Buzz Buzz?

[150222]

When the guard buzzes the driver the driver often puts the train in notch 3 before (s)he has buzzed back. I am currently on a train (I won't say which one) and at the last station the guard buzzed, Then the driver put the train in what sounded like notch 4, Then the train started moving before the buzz was given. My question is can a driver get in trouble for doing that? Or am I fussing about nothing?

 

[Hydro]

AFAIK there's no problem with this.

 

[driver9000]

I'd say fussing over nothing. At least the Driver is taking power after the RTS has been given.

Personally I return 2 once I've opened up as it proves the traction interlock to me and that I have power. There is nothing worse than getting 2, sending it back, opening up and then nothing happening. A side effect is that should I not return 2 and the train doesn't move it may serve to give the Guard a clue that I may have a problem and they often call me up on the cab-call phone.

 

[myboysam]

We asked the same question to our trainer during rules. The reply back was that the 2 buzzes were for the guard to tell the driver that his job was done and the driver replies back with 2 to acknowledge that fact and he/she can get on with their job. He said this was the Scotrail staff answer and he checked on it with Ops standards before passing it on to us. I can't answer for any other TOC and would never dare question drivers with years under their belt as to why they do what they do but this is what we were told.

 

[TDK]

When the guard buzzes the driver the driver often puts the train in notch 3 before (s)he has buzzed back. I am currently on a train (I won't say which one) and at the last station the guard buzzed, Then the driver put the train in what sounded like notch 4, Then the train started moving before the buzz was given. My question is can a driver get in trouble for doing that? Or am I fussing about nothing?

This is common practice - say for instance the guard gives the driver 2 on the buzzer and then the driver gives 2 back tries to take power and nothing happens? This used to be a manditory procedure for the TOC I used to work for and was monitored.

 

[150222]

I think some people may be confused at what I'm getting at. I am not talking about the driver buzzing the guard just after (s)he has taken power. I mean that the driver took power and the train began to move before the driver buzzed back. I have never encountered this before however the train on the way back upon departing one station there was a good 3/4 seconds between movement and the drivers buzz.

 

[142094]

I'd say fussing over nothing. At least the Driver is taking power after the RTS has been given.

Personally I return 2 once I've opened up as it proves the traction interlock to me and that I have power. There is nothing worse than getting 2, sending it back, opening up and then nothing happening. A side effect is that should I not return 2 and the train doesn't move it may serve to give the Guard a clue that I may have a problem and they often call me up on the cab-call phone.

Think this was one of the points about the guard getting left behind at Walsden recently - driver took power, door interlock hadn't been gained, guard gets off and subsequently left behind.

 

[TDK]

I think some people may be confused at what I'm getting at. I am not talking about the driver buzzing the guard just after (s)he has taken power. I mean that the driver took power and the train began to move before the driver buzzed back. I have never encountered this before however the train on the way back upon departing one station there was a good 3/4 seconds between movement and the drivers buzz.

As long as the driver gives the guard 2 back on the buzzer it really does not matter, as a passenger the buzzer code between driver and guard really is not any of your business

 

[150222]

Think this was one of the points about the guard getting left behind at Walsden recently - driver took power, door interlock hadn't been gained, guard gets off and subsequently left behind.

Strange, I never heard about that and it would normally have been covered by the local paper as nothing happens 'round here.
Was it a 150/1?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

As long as the driver gives the guard 2 back on the buzzer it really does not matter, as a passenger the buzzer code between driver and guard really is not any of your business

I know, I was never claiming it was however as I had said I had never heard that before I was just curious as to what the policy was.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I don't see a problem with that. The important signal is from the guard to the driver, the rest is just an acknowledgement.

 

[TDK]

Or am I fussing about nothing?

Yes you are

 

[ralphchadkirk]

As long as the driver gives the guard 2 back on the buzzer it really does not matter, as a passenger the buzzer code between driver and guard really is not any of your business

I'm probably one of the most pro-rail staff posters on here (aside from staff themselves!) and even I would say that that post is bang out of order. People are allowed to ask questions based on what they see/hear.

 

[142094]

Strange, I never heard about that and it would normally have been covered by the local paper as nothing happens 'round here.

