Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

[infobleep]

Any idea how many were cancelled in total over the day ? Would a few trips get cancelled (for a variety of reasons) every day or are they usually 100% ?

I don't know. I also don't know how I'd go about collecting the stats including reasons. Certainly more cancelled than on South West Trains, who do employ guards.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[ah-media]

Taken from Network Rail

Cancellation and significant lateness (CaSL)

A train is counted as being a CaSL failure if:

It is cancelled at origin.
It is cancelled en route.
The originating station is changed.
It fails to make a scheduled stop at a station.
It is significantly late (ie it arrives at its terminating station 30 minutes or more late).

15/16 16/17 MA

Abellio Greater Anglia 2.5 3.1 3.0
Arriva Trains Wales 2.8 2.3 2.8
c2c Rail 1.3 3.7 1.7
Chiltern 1.0 4.0 1.9
Crosscountry 3.5 2.6 3.9
East Midlands Trains 1.7 1.4 2.2
First Hull Trains 6.1 7.5 6.7
Transpennine Express 5.3 1.9 6.4
GTR 4.8 7.9 7.9
Grand Central 5.9 6.7 5.7
Great Western Railway 2.3 2.5 2.9
Heathrow Express 1.3 2.2 2.4
London Midland 2.1 1.9 2.7
London Overground 1.6 2.4 2.2
Merseyrail 1.9 1.5 1.9
Northern 1.3 1.3 1.9
Southeastern 2.7 2.3 3.8
South West Trains 2.2 3.5 3.3
TfL Rail 2.0 3.6 2.9
Virgin Trains EC 6.6 6.8 7.0
Virgin Trains WC 2.0 1.7 4.4

Total 2.6 3.3 3.7

MA - The moving annual average is calculated over 365 days to 15 October.

 

[Goldfish62]

I imagine a lot of people don't care whether there computer data is backed up or not or they take the risk it will be fine.. ... Then they have a hard drive failure.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Then you point out a major crash might occur and there's an absence of a guard and you ask them if they would like a guard then? Finish your paragraph for you. Hope you don't mind.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

I should imagine that they'd wonder why you are suggesting they should travel by train at all if they should expect a major crash.

 

[infobleep]

I should imagine that they'd wonder why you are suggesting they should travel by train at all if they should expect a major crash.

It's not about expecting a major crash but having people there should it happen.

I mean the numbers killed in house fires or car crashes are low. Do I suggest people don't live in houses or drive cars? No. However people wouldn't expect there not to be a fire service or ambience service, even if the risk is low.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Taken from Network Rail

Cancellation and significant lateness (CaSL)

A train is counted as being a CaSL failure if:

It is cancelled at origin.
It is cancelled en route.
The originating station is changed.
It fails to make a scheduled stop at a station.
It is significantly late (ie it arrives at its terminating station 30 minutes or more late).

15/16 16/17 MA

Abellio Greater Anglia 2.5 3.1 3.0
Arriva Trains Wales 2.8 2.3 2.8
c2c Rail 1.3 3.7 1.7
Chiltern 1.0 4.0 1.9
Crosscountry 3.5 2.6 3.9
East Midlands Trains 1.7 1.4 2.2
First Hull Trains 6.1 7.5 6.7
Transpennine Express 5.3 1.9 6.4
GTR 4.8 7.9 7.9
Grand Central 5.9 6.7 5.7
Great Western Railway 2.3 2.5 2.9
Heathrow Express 1.3 2.2 2.4
London Midland 2.1 1.9 2.7
London Overground 1.6 2.4 2.2
Merseyrail 1.9 1.5 1.9
Northern 1.3 1.3 1.9
Southeastern 2.7 2.3 3.8
South West Trains 2.2 3.5 3.3
TfL Rail 2.0 3.6 2.9
Virgin Trains EC 6.6 6.8 7.0
Virgin Trains WC 2.0 1.7 4.4

Total 2.6 3.3 3.7

MA - The moving annual average is calculated over 365 days to 15 October.

