Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Approx 10:00 this morning was greeted by LUL staff at the top of the exits
to announce the Victoria Line was suspended between Walthamstow Central and
Highbury & Islington due to a person under a train.

Contingency plan to walk to the WAGN station was only to be met with staff
who announced their station was also closed "at the request of the BTP"
despite the incident being on the Victoria Line and WAGN trains were
running through non stop. Any ideas why the BTP opted to close that too?

--
Phil Richards
London, UK
Home Page: http://www.philrichards1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 19:51:47 +0000, Phil Richards
wrote:

Approx 10:00 this morning was greeted by LUL staff at the top of the exits
to announce the Victoria Line was suspended between Walthamstow Central and
Highbury & Islington due to a person under a train.

Contingency plan to walk to the WAGN station was only to be met with staff
who announced their station was also closed "at the request of the BTP"
despite the incident being on the Victoria Line and WAGN trains were
running through non stop. Any ideas why the BTP opted to close that too?

A guess but it is virtually impossible to stop people alighting from the
WAGN trains to head to the Tube regardless of how many announcements are
made [1]. Given that, IIRC, the WAGN station stairs and corridors are
not what you would call spacious there may have been concerns about
serious overcrowding in a confined space as people diverting from the
tube ran into the people heading off WAGN trains to the Tube. The other
issue is that the WAGN train frequency is not very high and having to
deal with lots of people waiting for the Tube to resume as well as
people fed up with waiting for a train may have caused concern. Seven
Sisters is so busy that the local buses can overwhelmed very quickly if
the Tube ceases to run into town. As I say a complete guess and what
feels like a bit of an over reaction to me but I wasn't there so don't
know how busy the place was. I may know more tomorrow when I see the
daily report.

The only alternative is that there was a crime of some sort in the
vicinity of the WAGN station.

[1] I've seen this too many times at Walthamstow Central when the Vic
Line service has collapsed and everyone is trying to get to Liverpool
St.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Paul Corfield wrote:

Contingency plan to walk to the WAGN station was only to be met with staff
who announced their station was also closed "at the request of the BTP"
despite the incident being on the Victoria Line and WAGN trains were
running through non stop. Any ideas why the BTP opted to close that too?

A guess but it is virtually impossible to stop people alighting from the
WAGN trains to head to the Tube regardless of how many announcements are
made [1]. Given that, IIRC, the WAGN station stairs and corridors are
not what you would call spacious there may have been concerns about
serious overcrowding in a confined space as people diverting from the
tube ran into the people heading off WAGN trains to the Tube. The other
issue is that the WAGN train frequency is not very high and having to
deal with lots of people waiting for the Tube to resume as well as
people fed up with waiting for a train may have caused concern.

Although I don't use Seven Sisters on a daily basis (Turnpike Lane is my
local station) this isn't the first time I've turned up to find the
Victoria Line closed including at least three times during the Piccadilly
Line closure back in the Summer. However I've never found the WAGN station
closed as well.

Seven Sisters is so busy that the local buses can overwhelmed very
quickly if the Tube ceases to run into town.

Absolutely and you couldn't get on a 259 or 279 towards Manor House, so a
long walk thus endured.

I may know more tomorrow when I see the daily report.

If you could let us know that'll be great.

The only alternative is that there was a crime of some sort in the
vicinity of the WAGN station.

Possible, but the Police activity seemed to be centred on the Victoria
Line. No sign of cordoning off the WAGN station entrance on Seven Sisters
Road. The exact words I got told at the WAGN station was closed was a
Police request and not overcrowding.

[1] I've seen this too many times at Walthamstow Central when the Vic
Line service has collapsed and everyone is trying to get to Liverpool
St.

One wonders how the lines into Liverpool Street ever coped pre-Victoria
line days.

--
Phil Richards
London, UK
Home Page: http://www.philrichards1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Well into this incident LU passengers were being allowed to use NB
trains to reach Seven Sisters prior to the train stabling in
Northumberland Park Depot, even though the 'official' view was nothing
running north of Highbury. WAGN actually asked if LU wanted more trains
to call at their part of the station.