Ah, it was actually Walkden (get mixed up between the two sometimes)

Thread is here.

 

[tom1649]

Certainly on the 101s, there wasn't even the facility for the driver to buzz back to the guard. This applied right until the end in First North Western days.

 

[150222]

Certainly on the 101s, there wasn't even the facility for the driver to buzz back to the guard. This applied right until the end in First North Western days.

I know about that although IIRC they did have the facility to do it however it was removed under FNW.

 

[driver9000]

Think this was one of the points about the guard getting left behind at Walsden recently - driver took power, door interlock hadn't been gained, guard gets off and subsequently left behind.

Without door interlock the train wouldn't have moved, I think you mean that interlock was gained after the Guard left the train?

 

[scotsman]

I know about that although IIRC they did have the facility to do it however it was removed under FNW.

no, first gen DMUs didn't have buzzers in the Drivers cabs

 

[hants-man]

no, first gen DMUs didn't have buzzers in the Drivers cabs

That's funny - I'd swear Class 108s do have buzzers cab to guard.

 

[TDK]

I'm probably one of the most pro-rail staff posters on here (aside from staff themselves!) and even I would say that that post is bang out of order. People are allowed to ask questions based on what they see/hear.

And that is not for you to say that is a moderators job. Ansd I agree people are allowed to ask what they like however read the OP below and my view and then you may see my point

The op quotes When the guard buzzes the driver the driver often puts the train in notch 3 before (s)he has buzzed back. I am currently on a train (I won't say which one) and at the last station the guard buzzed, Then the driver put the train in what sounded like notch 4, Then the train started moving before the buzz was given. My question is can a driver get in trouble for doing that? Or am I fussing about nothing?



Maybe the op should have asked what the protocol is instead of questioning a professional and the process without having the knoeldge to question it. He should have asked what the protocol is before quoting what a driver did or did not do - as I said as a passenger none of his business

 

[Jonfun]

As much as I don't want to have an argument, I think that's (with respect) a bit harsh TDK. As a mere 'passenger' should I therefore apply this to other situations, such as the one I witnessed (and was very nearly involved directly in) where a Northern Rail guard released all train doors on a short platform in the pitch black, resulting in people only at the last minute realising there was no platform next to the door and climbing down and walking along the cess? By your argument, he's a professional, so I shouldn't stop and query it because it's none of my business.

Don't get me wrong TDK, I'm mostly a lurker around here these days and I find the vast majority of your input very useful and insightful, but that does seem incredibly arrogant and unfair on the chap.

Although yes, 150222, you are fussing a bit over nothing.

In addition, some first gen DMUs (including at least some 101s) are and were fitted with return buzzers - perhaps not from new - although I wouldn't be able to give which specific ones.

 

[deltic1989]

And that is not for you to say that is a moderators job. Ansd I agree people are allowed to ask what they like however read the OP below and my view and then you may see my point

The op quotes When the guard buzzes the driver the driver often puts the train in notch 3 before (s)he has buzzed back. I am currently on a train (I won't say which one) and at the last station the guard buzzed, Then the driver put the train in what sounded like notch 4, Then the train started moving before the buzz was given. My question is can a driver get in trouble for doing that? Or am I fussing about nothing?



Maybe the op should have asked what the protocol is instead of questioning a professional and the process without having the knoeldge to question it. He should have asked what the protocol is before quoting what a driver did or did not do - as I said as a passenger none of his business

The OP asked a valid question and added a bit of background to explain the reason for the question. This is a disscussion forum where people meet in a manner of speaking to discuss a common interest. Saying that something is 'none of your business' is clearly not the way to behave after a question has been asked, I would understand your point of view had the OP come across as agressive or condemning towards the driver but he didn't he asked a question out of curiosity. Patience is the best virtue to have when frequenting forums and it seems that you have shown a lack of this in this instance whilst what you posted was your own opinion and I respect your right to it maybe a little discretion would have been the best course here.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

And that is not for you to say that is a moderators job.

Fair enough, it is for the moderators to decide. But do you really think that they're going to stop people asking questions?!

