5 people suspended after SouthEastern rail tour driven by "unauthorised" person.

[LOL The Irony]

From the Evening Standard: https://www.standard.co.uk/news/tra...-is-driven-by-unapproved-person-a3997291.html

Five drivers have been suspended following allegations an “unauthorised” person was allowed to drive a Javelin train, capable of 140mph, on a journey from St Pancras International station.

Southeastern has launched a formal investigation and reported the alleged incident to the Office of Rail and Road, the government department responsible for railway safety regulations.


The alleged incident involved a special train travelling to Portsmouth to raise money for the Royal British Legion Poppy Appeal.


It is not known what speed the train was travelling when the unauthorised person, said to be a woman, was allegedly at the controls.


Two high-speed driver managers and three drivers have been stood down.

The five are understood to have volunteered to work unpaid for the journey in aid of the Poppy Appeal but are now at risk of losing their £54,000-plus-a-year jobs.

A Southeastern spokesman said: “We are currently investigating a potential driving irregularity involving Southeastern staff ... At no point was the safety of the train in question, nor were any members of the public involved.”

The incident is said to have happened when the drivers were in the train cab and under the supervision of a qualified driver manager and driver instructor.

The "unauthorised" person was a member of staff.

The Javelin was running under the protection of the automatic train protection system at the time, which would stop the train automatically if a signal was passed at danger.

It is normal practice for Southeastern trainees to drive in a supervised environment with passengers on board.

This matter is under investigation because of allegations made around the authorisation of this activity.

Very severe incident if what was said is true.

 

[Clip]

Wow. I am properly stunned by that if correct.

 

[LAX54]

OK from St Pan, but then says going to Portsmouth ? are 395's cleared for such a run ?

 

[Dhassell]

OK from St Pan, but then says going to Portsmouth ? are 395's cleared for such a run ?

Seems to have occurred during the railtour earlier this month which visited Portsmouth.

 

[tsr]

OK from St Pan, but then says going to Portsmouth ? are 395's cleared for such a run ?

One would hope so, given that they went there (and several other places, via Tonbridge, Redhill and Horsham) on the Poppy Appeal tour.

It's not a regular destination by any means...

 

[Jonfun]

I think my favourite line from that article has to be:

"...when the unauthorised person, who was said to be a woman, was at the controls."

 

[6Gman]

The press report seems to assume that the only hazard would be passing a red signal.

 

[dk1]

Shame it tarnishes the railtour itself which raised an amazing £31k for the Royal British Legion.

 

[Mag_seven]

Am I getting it wrong, but does the article imply there were SIX people in the cab (the five drivers plus the unauthorised person)?

 

[thedbdiboy]

I remember as a schoolboy in the 1980s getting a certain special train (I won't be specific on details) where around 20 people were crowded into the cab and the driver had a young lady on his lap driving the train. Of course Health & Safety hadn't been invented then.

 

[SP Man]

It's a hard one. The Driver Managers should be trained instructors and the risk would be very minimal.

 

[swaldman]

I'm confused. If "At no point was the safety of the train in question", then what's the problem?

 

[Iskra]

It's a hard one. The Driver Managers should be trained instructors and the risk would be very minimal.

Exactly.

Sad that people who have given up their time in an effort to raise money for charity are now looking at losing their livelihoods. Also sad that someone has reported this. There is a time for discretion to be shown, providing there was no detriment caused, this should be it. I can't imagine a massive rush for volunteers next time drivers are needed for such a tour.

 

[GW43125]

Not being funny though, but there always used to be a lot of this going on and nobody really cared nor was anyone in danger.
Even I've done things I probably shouldn't have on the railway, but as long as you're well supervised what's the problem?
(In my case, I made a mistake and was very swiftly not allowed to do any more).

 

[Elwyn]

I was driving a steam train in Poland 15 years ago (officially, and under the supervision of a Polish driver). We were at the terminus of a local service into Wroclaw, waiting to depart. A very beautiful Polish business lady in her 20s appeared at the cab door to enquire why today’s train was steam instead of the usual electric unit. My supervisor was clearly struck by her interest, and perhaps her beauty, and explained the background. He then invited her aboard. I was quickly told to vacate the driving seat and hold her briefcase instead. The intricacies of the reverser, injector and brakes were quickly explained (which obviously involved a certain amount of hands on guidance) and 2 minutes later we set off with the lady driving under close supervision. She drove to the next station, and no-one was any the worse for it (or any the wiser). But probably not a great idea all the same. Distractions cause accidents.

