Proposal 5: any of the following list of circumstances might make it impossible to keep within standard dwell times

• breakdown of customer vehicle on shuttle
• collision between two or more vehicles on shuttle, involving the filling out of damage claims / safety reports
• any other incident requiring presence of Security and / or Terminal Controller
• sudden illness of a member of staff directly involved in unload / load process
• administration of first aid to any passenger or staff member involved in the process
• detection of animals, firearms (not previously declared to Security) or other forbidden items
• any circumstances requiring a recirculation of passenger vehicles around the terminal after release from the reservoir
• breakdown of communications equipment (e.g. (CR, SIR)
• breakdown of shuttle equipment (e.g. alarms, doors, propping etc) - any form of "degraded mode"
• more vehicles released from reservoir than it is possible to accommodate on the shuttle
• vehicles over 1.85 metres attempting to enter shuttle

Proposal 6: to minimise delays caused by abnormal circumstances, consideration should be given to special procedures, training and periodic exercises

Proposal 7: eliminate abnormal circumstances totally, where this is within ET's control, through procedures, well-maintained equipment etc

2. Dwell Time Estimates

2.1 As anticipated in March 1992

2.2 As visualised in August 1994

These figures were derived from a meeting of the platform activities co-ordination group and represented their understanding of the procedures then applicable and their experience of actual times required, projected on to a full rake.

2.3 As visualised on 29th November1994

Additional estimates of unload and load time, depending on the number of vehicles, were given by participants at the meeting, as follows:

The figures reflect practical experience. Note that they demonstrate an unacceptable range of variation, which is further confirmed in the next section.

3. Dwell times - actual

3.1 The statistics

Two illustrative examples have been taken: a set of 35 in August and a set of 86 in November. Charts were produced, as reproduced in Appendices B and C respectively.

The table below, derived from the same statistics, show what progress has been achieved over the intervening months.

• The charts and table show several patterns superimposed on one another:
• a general improvement in speed, despite the increased loads carried
• an increase in the standard deviation overall, together with an increased range of time
• a number of "peaks" - excessive dwell times outside normal variations, which show no correlation to the number of vehicles loaded
• a lower level of variation after these peaks have been ignored, which is represented by an unchanged standard deviation of 3.8

3.2 Analysis

The evidence shown above indicates that an action plan to bring down dwell times to 22 minutes should include the following:

• eliminate the "peaks" (dwell times > 30 minutes), i.e. investigate and remove their special causes
• reduce the underlying average dwell time by several minutes more
• reduce the standard deviation from 10.8 to 3
• keep more detailed statistics, showing which sub-processes are responsible for excessive values and variations

4. Sub-processes

The following brief summary has been compiled from verbal information without consulting any procedure manuals. It was notable that different individuals had different views.

4.1 Stopping train > handover to CDT

The driver stops at the platform, applies brakes. Some say he should put the loco in standby mode (which takes a little time), others say this is not necessary. Driver communicates to CdT that he has stopped.

4.2 Prior to unloading

The CdT using his remote-operated automatic controls, opens fire doors, firms up the wagons' suspension, opens front and rear loader doors, lowers bridge plates. These operations are triggered in sequence but in practice some overlap takes place. When all operations are reported successfully completed. CdT instructs crew to commence unloading operations. Some members of crew will have already positioned themselves near the rear of the shuttle ready for unloading.

4.3 Unloading, cleaning, security check

Crew members carry out the following operations.

• guide customers out of the front loader (this seems to consist mainly of waving goodbye)
• (following the last vehicle) picking up litter
• security checks including toilets and stairs.

4.2 Prior to loading

Close front loader doors.

4.5 Loading

4.5.1 Assembly of vehicles in the reservoir

Allocation for a given shuttle is in principle carries out automatically using the TTM computer system which controls the operations of barriers on the terminals. In practice the automatic controls are being to some extent overridden to overcome inadequacies in the system. In any event, vehicles are allocated and assembled in the reservoir prior to arrival of the shuttle. Up to 95 cars can be fitted into a double-deck rake with no problem, i.e. 4 to a wagon except the lower front wagon which will hold up to 3 vehicles with disabled passengers. Up to 6 motor-cycles can be allocated.

