Doors not even opening

[90019]

Because the guard admitted it to the OP, as stated in the first post of this thread.

Even the OP shows that he's not completely convinced by what he's been told;

It seems, according to him, the guard told him that as no one was waiting on the platform at Glenrothes with Thornton station, and as it was snowing, they decided NOT to release the doors.

I am wondering if he missed it so found someone else to blame because he didn't want to look foolish.

 

[GB]

Because the guard admitted it to the OP, as stated in the first post of this thread.

That proves nothing other than you are willing to base your opinions on third hand information....information that may or may not be accurate.

Assuming for a moment that the guard didnt release the doors, did it occur to you that as it was snowing the train crew may of thought it was unsafe to allow passengers to alight?

 

[Surreytraveller]

So it's not just the word 'emergency' that you don't know the meaning of then. The passenger was unable to get offm either through their own error or an error by the traincrew. The crew did not refuse to let the passenger off, that would be a wholly different scenario

They did refuse. They didn't open the doors. It wasn't an accident the doors didn't open, the guard made a decision not to. Therefore it was deliberate.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

That proves nothing other than you are willing to base your opinions on third hand information....information that may or may not be accurate.

Assuming for a moment that the guard didnt release the doors, did it occur to you that as it was snowing the train crew may of thought it was unsafe to allow passengers to alight?

I am basing my opinion on what I've been asked to base it on. What are you basing yours on? Hypothetical non existant requests?

And if the crew thought it unsafe, they should have made an announcement and alternative arrangements for those overcarried. But as stated previously, the reason the doors weren't opened wasn't because it was unsafe - it was because it was cold.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I am wondering if he missed it so found someone else to blame because he didn't want to look foolish.

Perhaps (s)he did, but we have been asked for our opinion on what we have been told, whether or not it is what happened.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I personally have only ever used an emergency door open plunger once, when I had fallen asleep on a 158 from Blackburn to Blackpool and got locked in the unit which had been completely shut down.

Yet another example of railway staff not doing their job - the train should have been checked before leaving its destination.

 

[GB]

the reason the doors weren't opened wasn't because it was unsafe - it was because it was cold.

Making things up now are we?:roll:

As far as this topic goes, I make my opinions based on logic, common sense and experience with train crew. I dont base them on a "he said, she said" basses which you apparantly do.

By virtue of the nature of this forum and the railway industry we probably wont find out what happened for certain, however that doesnt mean I'm going to take the OPs post for gospel truth.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

I have been out all day, so am going to reply to a number of points. My apologies if the point has already been made.

The railway's first priority is safety. You cannot be safe without following the rules and procedures set down by the RSSB and others. Then the priority is the customer.

They did refuse. They didn't open the doors. It wasn't an accident the doors didn't open, the guard made a decision not to. Therefore it was deliberate.

Maybe it was deliberate for a reason, that it wasn't safe for the passengers to alight, but in that case an announcement should have been made, but it may have been forgotten because the guard also has to inform control. Either way, an announcement should have been made, I am not denying that.

Hypothetical non existant requests?

Well you were the person making hypothetical points when it suited you.


SurreyTraveller, there are a number of posts in this topic that you have not answered, either by error or convenience, which I am sure people would like to see answered.

 

[Surreytraveller]

SurreyTraveller, there are a number of posts in this topic that you have not answered, either by error or convenience, which I am sure people would like to see answered.

Let me know which ones - I haven't got time to sit here going round in circles with hypothetical things the OP hasn't said, or answering repeated things already answered.

 

[90019]

I haven't got time to sit here going round in circles with hypothetical things the OP hasn't said

In that case, show us where the OP said the doors weren't opened because it was cold;

But as stated previously, the reason the doors weren't opened wasn't because it was unsafe - it was because it was cold.

 

[313103]

I think that Surrey traveller is the power of all knowledge and is absolutely 110% correct in everything he does and says. He is never wrong and all the railway workers like myself are a bunch of lazy so and so's. Whilst us railway workers cock up every now and again and sometimes lose our jobs as a result surrey traveller has never made a mistake in his life and should really be the Managing Director of the company he works for due to his 110% success rate and being the most brainiest person that has ever lived on this planet.