What does 7.9 mean. Percentage cancelled or percentage about the average?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

 

[HowardGWR]

It's not about expecting a major crash but having people there should it happen.

I mean the numbers killed in house fires or car crashes are low. Do I suggest people don't live in houses or drive cars? No. However people wouldn't expect there not to be a fire service or ambience service, even if the risk is low.

That is so wrong it amounts to a non sequitur. The numbers you quote are high and very high indeed, respectively, compared with the chance of a rail crash.

That's the whole point about the amount one invests or spends for safety reasons. Disregarding any other reasons for having a guard function, the idea of carrying around a staff member in case of a train collision is a cost-benefit non-starter.

That, just to emphasise, is of course aside from any other reasons for having a guard.

 

[Deepgreen]

It's not about expecting a major crash but having people there should it happen.

I mean the numbers killed in house fires or car crashes are low. Do I suggest people don't live in houses or drive cars? No. However people wouldn't expect there not to be a fire service or ambience service, even if the risk is low.

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

What does 7.9 mean. Percentage cancelled or percentage about the average?

Sent from my SM-G925F using Tapatalk

Another text issue?! From where do you derive the idea that car crash deaths numbers are "low"? By any measure, they are hugely higher than by rail, and house fires also cause far more deaths than rail incidents.

 

[Dave1987]

That is so wrong it amounts to a non sequitur. The numbers you quote are high and very high indeed, respectively, compared with the chance of a rail crash.

That's the whole point about the amount one invests or spends for safety reasons. Disregarding any other reasons for having a guard function, the idea of carrying around a staff member in case of a train collision is a cost-benefit non-starter.

That, just to emphasise, is of course aside from any other reasons for having a guard.

So you are willing to say that the chances of a major derailment, train fire etc is sufficiently low that you would be willing to not have that second person on board to stop people detraining themselves and should people be killed or injured it just 'C'est la vie'? When you start letting the accountants manage safety it's a very very slippery slope. Arguably it's what happened in the US with their failure to make the train company implement a version of TPWS and look what happened!

 

[Solent&Wessex]

The RMT seem to refuse to accept DOO and DCO are different. So they presumably think that asking guards to not do door duties is the same as making them redundant!

I always interpreted it to be as you described, which is driver controlled doors but guard dispatch, rather than the Strathclyde manning arrangement which is DOO-P (since there's only a ticket inspector, not a guard). The railway must have an official definition of what DCO actually is. If it's not even defined anywhere then how on Earth could the DfT ask for it to be rolled out? :roll:

Its how the Javelins operate, unless anyone knows different

DCO - Driver Controlled Operation - is a bodge name which has come out recently to make it sound better than DOO(P), even though they are essentially the same. Under DCO the driver has complete control and authority over the train, but a second member of staff will be onboard where practical. This member of staff does not take part in dispatch nor is necessarily safety critical.

The term DCO became widespread from the GWR IEPs and their ability to run without a train manager, with the driver controlling the doors at all times - it's not a DOO train, it's "DCO".

For the umpteenth time in this and other threads:

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL BETWEEN DOO AND DCO.

The Railway Rule Book defines DOO as

"Driver only (or DO) train: A train that is worked only by a driver and does not have a guard."

There is no definition of DCO in the rule book, so the closest we get is what DCO is defined as in the Northern franchise agreement, which is:

"“Driver Controlled Operation”
means operation of a train by a driver alone without the need for a conductor (or any other Franchise Employee);"

So they seem very similar - i.e. the same - to me.

 

[Carlisle]

For the umpteenth time in this and other threads:

THERE IS NO DIFFERENCE AT ALL BETWEEN DOO AND DCO.
.

Considering Arriva northern haven't yet disclosed if trains will actually be allowed in service without a second staff member onboard, you can't claim this with any certainty just yet

 

[74A]

So you are willing to say that the chances of a major derailment, train fire etc is sufficiently low that you would be willing to not have that second person on board to stop people detraining themselves and should people be killed or injured it just 'C'est la vie'? !