I wonder if the decision to close the NR platforms had at least
something to do with the fact that it was easier for local managemwent
to deal with the incident without the "inconvenience" of those pesky
passengers. Fair enough maybe when a life is at stake, but not when the
person has been pronounced dead and is safely screened from the route
from NR to street.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Phil Richards wrote:

Approx 10:00 this morning was greeted by LUL staff at the top of the exits
to announce the Victoria Line was suspended between Walthamstow Central and
Highbury & Islington due to a person under a train.

Contingency plan to walk to the WAGN station was only to be met with staff
who announced their station was also closed "at the request of the BTP"
despite the incident being on the Victoria Line and WAGN trains were
running through non stop. Any ideas why the BTP opted to close that too?


Probably being a pedant, but do WAGN serve Seven Sisters?

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:45:55 GMT, Meeeee
wrote:




Probably being a pedant, but do WAGN serve Seven Sisters?

You beat me to it. Despite the signs that LUL display signs directing
people to the WAGN station.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Thu, 1 Dec 2005 22:28:47 +0000, Phil Richards
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:

I may know more tomorrow when I see the daily report.

If you could let us know that'll be great.

There was nothing in the report to say that the WAGN part of the station
was closed so no more info.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

No idea about why NR didnt stop at Seven Sisters.
However I can tell anyone it wasn't anything to do with 'pesky passengers'.
My main reason on this thread is to tell you that the T/Op who was on 'the'
train has suffered quite considerably. Unfortunately for him, this was his
third person on the tracks at SVS, in exactly the same place. He returned to
full duty on Tuesday after the last incident.
As you come into platform 5 at SVS, there is a bend, the previous 2
occasions have been 'near miss' incidents, where he has spotted a person in
the tunnel, as he has come round the bend at normal line speed. Quick action
on his part ensured stopped on the previous 2 occasions. I dealt with one of
these instances. Luckily i was not at work on Thursday, a bad day for the
Vic all over the place.
This chap is not a softy. But after this one, we can only hope he will be ok
to return. I dont know if i would.
Mal

"Ken" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 00:45:55 GMT, Meeeee
wrote:




Probably being a pedant, but do WAGN serve Seven Sisters?

You beat me to it. Despite the signs that LUL display signs directing
people to the WAGN station.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

A guess but it is virtually impossible to stop people alighting from the
WAGN trains to head to the Tube regardless of how many announcements are
made [1].


Probably because the announcements are often complete crap !

I've lost count of the number of times I've heard the familiar...

"Trains on such and such a line are seriously delayed we advice you
to use other routes".

Only to make my way to the platform anyway, find a half empty train
arrives within minutes, and I get to work on time.

People only take notice of announcements if they have a good track
record of accuracy.



--
Edward Cowling London UK

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 09:08:26 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

A guess but it is virtually impossible to stop people alighting from the
WAGN trains to head to the Tube regardless of how many announcements are
made [1].


Probably because the announcements are often complete crap !

Sorry but in the example of that I am most familiar with which is
Walthamstow Central, the announcements have been very clear and people
carry on in robot mode and take no notice. I have even told people
alighting from a One West Anglia train that there's no tube and still
they get off and carry on. It is not always the fault of the station
staff or the driver. Some people will not be told and you cannot assume
that every announcement is telling you something incorrect.

If you were told there was a fire would you ignore it and carry on
towards the hazard?

A bit of balance does no one any harm.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!,,

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

Sorry but in the example of that I am most familiar with which is
Walthamstow Central, the announcements have been very clear and people
carry on in robot mode and take no notice. I have even told people
alighting from a One West Anglia train that there's no tube and still
they get off and carry on. It is not always the fault of the station
staff or the driver. Some people will not be told and you cannot assume
that every announcement is telling you something incorrect.


You mean like on the 7th July telling everyone it was an electrical
problem for at least an hour !!

