W Driver Only Operated Trains (DOO) discussion

[Don King]

Ultimately why as a driver would I want to take on criminal liability for the behaviour of passengers at platforms, on top of all my other duties?

Do any of these pro-DOO posters actually work in safety critical roles, and if so do they want to take on further responsibility which can lead to imprisonment, based on unpredictable behaviour of members of the public?

Presumably also they would like to explain how I can safely deal with passengers leaning against the 10th coach of a train on a curve when I am in the front in a segregated cab?

Presumably they would agree it is more inefficient for me to inform the signaller I am leaving the cab, secure the cab, walk down there, admonish the passengers, walk back, inform the signaller I am back in, check the CCTV again and then realise the passengers are back at it, repeat process and so forth. Compared to a guard stood on the platform dispatching from the safest location who can see what is properly going on, monitor specific risky behaviour, and can modify their dispatch position based on daily changing circumstances, and short of checking the starting signal aspect if we have one, concentrate on dispatch solely, whilst we worry about whether the signal is yellow or green, whistle boards, track workers, crossings, signal distances, rather than if some drunken buffoon is going to drag themselves under the train.

 

[Goldfish62]

Not quite true, these cctv screens were put only in the last at best 5 years, and were put in to replace dispatch staff at locations where dispatch staff were allocated. I can think of one location (Richmond) that had these fitted, but I am not sure if dispatch staff have been replaced as I haven't been down there since 2013.

No, dispatch staff are still there. As far as I can tell the screens are not to replace anything but to see part so the platform that neither they or a despatcher can see on their own. The monitors are seriously cr*p, though, with images akin to the first colour TVs.

 

[HH]

What stations do these services call at that don't have platform staff?

 

[yorkie]

Why are you constantly bleating on about LU? An urban rapid transport system running at low speeds over short distances ike LU, Glasgow Subway or the Midland Metro has very little in parallel with a train going for hundreds of miles at 125mph.

Please try to keep it civil; in my opinion using disparaging remarks is a sign of losing the argument anyway.

I was replying to another member who brought up LU.

As for the speed of the trains, I agree LU isnt a fair comparison; there are however numerous 100mph examples.

 

[ainsworth74]

But, of course, SETs are going to be doing 125mph and possibly in the future 140mph.

 

[Haydn1971]

But, of course, SETs are going to be doing 125mph and possibly in the future 140mph.

Speed isn't really relevant in automated systems, modern airliners routinely use auto flight systems, even NASA's Space Shuttle had automated flight systems running at Mach 25 - whilst I accept that the hazards are different. Sad as it may seem, the days of having drivers on trains are very much numbered.

 

[455driver]

So you say "almost a zero turnout looking likely for tomorrow",however FGW on their website and in todays press say they " will be running 70% of their normal Sunday services".

Surely you can't both be right?

Well they certainly are not running 70% of their normal services down here so I wonder how they have managed to compile that figure?
Do you think it might be because they are including all the current DOO services to get the numbers up?
Why don't you ask them what percentage of non DOO services ran, after all these are the ones effected by the strike action!

 

[Busaholic]

The terrorist incident on the Amsterdam to Paris, happily without loss of life, should focus attention on a train travelling non-stop, say, between Reading and Exeter without a supervisory person on board, however you designate them. I'm not one for writing to my MP usually but as the newly-elected one down here seems to have Dave's ear, I'm going to do so and propose that the Dept for Transport stipulates the Greatest Western Railway Ever Since the Last Lot, or however they style themselves in future, be instructed that they must have such a person on board for runs of over a certain mileage, particularly where trains are stopping infrequently en route. Each train on the Paddington to Penzance must at virtually any time on the journey have people on board who have paid thousands of pounds aggregated, a five figure sum in many cases particularly nearer to the London end. The REAL Great Western Railway had staff for every eventuality and prided themselves on it and, presumably, still made a profit. I'm not saying that FGW should cover every eventuality, just this basic one.

 

[455driver]

The fact is LU is a safe rail system by any sensible measure. Are you denying that? If so we are going to have to agree to disagree.

By the way I'm currently on an FGW train which ia on time with friendly staff and we have even had a full ticket check out of Truro (first time out of several trips in the last few days).strike having no noticeable impact here.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They are comparatively rare and rail travel remains safe. Would you apply the same arguments to the Newcastle TPE incident? Or, I guess, not...?

Was the guard a proper guard or a 'clip the thing that looks like a ticket and smile' office bod?

