New Generation Rollingstock

[Fares_Fair]

Day 1000
Thursday 15th November 2018 

[ozbob]

19th February 2016 ...

NGR 701 on the way to Wulkuraka through Goodna

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/Jeffrey_Addison/status/1060091474870583296

[ozbob]

More ongoing bumble from TMR..
Anyone know if someone quit before COI delivers it's findings?

[ozbob]

https://smartjobs.qld.gov.au/jobs/QLD-292871-18

Principal Rail Advisor

Transport and Main Roads (Organisation site)

New Generation Rollingstock: Infrastructure Management and Delivery; Brisbane

In the role of Principal Rail Advisor (NGR Operations) you will support the NGR Project Team in meeting its NGR Operations contract management obligations specifically in terms of the availability and maintenance regime by providing management of applicable processes and procedures, interfacing with the operator and advice to the Project Team in regards to rail operations and maintenance.

You will be responsible for ensuring due diligence and accountability in relation to all technical availability and maintenance contract requirements.

============================

This obviously means that TMR will be continuing looking after the NGR trains  ... something they have spectacularly failed at so far ...

[Stillwater]

As can be seen from the job description, TMR realises it's workforce does not have the skills and smarts to manage the NGR fiasco.  They are seeking to 'buy in' the talent at this late stage.  The worrying words are these: .... "provide recommendations and guidance to support a multi-disciplinary team" ... blah blah.  So, this is another layer of workers providing advice and recommendations to a decision-maker.  The person sought in the advertisement is not themselves the decision-maker.  They will be the principal rail ADVISOR .... advising whom?  Where are the decisions being made?  As it is, the TMR structure dices and slices responsibility and smears it over a number of individuals, all operating in silos.  It looks all the world like an organisation preparing for the day when another load of the brown stuff hits the fan -- everyone gets a little fleck of discolouration on their cheek, but no one person cops the full dump and, as a consequence, would be shown the door. 

[ozbob]

As can be seen from the job description, TMR realises it's workforce does not have the skills and smarts to manage the NGR fiasco.  They are seeking to 'buy in' the talent at this late stage.  The worrying words are these: .... "provide recommendations and guidance to support a multi-disciplinary team" ... blah blah.  So, this is another layer of workers providing advice and recommendations to a decision-maker.  The person sought in the advertisement is not themselves the decision-maker.  They will be the principal rail ADVISOR .... advising whom?  Where are the decisions being made?  As it is, the TMR structure dices and slices responsibility and smears it over a number of individuals, all operating in silos.  It looks all the world like an organisation preparing for the day when another load of the brown stuff hits the fan -- everyone gets a little fleck of discolouration on their cheek, but no one person cops the full dump and, as a consequence, would be shown the door.

It is difficult to imagine a more stuffed up situation than what we have with the NGRs.

1.  They are non DDA DSAPT compliant - being operated technically illegally.

2.  Will require costly rectifications, at least $300 million I would expect.

3.  Locks in an expensive staffing solution at stations for the next 30 years.  In effect all stations will have to be staffed from first to last train as NGRs become the main train in operational service. What concerns me is that the high labour costs will no doubt impact on service improvements, having staff at stations is not necessarily a bad thing though, it is just the high cost railway become an extreme cost railway.  In view of this savings must be made at the top!     The only possible labour saving at the ' front line ' is to operate the NGRs as DOO eventually (once network has ATP).  But this is many years away yet.

4. The clowns responsible for this mess are still there on the public teat.

5. Delays with the introduction of the NGRs have impacted on reliability as the older units forced to keep running. There has been a loss of confidence in the rail network as the mess continues.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1060374674243108864

[achiruel]

3.  Locks in an expensive staffing solution at stations for the next 30 years.  In effect all stations will have to be staffed from first to last train as NGRs become the main train in operational service. What concerns me is that the high labour costs will no doubt impact on service improvements, having staff at stations is not necessarily a bad thing though, it is just the high cost railway become an extreme cost railway.  In view of this savings must be made at the top!     The only possible labour saving at the ' front line ' is to operate the NGRs as DOO eventually (once network has ATP).  But this is many years away yet.

Having an implementation plan for DOO will mitigate that somewhat, although planning should've started some years ago for this.

[#Metro]

How many additional staff, excluding drivers and guards, will be necessary?

