DOO in Scotland and Wales

[Highlandspring]

Without wanting to get onto the DOO argument hamsterwheel, I’ve always thought that the time to have the big showstopping fight about DOO was when the BedPan line went over in 1983 or at the latest when SMA was first proposed in 1985. The genie came out of the bottle then and 30+ years of largely trouble free operation has done little to reinforce the idea that it is unsafe.

 

[woodmally]

Without wanting to get onto the DOO argument hamsterwheel, I’ve always thought that the time to have the big showstopping fight about DOO was when the BedPan line went over in 1983 or at the latest when SMA was first proposed in 1985. The genie came out of the bottle then and 30+ years of largely trouble free operation has done little to reinforce the idea that it is unsafe.

I too am trying desperately to avoid the hamster wheel. Leaving my personal view of this current dispute to oneside. All that passengers really want from the Northern dispute is it to end. It seems what I often hear from RMT is that it happened in Scotland so why cant it happen in England. And from Northern its built into the contract. So If RMT are right then surely Northern are wrong and Northern can back down or is the situation in Scotland much different based on it being a different government. I just think a bit of transparency over this argument would not go a miss to resolve our current problems.

 

[68000]

I understand that the frachise agreement between Transport Scotland and Abellio only stipulates that any new rolling stock should be capable of being operated DCO (DOO) including driver CCTV

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

I went on tram-trains in Germany more than 20 years ago (Karlsruhe) and here we are in the UK still trying to get them to work !

Very true! The wheel/rail interface standards are different here compared to the continent. This has an impact on the ability for wheelsets to operate safely on both heavy- and light-rail networks. It's not insurmountable but our solution still needs to be validated. It's unfortunate that the South Yorkshire trial has electrified the heavy-rail line to light-rail standards, voltage and all, meaning that line is a completely non-standard part of the national heavy-rail network. That is not how tram-trains were supposed to work! Arguably a precedent, of sorts, was set by the Randstad Rail scheme between Rotterdam and The Hague which is possibly unique. The former heavy-rail line is now served by both Rotterdam Metro trains, which can be likened to Tyne & Wear Metro stock, and by trams from The Hague, which are a modified design of street tram. There is no interaction with heavy-rail trains though the tracks of the two systems are adjacent to each other in places.

 

[Bletchleyite]

TBH RandstadRail is more like Metrolink.

 

[Tractor2018]

It was only eventually resolved when ASLEF hinted at industrial action if the Conductors didn't get to keep control of the platform train interface and door closing.

This.

I may be wrong, but I also seem to remember ASLEF raising the possibility of some kind of injunction at that time, an option due to differing disabled access laws between Scotland and England. Unless im getting mixed up with something else.

 

[170401]

My understanding of Scotrail is that it was down to Abellio the franchisee to decide whether or not to implement DOO on the new rolling stock, and as suggested above they decided not to pursue it at this moment in time due to the industrial action and so on. However driver open, guard close could be argued to be one of the precursors to DOO anyway like on Southern Rail so they are just biding their time. The railway is the railway and thankfully (or maybe unthankfully for some) change takes a long time.

The actual reason for a need to change working practices is down to the requirements of ASDO and the need to run trains that are longer than platforms served. This is not possible with conductors opening doors.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The actual reason for a need to change working practices is down to the requirements of ASDO and the need to run trains that are longer than platforms served. This is not possible with conductors opening doors.

I can see no technical reason why it would make any difference who pressed the open button, and certainly it makes no difference who presses the close button.

 

[170401]

I can see no technical reason why it would make any difference who pressed the open button, and certainly it makes no difference who presses the close button.

Manual selective door opening has long been rejected in Scotland. I don't know the actual reasons for this but it has been suggested elsewhere there were safety concerns when class 170 was introduced and SDO was rejected. If anyone knows more feel free to PM me.

 

[laseandre]

The actual reason for a need to change working practices is down to the requirements of ASDO and the need to run trains that are longer than platforms served. This is not possible with conductors opening doors.

You know SWR have guard-operated ASDO, right? There are probably more too...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Manual selective door opening has long been rejected in Scotland. I don't know the actual reasons for this but it has been suggested elsewhere there were safety concerns when class 170 was introduced and SDO was rejected. If anyone knows more feel free to PM me.

I'm not talking about manual SDO or UDS (much as this is used quite happily on some LNR services, though may well not be any more if all of the platforms affected have been extended, I forget[1]). I'm talking about ASDO with the guard pressing the open button as, as someone has pointed out after me, happens on SWR already.

As far as I can see there is no specific safety benefit or disbenefit to who presses the open button in this context. The ASDO will ensure it is not unsafe to press it and ensure the correct number of doors open.

There are other advantages of driver release, such as time, but those are not relevant to ASDO in and of itself.

[1] It may be held in reserve for occasional use e.g. if a Euston train uses platform 6 at Bletchley, which is extremely unusual but has happened.

 

[mark-h]

You can't pay the Conductor on board unless theres been an issue with the TVM's at the stop you joined, they check tickets and hand out £10 penalty fares if you knowingly board without a ticket and the machines are in full working order

It is an "On-board fare" not a penalty fare- the clippy (they did literally punch holes in tickets after the reopening of Edinburgh's trams) is not able to issue fines/penalty fares, but can ask the person to get aff.

I have only seen the On-board fare charged once- it was for a journey from St Andrews Square to the airport by somebody who (looked liked they) worked in finance/banking- they were given the opportunity to get off at the next stop to buy a regular ticket but chose to stay on board. They openly admitted to the conductor that they they were going to claim it on expenses (with the implication that they did not give a FF what it cost their employer).