• Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Driver forgot to turn lights on?

Status
Not open for further replies.

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,995
Location
Crayford
Inside a pic train after entering the tunnel at Barons Court a few minutes ago. Lights were turned on at Earls Court.
 

Attachments

  • IMG-20240309-WA0002.jpg
    IMG-20240309-WA0002.jpg
    46.5 KB · Views: 215
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

Dstock7080

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2010
Messages
2,971
Location
West London
Staff Circular No. 33 1984 Operating of One Person Operated trains, states: “while in passenger service car lighting must remain on at all times”.
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,995
Location
Crayford
Staff Circular No. 33 1984 Operating of One Person Operated trains, states: “while in passenger service car lighting must remain on at all times”.
Well they weren't on when it arrived at Hammersmith, so presumably someone will have a tea no biscuits.
 

bluegoblin7

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2011
Messages
1,546
Location
JB/JP/JW
Well they weren't on when it arrived at Hammersmith, so presumably someone will have a tea no biscuits.
Only if people go out of their way to highlight it.

It happens, it isn’t a big deal, and most drivers will realise anyway.

Threads like this turn an incident that wouldn’t even get logged into something far bigger. No one got hurt, and we’re all human.

If only enthusiasts were under the same scrutiny as staff…
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,995
Location
Crayford
Well I'm so sorry to upset your sensibilities. Good luck talking to my niece whose response to a similar incident years ago is that she will NEVER EVER go in an Underground train again. She often walks across town rather than take the tube. It is scary, especially if you're of a nervous disposition.
 

cactustwirly

Established Member
Joined
10 Apr 2013
Messages
7,648
Location
UK
Only if people go out of their way to highlight it.

It happens, it isn’t a big deal, and most drivers will realise anyway.

Threads like this turn an incident that wouldn’t even get logged into something far bigger. No one got hurt, and we’re all human.

If only enthusiasts were under the same scrutiny as staff…
Why shouldn't it be highlighted?

It is clearly a safety issue the train is completely pitch black.

Are you saying that operational incidents should be covered up?
 

CarrotPie

Member
Joined
18 Mar 2021
Messages
870
Location
̶F̶i̶n̶l̶a̶n̶d̶ Northern Sweden
Only if people go out of their way to highlight it.
And why wouldn't they?
It happens, it isn’t a big deal, and most drivers will realise anyway.
If the driver doesn't realise, that sounds like a big deal to me!
Threads like this turn an incident that wouldn’t even get logged into something far bigger.
Do they? How?
If only enthusiasts were under the same scrutiny as staff…
Why should they be? They are not (acting as) employees of the railway.
 

bluegoblin7

Established Member
Joined
10 May 2011
Messages
1,546
Location
JB/JP/JW
Why should they be? They are not (acting as) employees of the railway.
Because everyone is human, and therefore makes mistakes?

I’m not saying it isn’t an issue, but if it’s already been corrected (which the OP states it was) what is achieved by posting it for all to see? And if it isn’t realised, I’m sure a polite knock on the drivers window, or a word with station staff, will get it resolved immediately and everyone can carry on with their day.

But of course, no one posting here has ever made any mistakes ever in their life ever.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
71,015
Location
Yorkshire
Only if people go out of their way to highlight it.
Are you suggesting that such an occurrence should be logged/reported, but perhaps wouldn't have been?
Threads like this turn an incident that wouldn’t even get logged into something far bigger....
What are you implying here?

If it's not something that needs to be logged, how can there be any issue?
 

Andrew S

Member
Joined
4 Aug 2018
Messages
172
I used to regularly travel on the eastern end of the Central Line in the 1980s and 90s and it seemed like standard practice to keep lights off on the open air sections in daylight. Sometimes the guard would wait until the rear car (where the guards position was) was in the tunnel after Leyton before switching on. It seemed fun and innocent then.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
18,354
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Are you suggesting that such an occurrence should be logged/reported, but perhaps wouldn't have been?

I’d imagine that what has happened is either the driver has noticed of their own accord, someone has tapped on the door and drawn attention to it, or perhaps a report was made via station staff and a call made to the driver via control.

In the first two scenarios there’s no real need to log things. In the third then an entry would probably be made in the controller’s log book, purely as a record of the communications.

In all cases it’s very unlikely for further action to taken; nor required. Not sure what action people here would expect to happen?

Note that there seems to be an assumption the driver is at fault. There are defect scenarios on some LU stocks that can put parts of the train into total darkness. The 92 stock is notorious for it.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
71,015
Location
Yorkshire
I’d imagine that what has happened is either the driver has noticed of their own accord, someone has tapped on the door and drawn attention to it, or perhaps a report was made via station staff and a call made to the driver via control.