My grandmother lived near Wormit in Fife and she told me about an accident there in the 1950s when a Sunday school charter train ran into the station going too quickly, and derailed (with 3 deaths). The later enquiry reportedly revealed that the driver had had a drink or two and that there were 3 unauthorized passengers on the footplate including one of the children on the outing, and so perhaps the crew’s attention had not been as focused as it should have been.

https://www.eveningtelegraph.co.uk/...into-wormit-station-with-539-people-on-board/

Being very strict about who is in the drivers cab when a train is operational, is pretty important in my opinion.

 

[neilm]

The cowden rail crash clearly should remind people why only the driver should drive the train. The rules are very clear and should always be respected, otherwise accidents happen and people can get killed.

I am sure they will have plenty of volunteers next time as most drivers know the rules.

 

[GB]

The cowden rail crash clearly should remind people why only the driver should drive the train.

You mean the one where there was a suggestion the guard may have been at the controls but was never actually proven. In any respect, fully qualified drivers have caused accidents/incidents so that logic doesn't really wash.

 

[deltic]

They were just seeing if Phillip Hammond's statement was true - that driving a train isn't difficult, even a woman can do it.

 

[neilm]

You mean the one where there was a suggestion the guard may have been at the controls but was never actually proven. In any respect, fully qualified drivers have caused accidents/incidents so that logic doesn't really wash.

I think it does, driver was not at the controls and accident happened.

And what would of happened this railtour train was in accident with someone else at the controls and crashes into timetables train? The ORR has already had to clamp down on WCR. This could easily stop railtours happening or at least stricter regulation that makes them harder to operate.

I am sure they thought it was fine, but someone on that train did not think it was right and they were as rules were broken.

 

[bramling]

The cowden rail crash clearly should remind people why only the driver should drive the train. The rules are very clear and should always be respected, otherwise accidents happen and people can get killed.

There were a number of differences with the Cowden situation.

Apart from the fact that it was never more than a theory that the guard was driving (in fact IIRC the report concluded from the limited evidence available that it was more likely the driver was), in the case of Cowde the driver wasn't an instructor and was actually fairly inexperienced himself, whilst at the same time driving in fog. Also it was also a possibility that the train was running with AWS isolated.

 

[ComUtoR]

And what would of happened this railtour train was in accident with someone else at the controls and crashes into timetables train?

As stated in the article. Trainees drive in passenger service all the time. Not having a qualified Driver at the controls isn't an issue.

I am sure they thought it was fine, but someone on that train did not think it was right and they were as rules were broken.

Which rules were broken ? The article clearly states that this is because there is an allegation of how is was authorized and not any "rules" being broken.

 

[neilm]

As stated in the article. Trainees drive in passenger service all the time. Not having a qualified Driver at the controls isn't an issue.



Which rules were broken ? The article clearly states that this is because there is an allegation of how is was authorized and not any "rules" being broken.

I guess we shall just wait for the final outcome, but it just surprised me how people can defend this. I hope if those people are in this capacity they think twice.

 

[ComUtoR]

I guess we shall just wait for the final outcome

If you know what rules were broken then feel free to fill us all in.

but it just surprised me how people can defend this.

Even the article states that the train was safe at all times. Trains are driven every day where the person at the controls is not a qualified Driver. I truly don't know where the problem is.

 

[CC 72100]

Even the article states that the train was safe at all times. Trains are driven every day where the person at the controls is not a qualified Driver. I truly don't know where the problem is.

Agreed - but anyone who is in the capacity of a trainee driver has gone through the necessary psychometric testing and basic cab familiarisation to be there - I wonder if the problem in this situation is not that someone who is unqualified was allowed to drive, but more so the (lack of ) prior experience and (lack of testing of the) aptitude of that individual.

As you've alluded to, a trainee under Instructor/Manager instruction takes place everyday, but the trainee has gone through a process to reach this point.

 

[ComUtoR]

As you've alluded to, a trainee under Instructor/Manager instruction takes place everyday, but the trainee has gone through a process to reach this point.

I can see that and agree to a certain extent.

With a Trainee/Instructor the Trainee has never driven a train before and is 100% under instruction for a fair number of hours before the reins are let off. There is also a case where there is little to no experience before they get some manual handling done. When I started I was driving a train after about 2/3 weeks and only just out of PTS and still learning rules.