Now getting back to the subject matter, have we yet to consider that the original poster is a troll looking to cause trouble? Of cause we havent he would never do such a thing would he?

 

[Surreytraveller]

In that case, show us where the OP said the doors weren't opened because it was cold;

"It seems, according to him, the guard told him that as no one was waiting on the platform at Glenrothes with Thornton station, and as it was snowing, they decided NOT to release the doors."

It is safe to assume that if it's snowing, then it is cold. Unless the guard was afraid a snowflake may have entered the train!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Let me know which ones - I haven't got time to sit here going round in circles with hypothetical things the OP hasn't said, or answering repeated things already answered.

GB's post further up the page for one.

I think that Surrey traveller is the power of all knowledge and is absolutely 110% correct in everything he does and says. He is never wrong and all the railway workers like myself are a bunch of lazy so and so's. Whilst us railway workers cock up every now and again and sometimes lose our jobs as a result surrey traveller has never made a mistake in his life and should really be the Managing Director of the company he works for due to his 110% success rate and being the most brainiest person that has ever lived on this planet.

 

[bluebottle]

It is safe to assume that if it's snowing, then it is cold. Unless the guard was afraid a snowflake may have entered the train!

Is it also safe to assume that if it's snowing, the platform is likely to be slippery? I'd have thought that a safety issue.

 

[royaloak]

So Mr Sorrytraveller, how often do you catch trains, and how often do you have problems THAT ARE THE TRAIN CREWS FAULT, as opposed to things outside the crews control as a percentage of your total number of trips?

You always like to "have a go" at train crew for any possible reason and yet you don't tell us what job you do, if any, for us to give it back.
Maybe you wanted a job on the railways but you were not good enough so you are jealous of us that do work on the railways, could be any number of reasons. You remind me of a person on another forum who is a medical student that likes to have a go never mind the lack of evidence to support the claims, I mean you would have thought that an incident like this would have made the papers.

IF the alleged incident took place for the reasons stated, which I very much doubt, then I look forward to seeing a copy the reply received by the OP from the company.

Of course if we don't hear anything then we all know what THAT means don't we!

 

[ralphchadkirk]

You remind me of a person on another forum who is a medical student that likes to have a go never mind the lack of evidence to support the claims, I mean you would have thought that an incident like this would have made the papers.

I see similarities...

I have travelled by train extensively since that is mine and my families choice of transport, and only once have I encountered a problem which could be the fault of a member of staff, yet is was sorted professionally and quickly.

 

[mumrar]

They did refuse. They didn't open the doors. It wasn't an accident the doors didn't open, the guard made a decision not to. Therefore it was deliberate.

That still doesn't mean they refused. You really should keep a dictionary handy before typing. Whilst it was intentional and deliberate that my local Tesco shut at 10 o'clock last night it doesn't mean that they refused to serve me.

 

[GWRtom]

somthing simialer(sp) last night a Dorchester south a 444 over shot the paltfrom resulting in the CDL not un locking causing the driver to use the emergancy door opening i belive meaning the train couldn't move off

 

[royaloak]

On a 444 the "CDL" is controlled by the guard, so should have used a local door only in that situation, nothing to do with the "emergency egress".

 

[GWRtom]

Ah my mistake 2nd Gen EMU's are not my strong point.

 

[royaloak]

Thats okay chief, as my post said-
what SHOULD have been done, but wasn't there so can't really pass comment.

there are lots of people on here that will willingly pass on any info you need, the trouble is there are lots of rules and regs out there that some self proclaimed "experts" who dont work on the railway dont understand.

 

[boing_uk]

there are lots of people on here that will willingly pass on any info you need, the trouble is there are lots of rules and regs out there that some self proclaimed "experts" who dont work on the railway dont understand.

Same could be said for many aspects of life where, to the outside observer, a simple solution lies. And the answers to the "why can't you.." questions are just met with frustration and ridicule.