 

[Robertj21a]

The terrorist incident on the Amsterdam to Paris, happily without loss of life, should focus attention on a train travelling non-stop, say, between Reading and Exeter without a supervisory person on board, however you designate them. I'm not one for writing to my MP usually but as the newly-elected one down here seems to have Dave's ear, I'm going to do so and propose that the Dept for Transport stipulates the Greatest Western Railway Ever Since the Last Lot, or however they style themselves in future, be instructed that they must have such a person on board for runs of over a certain mileage, particularly where trains are stopping infrequently en route. Each train on the Paddington to Penzance must at virtually any time on the journey have people on board who have paid thousands of pounds aggregated, a five figure sum in many cases particularly nearer to the London end. The REAL Great Western Railway had staff for every eventuality and prided themselves on it and, presumably, still made a profit. I'm not saying that FGW should cover every eventuality, just this basic one.

But the 'guard' on that Amsterdam train didn't do anything to help, it was the general public who resolved the issue !!

.

 

[A-driver]

But the 'guard' on that Amsterdam train didn't do anything to help, it was the general public who resolved the issue !!



.

How do you know he didn't do anything? How do you know he didn't contact the signaller to have police meet the train at the next station being that he knew the exact location of the train and would be immediately able to contact the driver and have the train stopped in a suitable location.

On a DOO a train it would rely on the passcomm being activated (not necessarily going to happen amongst the panic) and for the driver to speak to passengers. If the passengers are just giving panicked screams then the driver may have stopped in the middle of know where and gone back to investigate significantly delaying assistance.

I don't think you are in any position at all to claim that the guard didn't do anyone to help. Infact there is no basis to that comment.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Why are you constantly bleating on about LU? An urban rapid transport system running at low speeds over short distances ike LU, Glasgow Subway or the Midland Metro has very little in parallel with a train going for hundreds of miles at 125mph.

In this context it is similar enough. Both have doors, in which people die or get seriously hurt if trapped.

Though of course LU makes heavy use of dispatchers.

 

[bnm]

Well they certainly are not running 70% of their normal services down here so I wonder how they have managed to compile that figure?
Do you think it might be because they are including all the current DOO services to get the numbers up?
Why don't you ask them what percentage of non DOO services ran, after all these are the ones effected by the strike action!

PPM for services scheduled to run across the network today, at:

1800 - 85.3%
1600 - 85.2%
1400 - 85.9%
1200 - 85.2%
1000 - 84.8%

Around 75-76% through the day if you take out Thames Valley services.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But the 'guard' on that Amsterdam train didn't do anything to help, it was the general public who resolved the issue !!

.

And it is an exceptional situation. If such things ever become not exceptional, the solution will lie in airport style security and armed police, not in an unarmed guard.

 

[TEW]

Was the guard a proper guard or a 'clip the thing that looks like a ticket and smile' office bod?

From what I've seen, manager come guards aren't checking tickets. My ticket was checked by an RPI in Cornwall earlier though, and another train I caught had an actual guard onboard.

 

[455driver]

PPM across the network at:

1800 - 85.3%
1600 - 85.2%
1400 - 85.9%
1200 - 85.2%
1000 - 84.8%

Around 75-76% through the day if you take out Thames Valley services.

That is only for services that are running and doesn't answer my question, not that I am surprised at that!

 

[Captain Chaos]

PPM for services scheduled to run across the network today, at:

1800 - 85.3%
1600 - 85.2%
1400 - 85.9%
1200 - 85.2%
1000 - 84.8%

Around 75-76% through the day if you take out Thames Valley services.

These figures only relate to the services that are actually running though. Without going into too much detail I'm assuming the figures are being used against an emergency timetable as agreed with NR and not the usual timetable. These figures therefore should only relate to services that they told NR expected to run. I believe this was the same for the previous strike.

 

[Robertj21a]

How do you know he didn't do anything? How do you know he didn't contact the signaller to have police meet the train at the next station being that he knew the exact location of the train and would be immediately able to contact the driver and have the train stopped in a suitable location.

On a DOO a train it would rely on the passcomm being activated (not necessarily going to happen amongst the panic) and for the driver to speak to passengers. If the passengers are just giving panicked screams then the driver may have stopped in the middle of know where and gone back to investigate significantly delaying assistance.

I don't think you are in any position at all to claim that the guard didn't do anyone to help. Infact there is no basis to that comment.

He is reported to have locked himself away. While I'm sure that he was probably summoning assistance (all very sensible in the unusual circumstances), it remains the case that it was the general public who resolved it.

 

[Dave1987]

Speed isn't really relevant in automated systems, modern airliners routinely use auto flight systems, even NASA's Space Shuttle had automated flight systems running at Mach 25 - whilst I accept that the hazards are different. Sad as it may seem, the days of having drivers on trains are very much numbered.

