn to remain calm any time a train stopped outside a station for more than a few minutes and to convince myself there was no danger.

So once more, fair play to those who maintained even a modicum of calm.

This would suggest serious questions are going to be asked. And seemingly, the right sort of questions.

Have received an update that RAIB will complete their Preliminary Examination Review and the outputs will be considered by a senior panel today. This panel will decide on what course of action will be taken next.

Their decision will be published later this week.

On a point I raised myself earlier about witness engagement, RAIB have already collected evidence published on electronic media by witnesses/passengers. Accounts of events linked to this forum have been examined also.

Fantastic news, the findings will be interesting for sure.

In trying not to pre-judge RAIB outcomes, i was not as clear as I should have been.

The outcomes could take one of three courses, - decide to conduct a full investigation, decide to publish a safety digest (a briefer summary of recommendations based on known facts) or make no further enquiries.

I have no foresight as to any decision that will be made today…

RAIB have announced formally this afternoon (13 Mar 2018) at 15:00 that they will investigate the events following the stranding of trains in freezing weather, near Lewisham, 2 March 2018.

Following a preliminary examination of the circumstances surrounding the events near Lewisham on Friday 2 March 2018, the Rail Accident Investigation Branch (RAIB) has decided to launch a full investigation. Further details of the investigation and its scope will be published on the RAIB’s website within the next fortnight.

Link to announcement here:

Investigation into the events following the stranding of trains in freezing weather

Cheers for the update.

Interesting angle on the matter. Sure to infuriate some.

Very interesting - another version of events from a single point of view.

This will test RAIB to sort out the conflicts in these reports - but that is what they do.

Noticeably the SE tweet on the News Shopper piece is timed at 21:15 and refers to the train leaving Charing X at 17:10 some 4+ hours earlier. That’s a long wait.

If you page back to SE tweets on 2 March - they make their first report of ice forming on the on the third rail at 11:16 - some six hours before the departure of the 17:10.

The investigation will draw up an authoritative timeline - the RAIB will also look at the News Shopper report and probably enquire as to the accuracy of the SE statements made to council.

It has been said before - let the investigation be made and report be written.

Whatever the report says its a little disappointing our labour councillors seem to have prematurely fallen on the side of big business rather than the stranded commuter without hesitation.

It’s not as simple as “big business” vs commuter.

By most accounts it looks like “selfish commuter” vs “trapped commuter”

The train company tried to restore power five times in order that trains could move - on all occasions, passengers trespassing on the tracks meant the power could not be restored.

As I said in my earlier post, I went back to look at SE tweets on 2 March.

I had recall of seeing this one embedded in Robin Clarke’s blog.

image636×524 78.6 KB

I cannot see it now on the SE history.

Am i mistaken - have I gone word blind - or is SE selectively altering what the published record should show.

It’s a matter of interest what they post on Twitter, and what they delete. But deleting tweets is not the same as falsifying official records.

Did not use those words and it is worth repeating I could be mistaken.

The comments from that councillor do present as being that simple and my concern is that its something for a newspaper or forum to prejudge the output of a report but our elected representatives should not be.

With regard to the wider issues I personally think its important not to judge either side too harshly or too early in this relatively extreme situation. Doing so risks unintended consequences such as no trains on snow days.

Without having been on that train I cannot say I wouldn’t have done the same thing, and we cannot realistically judge the health and safety risk from the comfort of our keyboards. Maybe conditions were so bad on the train they were indeed better off evacuating, only people on the train could make that judgement. Maybe they weren’t, either way it clearly felt that way to people.

Equally I can’t say the rail companies did a bad job or shouldn’t have run trains. Would it have been better to abandon these people at London bridge? Should the trains have not run at all that day? Of course not, we can’t stop everything just because of some snow as people still need to get to work and if we cancel things because there might be an issue people will be forced to take a bigger risk by driving into work.

As with every incident there are lessons to be learnt but I’ll struggle to accept the blame being put onto passengers (customers would be a better word). Whatever actions they decided to take (right or wrong) were a consequence of the conditions they were in and the communications they were given. Given you can’t lock people into carriages the only way we’ll avoid the repeat of this is to address those two issues.

