Are DOO trains a good idea?

[ChrisCooper]

Chris, I know how a train works & the principals of the DSD etc, thank you.

I also find the way you talk about guards as not much use as being quite derogatory towards them & their grade, they're a part of the traincrew grade & whilst some may not be much cop at their job, there are some truly superb guards around & the same can be said for drivers & the driving grade as well.

I just don't like the thought of a DOO train on the mainline, because if there's a incident where the driver becomes incapacitated through either illness, accident or vandalism, whilst I know that the DSD or Vigilance will kick in and stop the train, who's going to take care of the passengers? Or is it a case of they fend & look after themselves?

As far as I'm concerned DOO is a penny pinching way of doing things & as a passenger I don't like it, I prefer a guard on there, so if something does go wrong at least we have a responsible person in charge of things & someone who can go and protect the train.

"I don't think we've found out yet what the awful consequences could be" - To be honest it was that part which made me assume you were talking about possible runaway, rarther than just passengers being stuck on the train with no capable member of staff. It's not an idea situation, but awful consequences hardly describes it, unless you're a tabloid newspaper. Look at it this way too, you might understand DSD etc, but not everyone reading your post might, and like me they might assume you are refering to runaways, and therefore think it's a distinct possibility, so explaining the safety measure in place to prevent that is useful from that point of view.

Anyway, trains that run DOO are all fitted with Cab Secure Radio which enables the signallers to call any train, and also make PA announcements to the passengers. As has been said, it's hardly going to be ages before someone realises that something is wrong. Passengers don't start panicing and trying to break out of trains that have been stopped for a few minutes without announcement, I know from experiance as quite a few times they don't bother announcing (last time it happened we were stopped for a good 10mins and had no announcement at all, we didn't even get an apology or explanation along with the usual announcement for the next station, no mention at all that we were about 15mins late by then). The guard on a 12 car none gangwayed unit is hardly going to be much help in the event of problems anyway.

 

[jon0844]

LeShuttle and Eurostar Train Managers are qualified to drive the trains, but they are fully qualified drivers and just take turns driving and TMing.

That's an interesting way of doing things. Why don't other TOCs do this? Not only would it mean more qualified drivers, but arguably it would give a bit more variety to the job.

Although, I suspect some TOCs might misunderstand the idea and get the driver to come out of the cab and do TM duties, while sticking the train on cruise control...




(Yes, I'm fully aware there's no cruise control on a train!)

 

[RPM]

Are you sure? I was always led to belive with regards to the Chilterns that it was DOO from Marylebone to Banbury then a guard from Banbury onwards.QUOTE]

Yes that is correct. Guards are required north of Banbury, everything south thereof is DOO, with two exceptions: South Ruislip to Paddington requires a guard and the class 121 bubble car which works between Aylesbury and Princes Risborough also has to have a guard.

 

[E&W Lucas]

How many routes are still open because of the savings that DOO provides?






I've driven both DOO & guarded trains. I would much prefer to have a guard, for thr sake of the pax if things go wrong, but it's not the end of the world if I haven't.

The role of guard has changed dramatically. Today, anything below solebar level is the driver's problem. That's a long way from the "guard being in charge of the train".


What is great, is if you've got an old school guard to help out if things do go wrong.

 

[313103]

That's an interesting way of doing things. Why don't other TOCs do this? Not only would it mean more qualified drivers, but arguably it would give a bit more variety to the job.

Although, I suspect some TOCs might misunderstand the idea and get the driver to come out of the cab and do TM duties, while sticking the train on cruise control...




(Yes, I'm fully aware there's no cruise control on a train!)

Ah yes but there is one big draw back in that plan, but first i would like to say that Driver Only Operation was brought in for one thing and one thing only, it wasn't brought it because it made the railway safer, it was brought on pure cost analysis. That is where the problem lies:
Train Companies would rather have the following (Not based on any factual company or figures).

