ac6000cw
Established Member
Yes, but that was 14 years ago - what is the current situation ?
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
W Driver Only Operated Trains (DOO) discussion
- Thread starter 387star
- Start date
- Status
Yes, but that was 14 years ago - what is the current situation ?
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
That says 'nearly all' their services. As I said I though the 12-car services (of which there aren't very many) retained guards.
ac6000cw
Established Member
What do you consider the 'most important' parts - in a day-to-day sense ?
Surely on lines without effective on-station ticket checking (staff or barriers), revenue protection is the most important - without that the money to pay for staff is at risk, so the job might not exist anyway ?
Deleted.
Last edited:
craigybagel
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 5,140
Thank you
Safety, customer service, revenue. Doesn't matter where,doesn't matter when. Its that order every time.
ac6000cw
Established Member
No, I'm genuinely interested - with the changes to rolling stock and infrastructure over the years since the steam age (power operated doors, extensive track circuiting/axle counters, AWS, TPWS, cab-secure/GSM-R communications, CCTV monitoring - both on-station and on-train, including door monitoring, fixed electric tail lights, locomotive run-arounds - to list out a few things), it seems to me that many of the traditional reasons the guard/conductor position existed have gone.
I can see perfectly valid commercial/security reasons for having a staff presence on some (or even most) trains, but living in a area where DOO - on up to 12-car trains - has been normal for at least 25 years, it's hard to see the justification for guards on a purely safety basis when other safeguards are in place on many lines.
Incidents on DOO happen all the time. They are published, but only internally. Mainly things like stop shorts and wrong side door release.
As a guard, i see myself as a backup to driver. I dont open the doors, but I close them. I give the bells for ready to start when i know that it is safe to go, the signal is showing the correct aspects and that the lunar/box is showing the correct way for our route. I'm also there from minor things like toilet alarms, through to major incidents. I know the routes and stations we stop at, so can deal with the issues that arise. A driver is busy driving to deal with all these things. Thats why my training was many weeks learning safety and issues, and one week, well 4 days learning to sell tickets, and then many weeks/months learning the routes and the job.
Its simple, imagine this common scenario:
12 car train, punter in the lav in coach 11 pushes the alarm:
train 1 has me: Driver makes the call, i go and check. reset the alarm, or deal with a disaster. train stays on the move unless I inform the driver otherwise.
train 2 is doo: Driver stops the train. Makes their way from the front to the back. Gets there, alarm reset. Back to cab. off you go. 5-10 mins lost on the BML.
Oh and for the railway company, large fines paid out for delays.
Whether I'm fixing a fault, getting a wheelchair off, saving a life or backing up the driver during an incident, reporting a failure on a level crossing that the driver cannot see, that's what a guard is there for.
I've never yet had to mutter those words, 'this is an emergency call', but I'm there for that day.
As a guard, i see myself as a backup to driver. I dont open the doors, but I close them. I give the bells for ready to start when i know that it is safe to go, the signal is showing the correct aspects and that the lunar/box is showing the correct way for our route. I'm also there from minor things like toilet alarms, through to major incidents. I know the routes and stations we stop at, so can deal with the issues that arise. A driver is busy driving to deal with all these things. Thats why my training was many weeks learning safety and issues, and one week, well 4 days learning to sell tickets, and then many weeks/months learning the routes and the job.
Its simple, imagine this common scenario:
12 car train, punter in the lav in coach 11 pushes the alarm:
train 1 has me: Driver makes the call, i go and check. reset the alarm, or deal with a disaster. train stays on the move unless I inform the driver otherwise.
train 2 is doo: Driver stops the train. Makes their way from the front to the back. Gets there, alarm reset. Back to cab. off you go. 5-10 mins lost on the BML.
Oh and for the railway company, large fines paid out for delays.
Whether I'm fixing a fault, getting a wheelchair off, saving a life or backing up the driver during an incident, reporting a failure on a level crossing that the driver cannot see, that's what a guard is there for.
I've never yet had to mutter those words, 'this is an emergency call', but I'm there for that day.
Last edited:
Though on this FGW proposal one assumes the TM would still be able to go and check to see what's what leaving the driver free to drive unless things are a major disaster.
I will always be totally opposed to proper DOO where there is literally only a driver on board the service. It's bad for passengers in just about every meaningful way (safety and customer service).
chris11256
Member
- Joined
- 27 Dec 2012
- Messages
- 734
c2c aren't completely DOO. 12 carriage services still have a guard. Although there aren't very many 12 carriage trains in peak/
craigybagel
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 5,140
This is a crucial point. There are some skills I possess as a guard that I will most likely never use. They are however also the most important.