Yes that is the case the cost of employing a second person on board outweighs any benefit gained. DOO has been in use since 1982. If there was any benefit in having the second person surely it would have come out by now ?

Also in any cost/ benefit analysis you also have to take into account in such an accident there is also a good chance that second person will also be disabled. Unless you propose for them to travel in some sort of padded survival cell so that you can be sure they will be there in case on emergency.

With the recent Watford incident the driver had already pressed the emergency button on his GSMR and the other train was already stopping. All trains in the area came to a stand so there was no risk of any passengers being hit by other trains. It was helpful having a guard on board but I can't see the outcome would have been any different if it had been DOO.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Considering Arriva northern haven't yet disclosed if trains will actually be allowed in service without a second staff member onboard, you can't claim this with any certainty just yet

No the OP is right. There is no difference between DOO and DCO. Ive no doubt that if an OBS is not available the train will still run. And if the OBS go on strike then the trains will still run.

 

[Astradyne]

So you are willing to say that the chances of a major derailment, train fire etc is sufficiently low that you would be willing to not have that second person on board to stop people detraining themselves and should people be killed or injured it just 'C'est la vie'? When you start letting the accountants manage safety it's a very very slippery slope. Arguably it's what happened in the US with their failure to make the train company implement a version of TPWS and look what happened!

I am happy not to have a guard on my train .... as this has been the case for many year .... and never been involved in a major crash or incident. Beside, with the guard liable to be standing, he has the highest risk of injury .... so an injured guard could be a liability to the passengers.

There must be hundreds of thousands of DDO journeys taken every weekday .... how many rumblings about it being unsafe are made by passengers .... probably less than one person ... Mick Cash makes.

Also what is the difference from a passengers perspective if you are in a non-gangwayed unit, which is not the one the guards is in?

 

[Dave1987]

Yes that is the case the cost of employing a second person on board outweighs any benefit gained. DOO has been in use since 1982. If there was any benefit in having the second person surely it would have come out by now ?

Also in any cost/ benefit analysis you also have to take into account in such an accident there is also a good chance that second person will also be disabled. Unless you propose for them to travel in some sort of padded survival cell so that you can be sure they will be there in case on emergency.

With the recent Watford incident the driver had already pressed the emergency button on his GSMR and the other train was already stopping. All trains in the area came to a stand so there was no risk of any passengers being hit by other trains. It was helpful having a guard on board but I can't see the outcome would have been any different if it had been DOO.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


No the OP is right. There is no difference between DOO and DCO. Ive no doubt that if an OBS is not available the train will still run. And if the OBS go on strike then the trains will still run.

Well I'm not surprised by your answer at all. I notice you only respond to the posts you want to respond to which fit your ideology. For a driver in an emergency situation having a second member of crew to assist is invaluable. I know a driver who had to evacuate his train before the MOM could get there on his own as he was DOO and he said it was a nightmare. There are far far more risks to passengers than just other trains especially on AC electrified lines. But again you clearly know better than people who actually do the job. All this is cost cutting and performance protecting nothing more. It definitely seems that performance is becoming more important than safety. As drivers though we always make safety top priority, that is why we support guards. I notice as well you say about OBS going on strike having no effect, so what about the 'enhanced customer service' stuff. If OBS go on strike they won't be providing the 'enhanced customer service' so surely them going on strike would be very bad for the company?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am happy not to have a guard on my train .... as this has been the case for many year .... and never been involved in a major crash or incident. Beside, with the guard liable to be standing, he has the highest risk of injury .... so an injured guard could be a liability to the passengers.

There must be hundreds of thousands of DDO journeys taken every weekday .... how many rumblings about it being unsafe are made by passengers .... probably less than one person ... Mick Cash makes.

Also what is the difference from a passengers perspective if you are in a non-gangwayed unit, which is not the one the guards is in?

