NRES in detail says it’s actually at Bayford, and mainline trains were diverted that way already due to engineering work. Can’t really see why it’s being reported as a a problem at Finsbury Park?A train failure at or near Finsbury Park around 1630 today seems to have resulted in widespread delays to all services which should have been passing through the station. Presumably it failed at an optimum location for blocking all traffic?
Sorry I just caught the banner headline rather than the small print on https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/service_disruptions/today.aspx which (still) readsNRES in detail says it’s actually at Bayford, and mainline trains were diverted that way already due to engineering work. Can’t really see why it’s being reported as a a problem at Finsbury Park?
That’s what I meant, NR’s top headline makes no sense. Elsewhere they have Kings Cross to Stevenage. Weird.Sorry I just caught the banner headline rather than the small print on https://www.nationalrail.co.uk/service_disruptions/today.aspx which (still) reads
Major disruption: Finsbury Park.
Driver split coffee all over the control in the cab.
Says a lot about Siemens cab design if you ask me.Driver split coffee all over the control in the cab. They did plan to do single line working as the unit could be driven from the south end cab but the MOM couldn’t work the ground frame at Cuffley so eventually a driver from Hitchin came to pick up a spare unit in the sidings at Hertford north to move back into Hertford.
Are 717's CPBC like 700's fly by wire.Says a lot about Siemens cab design if you ask me.
There should only a few places liquid can ingress into the controls of a 717. Gaps between Power Brake Controller and the desk or a few other buttons (Sander/ ETCS/Bell buzzer/Drive direction switch) flush with the desk.
Would it not have been too much to ask to put some impermeable seal between control interface and desk at these obvious 'weak points' ?
And as per a previous post of mine, if Siemens had put a sensible size cup holder in a sensible position in I doubt the driver would have spilt their coffee.
YesAre 717's CPBC like 700's fly by wire.
Says a lot about Siemens cab design if you ask me.
If Siemens had bothered to do some decent ergonomics they'd have put the cup holder in a decent position in the cab.Say's a lot about the drivers ability to contain his coffee!
The ergonomics would have been scrutinised by all parties at design stage, so not solely a Siemens thing I would have thought.
Just be grateful for having cup holders, ours don't!
Definitely coffee in a beaker with a child proof lid.If true, I presume this would be a meeting without coffee and biscuits ?
Certainly without coffee *edit* Iphone76 beat me by seconds to thay one!If true, I presume this would be a meeting without coffee and biscuits ?
I really hope they do identify it as the root cause. Or at least issue sippy-cups as part of the drivers equipment.I'm not familiar with these units but my point about scrutiny would involve those between owner / operator/ manufacturer / maintainer. If those who work them day in-day out had no input at that stage then I agree that would have been silly.
If I was working a fault that had amassed a considerable amount of delay minutes and I found the remains of a spilt drink in the desk then I'm sure that would be something that would be fired back at the TOC.
TOC then might consider modifying the cup holder if that was raised as the root cause!
Exactly, it's all reactive. Now hundreds of delay minutes have been caused something MAY be done about it.From what I can tell, there is no incentive for the maintainer to physically ride out and ask traincrew on their opinion, that would be up to the TOC internally. Typically TOCs fleet/technical department raises issues with maintainer.
I specifically say maintainer as the designers will be long down the road at this point!
Exactly, it's all reactive. Now hundreds of delay minutes have been caused something MAY be done about it.
If the design engineer (as it was their bright idea to have the cab engineered that way) was to now observe, then hopefully they'd go realise they might need to redesign some of it. It's not a maintainer/fitters problem, it's the 'clever clogs' who thought their design was right at the start.
But I know realistically this will never happen. It's all ideal world thinking.
Having watched lots of aircrash investigation, and seeing how boeing/airbus design cockpits, there's a lot the railway could learn from that.
Hopefully you'd be in your seat before getting your drink thoughOn the 747 Boeing installed a cup holder right by where you put your foot getting in and out of the seat, so not perfect. Airbus is pretty good.
The ergonomics would have been scrutinised by all parties at design stage, so not solely a Siemens thing I would have thought.
I'm no cab design engineer, but I'd have thought about putting some sort of seal between the control and desk interface for potential spills.Note that when I say "all parties", I didn't mean traincrew...
The point being that the unit design had been accepted, therefore, how can the manufacturer be solely blamed for a train failing due to the desk not being totally driver/coffee proof?!
The point being that the unit design had been accepted, therefore, how can the manufacturer be solely blamed for a train failing due to the desk not being totally driver/coffee proof?!
Weren't the ScotRail 385's a similar story with the windscreen problem. Yes, it was captured at an earlier stage, but arguably not early enough and the fix looks like a bodge job!It's a sorry state of affairs when the end-user isn't even consulted on the design of the thing they'll be using. Although I doubt the general travelling public had much input on the saloon design either.