Given that this strike was called before any talks or negotiations happened, it is always possible that the outcome of the talks that will now happen would have been the same as if the talks happened without the strike.
It seems clear to me that the RMT has won something with the strike, which is an improvement in the guarantee they have been given before they enter the talks: that the already-guaranteed 2nd person would be a conductor.
A lot of the talk on here was that, for a widespread rural operator, the step to make the guaranteed second staff member into a guaranteed safety-critical guard was a no-brainer... so what are the chances that sensible talks would have reached the same conclusion?
We'll never know the answer, but it has to leave a nagging doubt as to whether it was worth 2 months of pay.