So what do you say to those people who detrained themselves onto the track simply because the driver was too busy to tell people what was going on? Again what do I know? I just drive trains day in day out :roll:

 

[BestWestern]

I am happy not to have a guard on my train .... as this has been the case for many year .... and never been involved in a major crash or incident. Beside, with the guard liable to be standing, he has the highest risk of injury .... so an injured guard could be a liability to the passengers.

There must be hundreds of thousands of DDO journeys taken every weekday .... how many rumblings about it being unsafe are made by passengers .... probably less than one person ... Mick Cash makes.

Also what is the difference from a passengers perspective if you are in a non-gangwayed unit, which is not the one the guards is in?

Is that a serious post?!

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Considering Arriva northern haven't yet disclosed if trains will actually be allowed in service without a second staff member onboard, you can't claim this with any certainty just yet

Perhaps you didn't read the full post I wrote?

The Railway Rule Book defines DOO as

"Driver only (or DO) train: A train that is worked only by a driver and does not have a guard."

There is no definition of DCO in the rule book, so the closest we get is what DCO is defined as in the Northern franchise agreement, which is:

"“Driver Controlled Operation”
means operation of a train by a driver alone without the need for a conductor (or any other Franchise Employee);"

So they seem very similar - i.e. the same - to me. DO runs without a Guard. DCO runs without a Conductor (Guard). In both cases the train CAN run without a second member of staff on board. Therefore, operationally, they are both the same.

 

[Antman]

I am happy not to have a guard on my train .... as this has been the case for many year .... and never been involved in a major crash or incident. Beside, with the guard liable to be standing, he has the highest risk of injury .... so an injured guard could be a liability to the passengers.

There must be hundreds of thousands of DDO journeys taken every weekday .... how many rumblings about it being unsafe are made by passengers .... probably less than one person ... Mick Cash makes.

Also what is the difference from a passengers perspective if you are in a non-gangwayed unit, which is not the one the guards is in?

I couldn't have put it better and presumably in the unlikely event of an accident the guard will turn into superman?

 

[Dave1987]

Well when the current government is hopefully ousted from No10 one hopes all these changes are reversed and all TOCs are compelled to hire guards again.

 

[Don King]

I am happy not to have a guard on my train .... as this has been the case for many year .... and never been involved in a major crash or incident. Beside, with the guard liable to be standing, he has the highest risk of injury .... so an injured guard could be a liability to the passengers.

The guard on the Ufton Nervet crash was doing revenue stood up. He escape with a cut finger. I believe he was in the coach where passengers died. The driver was sat down. He was killed.

There must be hundreds of thousands of DDO journeys taken every weekday .... how many rumblings about it being unsafe are made by passengers .... probably less than one person ... Mick Cash makes.

The following link may be of some help - http://www.google.co.uk

But here are a few examples of passengers.

A Paddington survivor.
http://www.watfordobserver.co.uk/stalbans/14788595._They_are_seeking_private_profit_before_public_safety____train_crash_survivor_backs_unions_in_Southern_dispute/

The National Pensioners Convention
http://npcuk.org/date/2016/10/page/4

Liverpool Council
http://www.railtechnologymagazine.com/Rail-News/liverpool-council-joins-campaign-opposing-driver-only-operation

Disabled People Against Cuts
http://dpac.uk.net/2016/08/support-the-rail-workers-striking-for-disabled-peoples-right-to-travel/

And yes there are plenty of commuters supporting ASLEF and the RMT in Southern land - look at the reaction to their pathetic "Strike Back" campaign. Yes there will be some opposed such as the usual "jail all strikers and kill their children" variety, and the "corporations are our new rulers, anyone opposed is racist / communist" types, as well as those who are reliant on media propaganda and have not delved deeper into the issues surrounding train dispatch, emergency protection, rail fatalities, train breakdowns, derailments and so on - partially due to a mixture of media and government bias, poor communications and public relations from the unions, and simply not having the time to research every last thing.

Also what is the difference from a passengers perspective if you are in a non-gangwayed unit, which is not the one the guards is in?

