gabrielhj07
Established Member
Very true!Fixed that for you![]()
Very true!Fixed that for you![]()
It has been confirmed by many sources and also several times on this Forum that SWR drivers agreed to DCO in 2021 as part of a pay and conditions package. It's no longer an issue.I understood that there was a longstanding resistance by SWR drivers to anything other than driving. Was there not a pre-privatisation national agreement on DOO/DCO which was never successfully implemented out of Waterloo? They took the money, though.
I haven't read the article yet so I can't be sure, but I would imagine 'provisional acceptance' means something along the lines of: 'they're not quite up to par yet, but we will accept them based on the understanding that they are in the process of being improved/fixed'.Still not quite sure what the Railway Magazine article means by "provisional" acceptance?.
Sorry if this has already been asked, but what does DCO stand for?It has been confirmed by many sources and also several times on this Forum that SWR drivers agreed to DCO in 2021 as part of a pay and conditions package. It's no longer an issue.
Whether a hardcore element are trying to put a spanner in the works is of course a different matter.
Driver Controlled Operation, ie there's someone else on board as well.Sorry if this has already been asked, but what does DCO stand for?
And am I correct in thinking DOO is "Driver Only Operation", like on Thameslink or London Underground?
Driver Controlled Operation - the driver does the doors like DOO but a 'guard' remains on the train. Depending on how successful the RMT union have been the 'guard' has varying levels of safety responsibility from TOC to TOC.Sorry if this has already been asked, but what does DCO stand for?
And am I correct in thinking DOO is "Driver Only Operation", like on Thameslink or London Underground?
Sort of, BR started paying the nationally agreed £8 daily DOO allowance to South Western suburban drivers to operate class 455 cab secure radios around 1992, but later withdrew it when they refused any further moves towards DOO.Was there not a pre-privatisation national agreement on DOO/DCO which was never successfully implemented out of Waterloo? They took the money, though.
Another interesting one is note 15 to accountsRock Rail South West Plc the owners of the 701's have deposited their accounts for year ended 31/12/21.
They collected another 62m (50m in 2020) from Alstom for ongoing delays to delivery of units. Its not clear from the accounts whether they are compensating SWR.
Also no units have had a charge raised against them since Nov 2020 which is probably Rock Rail exercising maximum caution given they accepted a few units and then found the customer didn't agree with their assessment of them being fit for purpose.
Well, considering air-conditioned 450s have partially replaced the oven-like “red” stock on Woking/Cobham/Chessington, some might say it was a little nicer than usualCan't see things improving anytime soon. All SWR needs is a heatwave and things will get ugly, with rammed trains and people losing their patience. Not to mention Wimbledon tennis is not too far off now.
Multiple industry sources.Do you have a source for this? It’s a very big claim on the history of what seems to be a troublesome unit.
Just as I thought things couldn't get any worse with them.Multiple industry sources.
So if this affects only 701s they must use different traction converter cases to other Aventras? That doesn’t seem very efficient...Just as I thought things couldn't get any worse with them.
In all fairness, the one parked at Clapham Yard (think it’s 025?) is shut down with a red headlamp attached - although last I saw this was a few days before the 19thThis is easily verified or not: has anyone seen any 701 moving, other than being dragged dead by a locomotive, since the 19th?
This is still the case it hasnt moved and still has the not to be moved on it.In all fairness, the one parked at Clapham Yard (think it’s 025?) is shut down with a red headlamp attached - although last I saw this was a few days before the 19th
Or a different batch of capacitors (or other component) that has quality and premature failure issues.So if this affects only 701s they must use different traction converter cases to other Aventras? That doesn’t seem very efficient...
Ah yes, I remember the explosion at Guildford.Or a different batch of capacitors (or other component) that has quality and premature failure issues.
A duff batch of capacitors caused issues with part of the retractioned 455s fleet...
All the IGBTs on SWT Class 455s were modified to add pressure switches so when the gases built up, the traction would cut out. Modified units were identifiable by not having the ratchet straps, the straps worked as a 57 unit tried to do the same as 5901 but the traction cases were restrained.Ah yes, I remember the explosion at Guildford.