With basic cab familiarization it takes less than 2/3 minutes to give someone the basic instruction on how to stop a train in an emergency and how to contact the Signaller (the minimal requirements) and even with a Trainee its still pretty much sit there and do that.

I truly for the life of me can't think of any rule that would prevent anyone from getting in the driving seat from day one (prior to any rules, traction or PTS)

However, I am aware of the Cab familiarization requirements on Southeastern and I am aware of what the procedure is for letting someone else drive the train and I wonder if that was potentially the issue as internal procedure looks to have not been followed; which is what the article is alluding to.

Safety wise this is a non issue. Again, the article states that at no point was there any safety issues. I would certainly reiterate that in case people are worried.

I've driven a train with a guest and if I was asked to step aside and let them drive I doubt I would have flinched either.

 

[Paul Hitchcock]

I can see that and agree to a certain extent.

With a Trainee/Instructor the Trainee has never driven a train before and is 100% under instruction for a fair number of hours before the reins are let off. There is also a case where there is little to no experience before they get some manual handling done. When I started I was driving a train after about 2/3 weeks and only just out of PTS and still learning rules.

With basic cab familiarization it takes less than 2/3 minutes to give someone the basic instruction on how to stop a train in an emergency and how to contact the Signaller (the minimal requirements) and even with a Trainee its still pretty much sit there and do that.

I truly for the life of me can't think of any rule that would prevent anyone from getting in the driving seat from day one (prior to any rules, traction or PTS)

However, I am aware of the Cab familiarization requirements on Southeastern and I am aware of what the procedure is for letting someone else drive the train and I wonder if that was potentially the issue as internal procedure looks to have not been followed; which is what the article is alluding to.

Safety wise this is a non issue. Again, the article states that at no point was there any safety issues. I would certainly reiterate that in case people are worried.

I've driven a train with a guest and if I was asked to step aside and let them drive I doubt I would have flinched either.

Six people in the cab does seem rather a lot though

 

[Warwick]

The cowden rail crash clearly should remind people why only the driver should drive the train. The rules are very clear and should always be respected, otherwise accidents happen and people can get killed.

I am sure they will have plenty of volunteers next time as most drivers know the rules.

There's a massive difference in the safety systems built into a "Javelin" and those of a 1960's DEMU. The Cowden crash was passing a red signal in fog on a single line. Even I know that and I'm still learning about railways.

 

[Busaholic]

In theory, having passed all the tests for guards on the London Underground at the White City Training Centre in the 1970s, as part of my management traineeship, I could have been called on to drive an underground train in an emergency. Frankly, I couldn't envisage any situation in which that might have been desirable, even at 14 rather than 140 mph, and it never happened. I do wonder, though, just how 'in charge' of the driving this unauthorised person really was, and were lives really at risk? I wouldn't presume to know the answers, but hopefully others do.

 

[CC 72100]

However, I am aware of the Cab familiarization requirements on Southeastern and I am aware of what the procedure is for letting someone else drive the train and I wonder if that was potentially the issue as internal procedure looks to have not been followed; which is what the article is alluding to.

Safety wise this is a non issue. Again, the article states that at no point was there any safety issues. I would certainly reiterate that in case people are worried.

I've driven a train with a guest and if I was asked to step aside and let them drive I doubt I would have flinched either.

Yes, that's probably also what I was referring to in a roundabout way (not intentionally roundabout way - just poor wording on my behalf).

Agree that there is no safety issue here. If the person 'pushing the buttons' (meant not in an insulting sense, but in the sense that to begin with trainees merely carry out the physical actions as instructed by their manager/instructor and don't think for themselves yet) is accompanied by someone who is competent to train/instruct then there's very little that can go wrong.

 

[bramling]

Yes, that's probably also what I was referring to in a roundabout way (not intentionally roundabout way - just poor wording on my behalf).

Agree that there is no safety issue here. If the person 'pushing the buttons' (meant not in an insulting sense, but in the sense that to begin with trainees merely carry out the physical actions as instructed by their manager/instructor and don't think for themselves yet) is accompanied by someone who is competent to train/instruct then there's very little that can go wrong.

The only issue that I can think of is if the individual doesn’t meet the medical standards for any reason, the obvious one springing to mind being eyesight. That certainly could introduce issues, although again the scenario is far-fetched, and of course there’s still the presence of the instructor in the cab to guard against anything going wrong.