Passcom Penalty?

[MrPIC]

Hi all, on most trains I use there is a notice/cover on the pass comm alarms stating "penalty for improper use £50" or something similar. Has anybody actually been issued with such a penalty? Or had to issue one? I as a driver have had pass comm's pulled a few times and each time for some nonsense reason, but I've never taken details or whatever you might need to do in order to penalty someone.

 

[grumblingalong]

I've dealt with 3 activations in the last few months, two of the three there was no culprit to be seen, third was someone on the loo, because you know, "emergency press here" locks the door!

Never had the chance or inclination to chase a penalty, get the train moving again. It's more a deterrent I think.

 

[Master29]

I've dealt with 3 activations in the last few months, two of the three there was no culprit to be seen, third was someone on the loo, because you know, "emergency press here" locks the door!

That is kind of counterproductive considering getting everyone off the train maybe the reason it was pulled in the first place. Although it does serve the beggar who did get locked in right.

 

[Stigy]

Hi all, on most trains I use there is a notice/cover on the pass comm alarms stating "penalty for improper use £50" or something similar. Has anybody actually been issued with such a penalty? Or had to issue one? I as a driver have had pass comm's pulled a few times and each time for some nonsense reason, but I've never taken details or whatever you might need to do in order to penalty someone.

You can be reported for summons in the same way any other offence on the railway is dealt with. This issue comes when people play ignorant and unless a staff member actually witnesses miss-use, it's very hard to prove. The penalty you mentioned usually goes up to a 1000GBP (stupid pound key not working...) and is the maximum amount upon conviction at court.

Sums of 60GBP tend to be the amount you can be issued in the way of of Penalty Notices for Disorder PND, which can be issued by Police or specialist staff for certain low-level offences. Miss-use of communications equipment including passcoms is covered in this way. PNDs are similar to Penalty Fares in that they're a way of keeping low-level offences out of court. As long as an offender admits the offence and meets certain other criteria, they'd be eligible for a PND.

 

[matt_world2004]

I would hope passcom penalties are only issued for deliberate malicious misuse rather than someone accidentally pulling it thinking it was the toilet lock.

 

[Comstock]

I remember as a little kid wanting to spend nearly my entire savings account (I had 55 quid in the post office IIRC) doing this. My reason? So we could get off the train at the disused station near our house instead of going 6 miles and two buses out of the way getting off at Burton station. Sadly my parents wouldn't let me. Spoil sports

That would have been well over 30 years ago, so if it's still 50 quid it's quite good value these days really!

 

[fairysdad]

I remember as a little kid wanting to spend nearly my entire savings account (I had 55 quid in the post office IIRC) doing this. My reason? So we could get off the train at the disused station near our house instead of going 6 miles and two buses out of the way getting off at Burton station. Sadly my parents wouldn't let me. Spoil sports

That would have been well over 30 years ago, so if it's still 50 quid it's quite good value these days really!

I remember reading a short story many years back entitled Penalty for improper use. In it, the protagonist, a young lad, decided to do just that - save up the amount, and when he had it, pull the chain to see what happened. Unfortunately - or, rather, fortunately - the first time, there was a track obstruction ahead, unseen by the driver, and so the lad was hailed a hero. The same happened in subsequent pullings, and, in the way stories go, things were beginning to look somewhat suspicious. On the final one, somehow (I can't remember exactly how), he himself died, that being the 'penalty for improper use'.

I realise that my story telling abilities are far lesser than those of the person who wrote the story itself, but unfortunately I cannot remember who wrote it, nor what compilation of short stories it appeared in when I read it back at secondary school...

 

[bb21]

Hi all, on most trains I use there is a notice/cover on the pass comm alarms stating "penalty for improper use £50" or something similar. Has anybody actually been issued with such a penalty? Or had to issue one? I as a driver have had pass comm's pulled a few times and each time for some nonsense reason, but I've never taken details or whatever you might need to do in order to penalty someone.

Unless it's very serious misuse, no TOC is going to bother chasing it up. Some stern words if needed be, and if a policeman is about, get them off the train.

Far more important to get the train moving asap and get (the many) other people onboard to their destination with minimal delay.

(I know, some on here would find it strange that TOCs actually want to try their best to give customers as smooth a journey as possible.)

 

[Bletchleyite]

Hi all, on most trains I use there is a notice/cover on the pass comm alarms stating "penalty for improper use £50" or something similar. Has anybody actually been issued with such a penalty? Or had to issue one? I as a driver have had pass comm's pulled a few times and each time for some nonsense reason, but I've never taken details or whatever you might need to do in order to penalty someone.