We've been fortunate so far that we've only had one DOO accident where the driver was killed (Ladbroke Grove) and on that occasion I believe there was a driver travelling in the rear cab who was able to assist? That doesn't mean we'll never have an incident where a DOO driver is left incapacitated and there's no one left to assist the passengers, we've just been lucky so far. We have however had accidents where the driver has been incapacitated, but passengers have been looked after by the guard.
But there is a proviso that the train can run DOO if no TM is available. It won't be planned (for now), but it will happen.
Indeed! I replied to 455driver somewhere or other that whilst I don't have an issue with the train running DOO if no TM is available (in which case sarahj's train 2 may well apply if there are no catering crew available to investigate) it should never be planned to do so (every SET should always have a TM diagrammed to it) and there needs to be penalties in place in the franchise agreement to make sure no unscrupulous TOC tries to get away without having a TM on every train.
I was trying to find that... They worded it like it was a very good thing
WatcherZero
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Feb 2010
- Messages
- 10,272
People seem to be assuming that without a guard staff wouldn't be trained in responding to an incident and safely evacuating the train.
Probably meaning the first in the privatised era , but at the end of BR times in 1994 WAGN went completely DOO When the Moorgate line was converted
Last edited:
Flamingo
Established Member
- Joined
- 26 Apr 2010
- Messages
- 6,810
There is a reason for that - they aren't.
At the risk of repeating myself ad nauseum, but I'll do it again for the hard of thinkink:
THE GUARDS MAIN JOB IS NOTHING TO DO WITH REVENUE - IT IS TO ENSURE THE SAFE RUNNING OF THE TRAIN. EVERY SAFETY SYSTEM BEING MENTIONED ARE TO DO WITH THE DRIVING OF THE TRAIN, NOT THE INTERIOR, PASSENGERS, OR PLATFORM/TRAIN INTERFACE. THIS NEEDS TO APPLY TO EVERY TRAIN, AND SHOULD NOT BE ABANDONED WHEN RESOURCES CAN'T GET THEIR ACT TOGETHER!.
Are people on here ignoring this on purpose, because it doesn't suit their agenda?
Last edited:
ANorthernGuard
Established Member
- Joined
- 8 Oct 2010
- Messages
- 2,662
Yep usually. But you have a thumbs up from Me m8
NSEFAN
Established Member
To be fair, people who don't work as guards probably don't see the need for them because they don't have to deal with daily mishaps and passengers being silly. Most passengers only ever interact with the guard if they are performing revenue or customer service duties. If the public don't understand the need for guards then to them it just looks like "typical railways staff going on strike at the drop of a hat" or however the Tabloids spin it this week.Flamingo said:
HSTEd
Veteran Member
- Joined
- 14 Jul 2011
- Messages
- 17,012
well to be fair, once ERTMS arrives you can probably eliminate stop shorts and wrong-side door openings by having a balise in the platform approach that tells the train where the start and end of the platform is, and on what side it is.
That would be quite complex with the necessity of handling scissored platforms like the ones at Doncaster though (the balise would have to be active and linked to the signalling system in that case).
That would be quite complex with the necessity of handling scissored platforms like the ones at Doncaster though (the balise would have to be active and linked to the signalling system in that case).
SWT's have (or are about to have it) ASDO without ERTMS on some of their services, which uses kit between the sleepers so that the train knows where it is and therefore what doors it can and can't open, regardless of where it stops along the length of the platform.
There are some major problems to overcome with DOO for Crossrail on the Great Western. Crossrail trains will have in-cab CCTV which requires fixed CCTV on the stations but they only have 6 screen views which means you have to be able to see 10 cars - 20 sets of doors - from 6 views. No easy, and to do this the cameras need to be mounted close to the trains to get a longer view, that means they come in to the Drop Zone for the OHEL so have to be earthed to take 12KA traction current in the event of a fault and, of course, cannot be faulted, maintained or serviced without an isolation.
But that's not the end of the problem. Not all trains on the route have in cab DOO so for those that don't rely on platform displays, this now means that a driver of a Crossrail train may have different views within the cab from those on the platform monitors which may be confusing.
But that's not the end of the problem. Not all trains on the route have in cab DOO so for those that don't rely on platform displays, this now means that a driver of a Crossrail train may have different views within the cab from those on the platform monitors which may be confusing.