The following Road Traffic staff are deployed outside to control and assist tourist traffic:

• 1 at allocation zone, operating TTM
• 3 at reservoir
• 2 at platforms, helping to control flow, but switched to SIR and under the control temporarily of the CdT
• 1 at roundabout after Tolls
• 1 in PTB car park

4.5.2 Release from reservoir and drive to shuttle

Two streams are released at once, one for upper deck and one for lower deck, directing them to the platforms on either side of the shuttle. Sometimes the two streams of traffic get somewhat mixed, or one vehicle might pull over to one side to rejoin the stream later.

4.5.3 Flow control

Sometimes the traffic marshals on the platform may assist in holding up the vehicles if requested to do so, allowing the train crew inside the shuttle time to fill the wagons properly and give instructions to the drivers (see next section).

However it is currently the task of train crew (members "Foxtrot" and "Golf") to hold back the cars within the shuttle (two wagons below the one where the parking is being done).

If vehicles were allowed to pass down the shuttle without this control, several undesirable things may happen:

• congestion in the shuttle resulting in a build-up of pollution from exhausts
• drivers parking without being instructed, possible with too much space behind the vehicle in front
• drivers parking possibly across wagons or over fire door protection barriers
• drivers possibly leaving their vehicles, resulting in delay when staff ask them to move to correct position

4.5.4 Fitting within a wagon

Vehicles for safety reasons are to be parked 20cm between bumpers. Vehicles are to be packed four or five cars per wagon, depending on length. To do this right first time requires experience.

Crew use standard hand signals to indicate "come on", "slow down", "a little bit further", and "stop". This part of the operation therefore does not require the use of language.

4.5.5 Safety instructions

There are several safety instructions which have to be communicated to drivers:

• Wind down driver's window and keep it wound down throughout journey. Unless it is wound down, no further instructions can be given.
• engage handbrake very firmly
• engage first gear, or Park if vehicle has automatic transmission
• switch off ignition
• no smoking
• switch off headlights, as these could set off fire alarms
• no flash photography, as it could set off fire alarms
• listen to any further safety announcements that may be given

In fact, there is not time to give all these instructions to each driver, as if this were done, the load time would extend to an hour or more.

Some of these instructions are already repeated on the dot matrix displays in several languages during the journey. Some of the instructions are repeated over the PA system.

The ones that the train crew concentrate on giving to each driver are the ones about windows, brakes and gears. The total message in fat is often abbreviated to "window down, handbrake on, first gear", said in English or French depending on the number plate of the vehicle--not always a reliable guide. The message is given rapidly and an unprepared driver may not understand, especially if it is not given in his own language.

Serious safety risks are however minimised by the member of the train crew carrying out a visual check that the driver has understood: either the gear stick and brake lever appear to be in the required position--not always easy to tell--or the driver carries out the appropriate manipulations under the watchful eye of the crew member.

Delays are caused when the driver is currently engaged in some other activity and is therefore not able to obey the instructions instantly. This possibility is minimised if the instructions are given at the exact moment of parking the vehicle. We shall return to this point later, when considering areas for improvement.

There is also a risk of delay if the driver does not understand the message or feels prompted to ask relevant--or irrelevant--question of the train crew member. The appropriate response of the crew member in such circumstances is to say something like, "If you'll excuse me, I'll return to deal with that when we have loaded all the vehicles." However, it is often difficult to recall which driver(s) asked the question, when later walking back from the rear of the rake. Again, we shall return to this point.

4.5.6 Close fire doors

It is normal practice to close the fire doors of each wagon as soon as that wagon has been loaded. Staff operate local switches for this purpose. The suspension is inflated to the setting for transit.