I have pulled passcoms twice, in neither case was any threat made of the penalty, rather the issue I pulled it for was resolved and the train then proceeded.

Now the train doesn't have to stop for the driver/guard to establish the problem, I'm not even sure a fine is appropriate, as it will put people off using it when they need to. You don't see threats of a fine on building fire alarm call boxes.

 

[ComUtoR]

Now the train doesn't have to stop for the driver/guard to establish the problem

Depends who has to reset the passcom and depends on the location. Once the passcom has been pulled then someone has to go back and reset it. On a DOO service that will be the Driver.

Many times the passcom is pulled and there is no-one there. I've had one that was quite serious and there was still no-one there as the person who pulled the passcom was dealing with the passenger who passed out.

People will default to pulling the passcom and some seem to want to find the slightest reason to pull it. It does seem that what was once something that was seen as a last resort, emergency equipment. Has now become a passenger on demand brake application.

 

[BestWestern]

I think it's high time the concept of a Passcom and brake application was given serious consideration. On new stock it is surely far more sensible to have a simple 'call for aid' with a voice communication function, and perhaps a cctv link on the TMS. The crew can then decide whether it warrants immediate attention or not. It's an interesting contrast of views, that a train must have this urgent emergency communication function, yet a second member of staff to deal with such incidents - which are deemend likely enough to require the above - is entitely superfluous.

 

[ComUtoR]

On new stock it is surely far more sensible to have a simple 'call for aid' with a voice communication function, and perhaps a cctv link on the TMS.

These both exist. There is a call for aid feature on 319's (retro fitted) and on a 376 the passcom activates in-cab cctv. Probably many other stock too.

The rest.... um, err, well.. ahh... hmm...

 

[BestWestern]

These both exist. There is a call for aid feature on 319's (retro fitted) and on a 376 the passcom activates in-cab cctv. Probably many other stock too.

They do, but only alongside the existing Passcom kit. I would suggest that the call for aid should become the standard tech throughout the whole train.

 

[ComUtoR]

I would still keep the passcom/emergency brake because I see a necessity for it. I would agree that a call for aid could be used for the more minor issues. That would hopefully let passengers have the ability for communication but should highlight that the big red handle is for EMERGENCIES.

 

[tsr]

They do, but only alongside the existing Passcom kit. I would suggest that the call for aid should become the standard tech throughout the whole train.

On a 377 you have such a system, with an added emergency automatic brake if the driver does not override it. The passcom does the following besides the brake application:

- Activates a flashing local BIL lamp on the side of the train
- Displays the relevant saloon CCTV on any illuminated MITRAC or conductor panel CCTV display
- Shows the coach number on Mitrac PA handsets
- Activates a high-pitched continuous beep in the driving cab until reset
- Activates a voice link to the driving cab, with monitoring available on other handsets (unfortunately this also broadcasts over the PA if the audio system gets its priorities wrong, but anyway...)

Will that do? Obviously it's Bombardier, so on the assumption it actually works...

 

[IKB]

I would still keep the passcom/emergency brake because I see a necessity for it. I would agree that a call for aid could be used for the more minor issues. That would hopefully let passengers have the ability for communication but should highlight that the big red handle is for EMERGENCIES.

The problem I foresee with that is whilst passengers might understand what the big red passcom handle is for (i.e. serious stuff)...there's a danger that the lesser 'call for aid' will become misused for routine questions and information (one persons missed connection is anothers call for aid). On a DOO train the last thing you want is semi-regular inappropriate activations whilst you're trying to concentrate on your main task of driving. People nowadays like to take the path of least resistance so pulling that cord to find out the info they want (right now!) might be seen as the easy option.

 

[ComUtoR]

On a DOO train the last thing you want is semi-regular inappropriate activations whilst you're trying to concentrate on your main task of driving.

Ahh the joys of driving 319's

 

[QueensCurve]

I remember as a little kid wanting to spend nearly my entire savings account (I had 55 quid in the post office IIRC) doing this. My reason? So we could get off the train at the disused station near our house instead of going 6 miles and two buses out of the way getting off at Burton station. Sadly my parents wouldn't let me. Spoil sports

That would have been well over 30 years ago, so if it's still 50 quid it's quite good value these days really!

For many years I wanted to do it just for the fun of it!

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Have any multiple unit classes had the "newer style" passcomm systems retrofitted?

 

[grumblingalong]

Have any multiple unit classes had the "newer style" passcomm systems retrofitted?

AGA 156's have "call for aid" alarms fitted with the DDA compliant loos and seating, not technically a "passcom" though I suppose

 

[mbreckers]

Had reasons to press the Call For Aid button on a ScotRail 320, both times ignored by the driver. This is for being over-carried after assistance staff failed to show up to help a wheelchair off.