Hence why Cross Country stipulated another member of staff in the leading set of a double voyager, and Class 180s had a guard in both units. Even if the worst comes to the worst, there is still a guard on board to deal with emergency situations on the line. In a situation where a train is stranded, in many cases the guard could still go from set to set entering and exiting via the cabs and trackside should it be required.

 

[Astradyne]

Is that a serious post?!

Of course it is serious ... I have used DOO services for the past umpteen years ... so do you dispute anything I have stated or just trying to be a comedian.

If I am in a 10 car 171 ... and not in the same unit as the guard ... how is he going to help me in a crash?

Hence why Cross Country stipulated another member of staff in the leading set of a double voyager, and Class 180s had a guard in both units. Even if the worst comes to the worst, there is still a guard on board to deal with emergency situations on the line. In a situation where a train is stranded, in many cases the guard could still go from set to set entering and exiting via the cabs and trackside should it be required.

That is one example ... probably as a union concession ... but plenty of examples on the network where this is not the case

So what do you say to those people who detrained themselves onto the track simply because the driver was too busy to tell people what was going on? Again what do I know? I just drive trains day in day out :roll:

I would say to you if the driver can not stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. He is clearly not up to the job.

 

[Andrew32]

I am happy not to have a guard on my train .... as this has been the case for many year .... and never been involved in a major crash or incident. Beside, with the guard liable to be standing, he has the highest risk of injury .... so an injured guard could be a liability to the passengers.

There must be hundreds of thousands of DDO journeys taken every weekday .... how many rumblings about it being unsafe are made by passengers .... probably less than one person ... Mick Cash makes.

Also what is the difference from a passengers perspective if you are in a non-gangwayed unit, which is not the one the guards is in?

Part of the Me, Myself and I brigade I see

Just because you don't care wether a guard is on the train or not, others do, like those who do not choose to be disabled but rely on others to help and we need help in an emergency evacuation.

There was an incident earlier this year in Yorkshire where and individual feel between the platform and the train, he was badly injured but had the train not been guard operated, nobody would have seen him fall down onto the track and the train would have sliced him in two as the driver would have been oblivious to the situation with the cab monitors switching off as he pulled away, thankfully the guard stopped the train and saved his life.

There are hundreds of passengers that are supportive of the Keep the Guard on the train campaign up north and don't want to loose us and given the fact that there is public support down south regarding the southern fail dispute I think your argument that nobody cares is a little of the mark.

What southern are wanting to do is turn guards into ticket monkeys, someone without route knowledge, evacuation training, the ability to carry out the HOT procedure, carry out emergency protection of the line using TCOC'S and dets.

They would be absolutely clueless at to what to do in an emergency and that's no good when hundreds of lives are at risk in an emergency situation, it's the difference between a preventable accident and carnage.

You wouldn't get on a plane with just the pilot on as if he were incapacitated who who fly the thing?

Same as if the driver was killed or incapacitated in an accident, hundreds of passengers would be panicking, pulling the EDR's and running onto a running line that hadn't been blocked and getting splattered by a passing train, as for those who stayed on the train, they'd just wait for the next service to slam right into them, killing even more.

A guard can prevent that, we are more than just ticket monkeys.

 

[Don King]

I couldn't have put it better and presumably in the unlikely event of an accident the guard will turn into superman?

Perhaps ask the passengers involved in the Paddington crash and Ufton Nervet crashes what they think of the actions of the guard?

Or the passengers involved on board the unit involved in the 2006 Oxenholme stabbing, when the guard managed to get passengers out of the area and lock the murderer on his on in a carriage, forcing him to escape by smashing his way out of the window of a moving train.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Of course it is serious ... I have used DOO services for the past umpteen years ... so do you dispute anything I have stated or just trying to be a comedian.

If I am in a 10 car 171 ... and not in the same unit as the guard ... how is he going to help me in a crash?

* Protection of the line to stop trains running into the wreckage, running over self evacuating passengers, or any other movements (e.g. points) which could injure / kill anyone - based on route knowledge and traction knowledge.