4.6 After loading

• Crew members report to CdT "Loading Complete"
• CdT triggers remote closing of bridge plates and rear loader doors
• CdT checks all controls are OK
• CdT hands over to driver
• Departure

4.7 Other activities

4.7.1 Calling Tunnel Services (sub-contractor)

Main cleaning of the inside of wagons is done by tunnel Services during daily maintenance when the rake is out of service. But in certain circumstances Tunnel Services may be summoned for any of the following tasks, to be performed during dwell time:

• clearing up mess
• fixing toilets
• replenishing water for toilets
• emptying toilet tanks

4.7.2 Change of shift

A change of shift may take place during a normal dwell time. At this point fresh supplies of toilet paper and other such items may be taken on board.

4.7.3 Check supplies

It is envisaged that checks and replenishment of certain other supplies, such as the following, are not performed during normal dwell times. Certain other supplies on board the shuttle are definitely not performed during normal dwell times:

• breathing apparatus
• fire extinguishers
• stretchers
• transfer chairs

5. Improvement

5.1 General

Proposal 8: Formally recognise Dwell Times as a single process within ET operations. From this decision a number of others may flow:

• a single responsibility for managing the process, covering both terminals and both UK and French crews
• a single responsibility for managing improvements to the process
• integrated procedures
• reviews and audits of conformance to, and effectiveness of, procedures
• fully co-ordinated training
• a group set up in permanence to improve the process and ensure communication and understanding between all parties
• permanent monitoring of process performance

Observations: Any or all of the suggestions listed may be appropriate in conjunction with organisational changes to clarify who is in charge moment to moment (in normal or degraded mode working).

Proposal 9: Ensure that improvements are well co-ordinated:

• ground-level staff to be involved at all stages
• all initiatives to be referred to a nominated management representative
• progress reports to be shared amongst the departments involved, with everyone who needs to know being informed

Any given stream of cars can be divided quickly with a little practice.

For example, if the cars are proceeding towards the left, crew members Foxtrot or Golf can split them into wagon-loads as marked by commas in the following example:

<- S B B B, S S S S S, B S S S, B B S B, S B S B, B S B S S,S S S S, B B B B, S B S S

In practice, the rule is simple. If the next group of four cars contains a big car, that is as much as you can get in a wagon. If all four are small, and the one following is also small, then you can take 5 in a wagon. It is possible that some combinations of big vehicles could not fit 4 to a wagon (such as four hearses or Rolls-Royces) but such combinations are unlikely. Also note that vehicles with low trailers are not permitted on double-deck rakes.

If cars come in a random stream of big and small it then becomes a game of mental dexterity for Foxtrot or Golf to send exactly one wagon's worth of vehicles to Delta or Echo. The rules of the game can be practised anywhere, but the crucial skill is being able to categorise any vehicle at a glance into long or short.

Note: see table of sample car lengths in Appendix B.

Proposal 16: it would also be possible to assess cars in 3 sizes - small, medium and large.

Observations: this would be less easy for staff, and is noted merely for possible future consideration.

Proposal 17: combine training with research in defining a new sequence of operations in the "wagon-filling" sub-process. The sub-process consists of parking, giving safety instructions and closing fire doors.

Proposal 18: make a video tape showing the required communications (driver / chef de train / TCC / platform staff / train crew / passengers) with instructive scenarois showing how various incidents and difficult situations can be handled. Even producing such a tape can be a useful tool in research, training, staff participation. Showing the video can be useful in training, briefing and further research.

Proposal 19: Solve the conflict felt by staff (particularly train crew) between opposing demands:

• speed up the dwell time process
• deliver maximum customer care

Additionally there may be a conflict between:

• written procedures
• verbal briefings
• day-to-day practical experience

Staff see themselves as customer service agents who are there to make the customer happy and project a certain image of travel by Eurotunnel. They find it sometimes hard to equate this with certain compromises required in practice, such as having to give safety instructions verbally in a few seconds.

Proposal 20: take great care when introducing changes to load and unload procedures, not to introduce increased stresses and uncertainties amongst the staff involved.Ensure that changes are thoroughly planned, co-ordinated across departments, and that staff are well-briefed. Collect feedback and study results before committing to permanent change.

Proposal 21: make clear to staff that management's interest is sustained and long-term; also that it is not one-sided (e.g. pushing speed at the expense of staff and customer well-being).

