Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
Yes but that isn't always the case is it? No need to comment any further.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
My Overground Train rolled back at Shepherd's Bush yesterday
- Thread starter Voyager 2093
- Start date
- Status
Yes but that isn't always the case is it? No need to comment any further.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
I get it now,it does have brake interlock with an SSR associated with it. Thanks (SSR = Speed sensor relay)
2030720310
Member
- Joined
- 20 Jan 2009
- Messages
- 456
TheExmoorBeast
Member
What goes on, on railtours probably goes unnoticed because it's not publicised, however to publicise an incident with a unit number, station and date on a public forum to me is almost tantamount to reporting an individual.
We're all human & we can all make mistakes and I'm sure that the train operator concerned never intended to let the train roll back, they may well have got away with it had it not been for motormouth (jamaal) doing the dirty.
Before anyone starts having a go, you need to ask yourselves how many times have I made a mistake and then covered it up?
Office bods do it all of the time, the thing is in the office they can get away with it by deleting files or correcting the error on the computers, Drivers/Guards however don't have that luxury are constantly monitored by management courtesy of data recorders & CCTV and they don't need the likes jamaal putting the knife in as well.
We're all human & we can all make mistakes and I'm sure that the train operator concerned never intended to let the train roll back, they may well have got away with it had it not been for motormouth (jamaal) doing the dirty.
Before anyone starts having a go, you need to ask yourselves how many times have I made a mistake and then covered it up?
Office bods do it all of the time, the thing is in the office they can get away with it by deleting files or correcting the error on the computers, Drivers/Guards however don't have that luxury are constantly monitored by management courtesy of data recorders & CCTV and they don't need the likes jamaal putting the knife in as well.
Voyager 2093
Member
Wow one post and I have earned the name 'motormouth'. I never had any intention to get the driver in trouble, I just included the exact Train and time to make it easier for anyone to verify.To be honest i am not going to entertain this, it was just something strange and I wanted to know whether anyone else on the forum was on this Train. The post seemed to offend you so I edited it. We all have the common interest of Trains on this forum and can we please not let this get in the way or cause any disputes.
Regards
Jamaal
Last edited:
TheExmoorBeast
Member
But you don't put details like that on here, by putting unit numbers, times etc on here for even 60 seconds (yours was on here for at least 55 minutes before you edited it) would have given any manager/staff who worked for the company ample time to make notes, ring up or go back into the records, check and see if any incident was reported. If not why not!
You could have dropped someone in it. BIG TIME!
Don't try and condone what you did, you can't. There are enough backstabber's in this world without you adding to their number.
You could have dropped someone in it. BIG TIME!
Don't try and condone what you did, you can't. There are enough backstabber's in this world without you adding to their number.
EPB on Tour
Member
You orginal posting was that of a grass up post,simple as that.Dont try and squirm your way out of it.
Voyager 2093
Member
I understand where you are coming from. While I understand the reason you say I have done something wrong I don't think I've done anything wrong. If anything I may have outlined a problem which is a beneficial factor to the company and passengers.
I would like to end by stating I am not a backstabber. I will know next time not to post things as such.
I would like to end by stating I am not a backstabber. I will know next time not to post things as such.
That is the problem you see. "Got away with it". That attitude is rife in our (and other similar) industries. You can flame me all you want, but a huge number (but I wouldn't say the majority) of people in our industry are more concerned about looking out for their mates than letting standards slip & using shortcuts and sloppy practises, and they are NOT mutually exclusive.
I don't agree that it is right to announce it publicly as on this forum, your language (in the whole post, not just what was quoted) indicates that you see absolutely nothing wrong with it and that a blind eye should be turned. It is also interesting that not one person has challenged me saying that if it was a technical problem, it would be logged so the driver has nothing to worry about.
TheExmoorBeast
Member
ukrob, I'm not condoning it 100%, but what jamaal did was fundamentally wrong, putting all of the details of an incident like that is far from helpful.
The incident may well have been reported by the train operator, it may well have been a fault on the train concerned or a plain and simple error, in which case all well and good, but for goodness sake don't publish things like that on here because the next thing we'll have is a hysterical headline "train runs away with doors open" and all sorts of other tabloid drivel.
It's something that should be seen and not heard about in the public domain.
The main thing is no one was hurt, no damage was done, well maybe some professional pride on the train operators behalf, but other than that nothing major happened. Let's hope that the train operator doesn't suffer anything more than a quiet word in the ear or a slapped wrist.
The incident may well have been reported by the train operator, it may well have been a fault on the train concerned or a plain and simple error, in which case all well and good, but for goodness sake don't publish things like that on here because the next thing we'll have is a hysterical headline "train runs away with doors open" and all sorts of other tabloid drivel.
It's something that should be seen and not heard about in the public domain.