Something is woefully wrong with communications on our trains. Whether
it means better radios, or a complete revamp, it needs doing.

--
Edward Cowling London UK

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

If you were told there was a fire would you ignore it and carry on
towards the hazard?

A bit of balance does no one any harm.

You've got me ticked off now :-)

Ok, I'll give you an example from the week before last.

Monday - Went to Palmers Green to get the WAGN service to Moorgate. Told
by station announcer that all services were going to Kings Cross because
of problems at Drayton Park - at this half the people trot off for the
bus. When the train comes the driver tells us to ignore all that, as
he's going to Moorgate. We arrive at Finsbury Park to hear lots of
announcements saying it's a Kings Cross train, station board says
Moorgate, driver laughs and tells us they can say what they want, but
he's going to Moorgate - We arrive on time at Moorgate. How about all
those poor sods queuing for the bus at Palmers Green ??!!

Tuesday - Same announcement about problems at Drayton Park and all
services going to Kings Cross. Driver says the same today. We arrive at
Finsbury Park and the station board says Moorgate, the announcer is
hollering Kings Cross, and then the driver.... tells us all to get off
as he's terminating there !!

So please don't get patronising when I say I'd believe Lord Archer is a
saint before I'd take anything said by station announcers as gospel !!

--
Edward Cowling London UK

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

This type of thing is common. It happens all the time
When a problem arises its a dynamic situation, it can fix itself in
seconds...or last an hour. Would you prefer it then if when a problem arose
we anounced that the service will not start for say, an hour. Then if the
problem fixed itself in 5 minutes we would not run trains until the hour
ewas up so that you could say yes, we were right it was an hour?
That way we would always be right. No one would get anywhere but hey....you
would be happy.

Mal

"Edward Cowling London UK" wrote in message
...
In message , Paul Corfield
writes

If you were told there was a fire would you ignore it and carry on
towards the hazard?

A bit of balance does no one any harm.

You've got me ticked off now :-)

Ok, I'll give you an example from the week before last.

Monday - Went to Palmers Green to get the WAGN service to Moorgate. Told
by station announcer that all services were going to Kings Cross because
of problems at Drayton Park - at this half the people trot off for the
bus. When the train comes the driver tells us to ignore all that, as he's
going to Moorgate. We arrive at Finsbury Park to hear lots of
announcements saying it's a Kings Cross train, station board says
Moorgate, driver laughs and tells us they can say what they want, but he's
going to Moorgate - We arrive on time at Moorgate. How about all those
poor sods queuing for the bus at Palmers Green ??!!

Tuesday - Same announcement about problems at Drayton Park and all
services going to Kings Cross. Driver says the same today. We arrive at
Finsbury Park and the station board says Moorgate, the announcer is
hollering Kings Cross, and then the driver.... tells us all to get off as
he's terminating there !!

So please don't get patronising when I say I'd believe Lord Archer is a
saint before I'd take anything said by station announcers as gospel !!

--
Edward Cowling London UK

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:41:29 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

Sorry but in the example of that I am most familiar with which is
Walthamstow Central, the announcements have been very clear and people
carry on in robot mode and take no notice. I have even told people
alighting from a One West Anglia train that there's no tube and still
they get off and carry on. It is not always the fault of the station
staff or the driver. Some people will not be told and you cannot assume
that every announcement is telling you something incorrect.


You mean like on the 7th July telling everyone it was an electrical
problem for at least an hour !!

This has been done to death. I would invite anyone with appropriate
knowledge of the railway who was presented with the events and
information as it came in to reach any other conclusion than the one
about a power problem.

You are making statements with the benefit of hindsight. You were not
present as the events unfolded within the organisation so don't make
simplistic statements.

God help us if there is a next time but I look forward to your
announcements being made on the public address system and on national TV
that completely and fully diagnoses the events given your clear and
obvious omniscience.

Something is woefully wrong with communications on our trains. Whether
it means better radios, or a complete revamp, it needs doing.