Say this is the current set up
Drivers salary >> £44,000 x 200
Conductors salary >> £24,000 x 175
In the analisation of what you would say you would need
Drivers >> £44,000 x 400

The Companies if they could get away with it would probably accept the following

Drivers salary >> £47,000 x 200
Conductors salary >> £24,000 x 0

The only reason why London Overground havent got rid of Conductors is purely because they as company wont get any money that is saved (TfL would get it, but not LO) that is a saving if they did get rid of us of £3,500,000 per annum. Then you would need to take into account the uniform costs, training costs, Management costs etc and you could quite easily save at least another £1,000,000. If London Overground did get this saving i would be under no illusion that DOO would already be in opeartion on all its services, and that i would be yet another person on the dole with no long term future. Ive been there before and no doubt in the not so far future i will be visiting it again.

 

[CarterUSM]

Can we stay off the topic of guard operated versus DOO? As has been stated by yorkie it has been done to death recently and I have said more than enough about it myself. though don't get the wrong impression, also from yorkie,-no offence intended- that we guards all sit about reading papers and pressing buttons. Me and the majority of my colleagues nationally do not do this as part of our duties, as much as perhaps we'd all like to.

 

[Mojo]

I just don't like the thought of a DOO train on the mainline, because if there's a incident where the driver becomes incapacitated through either illness, accident or vandalism, whilst I know that the DSD or Vigilance will kick in and stop the train, who's going to take care of the passengers? Or is it a case of they fend & look after themselves?

We have had this discussion before and I do not think we should be bringing it up again for we are in danger of going around in circles. Nobody agrees on it. This thread should be for discussing the business sense to TOCs of DOO.

 

[jon0844]

I think it's unfair to say that some guards just hide away and read a newspaper. Surely in this day and age, they'd be better off reading a paper via an app on their iPhone?

(Ducks!)

 

[Failed Unit]

How many routes are still open because of the savings that DOO provides?
.

None I suspect, most of the route DOO operates on are in urban areas linking major population centres. These routes make a lot of money as it is, with DOO main driver been that the gaurd doesn't have time to do anything commercial anyway as per North London line. If they tried to sell a ticket they would be at the next station before they had chance to complete the transaction!

On rural lines all lines are traditional guard operated. If any company tried to invest in equipment to make them suitable for DOO they would probably find that they couldn't make a return in the duration of a 10 year franchise! They would need someone on board selling tickets anyway so the diffence in pay wouldn't be worth the investment and maintenance of monitors etc.

 

[ChrisCooper]

It was the "paytrain" concept of having the guard not only checking tickets but also selling them that saved a lot of branch lines, as it allowed ticket offices at stations to be closed. These days more and more stations are getting ticket machines, but they cost a lot to purchase and maintain for lightly used stations, and you still need someone on the trains to check tickets. Fit barriers and the station needs to be staffed.

As for the cost of OPO equipment, lightly used lines would need no more than mirrors. Monitors are only needed where the trains are too long for the driver to clearly see the rear doors, or where the platform is curved. There is also the option of doing like they do on trams, having the mirrors or cameras on the train.

Sheffield and Nottingham trams both have an alternative crewing arrangement that the railways have not embraced that could work very well for lightly used lines. They have the driver operating the doors, and a conductor who is just there to check and sell tickets. They are not safety critical, so this can be reflected in wages and training (unlike a traditional conductor who is responsible for passenger safety).

 

[CarterUSM]

DOO in strathclyde works the way you have just described Chris. Ticket examiner to sell and check tickets only. Though some also assist on busy guard operated services.

 

[Aictos]

Take FCC services, should really have a second member of staff to check tickets or sell tickets on all trains but probably wouldn't work due to costs as opposed to SPT services.

Especially when the booking offices are not available.

 

[HSTfan!!!]

It's a bit unfair to say all guards hide in the back cab doing nothing, that's simply a stereotype, and they can easily be caught out for not doing any work on certain routes.
Certainly I know guards who won't stop all day to sit down for five.
I think trains should definitely have more than one member of staff, in the event of an emergency where for example the driver is dead/injured, who takes charge on a DOO train? If you have a guard (providing he's survived etc) you have a second person who can take charge and guide passengers to safety, inform signaller/emergency services etc. With regards to DOO, (I've never seen it in practice so do correct me if I'm wrong) I assume drivers make announcements etc? Surely this takes their concentration away from the job in hand?
I can see how the system works on the tube for example, but I certainly can't see how it would work on an intercity service.