* Switching off the current (where appropriate) to avoid said passengers being electrocuted, be it DC 3rd rail or AC power lines which could have come down.

* Securing of driving cabs / brake vans to preserve evidence (brake gauge readings, positions of levers) and so forth (which may be used for further investigation, as either the cause or a contributory cause / impediment of / to the incident).

* Access the tools required to assist with train evacuations - ladders, fire extinguishers and so on.

* Co-ordinate people on board the train who may be able to assist either with operational duties (safety critical off duty or on duty rail staff) or customer service / crowd control (on / off duty staff) and passengers who may be in the police, fire brigade, armed forces or medical fields.

* Inform emergency services and rail authorities of the correct location, nature of the incident, approximate number of passengers, nature of passengers (disabled, vulnerable, children, intoxicated, potentially violent, whatever), and alert them to any hazards or additional issues on site.

* Hand over control of isolations to Rail Incident Officer / similar grades who will take charge.

 

[Astradyne]

Part of the Me, Myself and I brigade I see

Just because you don't care wether a guard is on the train or not, others do, like those who do not choose to be disabled but rely on others to help and we need help in an emergency evacuation.

There was an incident earlier this year in Yorkshire where and individual feel between the platform and the train, he was badly injured but had the train not been guard operated, nobody would have seen him fall down onto the track and the train would have sliced him in two as the driver would have been oblivious to the situation with the cab monitors switching off as he pulled away, thankfully the guard stopped the train and saved his life.

There are hundreds of passengers that are supportive of the Keep the Guard on the train campaign up north and don't want to loose us and given the fact that there is public support down south regarding the southern fail dispute I think your argument that nobody cares is a little of the mark.

What southern are wanting to do is turn guards into ticket monkeys, someone without route knowledge, evacuation training, the ability to carry out the HOT procedure, carry out emergency protection of the line using TCOC'S and dets.

They would be absolutely clueless at to what to do in an emergency and that's no good when hundreds of lives are at risk in an emergency situation, it's the difference between a preventable accident and carnage.

You wouldn't get on a plane with just the pilot on as if he were incapacitated who who fly the thing?

Same as if the driver was killed or incapacitated in an accident, hundreds of passengers would be panicking, pulling the EDR's and running onto a running line that hadn't been blocked and getting splattered by a passing train, as for those who stayed on the train, they'd just wait for the next service to slam right into them, killing even more.

A guard can prevent that, we are more than just ticket monkeys.

I regularly use a DOO train ... we dont even need an onboard ticket monkey as you so tactfully call them. OBS is just a way of not having to sack all the guards.

Up north and a little 1 or 2 coach train yes ... that might be the case ... but then on a 12 car train he has as little chance of seeing a falling passenger as the driver.

Train slamming into the stationary train. That is what signals are for. If what you are saying is correct, the railway has bigger issues than if there is a guard on the train. And down south we all have mobile phones ... sure at least one passenger could dial 911(999)

 

[Don King]

I would say to you if the driver can not stand the heat, he should get out of the kitchen. He is clearly not up to the job.

So the one man who chances has seen the incident unfolding before his eyes, and who is at the greatest risk of incapacitation or death, who has a multitude of associated duties to do, assuming he even survives or is in any fit state to do anything, should be sacked because he is unable to effectively perform crowd control duties single handedly (something that no driver has ever been trained on to my knowledge), on a train where he has zero / or a very vague idea of what sort of passengers he is carrying, and the nature of their individual needs.

You may as well sack every single driver on the network then.

 

[Andrew32]

If I am in a 10 car 171 ... and not in the same unit as the guard ... how is he going to help me in a crash

If the train crashed, regardless of how many carriages it had and the driver was killed or incapacitated the guard would help you by doing the following.

First of all the guard would press the red button on the GSMR to alert all trains within a ten mile radius the a train was in distress.