As you obviously have the answer to everything as you feel able to offer
criticism so freely then I'm sure the MD of LUL will receive your
proposal with open arms.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:57:27 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

If you were told there was a fire would you ignore it and carry on
towards the hazard?

A bit of balance does no one any harm.

You've got me ticked off now :-)

Good. That makes us equal given your remarks about 7 July which are a
comment too far.

So please don't get patronising when I say I'd believe Lord Archer is a
saint before I'd take anything said by station announcers as gospel !!

Now go and boil your head.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

God help us if there is a next time but I look forward to your
announcements being made on the public address system and on national TV
that completely and fully diagnoses the events given your clear and
obvious omniscience.

Again smart arse patronising comments about the poor old public who have
to travel on these part privatised, part god knows what transport
systems.

We're not talking about a scout jumble sale, where if the tanoy system
doesn't work we all say "good effort" and smile benevolently.

This is the transport for one of the busiest cities in the world !!

There should be not good communications, but first bloody rate
communications at all times. I'm beginning to think the RMT have a point
about striking to get safety issues looked at.... nothing else seems to
get it done.


--
Edward Cowling London UK

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

In message , Mal
writes
This type of thing is common. It happens all the time
When a problem arises its a dynamic situation, it can fix itself in
seconds...or last an hour. Would you prefer it then if when a problem arose
we anounced that the service will not start for say, an hour. Then if the
problem fixed itself in 5 minutes we would not run trains until the hour
ewas up so that you could say yes, we were right it was an hour?
That way we would always be right. No one would get anywhere but hey....you
would be happy.


So you're admitting my point that a huge number of the announcements are
just plain wrong. Maybe that's ok at the local jumble sale, but not on
the public transport system.

Especially after all the smart arse comments about dumb old Joe public
ignoring announcements.

Of course they ignore them! They realise many are complete and utter
crap.

--
Edward Cowling London UK

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Edward Cowling London UK wrote:

Especially after all the smart arse comments about dumb old Joe public
ignoring announcements.

Of course they ignore them! They realise many are complete and utter
crap.

In order to decide that they first have to listen to them. Many don't,
they're too busy chatting or listening to personal stereos or whatever.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 20:00:06 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

God help us if there is a next time but I look forward to your
announcements being made on the public address system and on national TV
that completely and fully diagnoses the events given your clear and
obvious omniscience.

Again smart arse patronising comments about the poor old public who have
to travel on these part privatised, part god knows what transport
systems.

Not patronising at all. You are sitting in judgement. Therefore I assume
you know what needs to be done. What technically has to be done and what
is not being done? What are the safety issues to which you refer?

I'm interested to know given that public address systems are being
replaced or upgraded, we're getting a new integrated radio system
installed, there are the new Home Office sponsored emergency service
radio systems as well. I'm also interested to know what part of the
emergency response to the terrorist events was mishandled where
apparently our communications were so inadequate. Strange that we got
several hundred thousand people off the network without injuring anyone
during that exercise.

I notice you declined to comment on my response to the 7th July
incidents - why is that then? Am I right or do you have evidence that
refutes what I said?

You seem to be confusing equipment with the fluidity of events in the
midst of what was a national emergency. Do you seriously expect
communications to be perfect in such an environment?
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

No Edward...thats not what i said at all.
When an anouncement is put together....its 99% certain its correct. In the
time it takes to get the info to all concerned....and we do have multicall
systems so not 1 person is siting making all the calls, the situation could
change.
I said, Would you prefer each incident had a standard time of closure so
that you could say we were right and be a happy chappy.
You didnt answer.
What jumble sales have you been to?

Mal

"Edward Cowling London UK" wrote in message
...
In message , Mal
writes
This type of thing is common. It happens all the time
When a problem arises its a dynamic situation, it can fix itself in
seconds...or last an hour. Would you prefer it then if when a problem
arose
we anounced that the service will not start for say, an hour. Then if the
problem fixed itself in 5 minutes we would not run trains until the hour
ewas up so that you could say yes, we were right it was an hour?
That way we would always be right. No one would get anywhere but
hey....you
would be happy.


