Class 158/159 SWT Door Locked

[superalbs]

I catch a SWT Class 158/159 to Exeter Central to get to college, and notice the front doors on these units is always locked.

At Exeter Central, sometimes the driver releases the front door, but why bother locking this door out of use? It means that only 75% of doors are usable on a 2 car set.

I notice this is not the case on other operator's Class 158s, but it is for Class 150/2s.

Why does this happen?

 

[43096]

I catch a SWT Class 158/159 to Exeter Central to get to college, and notice the front doors on these units is always locked.



At Exeter Central, sometimes the driver releases the front door, but why bother locking this door out of use? It means that only 75% of doors are usable on a 2 car set.



I notice this is not the case on other operator's Class 158s, but it is for Class 150/2s.



Why does this happen?

It is to do with driver access to external doors, as there is no separate door to the cab on these units. Consider a scenario where the driver needs to leave the train somewhere out in the middle of nowhere, and the vestibule is rammed on a peak train. Driver gets to door (eventually) and opens it. Presumably the thought is that there is then a risk to passengers, especially in third rail areas.

Hence isolating the front doors. It was the same on the 442 fleet when they were SWT units.

 

[superalbs]

Is it SWT policy, because other operators don't have this, even those with 158s on third-rail.

 

[AlterEgo]

Previous discussion here: http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=111112

 

[Smudger105e]

Is it SWT policy, because other operators don't have this, even those with 158s on third-rail.

On a SWT 158s and 159s the doors are out of use when a driving cab is active. Not sure about other operator's vehicles.

Sent from my SM-G800F using Tapatalk

 

[swt class 450]

I catch a SWT Class 158/159 to Exeter Central to get to college, and notice the front doors on these units is always locked.

At Exeter Central, sometimes the driver releases the front door, but why bother locking this door out of use? It means that only 75% of doors are usable on a 2 car set.

I notice this is not the case on other operator's Class 158s, but it is for Class 150/2s.

Why does this happen?

They have been doing this for years. The front set of doors on all SWT 158s and 159s are always locked out of use on all routes. I dont think it is a very good idea as it creates more overcrowding and congestion. The 158s and 159s already have an unsuitable narrow doors at the ends of the coaches layout (instead of wide double doors at 1/3 and 2/3 positions) so this just makes it worse. I am really not that sure why they think this is neccesary especially as all other TOCs 158s always keep the front set of doors unlocked and available for use by passengers.

 

[43096]

Is it SWT policy, because other operators don't have this, even those with 158s on third-rail.

Yes it is SWT policy.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They have been doing this for years. The front set of doors on all SWT 158s and 159s are always locked out of use on all routes. I dont think it is a very good idea as it creates more overcrowding and congestion. The 158s and 159s already have an unsuitable narrow doors at the ends of the coaches layout (instead of wide double doors at 1/3 and 2/3 positions) so this just makes it worse. I am really not that sure why they think this is neccesary especially as all other TOCs 158s always keep the front set of doors unlocked and available for use by passengers.

Have you actually read what had been posted above on this thread and the previous thread linked to above? Because it explains the reasons why!

 

[fgwrich]

They have been doing this for years. The front set of doors on all SWT 158s and 159s are always locked out of use on all routes. I dont think it is a very good idea as it creates more overcrowding and congestion. The 158s and 159s already have an unsuitable narrow doors at the ends of the coaches layout (instead of wide double doors at 1/3 and 2/3 positions) so this just makes it worse. I am really not that sure why they think this is neccesary especially as all other TOCs 158s always keep the front set of doors unlocked and available for use by passengers.

Because in short, apart from the short-ish leg from Redbridge to Portsmouth Harbour (and the occasionally but forgettable Brightons) SWT are the only operator to operate 158s over the Third Rail areas. The rest is as above.

 

[swt_passenger]

Because in short, apart from the short-ish leg from Redbridge to Portsmouth Harbour (and the occasionally but forgettable Brightons) SWT are the only operator to operate 158s over the Third Rail areas. The rest is as above.

As I just pointed out in another thread, the alleged reasoning years ago was primarily to do with the nature of the third rail stretch from Waterloo to Basingstoke, which is 4 track and considered a higher risk if the leading doors need to be opened for the driver to get off for some reason.

People often seem to forget that the 442s also had a leading vestibule lock out system for the same safety reasons, i.e. it wasn't a 159 only scheme.