Proposal 22: Train crew should adapt a technique used by airline flight attendants when passengers require attention at inconvenient times, such as during loading. Any passenger who asks a question when safety instructions are given, or needs further assistance, should be told that the member of train crew will return as soon as loading is complete. The member of staff will then place a small sticker on the car roof as a marker. Observations: at present, staff often promise to return to answer passengers' questions, but on their return it is difficult to remember the vehicle or passenger concerned.

5.5 Procedural

5.5.1 General

Proposal 23: ensure that there are sufficient up-to-date procedures for the guidance of all staff involved in dwell process. The procedures need to be consistent with one another and with the practical realities.

Proposal 24: ensure that French and British crews are working to the same sets of rules, and the same interpretations of them, where there is scope for interpretation.

Proposal 25: emphasise that passengers are in no circumstances to leave their vehicles whilst on the platform for loading or unloading. The normal reason for this practice is photography. They wish to show their car and its occupants against a background of Le Shuttle locomotive. However this has a disruptive effect slowing down load r unload. Observations: at one Train Crew Quality Council meeting reluctance was expressed to stop passengers doing this as it was felt that marketing considerations demanded it, especially as some passengers were from the media. However, there are safety problems as well.

5.5.2 Late Arrivals

Proposal 26: the closing of vehicle allocations should be timed so as to valid two possibilities:

• vehicles showing up after the loader doors have been closed
• vehicles attempting to board when the loading has been based on a "loose-loading"  estimate of vehicles (i.e. the estimate was less than 95, permitting 4 per wagon, but late arrivals push the total to over 95)

Observation: how to achieve this needs to be studied.

Proposal 27: allocation should be started and finished tow minutes earlier than at present.

Observation: the intention of this proposal was to speed up the start of loading and to prevent late arrivals. The effect of the proposal could be to add 2 minutes to the motorway-autoroute time.

5.5.3 Fitting vehicles to wagons

Proposal 28: divide vehicles into wagon loads whilst parked in the reservoir. Observations: there is no guarantee that the vehicles will actually load in the same order. In any case you have to find a way of showing the division into wagon-loads to the staff at platform or on shuttle.

Proposal 29: segregate long and short vehicles into separate lanes at reservoir / allocation. Observations: this would be labour-intensive and error-prone. No guarantee that the vehicles will be in those lanes by the time they reach the shuttle. However, it might facilitate speedy loading of the short ones five to a wagon.

Proposal 30: separate the two streams of traffic for upper and lower decks by road cones or flexible posts fixed to the ground on approach roads and overbridges. Observations: if you take the flexibility out, one vehicle that stops en route will hold up the entire flow and delay the loading process.

Proposal 31: lanes in reservoirs are divided laterally in wagon loads, with white lines, enabling marshals to measure wagon loads. Observation: to make this work, the vehicles would have to be parked at 20cm intervals which is labour-intensive and an inconvenience to the customer.

Proposal 32: separate wagon load markings in reservoirs which have areas cross-hatched in yellow, indicating "Don't park on this part"/ Thus drivers would automatically put themselves into wagon-loads when arriving at the reservoir. Observations: but they would still not park close enough to each other without laborious intervention of road marshals.

Proposal 33: identify wagon-loads by means of stickers fixed to the front vehicle of each wagon-load, colour-coded to indicate 4-vehicle or 5-vehicle group. Observations: as already stated, the groups might break en route from the reservoir to the platform.

Proposal 34: by some means, tell the driver which wagon to go to. Observations: Unworkable. Safety risks. Contrary to the whole principle of firm control by ET staff.

Proposal 35: use number of vehicles counted at allocation or reservoir to determine the load plan. For example, if there are no more than 95 vehicles, they can be loaded 4 to a wagon throughout, making the load task quick and easy. Observations: this information needs to be available to the CdT at the start of the load process, so that any necessity for 5 vehicles to a wagon can be put into effect from the start. Under fully automatic TTM operation, allocation and loading are not overlapped. However, under manual over-ride, it is possible to allocate late-comers whilst loading is in process. In practice, therefore, loading 5 to a wagon needs to be put in place when there is something less than 95 vehicles at start of loading.