So you're admitting my point that a huge number of the announcements are
just plain wrong. Maybe that's ok at the local jumble sale, but not on the
public transport system.

Especially after all the smart arse comments about dumb old Joe public
ignoring announcements.

Of course they ignore them! They realise many are complete and utter
crap.

--
Edward Cowling London UK

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Edward Cowling London UK wrote:

Monday - Went to Palmers Green to get the WAGN service to Moorgate. Told
by station announcer that all services were going to Kings Cross because
of problems at Drayton Park - at this half the people trot off for the
bus

Which must explain that the commuters of Palmers Green are pretty stupid.
Why do they all start heading for the bus like a heard of sheep? Logical
solution to remain on the WAGN service as far as Finsbury Park, wait for
any updated announcements there and if the Moorgate branch is still closed
then change on to the Tube or buses accordingly.

--
Phil Richards
London, UK
Home Page: http://www.philrichards1.pwp.blueyonder.co.uk

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:41:29 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:

In message , Paul Corfield
writes

Sorry but in the example of that I am most familiar with which is
Walthamstow Central, the announcements have been very clear and people
carry on in robot mode and take no notice. I have even told people
alighting from a One West Anglia train that there's no tube and still
they get off and carry on. It is not always the fault of the station
staff or the driver. Some people will not be told and you cannot assume
that every announcement is telling you something incorrect.


You mean like on the 7th July telling everyone it was an electrical
problem for at least an hour !!

Oh for ****'s sake. The electric surge story was fabricated by the
security services to avoid panic. Of course it wasn't factually
correct, but you can't blame the public transport operators for that.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

In article ,
Ken wrote:
On Sat, 3 Dec 2005 11:41:29 +0000, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:
You mean like on the 7th July telling everyone it was an electrical
problem for at least an hour !!

Oh for ****'s sake. The electric surge story was fabricated by the
security services to avoid panic.

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous incidents.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"We can also agree that Saddam Hussein most certainly has chemical and biolog-
ical weapons and is working towards a nuclear capability. The dossier contains
confirmation of information that we either knew or most certainly should have
been willing to assume." - Menzies Campbell, 24th September 2002.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

David Boothroyd wrote:

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous incidents.

Why do they need to speculate ? If an explosion happens in a LUL tunnel,
it is going to create on almighty bang. Everybody within range will know about
it almost immediately. Don't they have cameras ? People who report to them ?
How come it took the LUL controlers 1h or so to find-out that it had been an
explosion ?

Richard [in PE12]

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Endymion Ponsonby-Withermoor III wrote:
David Boothroyd wrote:

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous
incidents.

Why do they need to speculate ? If an explosion happens in a LUL
tunnel, it is going to create on almighty bang. Everybody within range
will
know about it almost immediately. Don't they have cameras ? People
who report to them ? How come it took the LUL controlers 1h or so to
find-out that it had been an explosion ?

Because the symptoms were indicative of massive power failures and no one on
the spot was in a position to tell them otherwise for about twenty minutes.
A terrorist attack is not the first thing that comes to mind.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 15:27:12 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote:

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous
incidents.

Why do they need to speculate ? If an explosion happens in a LUL
tunnel, it is going to create on almighty bang. Everybody within range
will
know about it almost immediately. Don't they have cameras ? People
who report to them ? How come it took the LUL controlers 1h or so to
find-out that it had been an explosion ?

Because the symptoms were indicative of massive power failures and no one on
the spot was in a position to tell them otherwise for about twenty minutes.
A terrorist attack is not the first thing that comes to mind.

I think there are two issues being confused here. There's no reason to
doubt that TPTB at LU spent the first 20 minutes (or hour or however
long) thinking a power surge was responsible for the incidents.
However, the public were told for *hours* afterwards that it was just
a power surge. For the whole morning, news organisations were
variously reporting up to 7 explosions on the Underground and up to 3
on buses, while being kept completely in the dark by official sources.
There was a definite witholding of information, be it at the behest of
LU, or the security services, or whoever.