[ozbob]

How many additional staff, excluding drivers and guards, will be necessary?

Hundreds ...

[brissypete]

If all stations were staffed full time would DOO be then possible without system upgrades as the station staff would do the clearance to proceed.

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk

[ozbob]

If all stations were staffed full time would DOO be then possible without system upgrades as the station staff would do the clearance to proceed.

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk

The problem is the lack of ATP.  There will be no DOO until the network has full ATP.

See > https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=13085.msg214474#msg214474 this details an event where the guard stopped the train as the driver was going through red signals.

... A BRISBANE train guard who deployed an emergency brake helped avoid a potentially serious crash last year after the driver had failed to stop at a red light despite repeated emergency warnings.

An ATSB investigation into the incident on October 12 last year found the train, which was returning from Kippa-Ring to Bowen Hills, was finally pulled up 83m before converging onto tracks opened for another train.

Investigators found the train passed two yellow warning signals just south of Petrie Station, with the driver manually acknowledging the warnings after an automatic warning system triggered an in-cab alert.

The driver then passed a red signal but told investigators he did not see it because he was "focused on the preceding train and not the signal indication directly in front".

The train passed through the red signal travelling about 41km/h, alerting a network control officer who issued an emergency radio broadcast calling for the train to stop.

The driver thought the call was for another train but did slow down to walking pace, the report says.

As the train slowed, the guard believed it was about to stop and radioed back to the control officer that the situation was under control.

But then the train driver, still unaware that he had driven through the red light, started to speed up.

"In response the guard opened the brake pipe cock, causing an emergency brake application that brought the train to a complete stop," the report says.

The train stopped about 320m past the red signal, just short of entering a track opened for another train that was a few kilometres away.

"The action of the guard opening the brake pipe cock, causing an emergency brake application, was a positive action that prevented a potentially more serious incident," the ATSB found. ...

[HappyTrainGuy]

If all stations were staffed full time would DOO be then possible without system upgrades as the station staff would do the clearance to proceed.

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk

Nope. Station staff do not have any track safe working clearances for train crew. This goes against train crew safeworking procedures.

[ozbob]

The fact that the NGRs were designed and built in a DOO configuration for a network that is not equipped for DOO ( lacks ATP ) is something I hope the COI is wrestling with.  It is just incomprehensible.  How did they think they could do it?

[brissypete]

If all stations were staffed full time would DOO be then possible without system upgrades as the station staff would do the clearance to proceed.

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk

The problem is the lack of ATP.  There will be no DOO until the network has full ATP.

See > https://railbotforum.org/mbs/index.php?topic=13085.msg214474#msg214474 this details an event where the guard stopped the train as the driver was going through red signals.

... A BRISBANE train guard who deployed an emergency brake helped avoid a potentially serious crash last year after the driver had failed to stop at a red light despite repeated emergency warnings.

An ATSB investigation into the incident on October 12 last year found the train, which was returning from Kippa-Ring to Bowen Hills, was finally pulled up 83m before converging onto tracks opened for another train.

Investigators found the train passed two yellow warning signals just south of Petrie Station, with the driver manually acknowledging the warnings after an automatic warning system triggered an in-cab alert.

The driver then passed a red signal but told investigators he did not see it because he was "focused on the preceding train and not the signal indication directly in front".

The train passed through the red signal travelling about 41km/h, alerting a network control officer who issued an emergency radio broadcast calling for the train to stop.

The driver thought the call was for another train but did slow down to walking pace, the report says.

As the train slowed, the guard believed it was about to stop and radioed back to the control officer that the situation was under control.

But then the train driver, still unaware that he had driven through the red light, started to speed up.

"In response the guard opened the brake pipe cock, causing an emergency brake application that brought the train to a complete stop," the report says.

The train stopped about 320m past the red signal, just short of entering a track opened for another train that was a few kilometres away.

"The action of the guard opening the brake pipe cock, causing an emergency brake application, was a positive action that prevented a potentially more serious incident," the ATSB found. ...

Thanks for that, I wasn't aware the guards did anything in between stations. Always good to understand things better.

Sent from my G8141 using Tapatalk

[hU0N]

1.  They are non DDA DSAPT compliant - being operated technically illegally.

That's a half truth at best.