Maybe the op should have asked what the protocol is instead of questioning a professional and the process without having the knoeldge to question it. He should have asked what the protocol is before quoting what a driver did or did not do - as I said as a passenger none of his business

Drivers are not some kind of untouchable deity. People are allowed to question them - just because someone is not passed in drivers' rules does not mean that they are not allowed to question whether something would get someone in trouble. This is in much the same way that I am not a doctor, yet I am allowed (encouraged actually!) to get a second opinion if I wish.

I'm all for people being given gentle advice that they haven't gone about things the right way (for instance see the Tyne and Wear Metro complaint thread), yet this is just silly.

 

[wensley]

That's funny - I'd swear Class 108s do have buzzers cab to guard.

So do 101s

 

[TDK]

As much as I don't want to have an argument, I think that's (with respect) a bit harsh TDK. As a mere 'passenger' should I therefore apply this to other situations, such as the one I witnessed (and was very nearly involved directly in) where a Northern Rail guard released all train doors on a short platform in the pitch black, resulting in people only at the last minute realising there was no platform next to the door and climbing down and walking along the cess? By your argument, he's a professional, so I shouldn't stop and query it because it's none of my business.

Don't get me wrong TDK, I'm mostly a lurker around here these days and I find the vast majority of your input very useful and insightful, but that does seem incredibly arrogant and unfair on the chap.

Although yes, 150222, you are fussing a bit over nothing.

In addition, some first gen DMUs (including at least some 101s) are and were fitted with return buzzers - perhaps not from new - although I wouldn't be able to give which specific ones.

OK, maybe a bit harsh and your scenario is completely different and a mistake and a breach of safety that was obvious, I really do get peeved with enthusiasts being what I would call "jobsworths" when they know just a small bit on the operation of trains, I see it far too often and have had this stuff first hand, I was questioned and downloaded once because a jobsworth spotter posted I was actually speeding when in fact I wasn't as he didn't know the linespeed and has an inacurate GPS device, I have had spotters approach me and question my driving style because they have a class 67 on BVE, I have had spotters question me on the validation of the route I was taking and asked me if NR were aware that I was travelling down a goods line the list is endless and this is why I have a harsh response, I am sorry 150222 but you do not have enough knowledge to question a train drivers actions and ask whether they could be in trouble for something you think was wrong when in fact there was nothing wrong with the process.

Maybe you can see why I react like I do when these subjects arise!

I have nothing against enthusiasts in general and most of them are decent people and I do chat to them, for the ones that know me on here they can confirm this, however some are just annoying!!!!!!!!
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Fair enough, it is for the moderators to decide. But do you really think that they're going to stop people asking questions?!



Drivers are not some kind of untouchable deity. People are allowed to question them - just because someone is not passed in drivers' rules does not mean that they are not allowed to question whether something would get someone in trouble. This is in much the same way that I am not a doctor, yet I am allowed (encouraged actually!) to get a second opinion if I wish.

I'm all for people being given gentle advice that they haven't gone about things the right way (for instance see the Tyne and Wear Metro complaint thread), yet this is just silly.

I do agree with your comment just read my post above and my response may be a bit clearer

 

[notadriver]

Some drivers don't buzz back at all. To be honest I don't think it's that important but I could be wrong.

 

[tom1649]

I've been on Sprinters and Pacers where the driver hasn't buzzed back. I've been on slam door EMUs where the driver hasn't belled back. I've always put it down to personal preference of the driver.

 

[142094]

Without door interlock the train wouldn't have moved, I think you mean that interlock was gained after the Guard left the train?

Yes - should have put that after the guard had got off and closed the door, the interlock was gained and the train moved off.

 

[pendolino]

On the very rare occasions I work a 455 with a conductor, I usually get a bit confused at the first stop as I get 2 bells, go to give 2 back and then spend a few seconds searching the desk for the signal bell button, before remembering that there isn't one.

 

[dave87016]

As someone said as long as the guard buzzes to the driver there is no problem, some drivers tend to "rev" up and the buzz twice

 

[tirphil]

On the Cambrian, at certain locations, the driver will give the guard two on the buzzer to indicate that (s)he has the road and the guard will not give two on the buzzer until they have heard this even though platform duties may be complete and the doors may be closed. This is to prevent guards giving two against an End of Authority (stop signal everywhere else)