Merseyrail unit moving away with door open

[Lampshade]

Hi All

No services/lines/times/stations mentioned, yesterday I was on a Merseyrail service, sat right at the back. As we were departing station X the Guard closed the doors and gave the two on the buzzer (bell) as the local door was closing, received two dings back and the train started to move - whilst the door was only halfway closed hock:

Is this supposed to happen? Does interlock not apply to the local door on these units? :?

 

[GM228]

Hi All

No services/lines/times/stations mentioned, yesterday I was on a Merseyrail service, sat right at the back. As we were departing station X the Guard closed the doors and gave the two on the buzzer (bell) as the local door was closing, received two dings back and the train started to move - whilst the door was only halfway closed hock:

Is this supposed to happen? Does interlock not apply to the local door on these units? :?

Was it a rolling start perhaps with traction only applying once the door interlock engaged, driver should not release his/her brakes before the interlock illuminates but without knowing the specifics it would be hard to comment on otherwise?

 

[Bletchleyite]

There is no interlock on the staff doors on 507s and 508s as used on Merseyside (unless it's been retrofitted at some point). Until the late 1990s at least usual practice was to give 2 bells with the door open and watch the train out of the platform with it open, only closing it once fully out of the platform.

 

[A-driver]

Hi All



No services/lines/times/stations mentioned, yesterday I was on a Merseyrail service, sat right at the back. As we were departing station X the Guard closed the doors and gave the two on the buzzer (bell) as the local door was closing, received two dings back and the train started to move - whilst the door was only halfway closed hock:



Is this supposed to happen? Does interlock not apply to the local door on these units? :?

Not really an issue if it was a local door as passengers can't get to it. If it was a passenger door that would be different.

 

[323235]

After the James Street incident both Northern and Merseyrail staff did door procedures to the letter but recently the tiny corner cutting has returned i.e. closing local doors on 323s with the passenger controls because it is quicker then using the panel button etc... so it doesn't surprise me that this type of thing has returned.

As long as the guard does it in a way as to stay as safe as possible then the merseyrail example is safer for passengers as they are watching platform behaviour longer

 

[prod_pep]

There is no interlock on the staff doors on 507s and 508s as used on Merseyside (unless it's been retrofitted at some point). Until the late 1990s at least usual practice was to give 2 bells with the door open and watch the train out of the platform with it open, only closing it once fully out of the platform.

The above practice could also be observed well into the 2000s from memory but you rarely see it now. There seems to be a mixed bag of approaches amongst guards at present: some give two bells and then close the local door, others start to close the local door before giving the bells. The former has to be the safer option though as it offers better platform visibility as the train departs.

As someone who was so used to the Merseyrail approach, using a 313 for the first time on Silverlink back in 2003 was a little strange with quite a long pause between the passenger doors closing and the bells being given.

 

[physics34]

If they are anything like 455s maybe the door got stuck

 

[jamesst]

Hi All

No services/lines/times/stations mentioned, yesterday I was on a Merseyrail service, sat right at the back. As we were departing station X the Guard closed the doors and gave the two on the buzzer (bell) as the local door was closing, received two dings back and the train started to move - whilst the door was only halfway closed hock:

Is this supposed to happen? Does interlock not apply to the local door on these units? :?

If you're talking about the cab area then those doors aren't covered by the interlock. No danger as no passengers can get near that area.
I very much doubt it was in a coach as these doors are covered by the interlock and so the driver wouldn't of been able to take power

 

[ComUtoR]

After the James Street incident...

As long as the guard does it in a way as to stay as safe as possible then the merseyrail example is safer for passengers as they are watching platform behaviour longer

So we have learned nothing then.

 

[racyrich]

We had something similar at Fenchurch St the other week on my usual 17.18 departure.

Well, we didn't pull away. We just started rolling, still 3 minutes to departure, definitely no power applied. All the doors open and of course lots of passengers boarding as at that time it was the next train out.
We rolled about 15 feet before the brakes were applied.

I never realised there was a gradient in the station!

 

[najaB]

Well, we didn't pull away. We just started rolling, still 3 minutes to departure, definitely no power applied. All the doors open and of course lots of passengers boarding as at that time it was the next train out.
We rolled about 15 feet before the brakes were applied.

Good thing it wasn't a WRC train at Reading or it would've been tweeted and re-tweeted before it had managed to roll 5 feet!