I feel sorry for the railway professionals on here that do their best day in day out and yet still get the hassle from external parties who simply don't/can't/won't understand that there is rarely a simple answer to what may seem a "simple" problem.

Yet another example of railway staff not doing their job - the train should have been checked before leaving its destination.

The train had reached its destination, had been shut down. Fortunately the internal doors were open as I have no idea how I would have made it to the door. The cab door was also open and I did contemplate entering the cab to see if I could exeunt through the end door, but the driving cab is not a place for me to be, regardless. Besides which, a mountain goat I am not, so a trip down on to the track and back up on to the platform was not an idea I entertained for long.

Yeah, okay, the unit should probably have been walked through. No harm came of it - I am not going to criticise the traincrew for it; it was a simple mistake. I would hardly go on record accusing it of being "yet another example of staff not doing their jobs".

May I enquire as to whether you have ever made a mistake in YOUR employ? And if so, you too could be accused of "not doing your job". But would that be fair?

No.

 

[Surreytraveller]

I feel sorry for the railway professionals on here that do their best day in day out and yet still get the hassle from external parties who simply don't/can't/won't understand that there is rarely a simple answer to what may seem a "simple" problem.

The professionals, yes. A lot of railway staff, however, do not act professionally. It is like that in any job.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Yeah, okay, the unit should probably have been walked through. No harm came of it - I am not going to criticise the traincrew for it; it was a simple mistake. I would hardly go on record accusing it of being "yet another example of staff not doing their jobs".

It was not a simple mistake. It was a fairly major one. It is not unheard of for unconcious passengers to end up dying because a train has not been walked through. And if a train is not walked through, a train ending up in a depot could cause a passenger to wake up and having to make their own way out and getting electrocuted or hit by a train in a depot. You are saying it was a simple mistake just to prevent the harassment from the jokers on here who want to be glorified parking attendants.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

May I enquire as to whether you have ever made a mistake in YOUR employ? And if so, you too could be accused of "not doing your job". But would that be fair?

Of course I have. We're all human. But then if I make a mistake, I wouldn't be going into one about trying to wriggle out of it.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

It is not unheard of for unconcious passengers to end up dying because a train has not been walked through.

Could you please provide evidence for that statement?

 

[Geezertronic]

The professionals, yes. A lot of railway staff, however, do not act professionally. It is like that in any job.

Out of interest, what do you do for a living?

 

[Surreytraveller]

On a 444 the "CDL" is controlled by the guard, so should have used a local door only in that situation, nothing to do with the "emergency egress".

Which is why he said 'something similar happened'. He didn't need his head bitten off.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Out of interest, what do you do for a living?

I'm an antogonist.

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Why not answer some of the above posts SurreyTraveller, rather than avoiding the point?

Edit - Oh I see you have, although rather immaturely.

 

[Surreytraveller]

GB's post further up the page for one.

Post number?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

94, although I'm more concerned with 111 at the moment.

 

[Surreytraveller]

Why not answer some of the above posts SurreyTraveller, rather than avoiding the point?

Edit - Oh I see you have, although rather immaturely.

You can talk! Lol.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

94, although I'm more concerned with 111 at the moment.

Sorry - Post 94 I didn't believe I was being asked anything? :roll:

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Sorry - Post 94 I didn't believe I was being asked anything?

Again skipping around the point :roll:
You don't need to be asked a question to provide a response.

You can talk! Lol.

Well you were the one that said this:

Talk to the hand, cos the face ain't listening to your rubbish!

 

[Surreytraveller]

Again skipping around the point :roll:
You don't need to be asked a question to provide a response.

Yes, but if a response is actually required, then you need to say so! I am not psychic. Perhaps railway staff think the public are psychic by expecting them to know the definition of the word 'emergency' for any given situation?

And what point is it I'm skipping?

 

[ralphchadkirk]

Well I've said so now, so a response please?

Perhaps railway staff should be psychics to know when passengers are going to pull the cord for the wrong reasons.