Yes, there are clauses within the DDA DSAPT that NGR trains do not comply with.  Same deal with the 160 series.  And the 120 series.  And the 100 series. And the EMUs.  QR have never operated commuter rollingstock that is compliant with all clauses of DDA DSAPT.

However, it's not "technically illegal" to operate trains like this. The standard itself makes this quite clear:

Section 33.7
(1) It is not unlawful to fail to comply with a requirement of these Standards if, and to the extent that, compliance would impose unjustifiable hardship on any person or organisation.
(2) However, compliance is required to the maximum extent not involving unjustifiable hardship.

It's worth understanding the process here.  When any government entity purchases a new train, they have three options:

• Comply with the standard in its entirety OR
• Comply with as much of the standard as that government entity believes it is feasible to comply with OR
• Apply for a short term exemption from compliance (which lasts a maximum of 5 years), after which they must then comply with the standard in its entirety

Importantly, there is no special process attached to either option 1 or option 2. If QR (or TMR or translink or the minister or whoever) chooses to adopt option 1 or option 2, all they reasonably need to do is make a good faith attempt to follow through on the option they have adopted. At this point, whatever type of compliance they have adopted is taken to be ok unless and until someone with standing challenges is.

That's where NGR is currently at. QR etc claims that they have complied with as much of the standard as it is feasible to comply with. Unless someone actually makes a formal complaint to the AHRC or the federal courts, then QR's view of the situation is the fact of the matter.  And QR's view is that the NGR trains are as compliant as they can feasibly be, which makes them entirely lawful, and makes operating them entirely lawful.

The point here is that legally speaking, any dispute can only exist when two relevant parties are expressing different accounts of the facts of a particular situation. At the moment, QR are the only relevant party expressing an account of the facts. (And QR's account of the fact is that they are compliant). If another interested party (such as a disability advocate of some kind) chooses to formally express a different account of the facts (by filing a formal complaint), then it might be different.  But until then, the trains are technically compliant and operating them is technically lawful.

The failed exemption application doesn't really have anything to say about the lawfulness or unlawfulness of the NGR trains.  I'm not sure why the state government pursued that.  It's an option that is really only designed to be appropriate for cases where QR is currently working towards full compliance and simply needs an extension of time.  The AHRC correctly deduced that extra time wouldn't make any difference for NGR and therefore told them that they should instead be relying on the undue hardship mechanism (ie option 2) to achieve compliance.  In any case, that doesn't change the fact that as it currently stands, the trains are exactly as compliant as QR decides they are, and operating them is exactly as lawful as QR decides it is.

Your point, Bob, should be that the trains rely on the undue hardship mechanism to get a free pass on some clauses of DDA DSAPT, and choosing not to fix these items now (while not unlawful) may prove to be painful in the long run.

[ozbob]

^ thanks for that feedback hUON.  I am only calling it ' technically illegal ' which they are. "The commission said it did not have the power to order the trains be removed, but the decision confirms the use of the trains is in breach of the Disability Discrimination Act."
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2018-03-02/qld-rail-train-not-granted-exemption-disability/9502556  But it is largely semantics until tested in a court of law.  Hence my term ' technically illegal ' as opposed to illegal.  There is a difference.

As far as the other trains go they have ongoing exemptions as I understand it.  The State applied for an exemption specifically for the NGRs but was denied. The other thing that was in the AHRC decision was that they don't intend to grant ongoing exemptions for ever.  So your final comment I think is very pertinent "  ... may prove to be painful in the long run ".

[InclusionMoves]

The comparison to older stock is irrelevant. Stock needs to be compliant to the standard that exists when they are built. Ngr failed this.

Unjustifiable hardship needs to be tested before it is applied QR has not done this.

If QR TMR is saying they have complied to the best of their abilities they have an uphill battle given they have admitted fault and that they could do better. That is a losing battle for them.

I do agree though that the legalities of this are stacked in the favour of government. My focus has been on legal reform of late. Others are working on rectification as legal reform in the end will give the teeth to ensure this does not occur again.

Geoff

[HappyTrainGuy]

3.  Locks in an expensive staffing solution at stations for the next 30 years.  In effect all stations will have to be staffed from first to last train as NGRs become the main train in operational service. What concerns me is that the high labour costs will no doubt impact on service improvements, having staff at stations is not necessarily a bad thing though, it is just the high cost railway become an extreme cost railway.  In view of this savings must be made at the top!     The only possible labour saving at the ' front line ' is to operate the NGRs as DOO eventually (once network has ATP).  But this is many years away yet.