 

[185]

As long as the guard does it in a way as to stay as safe as possible then the merseyrail example is safer for passengers as they are watching platform behaviour longer

Indeed, one thing was mentioned in court for the defence was the procedure introduced under Arriva Trains Merseyside in 2000, directly hinders the guard's view of the platform whilst moving. (Door is closed prior to the two bells).

Under the original procedure before this, (two on the bell, then slowly shut the cab local door), there is a risk of staff falling out or passengers trying to enter the open door whilst moving, however the view of the platform was considered more important during despatch.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Under the original procedure before this, (two on the bell, then slowly shut the cab local door), there is a risk of staff falling out or passengers trying to enter the open door whilst moving, however the view of the platform was considered more important during despatch.

In over 20 years of growing up with very frequent use of Merseyrail, I don't think I once saw someone attempt to enter the cab door of a moving train, if only because the guard's body would be fully blocking it so it would be futile. Though in the days before hustle alarms, it was far more common for the doors to be reopened for a runner, or for a single bell to be issued and them allowed to board through the cab door (did it a couple of times myself).

That method of operation (wave the train off and then watch from the local door until the train is out of the platform) remains usual practice in Germany, FWIW. I also observed it years ago on Eurostar but I don't know if they still do.

 

[8J]

Merseyrail and SWT on the 455's are the only TOCS I know who do it. Personally I believe it is safer as the train spends less time on the platform which in turn reduces the chance of an incident.

The likes of Northern and TPE are instructing guards to be very slow on the doors and methods such as RA dispatch in my opinion are unsafe and add to the time the train is spent unnecessarily standing still.

 

[oversteer]

We had something similar at Fenchurch St the other week on my usual 17.18 departure.

Well, we didn't pull away. We just started rolling, still 3 minutes to departure, definitely no power applied. All the doors open and of course lots of passengers boarding as at that time it was the next train out.
We rolled about 15 feet before the brakes were applied.

I never realised there was a gradient in the station!

Surely no Electrostar in normal service could move with passenger doors open? I'd have thought the RAIB would be very interested to know about this.

 

[tsr]

Surely no Electrostar in normal service could move with passenger doors open? I'd have thought the RAIB would be very interested to know about this.

It would certainly need to be investigated by the TOC if not RAIB. Electrostars can roll with the doors open but cannot take power.

 

[A-driver]

Surely no Electrostar in normal service could move with passenger doors open? I'd have thought the RAIB would be very interested to know about this.

Very few units have interlock linked to brakes. If the brake is released with doors open and the train is on a gradient it will roll. It can't take power though unless traction interlock is isolated.

The RAIB won't investigate a train roll with doors open unless it's considered particularly major. Happens fairly regularly (not that I'm claiming it isn't serious.) it certainly isn't an unheard of event.

 

[craigybagel]

Very few units have interlock linked to brakes. If the brake is released with doors open and the train is on a gradient it will roll. It can't take power though unless traction interlock is isolated.

.

Is it really that rare? I can't speak for your neck of the woods but all 4 DMUs I sign have the brakes interlocked with the doors. I know 155s don't, and loco hauled stock obviously, but I thought they were very much an exception!

 

[oversteer]

Yeah that really surprised me. I thought all modern trains had to have passenger doors closed and locked otherwise the brakes would come on automatically.

 

[the sniper]

Is it really that rare? I can't speak for your neck of the woods but all 4 DMUs I sign have the brakes interlocked with the doors. I know 155s don't, and loco hauled stock obviously, but I thought they were very much an exception!

Well at the very least I know 323s will roll with the doors open with brakes released. I've had it a number of times. I wouldn't say it's common, but enough for me to know you can get a move on pretty quick with just gravity. Usually the driver will realise before you intervene from the back cab though...

 

[A-driver]

Is it really that rare? I can't speak for your neck of the woods but all 4 DMUs I sign have the brakes interlocked with the doors. I know 155s don't, and loco hauled stock obviously, but I thought they were very much an exception!

I believe it's more common on DMUs-I seem to remember 170s have brakes linked to interlock?

But out of all stock I have signed-377,455,456,313,319,321,317,365-all can roll with doors open. Infact even at speed the brakes won't apply if the doors are opened on a 317. The first you may know a door is open at 100mph is when you feel that you arnt getting enough power and turn round to look at the interlock light. Although that is rare with most stock.