Proposal 36: pack vehicles in 5 to a wagon whenever this is possible, even if the shuttle will not be full. This will initially take more time, but the staff will obtain expertise more quickly and when there are full shuttles they will be experienced enough to deal with them. Observations: this will make loading a little slower at first. See further observations under Training above. Also this proposal is contradictory to the one which precedes it.

Proposal 37: set a limit on the mummer of vehicles which can be loaded on a double-deck rake. Progressively increase the limit as experience of loading increases. Observations: at the moment the limit is 95, which means there is no pressure to load 5 to a wagon, but for commercial reasons the limit will need to be raised. However as the theoretical limit of 118 (including 3 disabled) is approached, the mix and sequence of vehicles becomes more significant, involving the risk that some will not fit on, or that time will be wasted trying to get the best fit.

5.5.4 Monitoring

Proposal 38: monitoring of the process should be built-in and permanent. For example Chef de Train should keep timings of all dwell times and component parts, in an agreed format, which should be collated for regular analysis and any necessary corrective action.

5.5.5 Motor-cycles

Proposal 39: reservoirs should check the number of motor-cycles allocated to a shuttle. If up to 3, they should be loaded last, as train crew consider it quicker to stow them in the rear loader. If more than 3 and up to 6, load 3 last and the remainder first. Observations: check if it is really quicker to load them in rear - this has been disputed.

Proposal 40: Platform staff rather than train crew to load motor-cycles in rear loader.

5.6 Organisation

Proposal 41: increase the number of staff carrying out the duties of parking passenger vehicles, giving safety instructions and closing fire doors. Many members of train crew feel that this is the single most effective way to reduce dwell time. However, not all crew leaders agree. There seems little doubt, however, that when there are full shuttles, defined as more than 95 cars, plus motor-cycles, more staff will speed the process. Note that the fifth member of train crew acting as a relief already provides part of the extra resource required.

Observations: the following proposal suggests one way of obtaining this extra resource.

Proposal 42: increase role of Terminals in the load process. Put traffic marshals at present posted on platform within the shuttle and let them take over responsibilities of Foxtrot and Golf, i.e. holding back traffic two wagons away from where Delta and Echo and parking them. Observations: this allows two members of train crew to perform the operations of parking, safety instructions and fire-door closing. Traffic marshals leave the shuttle before it departs.

Proposal 43: control the flow of cars into the wagons from the loader doors rather than as in Proposal 42. Observations: This has the advantage of reducing queuing within the wagons and consequent exhaust pollution. It has the disadvantage that the marshal at the loader door cannot easily see what is happening in the wagon being parked. In the case of the upper deck he cannot see at all. See proposal 60 for special radios. To ensure a speedier process, a wagon load must be released into the shuttle a few seconds before the "parker" is ready for them. If the vehicles are sent too early this can interfere with the parking process as there would be no one to control the flow in the wagon. As the driving time from doors to wagon becomes steadily less as the rake fills, it is difficult to calculate when to release a wagon-load of cars.

Proposal 44: parking is undertaken by traffic marshals, leaving train crew free to give safety instructions, welcome their passengers on board and close fire doors. Observations: if combined with the previous proposal, this has the advantage that all manoeuvring is done by teams under the same management, i.e. Road Traffic.  It releases train crew for customer care duties and technical tasks, e.g. closing fire doors. However, it throws into question the role of the Chef de Train in controlling the load process. This would require further study.

Proposal 45: since differences do exist over the two sites - Folkestone and Calais - and with the two nationalities of train crew, exploit this fact to run limited trials of proposed improvements. When these have been demonstrated effective, carefully introduce them to both sides. Consistent monitoring and the keeping of impartial records will help ensure that prejudice and antagonism between the two sides are minimised.

5.7 Communications

5.7.1 Communicating safety requirements to passengers

Probably the most time-consuming aspect of the whole unload/load process is giving safety instructions to each driver.

Some of these instructions must be given at the time the driver parks his vehicle where guided by the member of train crew. They can be given earlier but there is a requirement to check at the time of parking that they have in fact been carried out. They cannot be given later.