Having an implementation plan for DOO will mitigate that somewhat, although planning should've started some years ago for this.

Was done decades ago but was deemed too costly and impracticable to implement it on the network at that time - and still is (station access issues - Virginia still has no standing zones for the entire first and 4th carriage, rollingstock issues with EMU/yet to enter service SMUs/locomotive services, safeworking issues, crew issues/state government not wanting to pay crews and staff more for the additional work load etc). Cheaper to keep the status quo than to drop massive amounts of money when there weren't massive numbers especially since QR and BT were fighting against each other for patronage. Any future line was to be designed with possible DOO running in mind as locomotive hauled services were phased out. In the early 90's it was rumored that the new Gold Coast services were to have ATP Bowen Hills-Gold Coast which changed to Beenleigh-Gold Coast and eventually nothing at all. Rollingstock (IMU100's) were ordered with ATP provisions but not installed. All too costly from treasury who had the final say when it came to funding for projects.

As Bob points out and one of the concerns back at the start of the 90's was that stations would require more full time staff negating the cost savings for removing guards. We could get away with DOO if there was CRR, NWTC, Camcos/Nambour realignment and duplication with ATP and compliant stations and rollingstock however we have none or only a handful of those and they aren't in the order you'd like.

[ozbob]

I will drop by Progress Rail tomorrow to wish NGR 701 and siblings all the best for the big 1000 !

What a testament to #NGRfail ...   

[verbatim9]

Regarding the unnecessary retrofitting of the NGRs in Maryborough and the extraordinary budget for that to happen. Money for the project could of been easily diverted to ATP and retrofitting stations for futire Driver Only Operation on the Gold Coast Airport line as well as the Doomben line.

Huge example is Southbank station. This was announced back prior to the last election no sign of construction as yet!? What happened?

[ozbob]

The work planned at Maryborough is for DDA DSAPT compliance. Nothing to do with DOO.

[verbatim9]

The work planned at Maryborough is for DDA DSAPT compliance. Nothing to do with DOO.

Yeah I know toilets and more LED screens in the Driver cabins for standing guards. Just stating that they have gone overboard with unnecessary compliance when they could of put the money towards DOO complaint stations and infrastructure.
Which in turn would of made the network better equipped to meet Disability standards.

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1062524317681049602

[ozbob]

NGR 701 arrived at Wulkuraka late afternoon on the 19th Feb 2016.  It is now ' official ' ... 

[ozbob]

It is day .... 777 of #railfail tomorrow.  Great numbers ... 

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1062724736130572288

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1062803490198642688

[ozbob]

Facebook ..

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1062808127551168512

[ozbob]

Facebook ..

Very strong response to this facebook post https://www.facebook.com/RAILBackOnTrack/posts/2323021961045311

Obviously the spin from TMR et al is not cutting through.   

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/ozbob13/status/1063183237835501568

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1064184283797962752

[ozbob]

Facebook ..

Surprising strong response

3,122 People Reached

[Stillwater]

The old line within government is that you never set up an inquiry unless you know what the likely findings are going to be.  The inquiry will paint an ugly picture when it produces its report on December 3.  The real issue is whether Bailey/Trad have the ability to implement the fix and whether there is money to pay for it.  In such cases, governments can get very angry and may be tempted to seek retribution on public servants (sackings) and on the organisations of government (QR and TMR).  Will the state government roll out the restructure investigated by the Citytrain Response Unit, if only as a PR fix?  Remember, in such circumstances, government must be SEEN to be doing something, even if what's being done is ineffectual and inadequate.  Fixing RailFail is a test of this government and, by now, they know it.  No longer can they say ... 'look over here ... look, shiny new infrastructure ... CRR, Gabba Upgrade, Brisbane live etc.'  Fundamentally the transport apple is rotten at its core.

[ozbob]

^

[ozbob]

Only a few days before the COI NGR hands down its findings .. 

[ozbob]

Days since NGR 701 towed to Wulkuraka

[ozbob]

https://twitter.com/railbotforum/status/1065438508322418688

[Stillwater]

The official website says the final report will be delivered BY December 3, but it probably will be on that day.  It will be interesting to see whether the government will sit on it while it builds a PR strategy to counter its damning findings.