He or she would then phone the signaller to as for the relevant lines to be blocked, giving details of where the train was and what the nature of the accident was and how many people were injured and what services were needed.

If the signaller couldn't give assurances the the line was blocked, the guard would have to carry out emergency protection of the line in order to prevent a further accident, something which the driver of a DOO train would be required to do, can't do it if he's dead.

This would involve placing TCOC'S on the effected lines and running one and a quarter miles up the track to place down three detonators on the effected lines 20 yards apart, the guard would also use his or her route knowledge to decide if any junctions needed to be protected by taking into account the direction of traffic and line speed.

By doing this, the guard would help to prevent another train or trains slamming into your crashed train at anything between 1mph to 125mph.

Would a non safety critically trained ticket inspector/on board supervisor be able to do all of this?

 

[Astradyne]

So the one man who chances has seen the incident unfolding before his eyes, and who is at the greatest risk of incapacitation or death, who has a multitude of associated duties to do, assuming he even survives or is in any fit state to do anything, should be sacked because he is unable to effectively perform crowd control duties single handedly (something that no driver has ever been trained on to my knowledge), on a train where he has zero / or a very vague idea of what sort of passengers he is carrying, and the nature of their individual needs.

You may as well sack every single driver on the network then.

Suppose that is one solution ... then the superman guards can drive the trains as well as help evacuttions.

Wonder how far we are way from driverless trains .... problem solved then.

 

[Don King]

I regularly use a DOO train ... we dont even need an onboard ticket monkey as you so tactfully call them. OBS is just a way of not having to sack all the guards.

Up north and a little 1 or 2 coach train yes ... that might be the case ... but then on a 12 car train he has as little chance of seeing a falling passenger as the driver.

The bulk of dispatch incidents investigated by the Rail Accident and Investigation Board have occurred with DOO self dispatch via CCTV on long trains - the very method the government want all trains to adopt.

Train slamming into the stationary train. That is what signals are for. If what you are saying is correct, the railway has bigger issues than if there is a guard on the train.

Tree / car / cattle / falling masonry / landslip / concrete blocks placed by vandals - all have caused crashes and derailments, of which some have been fatal to passengers and staff, let alone injuries. It's not all about trains going through red signals for starters.

And down south we all have mobile phones ... sure at least one passenger could dial 911(999)

Assuming 1) reception and 2) A proper answer to "Where is the accident sir?" "Er between Bristol Parkway and Swindon - can't see anything much there's a wall or a field here / it's dark"

 

[Astradyne]

If the train crashed, regardless of how many carriages it had and the driver was killed or incapacitated the guard would help you by doing the following.

First of all the guard would press the red button on the GSMR to alert all trains within a ten mile radius the a train was in distress.

He or she would then phone the signaller to as for the relevant lines to be blocked, giving details of where the train was and what the nature of the accident was and how many people were injured and what services were needed.

If the signaller couldn't give assurances the the line was blocked, the guard would have to carry out emergency protection of the line in order to prevent a further accident, something which the driver of a DOO train would be required to do, can't do it if he's dead.

This would involve placing TCOC'S on the effected lines and running one and a quarter miles up the track to place down three detonators on the effected lines 20 yards apart, the guard would also use his or her route knowledge to decide if any junctions needed to be protected by taking into account the direction of traffic and line speed.

By doing this, the guard would help to prevent another train or trains slamming into your crashed train at anything between 1mph to 125mph.

Would a non safety critically trained ticket inspector/on board supervisor be able to do all of this?

Out of curiosity does the guard do this 1.25 mile run and back, before or after he has evacuated you .... as this little jaunt is going to take over 10 minutes even if extremely fit ... by which time you would be dead if he ran first, and good chance the train would have already hit you if he evacuated the passengers first

 

[Andrew32]

Train slamming into the stationary train. That is what signals are for. If what you are saying is correct, the railway has bigger issues than if there is a guard on the train. And down south we all have mobile phones ... sure at least one passenger could dial 911(999)

If the train has derailed, the signal will turn to green behind the train so the signaling system would assume that the line is clear when it isn't, a guard placing down a TCOC will switch it back to red, signals on working properly when all wheels are on the line.