The main thing is no one was hurt, no damage was done, well maybe some professional pride on the train operators behalf, but other than that nothing major happened. Let's hope that the train operator doesn't suffer anything more than a quiet word in the ear or a slapped wrist.
TheExmoorBeast I agree that in public is not the place to mention it with such detail (which I didn't see, but I assume was very detailed), and to be honest that is more for the reason you state of a sensationalist headline moreso than the TOC happening to read the post.
I guess what my point was that some positions (again, in many industries) are defined as Safety Critical. People with these jobs should not start taking any shortcuts or use poor techniques, because once you are comfortable doing this, it is easy to start taking more and more liberties.
I should point out that I am by no means saying the staff in question were in the wrong - we don't know either-way, and I'm also not saying that people shouldn't make mistakes, because we all do as you point out.
It is just the looking out for each other culture than annoys me, and phrases like "got away with it" don't help give a good image of the industry. And just a thought - I'm sure that phrase could create an equally spectacularly bad tabloid story. "Rail Staff Try to Cover Up Driver Mistakes as the Norm". You get the idea
.
I guess what my point was that some positions (again, in many industries) are defined as Safety Critical. People with these jobs should not start taking any shortcuts or use poor techniques, because once you are comfortable doing this, it is easy to start taking more and more liberties.
I should point out that I am by no means saying the staff in question were in the wrong - we don't know either-way, and I'm also not saying that people shouldn't make mistakes, because we all do as you point out.
It is just the looking out for each other culture than annoys me, and phrases like "got away with it" don't help give a good image of the industry. And just a thought - I'm sure that phrase could create an equally spectacularly bad tabloid story. "Rail Staff Try to Cover Up Driver Mistakes as the Norm". You get the idea
.
Last edited:
anonymous0101
Member
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 192
ukrob you are right. Trains rolling back are not acceptable but its not something done purposely. A trainee was probably driving it and i'm sure won't make that mistake again. If i did it accidentally (i'm not a driver) i'd expect to get a telling off but that's it.
313103
Established Member
- Joined
- 13 May 2006
- Messages
- 1,595
I am not going to get involved in the slanging match because if i had seen the thread i could have asked one question to my TRM and he would have given me a name!
However going back to the alleged incident, it sounds to me that all the driver didnt do was put the train in 'hill start' even though he has put the controller into power, the train will not move off right away and sometimes role back. For 5 seconds that would be about a yard if that.
However going back to the alleged incident, it sounds to me that all the driver didnt do was put the train in 'hill start' even though he has put the controller into power, the train will not move off right away and sometimes role back. For 5 seconds that would be about a yard if that.
I can assure you that I've been on a number of TUBE trains that have had the doors open before the train has stopped. I didn't mention the stock, but I'm pretty sure that one example is the Met line stock.
If you think I'm lying, that's fine. I can't prove otherwise. However, I'd hope people know me well enough on here to not think I'd have any reason to lie.
I'm not naming names or dates, but it happens and at night it happens a lot more than in the day. That said, it may well happen in the daytime off-peak period too, but I don't really travel much then.
Trains opening doors when moving, or rolling back, is not totally unheard of - although I'd say doors being opened is more common than the rolling back which, for me, is very rare.
If you think I'm lying, that's fine. I can't prove otherwise. However, I'd hope people know me well enough on here to not think I'd have any reason to lie.
I'm not naming names or dates, but it happens and at night it happens a lot more than in the day. That said, it may well happen in the daytime off-peak period too, but I don't really travel much then.
Trains opening doors when moving, or rolling back, is not totally unheard of - although I'd say doors being opened is more common than the rolling back which, for me, is very rare.
TheExmoorBeast
Member
I was under the impression that these new fangled trains you lot have in London & SE didn't release the brakes until the unit had enough power to move forward, so it wouldn't roll backwards.
So far I've not seen a FGW HST inadvertently roll backwards..YET!
So far I've not seen a FGW HST inadvertently roll backwards..YET!
I found out by accident that on 153s if you come to a stand at a station and select neutral BEFORE the doors are released, you can then fully release the brakes with the doors open and then enable the train to roll.
On DMU stock I sign, as soon as the doors are released/opened, interlock is broken and you will neither be able to take power or release the brakes, although there is a small delay on a class 170.
On locomotive hauled stock ie (47 + Mk2s) you can fully release the brakes and take power with the doors open. Central door locking does not prevent the driver releasing the brakes and it does not prevent the driver taking power.
On DMU stock I sign, as soon as the doors are released/opened, interlock is broken and you will neither be able to take power or release the brakes, although there is a small delay on a class 170.
On locomotive hauled stock ie (47 + Mk2s) you can fully release the brakes and take power with the doors open. Central door locking does not prevent the driver releasing the brakes and it does not prevent the driver taking power.