I'm not particularly complaining, just trying to clarify.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 16:29:24 +0000, asdf
wrote:

On Sun, 4 Dec 2005 15:27:12 +0000 (UTC), "Brimstone"
wrote:

No it wasn't. It was a speculation by the LUL controllers as to what
could have happened to cause several different simultaneous
incidents.

Why do they need to speculate ? If an explosion happens in a LUL
tunnel, it is going to create on almighty bang. Everybody within range
will
know about it almost immediately. Don't they have cameras ? People
who report to them ? How come it took the LUL controlers 1h or so to
find-out that it had been an explosion ?

Because the symptoms were indicative of massive power failures and no one on
the spot was in a position to tell them otherwise for about twenty minutes.
A terrorist attack is not the first thing that comes to mind.

I think there are two issues being confused here. There's no reason to
doubt that TPTB at LU spent the first 20 minutes (or hour or however
long) thinking a power surge was responsible for the incidents.
However, the public were told for *hours* afterwards that it was just
a power surge. For the whole morning, news organisations were
variously reporting up to 7 explosions on the Underground and up to 3
on buses, while being kept completely in the dark by official sources.
There was a definite witholding of information, be it at the behest of
LU, or the security services, or whoever.

I'm not particularly complaining, just trying to clarify.

Given that the whole picture was confused for days why is it considered
so dreadful (not by you necessarily given your comment above) that it
took hours for an official "story" to be provided? I know we are all
desperate for news NOW! due to 24 hour news channels but it is simply
not practical or in many cases desirable.

Surely the initial priorities are to get the injured out and treated, to
be clear what people are dealing with, get people out of potential
harm's way and then NOT to induce mass panic in the populace who were in
Central London? Then the system has to be checked to make sure it is
safe for the resumption of trains.

The Police take over the handling of these situations and I do not
consider LU can be considered to be some sort of culpable party to any
accusations of media manipulation. It's quite clear from what Tim
O'Toole had to say at the time that his intent was not to scare people
away from using the tube - indeed he wanted people to go about the
system as normal. Hence the minor miracle of most of the network being
up and working next day. I think it is fair to say that Londoners were
grateful for that, I certainly was, and were also very appreciative of
how Tube & Infraco staff dealt with the incident and then worked to
restore the damaged parts of the network.

We are having company wide briefings with Tim at present and part of the
session has a film about 7/7 in it. This not only forces people to face
up to the trauma but also helps people understand what was done, by whom
and allows Tim to say thank you. While it was a bit tough to be reminded
of it I thought the thank you to be most appropriate - and not really
for office people like me but those who drive the trains, work in the
stations, manage the operations etc who were in the front line that day.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Paul Corfield wrote:

We are having company wide briefings with Tim at present and part of
the session has a film about 7/7 in it. This not only forces people
to face
up to the trauma but also helps people understand what was done, by
whom
and allows Tim to say thank you. While it was a bit tough to be
reminded
of it I thought the thank you to be most appropriate - and not really
for office people like me but those who drive the trains, work in the
stations, manage the operations etc who were in the front line that
day.

Hear, hear.

I note that a number of coppers involved on 7th July have received awards.
Does anyone know if TfL/LU will be making similar awards to their members of
staff who were on the ground and publicising the fact?

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sun, 4 Dec 2005, Phil Richards wrote:

Edward Cowling London UK wrote:

Monday - Went to Palmers Green to get the WAGN service to Moorgate.
Told by station announcer that all services were going to Kings Cross
because of problems at Drayton Park - at this half the people trot off
for the bus

Which must explain that the commuters of Palmers Green are pretty
stupid. Why do they all start heading for the bus like a heard of sheep?
Logical solution to remain on the WAGN service as far as Finsbury Park,
wait for any updated announcements there and if the Moorgate branch is
still closed then change on to the Tube or buses accordingly.