Next time it will be the big red button (well, chain)

Edit: To clarify, ScotRail said both times that the Call For Aid button had developed a fault during the journey. I didn't believe them.

 

[bb21]

The problem I foresee with that is whilst passengers might understand what the big red passcom handle is for (i.e. serious stuff)...there's a danger that the lesser 'call for aid' will become misused for routine questions and information (one persons missed connection is anothers call for aid). On a DOO train the last thing you want is semi-regular inappropriate activations whilst you're trying to concentrate on your main task of driving. People nowadays like to take the path of least resistance so pulling that cord to find out the info they want (right now!) might be seen as the easy option.

Some of them already do, especially the dopey sods who forgot to get off in time.

 

[xfield]

So what valid uses are there for pulling the chain? If its something like a medical emergency its always going to make sense to continue at full speed to a station rather than stopping in the back and beyond. Even if flames were licking at the side of the train, forcing the train to a stop in the middle of nowhere surely doesn't help matters?

 

[AlterEgo]

Even if flames were licking at the side of the train, forcing the train to a stop in the middle of nowhere surely doesn't help matters?

So if the train was on fire, you'd rather it not stop, so you can get off the train ASAP, but instead it would be better to wait five minutes until the next station??

If the train is on fire, I would pull the chain PDQ and get the hell out of there

From the wiki on the Eschede derailment:

six kilometres south of central Eschede, near Celle, the steel tyre on a wheel on the third axle of the first car broke, peeled away from the wheel, and punctured the floor of the car, where it remained embedded.[citation needed]

What ensued was a series of events that occurred within minutes yet took investigators months to reconstruct. The tyre embedded in the rail car was seen by Jörg Dittmann, one of the passengers in Coach 1. The tyre went through an armrest between where his wife and son sat. Dittmann took his wife and son out of the damaged coach and went to inform a conductor in the third coach. The conductor, who noticed vibrations in the train, told Dittmann that company policy required him to investigate the circumstances before pulling the emergency brake. The conductor took one minute to go to the site in Coach 1. According to Dittmann, the train had begun to sway from side to side by then. The conductor did not show a willingness to stop the train immediately at that point and wished to investigate the incident more thoroughly. The crash occurred just when Dittmann was about to show the armrest puncture to the conductor.

 

[edwin_m]

So what valid uses are there for pulling the chain? If its something like a medical emergency its always going to make sense to continue at full speed to a station rather than stopping in the back and beyond. Even if flames were licking at the side of the train, forcing the train to a stop in the middle of nowhere surely doesn't help matters?

At least with the intercom the driver can speak to the person raising the alarm and decide on the best course of action. For example in a medical emergency it may be better to make an unscheduled stop at a station that is reached sooner, is near a hospital etc, and emergency services can be called while the train is still moving rather than having to find out what has happened after it stops. In a fire it would be better to stop immediately, as long as that isn't in a tunnel, on a viaduct or somewhere else where people leaving the train would be in danger.

 

[Bletchleyite]

But if there's a derailed bogie bouncing along the four-foot, that conversation could be time wasted that results in deaths. (As noted above Eschede was of course a good example of this - as soon as the incident happened the passenger should have pulled it without asking about anything - and the fear introduced by threats of fines etc could well be what prevented this and thus caused deaths).

FWIW Germany has a dual system - green for passcom, red for emergency brake.

 

[Jonfun]

So if the train was on fire, you'd rather it not stop, so you can get off the train ASAP, but instead it would be better to wait five minutes until the next station??

If the train is on fire, I would pull the chain PDQ and get the hell out of there

I agree with xfield. I recall having a train fire a year or so ago, where if we'd have stopped where we were, we'd have stopped straddling a major junction so stopping the job, with no position of safety on either side of the line if passengers chose to self evacuate, no access for the fire brigade if the fire became more serious. Made far more sense to continue on into the next station where passengers could be detrained safely onto a platform and kept away from the vehicle on fire.

 

[Bletchleyite]

If the vehicle is on fire, continuing on solely so as not to stop the job would be irresponsible.

Continuing on to a location outside a tunnel or off a bridge where evacuation would be easier does make sense, but if passengers are at risk, that risk needs removing as soon as possible, whether the job is stopped or not.

 

[ComUtoR]

Modern units have overrides to allow for such issues.

 

[najaB]

If the vehicle is on fire, continuing on solely so as not to stop the job would be irresponsible.

Agreed. However, Jonfun said that there was no position of safety and no access for the fire brigade, stopping immediately would have been a bad choice for those reasons.