 

[philjo]

Take FCC services, should really have a second member of staff to check tickets or sell tickets on all trains but probably wouldn't work due to costs as opposed to SPT services.

Especially when the booking offices are not available.

I would tend to agree with this - particularly on late evening services when many booking offices are closed & the gatelines at some stations are not manned at this time.
However, unless the service was formed of 317 units, all the other units on the GN route (313, 321, 365) do not have corridor connections between the units when used in multiple, so one of the units would still be unstaffed. The new 12-coach peak hour services to Cambridge/Peterborough use 3 x 365 units. (though these services generally only call at gated stations with the exception of Peterborough & having to use the mainline platforms at Kings Cross due to their length).

 

[yorkie]

Can we stay off the topic of guard operated versus DOO? As has been stated by yorkie it has been done to death recently and I have said more than enough about it myself. though don't get the wrong impression, also from yorkie,-no offence intended- that we guards all sit about reading papers and pressing buttons. Me and the majority of my colleagues nationally do not do this as part of our duties, as much as perhaps we'd all like to.

When I talk about guards doing nothing apart from pressing buttons, I am of course referring to the SWT non-commercial guards on inner suburban workings, and perhaps other operators too (but none spring to mind) where it is not their duty to check/sell tickets. This is, of course, a very small minority of guards, and it's not really the guards' fault. I am basically saying I'd rather have an SPT style visible ticket examiner on a train than someone who presses buttons and is invisible to passengers on board the train (some people do disagree with me, and the pros and cons have been discussed previously). Sorry I didn't make this clear. Scotrail guards are always visible in my experience, as you say checking/selling tickets is part of their duties.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I think trains should definitely have more than one member of staff, in the event of an emergency where for example the driver is dead/injured, who takes charge on a DOO train? If you have a guard (providing he's survived etc) you have a second person who can take charge and guide passengers to safety, inform signaller/emergency services etc. .

It would never happen for IC type services.

While I am no fan of having one person operation, the problem is that if you make it a requirement for a train to have 2 members of staff in case of an emergency, then what will happen is some rail lines will become unviable due to costs, they will be replaced with buses. The buses will only be manned by 1 person. The buses are less safe, the chances of an emergency are higher. So overall safety for passengers is not improved; quite the opposite in fact. Many people will not put up with the bus and will travel by car, further increasing the risk of incidents.

While I don't want to see trains go to one person operation, if we make rail unaffordably expensive then lines will close. I fear the Tories won't like how much the railways are costing them and will propose cutbacks in maybe a years' time

 

[CarterUSM]

I should have known that is what you meant, you have mentioned that previously as I recall. I find it an unusual situation myself, guards started doing tickets years ago in general, I can't understand why they don't down that way. With regards to units in multiple, when I was a ticket examiner we were instructed not to change units unless at a manned station as it was not uncommon to be left behind if you weren't sharp, especially on 334's where there is a blind spot on the drivers cctv between units. Not to mention some drivers who made it sport to try and leave you behind anyway.

 

[Old Timer]

. I fear the Tories won't like how much the railways are costing them and will propose cutbacks in maybe a years' time

It will be nothing to do with the Conservatives but everything to do with the economy that has been left to them.

When it inevitably comes down to a choice between cutting spending on a hospital, or social services or railways which would YOU choose ?

 

[yorkie]

Well that's my point really, if the railways become unaffordable then those are the choices that will be made. I think the actions of both the Tories (originally privatising) and Labour (continuing it, and the ridiculous re-franchising, the SRA/DfT debacle, allowing ATOC to act as regulators, etc etc) are to blame for the railways costing us so much more than in the early 1990s. I'm not going to get into blaming one over the other, but in a years time I am assuming it will be the Tories in power who will have to make that decision. I could be wrong though.