Many proposals have been received of reinforcing the safety instructions in such a way as to reduce the communication burden on Delta and Echo.

It must be stressed that none of the proposals below remove responsibility from Train Crew members to ensure that the passenger vehicle driver has understood and obeyed.

Proposal 46: give safety instructions to pre-paid passengers as part of their ticket and information package. Observations: should be a series of pictograms, can't take up too much space as there is lots of other information to give as well. Not very major impact as driver may not read it or remember it.

Proposal 47: Give safety instructions to turn-up-and-go passengers as part of a ticket and information package given out at tolls. For example, there are plans for a comprehensive leaflet to be given out at tolls, covering several topics following requests from several Directorates and the CO. Observations: as for previous proposal.

Proposal 48: show a video in the Passenger Terminal Buildings giving information as to how the system works including the safety instructions (either as pictograms or a film of someone putting on handbrake etc) Observations: this would depend on other plans for use of videos. Also it would not reach all drivers.

Proposal 49: display safety information at reservoirs, using dot matrix, video etc. Observations: this depends on the technology being available for this purpose. In particular, the safety instructions, for maximum impact, need to be imparted pictorially rather than through text.

Proposal 50: give out a leaflet dedicated to communicating safety information to each driver in reservoir. Observations: this probably has maximum impact and the greatest likelihood of being read and remembered by drivers.

Proposal 51: give out safety information over PA in reservoir. Observations: there are limitations over use of PA in Folkestone, because of agreements with local residents about noise pollution. Impact is in any case likely to be low. PA announcements should generally be reserved for "news" - e.g. latest situation when there are delays, rather than routine material.

Proposal 52: give out safety information over PA in shuttle. Observations: to some extent this is done already. But the passenger does not hear it until after he has parked and so it does not serve the purpose of reducing the time of loading. NB dot matrix displays in shuttle also give the information, but for the same reason they do not speed up the parking process. They may however improve safety by reminding drivers who did not understand the information when they parked.

Proposal 53: safety information posters in shuttle. Observations: this proposal has merit. The posters could be largely independent of text, consisting of a set of pictograms giving all the instructions as well as indicating the reasons for them: no smoking - risk of fire; no flash photography - risk of fire alarms - delay to shuttle. In case of dispute or poor communication - language problem etc - Delta or Echo could refer the driver's attention, using gestures, to the nearest poster.

Further observations: passengers will have plenty of time to read safety instructions her and the instructions will be able to mention aspects which though important may not be stressed elsewhere, such as "keep away from the space between two vehicles", "take special care of small children and the weak, disabled or elderly - the cars might appear stationary but the train is moving fast. If emergency brakes are applied such passengers are at extra risk of injury."

Proposal 54: Train crew propose that a card is produced with pictorial safety instructions, in a form which permits the driver to hang it on his rear-view mirror. The back of this card would be available for commercial advertising. Observations: this might solve the problem of drivers being reluctant to open their windows in cold weather: if they see that a gift is being offered, they are more likely to open them, and hence to listen to the verbal instructions! However, drivers will not have the opportunity to read it until after the member of train crew has checked that they have obeyed the main instructions. It is therefore unlikely to speed up the giving of safety instructions.

5.7.2 Communications between staff

A previous report, resulting from a study by the Platform Co-ordination Working Group, listed a number of problems of communication in this area, which may be summarised as:

• technical: CR has poor voice quality, messages cut off, saturation of network. SIR subject to interference between one shuttle and another whilst on platform

• language
• organisation - cascading of information
• formalisation of messages

Proposal 55: reduce dependence on radio communications. After CdT has informed TCC that the shuttle is "ready to load", the vehicles are released from reservoir with no further radio communications until the message to CdT: "No more vehicles to load".

Proposal 56: prescribe the form of all routine radio messages (including those for a range of incidents and degraded modes) during loading / unloading to achieve the following objectives:

• language independence
• brevity

• clarity

• total number of cars
• number of vehicles with disabled passengers
• number of motor-cycles

Proposal 60: equip those involved in loading process with additional radio handsets on a special new network - neither SIR not CR. Observations: would this mean staff carrying two handsets? The rules for use of different networks would need to be clear and simple.