Or even to go to King's Cross, then take the tube to Moorgate. Getting on
a bus at Palmers Green does seem like complete madness.

tom

--
Judge Dredd. Found dead. Face down in Snoopy's bed.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

On Sun, 04 Dec 2005 16:29:24 +0000, asdf
wrote:



I think there are two issues being confused here. There's no reason to
doubt that TPTB at LU spent the first 20 minutes (or hour or however
long) thinking a power surge was responsible for the incidents.
However, the public were told for *hours* afterwards that it was just
a power surge. For the whole morning, news organisations were
variously reporting up to 7 explosions on the Underground and up to 3
on buses, while being kept completely in the dark by official sources.
There was a definite witholding of information, be it at the behest of
LU, or the security services, or whoever.

Thank you.

First of all, how can a 'power surge' cause a major explosion on one
train but not all of the others fed by the same substation? And there
were several trains. So, a system-wide 'surge'? Again, why would most
trains be unaffected?

And just how would the power supply apparently 'surge'? Maybe the grid
voltage could have shot up suddenly, but how? Wouldn't other
recipients of electricity (including National Rail electric services
in the London area) have noticed? And wouldn't the power supply, and
the trains, have had some protection?

The thing is I can't put my hand on any sources ATM, but I'm certain
that the authorities have said that the story was fabricated. And why
not?

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

"Ken" wrote in message
...

First of all, how can a 'power surge' cause a major explosion on one
train but not all of the others fed by the same substation? And there
were several trains. So, a system-wide 'surge'? Again, why would most
trains be unaffected?

And just how would the power supply apparently 'surge'? Maybe the grid
voltage could have shot up suddenly, but how? Wouldn't other
recipients of electricity (including National Rail electric services
in the London area) have noticed? And wouldn't the power supply, and
the trains, have had some protection?

Firstly, the story wasn't fabricated. Having been at Liverpool Street at the
time, standing in the main booking hall when the explosion occurred, I went
to the control room to take charge of the incident. As the control room
staff had already started the evacuation I contacted the Central Line
controller to advise them we were evacuating and for trains to non-stop,
stating there'd been a "rather large bang". The indications at the time at
that station, and other stations who were phoning us to find out what had
happened had the same symptoms as when a 22KV cable in a tunnel at Earls
Court failed. Obviously those who were receiving more information from other
parts of the network would have soon realised that as there were multiple
incident sites at the same time something far worse had happened, but I
would guess they were too busy dealing with life-saving at multiple sites to
give the press an update.

Incidentally, having seen the site at Aldgate, I was technically correct
regarding the 22kv cable, as it had, indeed, been vaporised.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

I note that a number of coppers involved on 7th July have received awards.
Does anyone know if TfL/LU will be making similar awards to their members
of
staff who were on the ground and publicising the fact?

There are various award sessions taking place, yes.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

Robin Mayes wrote:
"Brimstone" wrote in message
...

I note that a number of coppers involved on 7th July have received
awards. Does anyone know if TfL/LU will be making similar awards to
their members of staff who were on the ground and publicising the
fact?

There are various award sessions taking place, yes.

Good news and let's hope the Standard et al can give praise where it's due.

Seven Sisters This Morning
 

"asdf" wrote in message
...

I think there are two issues being confused here. There's no reason to
doubt that TPTB at LU spent the first 20 minutes (or hour or however
long) thinking a power surge was responsible for the incidents.
However, the public were told for *hours* afterwards that it was just
a power surge. For the whole morning, news organisations were
variously reporting up to 7 explosions on the Underground and up to 3
on buses, while being kept completely in the dark by official sources.
There was a definite witholding of information, be it at the behest of
LU, or the security services, or whoever.

Having seen some of the tactics the media, especially the foreign press
adopted to try and get "exclusive footage" of the incident sites I am so
glad nobody updated the media. We had a few more pressing concerns, like
trying to save lives and evacuating customers from trains stuck in tunnels.