There have been a number of station rolls in 365s over the past year for some reason, no one really knows why so specific to that stock or why the sudden rise.

 

[craigybagel]

I believe it's more common on DMUs-I seem to remember 170s have brakes linked to interlock?

But out of all stock I have signed-377,455,456,313,319,321,317,365-all can roll with doors open. Infact even at speed the brakes won't apply if the doors are opened on a 317. The first you may know a door is open at 100mph is when you feel that you arnt getting enough power and turn round to look at the interlock light. Although that is rare with most stock.

There have been a number of station rolls in 365s over the past year for some reason, no one really knows why so specific to that stock or why the sudden rise.

Cheers for that, you learn something new every day.....

Suppose the next question is, why fit it to DMUs and not EMUs?! And why, for example, was it retrofitted to 153s when they were converted from 155s, but at the same time new build EMUs were being built without it?!

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Are the doors interlocked with the brakes on 350s, 450s and 444s? Without looking at a video on youtube again i think I remember seeing a hazard light flashing on a desiro when the train was moving (presumably the coach where the guard is using the guard's panel). Does it only interlock above a certain speed?

 

[A-driver]

Are the doors interlocked with the brakes on 350s, 450s and 444s? Without looking at a video on youtube again i think I remember seeing a hazard light flashing on a desiro when the train was moving (presumably the coach where the guard is using the guard's panel). Does it only interlock above a certain speed?

The flashing hazard means the guards key is in, not that a door is open.

 

[Domh245]

My understanding is that the flashing light is indicative of a door control panel being active in that coach. I'm not entirely sure if the doors interlock with brakes on the desiros, but interlock is when the doors are proved close, so it is independent of speed. There is a relay that I think is used to allow the doors to open, and that is speed dependant (and makes quite a clunk when it operates) - this is common to a lot of stock.

 

[casualobserver]

....recently the tiny corner cutting has returned i.e. closing local doors on 323s with the passenger controls because it is quicker then using the panel button etc...

Really I was just looking for a response regarding that comment. Could it be considered an unsafe act liable to cause harm carrying out 'local' door procedure in the TS car in this manner? I only ask as I'm struggling to see a risk factor with this method of working.

 

[the sniper]

....recently the tiny corner cutting has returned i.e. closing local doors on 323s with the passenger controls because it is quicker then using the panel button etc...

Really I was just looking for a response regarding that comment. Could it be considered an unsafe act liable to cause harm carrying out 'local' door procedure in the TS car in this manner? I only ask as I'm struggling to see a risk factor with this method of working.

To be honest I'm not entirely sure what is being alleged.

 

[casualobserver]

sorry, that was supposed to be quoting post #5 in this thread but I clearly made an error. The original posting suggests that it's considered to be a shortcut closing the local door by means of the passenger close button as opposed to using the far slower, but technically correct close button on the door key switch panel and I was attempting to ascertain what the perceived risk was to taking this supposed shortcut method.

 

[the sniper]

sorry, that was supposed to be quoting post #5 in this thread but I clearly made an error. The original posting suggests that it's considered to be a shortcut closing the local door by means of the passenger close button as opposed to using the far slower, but technically correct close button on the door key switch panel and I was attempting to ascertain what the perceived risk was to taking this supposed shortcut method.

Yeah sorry I appreciated what you were quoting, I just don't fully understand what the issue is that is being alleged. As far as I knew to close the local door on the middle panel you have to push the local door close button at least first. I didn't know you could achieve the same thing by just pushing the public close door button, if you can, as I don't think I've tried it... If that works, I can't see that it's a problem at all. It's just a quicker closing door. It doesn't interfere with the dispatch procedure.

On a Class 170 you can shut the passenger doors and pull the local door shut within seconds! That'd be quicker than any way of shutting any 323 door.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The flashing hazard means the guards key is in, not that a door is open.

Indeed, a very useful feature should you need to speak to the guard in a hurry for any reason.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

sorry, that was supposed to be quoting post #5 in this thread but I clearly made an error. The original posting suggests that it's considered to be a shortcut closing the local door by means of the passenger close button as opposed to using the far slower, but technically correct close button on the door key switch panel and I was attempting to ascertain what the perceived risk was to taking this supposed shortcut method.

I can't see why there would be a specific risk to doing that aside from the principle of it not being correct procedure (and am equally not quite understanding why it's quicker?) Would be interested to know.