6. Conclusions

There are at present many different opinions as to how the dwell time can be reduced. There is a general divide between Train Crew and terminals, but even within these departments there are many different views. For example some crew leaders think that 22 minutes can be achieved without extra staff involved in the loading sub-process. Others - particularly the train crew responsible for the work - believe that allocation of extra resource is the single most effective way to improve the speed of loading.

A number of general points have emerged very clearly from the study:

• the actual times recorded show a wide range of variation indicating that there are a number of random or uncontrolled elements in the process. The target cannot be achieved until they are brought somehow under controlled and standardised.
• variations in practice and in understanding of the procedures, must be reduced to a common understanding, respected by UK and French staff in train crews Terminals and RCC.
• Standardisation should  however be preceded by a period of controlled trials, in which the most promising proposals are tried out, the results measured, and the views of all parties taken into account
• In order to progress to achievement of the required standard, and make systematic improvements, actual performance will have to be closely monitored. this could be done by independent sampling, but possibly the best way is for record-keeping by the staff to be incorporated into the process itself.
• The dwell process is an integral part f the ET transport system, hence will be with us for the next 50 years. The solutions we find now should not be short-term makeshilfts but stepping-stones giving ever-increased stability and efficiency to the process.

Appendix A             Index of Proposals

1. Shuttles should depart when ready, not wait for timetable

2. Set standards for dwell-time under "normal operation"

3. Familiarise staff with handling "normal" incidents

4. Research the probability and effect of "normal" incidents

5. Define "abnormal" circumstances

6. "Abnormal" procedures, training and exercises

7. Elimination of "abnormal" circumstances

8. Treat dwell time as an integral process

9. Co-ordinate improvement efforts

10.  Bring dwell time under statistical control

Technical

11. Replace fire door protection barriers

12. Prevent false triggering of alarms

13. Platform staff to request headlights off.

14. Timing of automatic controls triggered by the Chef de Train

Training

15. Categorise cars into small and big for loading purposes, and train staff in recognition

16. Categorise cars into three sizes for loading purposes (future)

17. Experiment with speedier "wagon-filling" routines

18. Video tape of dwell process, for training

Motivation

19. Clarify priorities for staff

20. Careful introduction of changes to process

21. Communicate management's sustained concern

22. Mark vehicles where crew will return to answer questions

Procedures

23. Adequate and up-to-date procedures for dwell process

24. Same set of rules for UK and French crews

25. Passengers not in vehicles strictly forbidden on platforms

26. Ensure timely closing of vehicle allocate

27. Earlier start and finish of tourist allocation

28. Identify wagon-loads in reservoir

29. Segregation of long and short vehicles

30. Separate traffic flows proceeding to upper and lower decks

31. Markings in reservoirs to identify maximum length of wagon-load

32. "No parking" spaces between wagon-lengths in reservoir

33. Identify front car of wagon with colour-coded sticker

34. Driver told which wagon to park in

35. Determine load plan from number of vehicles allocated

36. Routine packing of 5 vehicles per wagon

37. Progressively increase vehicles per wagon

38. Permanent monitoring of dwell process

39. Stow motor-cycles in rear loader if possible

40. Platform staff to load motor-cycles in rear loader

41. Extra staff for parking, safety instructions and closure of loader doors

Organisation

42. Increase role of Terminals in the load process

43. Control loading flow from loader doors

44. Traffic marshals to park vehicles in shuttle

45. Exploit variation across sites and crew to exploit best practice

Communication to passengers

46. Safety instructions as part of pre-paid ticket information pack

47. Safety instructions issued at tolls as part of information pack

48. Information video at PTBs including safety instructions

49. Safety information displayed visually in reservoir

50. Safety leaflet handed out at reservoir

51. Safety information over PA in reservoir

52. Safety information over PA in shuttle

53. Safety instruction posters in shuttle

54. Safety instructions to hang on rear-view mirror

Communication between staff