In the first two scenarios there’s no real need to log things. In the third then an entry would probably be made in the controller’s log book, purely as a record of the communications.

In all cases it’s very unlikely for further action to taken; nor required.
Thanks. So this thread isn't in any way going to make a difference; as I thought.
Not sure what action people here would expect to happen?
I'm not sure what turning it "far bigger" was meant to mean, but I assumed the suggestion was the driver may somehow get into trouble, which surprised me; I'm glad to hear that isn't the case.
 

rebmcr

Established Member
Joined
15 Nov 2011
Messages
3,882
Location
St Neots
Threads like this turn an incident that wouldn’t even get logged into something far bigger. No one got hurt, and we’re all human.

Because everyone is human, and therefore makes mistakes?
You seem to imply that the 'official' procedure following an incident like this is disproportionate compared to the incident itself — this could well be true.

Yet you also seem to imply that it is reasonable to expect a passenger to know of this imbalance, and for them to participate in mitigating it — this is not realistic.

It is the role of Train Operators' representatives to address such an imbalance, so that situations that are publicly known may be publicly discussed without causing any upset.
 

Mawkie

Member
Joined
17 Feb 2016
Messages
581
Drivers makes mistakes all the time, some are on the bigger end of the scale and some are on the smaller end of the scale.

I have certainly run without interior lights until someone knocked on the cab door and told me. I switched the lights on and made an apology along the lines of "I'm sorry, that was completely my fault, I know it can be scary for some people, I'm sorry again" and carried on with my day.

There is an in-cab indication on the 73 Stock which should illuminate when the interior lights are not operative (but obviously won't if that bulb is blown). I would say most drivers should notice in a tunnel section if their interior lights were not illuminated as you can see the illumatuon on the tunnel walls.

IMG_20240310_080355.jpg
(Picture shows the interior of a 73 stock cab, with the "Lights Off" indicator illuminated.)
 

Dstock7080

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2010
Messages
2,971
Location
West London
1973 Stock original TEP showed on/off indications and was difficult to interpret.
D Stock were the first to have only a clear “lights off” light placed near the driver which would shine brightly in dim conditions.
All subsequent new or refurbished Stock have the clearer indicator for showing the car lights being off.
 

Recessio

Member
Joined
4 Aug 2019
Messages
896
Location
London
I would be quite concerned if the lights were off for a long period of time. Presumably the CCTV is not equipped with night-vision either, so it could theoretically pose a safety risk (although not really given nearly everyone has torches in phones nowadays).
 

simple simon

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2011
Messages
655
Location
Suburban London
I used to regularly travel on the eastern end of the Central Line in the 1980s and 90s and it seemed like standard practice to keep lights off on the open air sections in daylight. Sometimes the guard would wait until the rear car (where the guards position was) was in the tunnel after Leyton before switching on. It seemed fun and innocent then.
Same here

There was one journey where the guard was somewhat tardy in switching the lights on, this was travelling east and I was in the front car. So, for what was probably only seconds (but seemed longer) we were all in pitch back.

Because the lights had been switched off even the emergency lights were off.

It was an experience - no harm done - but not something I'd want to happen too often or for too long.
 

Dstock7080

Established Member
Joined
17 Feb 2010
Messages
2,971
Location
West London
The Line Supplement and Appendix to the Rule Book allowed Guards to only have car lighting on at specified locations and in darkness.
On the District the flyunders at Barking and Chiswick Park were excluded.
 

janahan

Member
Joined
13 Feb 2014
Messages
122
I have always wondered why "checklists" are not used on Railways and other safety critical processes, such as those used on commercial aeroplanes (pre start/startup/etc). These checklists dont have to be complex, but just a step of things to do when starting a train for passenger use (and seperate ones for ECS), including things such as turn on cabin lights, etc. On newer stock they can be part of the Train management system with possible crosschecking capabilities, and on older stock just a clipboard and bunch of sheets.

I do understand the view by some that knowing what needs to be done is a sign of experience, but to repeat what was said, we are all human, and mistakes can be made, somethign that the Aviation industry painfully recognised in the past, and developed the comprehensive checklist system, that didnt care how experienced you are, but to follow that list.

As a software developer, I may not be in a "directly safety critical" industry, though some of what I do can effect safety indirectly, I still use checklists (called playbooks) for some things like deployment, despite being a highly experienced veteran, since any (we are human) mistake can result in huge reputational and commercial damage.
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,588
Location
Back office

Had that on a S7 once. Very strange experience and I let the driver know once the train reached the stop I was alighting at. He switched them on and that was that.
 

Russel

Established Member
Joined
30 Jun 2022
Messages
1,792
Location
Lichfield
We're all human, mistakes happen...

From some of the responses here, I'm guessing most people on this thread have never made an honest mistake at work?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top