Totally disagree with you there but that's not for this thread. Modern airliners can takeoff, cruise and land themselves but they still have to have 2 people on the flight deck.

 

[yorkie]

Was the guard a proper guard or a 'clip the thing that looks like a ticket and smile' office bod?

TPE is all Guards.

Totally disagree with you there but that's not for this thread...

Agreed. We have had threads on this subject before but if anyone has any further thoughts or developments to share they could start a new thread.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Totally disagree with you there but that's not for this thread. Modern airliners can takeoff, cruise and land themselves but they still have to have 2 people on the flight deck.

Because "if in doubt, stop" doesn't work for planes.

 

[PermitToTravel]

In this context it is similar enough. Both have doors, in which people die or get seriously hurt if trapped.

Though of course LU makes heavy use of dispatchers.

The staff waving dispatch bats on LU aren't actually dispatching - they are just there to speed up boarding. The driver still has to make the decision to go, to check the PTI, and to keep watching as the train leaves on lines where this is possible. LU drivers on other forums have reported being told off for waiting for the tip when the person with the bat was preoccupied.

 

[Mojo]

Why are you constantly bleating on about LU? An urban rapid transport system running at low speeds over short distances ike LU, Glasgow Subway or the Midland Metro has very little in parallel with a train going for hundreds of miles at 125mph.

This thread has moved on to talking about the risks around the PTI though. Surely in this example LU is more relevant, given the higher customer numbers and the higher number of times trains call at platforms?

 

[BestWestern]

The staff waving dispatch bats on LU aren't actually dispatching - they are just there to speed up boarding. The driver still has to make the decision to go, to check the PTI, and to keep watching as the train leaves on lines where this is possible. LU drivers on other forums have reported being told off for waiting for the tip when the person with the bat was preoccupied.

That's quite interesting; one wonders why they're issued with the baton at all :-/ Unless of course it's a 'Passenger Compliance Device'

LU is a very far cry from anything in the national network though of course, and the rush hour scrum complete with closing doors on intending passengers is not something that would ever be replicated on the railways. A non-comparison, really.

 

[Robertj21a]

LU is a very far cry from anything in the national network though of course, and the rush hour scrum complete with closing doors on intending passengers is not something that would ever be replicated on the railways. A non-comparison, really.

It must be just me, I don't see much difference in principle at all.

 

[BestWestern]

It must be just me, I don't see much difference in principle at all.

It is very different indeed. As I said above, the conditions on a Tube platform during rush hour would never be tolerated on the national network. Standards are very different.

 

[Robertj21a]

It is very different indeed. As I said above, the conditions on a Tube platform during rush hour would never be tolerated on the national network. Standards are very different.

OK, understood - but who is it saying that it 'would never be tolerated' ?. Surely it already occurs at, say, Clapham Junction, after there's been a delay ?

 

[Jonfun]

There's a train at Alton Towers that takes people from the car park to the gates. It runs on rails (well, a rail), has power doors, and runs with only a driver on board. They manage okay without a Guard, so why do the new trains FGW are getting need one?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The staff waving dispatch bats on LU aren't actually dispatching - they are just there to speed up boarding. The driver still has to make the decision to go, to check the PTI, and to keep watching as the train leaves on lines where this is possible. LU drivers on other forums have reported being told off for waiting for the tip when the person with the bat was preoccupied.

Interesting, so what's the point of the bat, then?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

There's a train at Alton Towers that takes people from the car park to the gates. It runs on rails (well, a rail), has power doors, and runs with only a driver on board. They manage okay without a Guard, so why do the new trains FGW are getting need one?

When the debate is about platform-train interface, it applies equally to all trains (well, at least all trains of any significant length[1]). It doesn't matter if it's a theme park monorail, or a 125mph EMU, or a commuter EMU, or the Tube. In all the cases, if someone is caught and dragged by the doors they will be seriously injured or killed. The argument is identical.

If the argument *isn't* about the platform-train interface, then that moves to the situations differing, of course. But much of the present dispute seems to be centred around who opens and closes the doors, does it not?

[1] It utterly baffles me as to why the Parry People Mover on the Stourbridge Shuttle is not DOO.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

There's a train at Alton Towers that takes people from the car park to the gates. It runs on rails (well, a rail), has power doors, and runs with only a driver on board. They manage okay without a Guard, so why do the new trains FGW are getting need one?

trying to be a Pratt ? I just love people who have never had sod all to do with real trains in the real world talking out of their rectums about something they know sod all about.

The RSSB have not even finished their research into PTI yet and the greatest risk ( 46- 48 percent ) to life and limb is the PTI interface.

I suggest you couch potatoes download the PTI strategy from the RSSB of Jan 2015 for starters and spend a few hours reading !