 

[swt class 450]

Yes it is SWT policy.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


Have you actually read what had been posted above on this thread and the previous thread linked to above? Because it explains the reasons why!

Yes i fully read that. But what i was saying is that i dont understand why SWT lock the front doors on their 158s and 159s but none of the other TOCs lock the doors on their 158s? Why is it considered a problem or safety risk to let passengers use the front doors on SWT but not on other TOCs?

 

[swt_passenger]

Yes i fully read that. But what i was saying is that i dont understand why SWT lock the front doors on their 158s and 159s but none of the other TOCs lock the doors on their 158s? Why is it considered a problem or safety risk to let passengers use the front doors on SWT but not on other TOCs?

The other operators didn't have to risk assess normal operations on four track third rail, did they?

 

[swt class 450]

The other operators didn't have to risk assess normal operations on four track third rail, did they?

FGW does yet they always leave the front set of doors unlocked.

 

[swt_passenger]

FGW does yet they always leave the front set of doors unlocked.

Only on a very short section of route near Southampton. The Waterloo approaches are a totally different ball game. If you don't want to believe it I don't care to be honest.

 

[swt class 450]

Only on a very short section of route near Southampton. The Waterloo approaches are a totally different ball game. If you don't want to believe it I don't care to be honest.

I do believe it but it just seems a bit over the top to lock the front doors out of use. I dont work in the railway industry so i am not expert on everything so maybe it is better this way.

Another similar thing is that SWT used to lock the front doors out of use on their 442s as well. Yet GTR have always left the front set of doors unlocked on their 442s and they run over (or did before they started to get withdrawn) long sections of four tracked third rail lines.

 

[dk1]

It is a shame that other operators never adopted this policy prior to the introduction of GSM-R. Always hated the hassle of having passengers in this area when we had to use an SPT & never understood why the unions tolerated it. Even more so when we want to make a swift get away but can't get passed those dithering to get on & off. That's why it's such a pleasure to get a class 170.

 

[43096]

It is a shame that other operators never adopted this policy prior to the introduction of GSM-R. Always hated the hassle of having passengers in this area when we had to use an SPT & never understood why the unions tolerated it. Even more so when we want to make a swift get away but can't get passed those dithering to get on & off. That's why it's such a pleasure to get a class 170.

I think that second last sentence gives away the real reason...

 

[tsr]

Yet GTR have always left the front set of doors unlocked on their 442s and they run over (or did before they started to get withdrawn) long sections of four tracked third rail lines.

Actually, on occasions those doors are locked out, and in any case the vestibule has to be clear of passengers before the door is released if not adjacent to the platform, which is a mighty faff on a busy train. The risks of those doors were recently re-emphasised to crews who still sign them.

It's also something which has caused problems with drivers alighting from trains at Battersea Pier Staff Halt.

 

[swt_passenger]

I do believe it but it just seems a bit over the top to lock the front doors out of use. I dont work in the railway industry so i am not expert on everything so maybe it is better this way.

Another similar thing is that SWT used to lock the front doors out of use on their 442s as well. Yet GTR have always left the front set of doors unlocked on their 442s and they run over (or did before they started to get withdrawn) long sections of four tracked third rail lines.

I hope you weren't aiming to tell me about the 442s also having the system when used by SWT, given I wrote that as well earlier, and only a few hours ago.

Both the privatised and nationalised railways have always had regional differences in policy, different people make different decisions as circumstances change.

This point about 159s always seems to be made into an SWT thing, but it's more likely to have been a decision taken by NSE, given the age of the units.

 

[swt class 450]

Actually, on occasions those doors are locked out, and in any case the vestibule has to be clear of passengers before the door is released if not adjacent to the platform, which is a mighty faff on a busy train. The risks of those doors were recently re-emphasised to crews who still sign them.

It's also something which has caused problems with drivers alighting from trains at Battersea Pier Staff Halt.

Yes i imagine it could be very difficult to clear the area. I have seen the front doors area on GTR 442s get very packed with lots of people standing in that area especially on peak hour trains.

Do staff actually board and alight at Battersea Pier Staff Halt on passenger trains? I thought it was just ECS stock that called there?

I hope you weren't aiming to tell me about the 442s also having the system when used by SWT, given I wrote that as well earlier, and only a few hours ago.