On the Paris Metro it's normal to release the doors when the train is still moving at around or just under 5mph - speeds up passengers getting off and on!
It's quite possible to open the doors and jump off with the train still moving and a foot or two away from its stopping position. Just like the days of EPBs, but its obviously safer with sliding doors.
TheExmoorBeast
Member
Mmm, just slam it into emergency and they'll fly off, down the platform on their noses.
O L Leigh
Established Member
There is a lot of speculation that doesn't aid the cause. Not many here seem to know how the various interlocking systems work, never mind the requirements of driving policies.
While I don't "sign" Cl378's, it does sound as though the driver simply failed to use the brake hold button on the CPBC to prevent a roll-back. I don't drive units with a CPBC (yet) so we take power against a step 1 brake instead and release it only once the power has come in.
Most interlocking systems connected with the doors are reliant on the status of the speed switch. On the stock I drive this tends to activate at around 5mph. Once the speed switch activates, all the interlocking features apply. Therefore it is not possible to drop the DSD and release it again immediately without waiting for the system to time-out and loss of door interlock will initiate an emergency brake application, whereas below that speed when the speed switch is not activated these "penalties" do not apply.
If the door systems on the Cl378's are anything like the computer controlled doors on a Cl315 pulling the emergency door egress handle does not immediately release the doors if the train is travelling above the speed set by the speed switch. Instead it just initiates an emergency brake application in the same way that a passcom would. To release the door you would need to pull the handle for a second time once the train has come to a stand. Therefore it does not endanger passenger safety if the driver overrides the emergency brake in order to select a more preferrable location to stop.
As for leaving the cab, it is permitted to do so with the key left in provided that the cab has been left secure.
O L Leigh
While I don't "sign" Cl378's, it does sound as though the driver simply failed to use the brake hold button on the CPBC to prevent a roll-back. I don't drive units with a CPBC (yet) so we take power against a step 1 brake instead and release it only once the power has come in.
Most interlocking systems connected with the doors are reliant on the status of the speed switch. On the stock I drive this tends to activate at around 5mph. Once the speed switch activates, all the interlocking features apply. Therefore it is not possible to drop the DSD and release it again immediately without waiting for the system to time-out and loss of door interlock will initiate an emergency brake application, whereas below that speed when the speed switch is not activated these "penalties" do not apply.
If the door systems on the Cl378's are anything like the computer controlled doors on a Cl315 pulling the emergency door egress handle does not immediately release the doors if the train is travelling above the speed set by the speed switch. Instead it just initiates an emergency brake application in the same way that a passcom would. To release the door you would need to pull the handle for a second time once the train has come to a stand. Therefore it does not endanger passenger safety if the driver overrides the emergency brake in order to select a more preferrable location to stop.
As for leaving the cab, it is permitted to do so with the key left in provided that the cab has been left secure.
O L Leigh
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
Thank you O L Leigh, I thought that was the case regarding keys.
anonymous0101
Member
- Joined
- 16 Jan 2010
- Messages
- 192
The policy regarding keys must differ according to toc. It seems older trains like hsts with a separate power and brake handle are less likely to roll back.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
i've noticed on the Paris metro, the door close switch works differently to ours. On a british train pressing the close button sounds the hustle alarm for a fixed time then the doors are closed. On the metro the first press sounds the hustle alarm, the second press will close the doors but crucially the button must be held down during this phase. If someone were to jump in at the last second releasing the button stops the process then depressing it continues closing the doors from their previous position. Once they are closed a bell sounds and if the same button continues to be held down the train will start if in ATO mode. I love it.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---
i've noticed on the Paris metro, the door close switch works differently to ours. On a british train pressing the close button sounds the hustle alarm for a fixed time then the doors are closed. On the metro the first press sounds the hustle alarm, the second press will close the doors but crucially the button must be held down during this phase. If someone were to jump in at the last second releasing the button stops the process then depressing it continues closing the doors from their previous position. Once they are closed a bell sounds and if the same button continues to be held down the train will start if in ATO mode. I love it.
RPM
Established Member
It could be that the hill start button was faulty. It has been known, and if that was the case then a certain amount of roll back would be unavoidable.
Leaving keys in units is not against the rules as O L Leigh correctly says. If you remove the key the Cab Secure Radio and Passenger Information System would have to be set up again from scratch, and also ATP on the units I sign. That is very slow because it goes through a self test routine before it can be set up and then you have to input the data for train length, isolated brakes etc.
Leaving keys in units is not against the rules as O L Leigh correctly says. If you remove the key the Cab Secure Radio and Passenger Information System would have to be set up again from scratch, and also ATP on the units I sign. That is very slow because it goes through a self test routine before it can be set up and then you have to input the data for train length, isolated brakes etc.
- Status