I assume people must have the direct line to the local signaller in thier mobile phones so they can tell them what junction there are at, what the line speed is, wether there on the Up or Down main line etc etc?

 

[Don King]

Suppose that is one solution ... then the superman guards can drive the trains as well as help evacuttions.

Wonder how far we are way from driverless trains .... problem solved then.

A well argued and coherent response...

On a mixed freight / high speed / regional and local passenger mainline? Good luck with that one. The custom built DLR meets none of those requirements, and has a guard who can drive train.

How about we automate your job? I'd be up for seeing you thrown to the corporate wolves and the dole queue, just as you seem happy to throw the rail staff to.

 

[Astradyne]

If the train has derailed, the signal will turn to green behind the train so the signaling system would assume that the line is clear when it isn't, a guard placing down a TCOC will switch it back to red, signals on working properly when all wheels are on the line.

I assume people must have the direct line to the local signaller in thier mobile phones so they can tell them what junction there are at, what the line speed is, wether there on the Up or Down main line etc etc?

OK the system then needs to change ... if a train unexpectedly does not exit a section within a given/normal time period (can be calculated from traffic conditions, colour of last signal) the signalman needs to contact the driver ... no response ... lock down the system.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A well argued and coherent response...

On a mixed freight / high speed / regional and local passenger mainline? Good luck with that one. The custom built DLR meets none of those requirements, and has a guard who can drive train.

How about we automate your job? I'd be up for seeing you thrown to the corporate wolves and the dole queue, just as you seem happy to throw the rail staff to.

My job is to automate everything! And that response was flippant.

 

[otomous]

I am happy not to have a guard on my train .... as this has been the case for many year .... and never been involved in a major crash or incident. Beside, with the guard liable to be standing, he has the highest risk of injury .... so an injured guard could be a liability to the passengers.

There must be hundreds of thousands of DDO journeys taken every weekday .... how many rumblings about it being unsafe are made by passengers .... probably less than one person ... Mick Cash makes.

Also what is the difference from a passengers perspective if you are in a non-gangwayed unit, which is not the one the guards is in?

Well I'm not, but I'm only a driver, so I'm the one hoping on every trip that:

- I won't have a fault that I can't concentrate on sorting out because I've got punters asking me questions I can't answer

- I won't have one under and be totally unable to deal with the punters because of the state I might be in

- I won't be incapacitated by a tree, an air rifle, a stone or a heart attack, leaving a signaller to find out that there's no driver when the DSD alarm goes off and no one to contact on the train

- I won't hit a cow and lose the GSMR and have to leave the passengers alone while I do protection

- I won't be stuck in a signal or power failure between stations with no one to reassure the punters because I can't be away from the radio for long

- a smoke alarm or passcomm doesn't go off on a crowded service which I have to go and sort out personally, stranding the train in the process

- there won't be sunlight shining in the cameras, on the monitors, or people who won't stand clear from the train that I can't communicate so I have to delay the train while I do things manually on the platform

- I don't miss someone falling in the gap or hanging on the train or running for it that a guard might have had a better chance of noticing

- a fight doesn't break out that I have to try and use my judgement to do something about whilst not endangering myself or anyone else

And if they were to occasionally consult train crew about train design and the implications of no gangway, they might stop building trains without them.

I think that's it, and plenty for passengers to be concerned about there - but no one has taken the trouble to explain these possibilities to them.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

A well argued and coherent response...

On a mixed freight / high speed / regional and local passenger mainline? Good luck with that one. The custom built DLR meets none of those requirements, and has a guard who can drive train.

How about we automate your job? I'd be up for seeing you thrown to the corporate wolves and the dole queue, just as you seem happy to throw the rail staff to.

Doh! Don King, Dave1987, we've done it again. Walked right into it. We're feeding the ants again. Why do we never learn?