Monty
Established Member
- Joined
- 12 Jun 2012
- Messages
- 2,356
SWT is using balises for its ASDO system and it's introduction practically ensures that guards will remain on South Western Division for a while yet, it is not fail safe and still requires the guard to ensure the train has come to a stand in the correct position.
craigybagel
Established Member
- Joined
- 25 Oct 2012
- Messages
- 5,140
And me.
That's interesting to know - was it specifically designed with guard operation in mind? I'd always worried that SWT's commercial guards would be some of the easiest to replace should some misguided bean counter choose to go down that route.
ac6000cw
Established Member
Thank you for the information (and not shouting).
Looking at the 'train 1' and train 2' situations you give, that feels like it's a basically commercial decision to have you on the train so that you can deal with 'things that happen' in a more timely manner or which would otherwise involve other staff having to be made available e.g. the wheelchair situation. That probably means that you 'pay your way' in an overall commercial sense, which is exactly how it should be - and should also ensure that there is a long-term future for the role (whether it's called guard/conductor/train manager or whatever) because at the very least it should be 'revenue neutral'. After all, there are plenty of organisations that promote the fact that they have 'customer care' people around - I don't see why the railways shouldn't do the same.
I broadly agree with yorkie's view on this - on lines equipped for DOO, the train operation should be the driver's responsibility, with the on-board staff member having primarily a customer care, security and revenue protection role.
Clarence Yard
Established Member
- Joined
- 18 Dec 2014
- Messages
- 2,533
Terry, I think the plan is that all FGW units in the DOO area will be fitted with bodyside cameras so the current DOO platform equipment can be dispensed with or modified before Crossrail becomes operational.
plymothian
Member
Who really needs guards? After all all they do is blow a whistle, wave a flag and try to make you pay a fare. Get rid of them, degrade the job and you have such a saving on staffing costs and training; though drivers will obviously get a bigger wage for more responsibility.
The letter is carefully worded, yet possibly too carefully, which is causing more questions than it answers.
It says that the driver will be solely responsible for the doors - what does this mean? Is it the XC half-way house of driver release, but guard initiated closing, or full DOO release and lock without the guard at all?
The bit about not needing a TM suggests the latter.
As a guard's responsibility is safety > customer care > delays > revenue, the biggest safety risks that need managing are at stations, and so are the biggest cause of delays. So without a guard, the job becomes customer care & revenue ie a glorified ticket examiner.
Buses easily went DOO to save money and no one misses conductors, and there are many rail DOO systems around now, that one day there will be no guards either, just revenue staff on less pay.
Sod it, with ERTMS the train will virtually be able to drive itself, so the driver can do tickets as well.
The letter is carefully worded, yet possibly too carefully, which is causing more questions than it answers.
It says that the driver will be solely responsible for the doors - what does this mean? Is it the XC half-way house of driver release, but guard initiated closing, or full DOO release and lock without the guard at all?
The bit about not needing a TM suggests the latter.
As a guard's responsibility is safety > customer care > delays > revenue, the biggest safety risks that need managing are at stations, and so are the biggest cause of delays. So without a guard, the job becomes customer care & revenue ie a glorified ticket examiner.
Buses easily went DOO to save money and no one misses conductors, and there are many rail DOO systems around now, that one day there will be no guards either, just revenue staff on less pay.
Sod it, with ERTMS the train will virtually be able to drive itself, so the driver can do tickets as well.
Last edited:
They wouldn't.
Some DOO services at my TOC have catering (Railgourmet trolley dollies) and revenue staff. They are barely even trained on their own jobs let alone emergency procedures. Sure, as a driver I would use them as able-bodied assistants in an emergency before I would call on a member of the public, but only just.
There's no way a TOC would remove the guards to cut costs and then provide a TM with equivalent safety-critical training. It doesn't fit the profit motive.
Jonfun
Established Member
Just as a point of order, being trained in assisting the safe evacuation of a train doesn't mean they're receiving safety critical training. WatcherZero never said the training would be equivalent.
As long as nobody loses their job then I am not overly concerned about this. As technology develops if it is safe to close the doors using CCTV / door sensors etc. then why not do things this way?
Some have mentioned about a lack of customer-facing staff on the trains if there is only a driver on board. Well half the guards on the Cardiff - Portsmouth trains never venture from the rear cab anyway so the public are already used to it!
Some have mentioned about a lack of customer-facing staff on the trains if there is only a driver on board. Well half the guards on the Cardiff - Portsmouth trains never venture from the rear cab anyway so the public are already used to it!
- Status