Deleting tweets doesn’t falsify accounts, but it does remove from public record elements of the timeline that could be crucial. I’m guessing that one was deleted because it was expressed in a, let’s say, inappropriate way.

Deleted tweets are never really gone. There’s always someone with a screen shot.

Given the above tweet I don’t think we can say:

“I think [Southeastern] probably did the best that it could.”

Dan

An update published by RAIB today.

Some preliminary hard facts and a narrative about the conduct of the detailed investigation.

Some timings and precise locations are present and this comment about elements that will be investigated:

“how passengers were briefed and kept informed, including the part played by mobile phones and social media”

Its a bit of a trawl to get through - indicative perhaps of how thorough RAIB will be.

Looks like the report timeline backs up the fact that passengers deliberate actions (unauthorised exits from the train) delayed the waiting trains from reaching the platform due to the resulting emergency power shut-off.

Regardless of what Southeastern did or didn’t tweet, the passengers actions put their own lives in danger and forced a far worse fate on other passengers.

The investigation continues. Maybe it will find that the driver instructed the passengers to disembark the train, say? In which case the passengers can’t be blamed for the situation.

But as things stand, it’s looking like their actions exacerbated a difficult situation.

Fascinating insight Chris. From what evidence did you draw these conclusions about passenger actions. As for your conjecture about the driver’s action - do you have a source that you want to share with RAIB about your stated certainties ?

As wiser heads have said on here - let’s wait for the investigation to be conducted.

Was that really called for?

Well, from the evidence in the link that you yourself posted - where it clearly states that the 16:26 was prevented from being able to pull into the station for detrainment at ~18:30 by people jumping off the train. The remaining passengers then had to wait a further 1.5 hours to be evacuated.

The fact that the passengers took these actions is undeniable - the reasons why they felt compelled to take these actions I guess is part of the investigation.

I presume you mean me.

Is @anon5422159 to be given the freedom to speculate without any evidential base whilst you elect to take me to task.

This commentary is more appropriate. The RAIB statement is theirs - not mine. So common wisdom would say - let’s wait for the RAIB conclusions .

There will probably be many factors to emerge - mitigating and incriminatory - before presumptive statements.are published.

My OP was informative. I expressed no views on its content - and I would invite you to look closely at it.

I have to agree. I have repeatedly been told not to repeat my comments, or make running commentary with nothing new to add. To me, that is what I see Chris doing here, as the same assumptions were made much earlier in the post too.

@anon51837532 however is offering newer information, and questioning the validity of speculation, which we all know is not helpful at the best of times.

While I frown at the actions of the people on the trains that night, I was neither there, nor am privy to the finer details which the report is looking into.

It is clear that people were stuck on a very packed train. Heating was switched off. Little information from the driver (not blaming the driver).

It was a shambles by the operators

Switched off? Or off because the power had to be turned off due to trespassers on the track?

I find this discussion extraordinary. There are no - repeat, no - circumstances in which it is acceptable for passengers to decide for themselves to get off a train and walk along a track - especially at night, especially in snow. The only exception would be if lives were in peril by remaining on the train - if it were on fire, for example.

Walking along a track with a live third rail is sheer bloody madness. You could trip on a sleeper and fall on the rail. The person behind you could trip - knocking you onto the live rail.

I don’t care how uncomfortable it was on the train. If someone is suffering from claustrophobia, or feeling faint, give them a seat and give them as much comfort and reassurance as possible. But stay on the bloody train.

Send a text to British Transport Police. Call BBC London news. Do anything at all. But stay on the train.

You do not want to be the father or mother or brother or sister who is wakened at 4.30am by a police officer at the door who removes their cap and says, “I’m sorry - but may I come in?”

Hi everyone

Just a gentle reminder that moderators decisions, past or present, are not to be discussed openly on threads.

As moderators we will get things right, we will get things wrong, or you may simply disagree with our decisions. All we can promise is that we try to be ‘light touch’ and will make decisions in what we view as the best way forward.

If you believe a post needs moderation it can be flagged, if you believe you (or the thread) have been unfairly moderated you can message the moderators and we will review our decisions.