 

[Old Timer]

Well that's my point really, if the railways become unaffordable then those are the choices that will be made. I think the actions of both the Tories (originally privatising) and Labour (continuing it, and the ridiculous re-franchising, the SRA/DfT debacle, allowing ATOC to act as regulators, etc etc) are to blame for the railways costing us so much more than in the early 1990s. I'm not going to get into blaming one over the other, but in a years time I am assuming it will be the Tories in power who will have to make that decision. I could be wrong though.

It will be public opinion driven by the media with plenty of Labour-led disingenuous mischief, lies and distortions being peddled, same as in the 1980s :roll:

 

[HSTfan!!!]

It would never happen for IC type services.

While I am no fan of having one person operation, the problem is that if you make it a requirement for a train to have 2 members of staff in case of an emergency, then what will happen is some rail lines will become unviable due to costs, they will be replaced with buses. The buses will only be manned by 1 person. The buses are less safe, the chances of an emergency are higher. So overall safety for passengers is not improved; quite the opposite in fact. Many people will not put up with the bus and will travel by car, further increasing the risk of incidents.

While I don't want to see trains go to one person operation, if we make rail unaffordably expensive then lines will close. I fear the Tories won't like how much the railways are costing them and will propose cutbacks in maybe a years' time

Thing is, is rail really that expensive to operate? no, with rising fares, and the operators profits ridiculously high even in recession - arriva plc reported £121.7 million profit last year - that's ridiculous. Even I can say the TOC's only seem to care about profit and shareholders.

 

[Failed Unit]

Thing is, is rail really that expensive to operate? no, with rising fares, and the operators profits ridiculously high even in recession - arriva plc reported £121.7 million profit last year - that's ridiculous. Even I can say the TOC's only seem to care about profit and shareholders.

Put we will then need to work out how much of that is subsidy.

Some would argue get rid of Arriva (or whoever runs franchise x) and you have £121.7million saving as the operators add little value to running the service. Most of the recent growth has been down to the economy rather than the franchise. Please don't say it is down to good marketing and AP fares, northern don't do much marketing or sell many AP fares!

 

[yorkie]

Thing is, is rail really that expensive to operate? no, with rising fares, and the operators profits ridiculously high even in recession - arriva plc reported £121.7 million profit last year - that's ridiculous. Even I can say the TOC's only seem to care about profit and shareholders.

Yes, that's £121 million of taxpayers money down the drain to a private company. But subsidy is what counts, and it has gone up massively in recent years. Yes some of it is well spent, but not by any means all of it, as the railway has become less efficient due to higher wages, over zealous H&S rules, privatisation issues and general red tape.

 

[HSTfan!!!]

I'm not sure what it's down to, I can't say it can all be down to the economy in a recession? Mind you i've seen little fluctuation personally in passenger numbers and it's been pretty much business as usual with only rising fuel costs to worry about from what I've seen. I'm very much in favour of taking the railways back to government ownership - but you can't argue that privatisation hasn't had some good effect on the network - despite no matter how much people whinge, todays railway is a damn sight better than 20 years plus ago.

Yes, that's £121 million of taxpayers money down the drain to a private company.

I agree, you're quite right, it's sad that what was once a service for the public now is just in aid of lining the shareholders pockets.

 

[Mojo]

£121 Million is hardly a large amount of money given their turnover and huge amounts of capital investment.

These "greedy shareholders" could be ordinary men & women on the street; I don't own any shares in a transport company but do in another organisation and I worked hard to get them and consider them a good investment, and I am in no ways greedy, I've worked hard to get money (and so have my family), and I want to see my funds grow. Don't forget how much of your private pensions are funded; if you have one then you're probably a "greedy shareholder" too

 

[HSTfan!!!]

I was indeed a shareholder in atw myself, but at the end of the day, the railways, I feel should be run for the public, not to make a profit as such. I'm sure a great majority of the british public feel the same way.

 

[regulation9]

That just shows why TOCs go for gates rather than ticket collection on trains. All the Scotrail services had Guards or Ticket Examiners (I believe...), but the gates brought in the revenue in the end. There is a definite customer service benefit of having a second person on the train, but there is no financial case for it.