Both the privatised and nationalised railways have always had regional differences in policy, different people make different decisions as circumstances change.

This point about 159s always seems to be made into an SWT thing, but it's more likely to have been a decision taken by NSE, given the age of the units.

No i was just pointing out the similarity between how the 158s / 159s / 442s all have the front door locked on SWT but not on other TOCs. I realise that you already wrote about the 442s on SWT. I guess you are right about how different regions and TOCs have different policies.

Out of interest when GWR hire a SWT 158 or 159 is the front doors still locked out of use?

 

[tsr]

Yes i imagine it could be very difficult to clear the area. I have seen the front doors area on GTR 442s get very packed with lots of people standing in that area especially on peak hour trains.

Do staff actually board and alight at Battersea Pier Staff Halt on passenger trains? I thought it was just ECS stock that called there?

Passenger services call there as well. In fact, these form quite a high proportion of the staff stops there. Generally 377s.

See here, for example:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...6/11/03/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=call&order=wtt

Of course, they have to be on the Brighton Reversible, which means that sometimes trains have to be substituted if one of them needs to use the Fasts or Slows for whatever reason.

 

[tbtc]

Because in short, apart from the short-ish leg from Redbridge to Portsmouth Harbour (and the occasionally but forgettable Brightons) SWT are the only operator to operate 158s over the Third Rail areas

A pedant writes - what about EMT 158s at Hunts Cross?

(a trivially short section of the journey, admittedly, but since Hunts Cross is brought up to refute the "Pacers can't operate on Third Rail" claim, I thought I'd mention it)

 

[swt class 450]

Passenger services call there as well. In fact, these form quite a high proportion of the staff stops there. Generally 377s.

See here, for example:
http://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/sea...6/11/03/0000-2359?stp=WVS&show=call&order=wtt

Of course, they have to be on the Brighton Reversible, which means that sometimes trains have to be substituted if one of them needs to use the Fasts or Slows for whatever reason.

Interesting. Thanks for the info. I will look out for these workings.

A pedant writes - what about EMT 158s at Hunts Cross?

(a trivially short section of the journey, admittedly, but since Hunts Cross is brought up to refute the "Pacers can't operate on Third Rail" claim, I thought I'd mention it)

Do the ATW 158s operate over third rail at Chester as well?

 

[Johncleesefan]

Out of interest when GWR hire a SWT 158 or 159 is the front doors still locked out of use?

Yes they are and they are a blessing to drive compared as nice and quite and you can actually get out of the cab to handover

 

[PHILIPE]

Interesting. Thanks for the info. I will look out for these workings.



Do the ATW 158s operate over third rail at Chester as well?

They do if they use Platform 7 or, at the South End, if they cross over from one side of the Merseyrail Third Rail to the other, i.e. to Sidings.

 

[D1009]

I suppose with the advent of GSMR there is less need for drivers to leave the cab away from stations, so the potential risk has lessened.

 

[swt_passenger]

I suppose with the advent of GSMR there is less need for drivers to leave the cab away from stations, so the potential risk has lessened.

That would certainly affect a more recent risk assessment wouldn't it, such as 442s on SN.

In the case of SWT, it would just then be a case of why change if it doesn't need to.

 

[tsr]

That would certainly affect a more recent risk assessment wouldn't it, such as 442s on SN.

As I said, sometimes 442s have had their leading doors locked out when operating over the Southern network.

Actually, thinking about it, I've mainly seen this happening when they've been used on late-night GX services in the past, presumably partly to prevent drunk or disorderly people from occupying a space which the driver may need to access quickly in an emergency.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

As I said, sometimes 442s have had their leading doors locked out when operating over the Southern network.

Actually, thinking about it, I've mainly seen this happening when they've been used on late-night GX services in the past, presumably partly to prevent drunk or disorderly people from occupying a space which the driver may need to access quickly in an emergency.

Should happen on all "Vomit Comet" services, pretty much every driver I've spoken to is sick to the back teeth of idiots banging on the cab door...

 

[D1009]

In the case of SWT, it would just then be a case of why change if it doesn't need to.

Surely it would reduce dwell times, at the moment a whole coach load of people have to enter and leave through one door.

 

[dk1]

I think that second last sentence gives away the real reason...

I take it you mean the bit about home time? If so then hell yes.