We’d all love nothing more than to never have to moderate any thread.

Thanks to everyone for their continued input and insights on the forum, and, as it’s now 11.45pm goodnight to all!

Let us now take a calmer look at what is happening here.

As i said some time ago:

anon5183jd:

RAIB then decide what action to take.

They come pre-prepared with powers to enter all properties and seize all records related to the incident(s).

and

anon5183jd:

On a point I raised myself earlier about witness engagement, RAIB have already collected evidence published on electronic media by witnesses/passengers. Accounts of events linked to this forum have been examined also.

The forum and its members have freedom to express its views - both speculative and informative. Interestingly exculpatory comments are consistently ignored by @ChrisBeach

However whatever we see happening on the forum is very different…

The board owner @ChrisBeach elects to reshape every commentary to suit his own view and in many occasions without evidentiary support.

It could be viewed that the appointed @moderators elect to support his views at his behest - and in some cases their actions appear to seek to suppress any counter commentary. Such comments will with some certainty be pre-selected by them to be re-assigned to private messages.

It should be pointed out at the outset that RAIB will and can see such exchanges including private messages.

So what is the point.

Normal commentary from board members have every entitlement to be read and/or commented on by other board members.

The RAIB may form a view that for a board owner who expresses a contrary view to every comment and alludes to the veracity of each comment, may elect to take a closer look as to why these comments are being made and to whom the comments are intended to influence. Particularly if comments from parties such as SE are to be elevated as take precedence without challenge.

It has been the case that commentary on this matter on the forum has been hidden.

Investigators may want to know why. They have the powers to see all public commentary and private messages - and this includes those of @moderators and @ChrisBeach.

It is possible that RAIB may elect to examine why a forum such as se23.life has elected to manipulate realities in this way.

It has been said more than once - @ChrisBeach should desist from further speculative commentary.

The full RAIB report will be published in due course.

And even if this discourse is removed by @moderators - RAIB will be fully informed on its content,

So calm on who’s terms and just who is going to inform the RAIB?

@anon51837532 has made some levelled some serious allegations against the @moderators. In the interests of transparency and to protect the integrity of the board, I hope they will respond publicly (although maybe in a new thread). As a long-time but now retired moderator of this forum, I can say that the idea that this is a fiefdom, with the moderators whipped into line by the owner is entirely wrong. Indeed, @ChrisBeach has made repeated efforts to recruit moderators whom he knows will challenge him and each other. The decision to remove posts from public view was only ever taken as a last resort and to prevent serious breaches of forum rules, or to protect the privacy of forum members. I am baffled by the idea of ‘pre-selection’ of posts for moderation.

The internet is full of unsubstantiated comment and while social media accounts that are direct sources will be taken into account by RAIB, they are unlikely to be looking at everything that was said by people with no expertise or knowledge - which applies to the majority of those in this thread.

Reading your comments on this and other threads, it feels as though you’re not fond of Chris and perhaps get more enjoyment from putting yourself at cross purposes. I do find it odd that you feel that Chris has no right to give personal opinions just because he owns the site. I’d understand if he was commenting as se23 but as it’s under his own name, I think he has much right as anyone else to comment.

The moderators do a fine job of keeping the site friendly. I note your last was written in the early hours so perhaps a fresh head in the morning might help you moderate your own post.

I don’t want to derail this topic any further, so will respond to the accusations above in a separate topic once I’ve been able to liaise with the remaining @moderators. and assuming that all those involved agree to my suggestion.

In the mean time though, I would like to state that should RAIB take an interest in any publically accessible content on this site, then we would naturally cooperate, immediatley and in full.

Any related private messaging however, would only be divulged if consent was given by all parties involved, or if we were presented with the appropriate legal authority. This approach is not to obstruct RAIB, or because the team feels it has has anything to hide, it’s just that private messages should be exactly that, private.

Frankly, if i’d been 4 hours standing crushed up on a train with no loo, i’d have been slamming the train operator too. And it would have been nothing to do with politics. It would have been to do with being in a horrible situation!

