ac6000cw
Established Member
Yes, for the production trains, and the side windows were also added.Wasn't the prototype HST cab redesigned ( from a central drivers position) to 2 seats side by side to have a second man for the unions?
Yes, for the production trains, and the side windows were also added.Wasn't the prototype HST cab redesigned ( from a central drivers position) to 2 seats side by side to have a second man for the unions?
That's my understanding too, and single-manning of EMU cabs goes back much further than that (AFIAK the Southern Railway and some of its predecessors introduced a 'motorman' grade for EMU-only drivers).Traditional dmus seem to have been single manned from the start,
When was that last the routine? Tywyn and Harlech for 20+ years, surely - coupled I suspect with some generous unproductive time owing to the timetable.There was certainly flexibility in the interpretation of the national agreements.
This tended to be inversely proportional to the size of the depot! (Nuneaton, Pwllheli, Carnforth tended to be much more co-operative than a Crewe or a Saltley!)
As an example Pwllheli regarded changing cabs at Barmouth (i.e. crews of southbound and northbound swopping over) as a "break from the driving environment" which certainly wouldn't be accepted at most depots!
Oh indeed. That was certainly a factor with Nuneaton and Carnforth, but closing Pwllheli (6 drivers, four with the same surname!) would have been a challenge.Possibly a factor was that small depots could be more easily closed if they were un-cooperative.
There was a certain small, one freight subsector dependant, depot which was visited by their man in the mac. from '222' and faced with the real threat of closure suddenly remembered that somehow their route knowledge enabled them to drive all over the country with just a little bit of refreshing. It wasn't only the 'seagulls'
You're quite correct - it was Tywyn in the example given. And, yes, there were some highly unproductive duties. One had no booked work, then the PNB ( ! ), then a return trip to Tywyn!When was that last the routine? Tywyn and Harlech for 20+ years, surely - coupled I suspect with some generous unproductive time owing to the timetable.
I think it was slightly more nuanced than single manning being the norm for dmus and emus. In areas where emus operated, the sheer number of trains meant that it was relatively easy to diagram duties that respected the maximum of eight hours duration with a PNB in the right place at the right time. For areas where dmus operated the service might be more sparse. To give an example, a double-manned Weymouth diagram in 1976 involved signing on at 15.20 to work a dmu to Bristol TM, relieving another dmu at Bristol TM 19 minutes after arrival and bringing it back to Weymouth with a late evening trip to Dorchester South and back empty, signing off at 00.07. The diagram was well in excess of 8 hours with no opportunity for a 30 minute break.Traditional dmus seem to have been single manned from the start....
Am I right in thinking that when the HSTs were introduced there were two qualified drivers in the cab, as part of an agreement with ASLEF and/or NUR?
Wasn't the prototype HST cab redesigned ( from a central drivers position) to 2 seats side by side to have a second man for the unions?
It was also due to the small matter of there being nowhere for an instructor/assessor/route learner/competent person to sit. That was quite an oversight in the original design.Wasn't the prototype HST cab redesigned ( from a central drivers position) to 2 seats side by side to have a second man for the unions?