Totally concur with this. Yes, I sometimes find that political views flavour occasional posts that could well do with remaining unpolitical, but on this occasion I think people are being targeted unfairly and at great - and unnecessary - length.

Do we honestly think that there could be a nefarious “agenda” simmering away behind the scenes, for which local and community interest provide a worthy front? What the hell would be the point?

The biteback on the mods is unnecessarily aggressive and beginning to put me off this otherwise useful and enjoyable space.

To avoid confusion between the two separate incidents:

3 posts were split to a new topic: Passengers stranded on faulty Southeastern train outside Lewisham for over three hours

Preliminary Railway Gazette magazine item on the findings of a report report commissioned by Southeastern and Network Rail in advance of the official RAIB report.

Findings and recommendations made are:

"It found that:

• the rail industry did not manage the incident in a way that put the needs of passengers first, leading to ‘unacceptable conditions’ on trains which had no or non-functioning toilets;
• the signalling team did not recognise the significance of the incident and react quickly to prevent escalation;
• command and control arrangements were inadequate;
• communications were inadequate;
• a lack of situational awareness meant existing procedures were not followed.

The report makes six recommendations, which NR and Southeastern said they would implement:

• strengthening decision making during bad weather;
• measures to prevent the build-up of ice on the conductor rail;
• reinforced measures to support decision making and communication with passengers to prevent uncontrolled self-evacuation;
• strengthening the ability of staff to prevent stranding incidents and respond rapidly to prevent escalation;
• updating procedures, with a focus on passenger welfare;
• strengthening and testing command and control arrangements."

This comment is mis-placed.

RAIB would not need and thereby not seek any “consent” for the disclosure of ALL messages private or otherwise if they so require it.

Here is a copy of the report which Southeastern and Network Rail jointly commissioned from Southwood Rail Consulting and Arthur D Little.

This report is separate from the independent report being investigated and prepared by RAIB:

Independent Report_Lewisham_Network Rail_Southeastern.pdf (484.6 KB)

The comment is not misplaced, it’s entirely correct. I suggest you read again the post you quoted. Personal messages will not be divulged unless there is a legal requirement to do, or consent from all parties - I’m not sure why you are disagreeing with this? FYI @armadillo is no longer a moderator, so while you quoted his post, that is why I am responded as a moderator. I’ve tagged @armadillo in case he wished to respond, though I don’t think he needs to.

Thank you for your 2 other posts, interesting and it would appear there is some acknowledgement that the situation was not acceptable and could have been handled much better from a passenger perspective. Hopefully changes will be made as it did sound like hell for people stuck on board, effectively stuck between a rock and a hard place as they say.

I believe you to be in error. I need no suggestion from you - peremptory or otherwise.

You seem to ground your belief that your board rules will prevail over the statutory powers invested in the RAIB.

The RAIB exists pre-armed with all necessary powers to demand all copies of of all correspondence, private messages and e-mails and have the required authority to raid such premises as to secure such information if any party erroneously believes it can withhold such data

I referred to such powers in my earlier posts.

Then again you could always check what powers the RAIB has by checking their web-site.

You need not feel bound to accept my position.

As matters stand I can see no position arising whereby RAIB would need to take such draconian action against SE23.life. But it is their call.

Anyway this is derailing the topic needlessly, if you want to discuss this further I’ll move these to moderator actions, if not let’s have all posts back on topic please.

Have a great rest of your weekend.

A more technically orientated piece from New Civil Engineer article in which they reference the major incident that left passengers stuck on trains in “intolerable” conditions at Lewisham during the so-called Beast from the East cold spell.

As the incident progressed, heating was lost, interior lighting began to dim, and people were forced ‘‘to relieve themselves in their clothes’’ in the packed carriages due to lack of toilets, the report said.

Eventually these conditions – and a lack of effective communication from train crews – led some passengers to take matters into their own hands, getting off the trains and walking along the tracks.

The item articulates the consultants’ proposal for Network Rail to consider additional infrastructure measures such as conductor rail heating to prevent build-up of ice on the conductor rail.

Looks like the RAIB report has been published:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/788622/190325_R022019_Lewisham.pdf

There is also coverage in the railway gazette here: