Should we have DOO?

[PermitToTravel]

I've only read parts of this thread so I've probably missed the answer to my own question, which is, how does the person responsible for dispatch stop a train quickly, or at all, once it's underway ?

If it's a DOO train does the Driver watch a cab monitor until the entire train is clear of the platform thereby ignoring everything in front of him ?

If it's a 222 type unit, once dispatched neither the Driver or TM has a view of the platform leaving only the platform dispatcher to stop the train, how ?

Seems to me that the only safe dispatch method is by Guard/TM on a train with drop windows enabling the Guard/TM to have instant contact with the Driver, does that mean all other types are unsafe and should be withdrawn ?

National Rail is pretty deficient in this respect. On Underground lines with modern (1992 or later) stock, a member of staff on the platform (busy platforms will usually have one) can raise both arms to give an emergency stop signal while any part of the train is still in the platform. On some lines there are even buttons on every platform that will immediately emergency stop any departing train
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

An interesting idea but how could it possibly be done, think of the number of people required to monitor every dispatch at each platform at Clapham Junction for example

Economies of scale - it might well be worth it if the whole network was worked this way.

 

[Moonshot]

An interesting idea but how could it possibly be done, think of the number of people required to monitor every dispatch at each platform at Clapham Junction for example
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


What other method is there to see an incident and then stop the train in an emergency ?

So what sort of risk do you import ?

 

[ExRes]

National Rail is pretty deficient in this respect. On Underground lines with modern (1992 or later) stock, a member of staff on the platform (busy platforms will usually have one) can raise both arms to give an emergency stop signal while any part of the train is still in the platform. On some lines there are even buttons on every platform that will immediately emergency stop any departing train

On modern stock such as the 22X family you could raise your arms until the cows come home but neither Driver or Train Manager would see you

I'm not sure what you mean by emergency stopping any departing train, if the train has passed the platform end what would stop it ?

 

[Moonshot]

On modern stock such as the 22X family you could raise your arms until the cows come home but neither Driver or Train Manager would see you

I'm not sure what you mean by emergency stopping any departing train, if the train has passed the platform end what would stop it ?

A GSMR message certainly would - assuming that could be sent by a despatcher

 

[ExRes]

So what sort of risk do you import ?

None whatsoever that I can see, I was a Trainman D operating trains by popping my head out of the window and I never encountered any risk

 

[PermitToTravel]

On modern stock such as the 22X family you could raise your arms until the cows come home but neither Driver or Train Manager would see you

I'm not sure what you mean by emergency stopping any departing train, if the train has passed the platform end what would stop it ?

They communicate with the train via the tracks

 

[ExRes]

A GSMR message certainly would - assuming that could be sent by a despatcher

GSM-R has moved on in the last 3 years so I hold my hands up on that one, but I can't imagine it would be fast enough to save anyone who slipped between platform and train whereas the Guard with his head out the window may well do
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

They communicate with the train via the tracks

Still too late to save that person though

 

[PermitToTravel]

Not at all necessarily - it'll be as quick as a guard hitting the emergency brake, and quicker than a guard giving one on the bell.

 

[Moonshot]

None whatsoever that I can see, I was a Trainman D operating trains by popping my head out of the window and I never encountered any risk

Ok - but if you looked at that objectively and did a risk assessment , what sort of risk would you import?

 

[LowLevel]

Every train until the 80s had a guard and either a window they could lean out of or a door they could leave open on the move - even the 150/1s. To me it is an example of what I mentioned before - stripping out rules and requirements for cost savings without fully considering the consequences.

One of those was to leave a big hole in the dispatch procedure that was largely ignored until someone died and then everyone went nuts about train dispatch. Now it is still a big hole in DOO dispatch and on trains that would never have been designed in the way they were today - no separate cab/crew doors etc. We've now re-remembered that even with power door stock people go down the gap and with the removal of guards or doors/windows of use have reduced the chance of doing anything about it.

If 125 mph Mk3/4 stock can have droplights then anything else should too, even if it's locked when not in use.

I believe technology for platform staff to directly stop a train is being considered but what form it might take, who knows.

 

[O L Leigh]

So now we're talking about replacing guards on trains with ticket inspectors to provide revenue protection and visual assurance to passengers and despatchers on every platform together with radio equipment to provide communication between train and despatcher. Have we finally left the realms of reality...?

O L Leigh

 

[PermitToTravel]

It's really unacceptable that such technology isn't already present, given that it already exists.

As a dirt cheap alternative, would a whistle code work?

 

[ExRes]

Not at all necessarily - it'll be as quick as a guard hitting the emergency brake, and quicker than a guard giving one on the bell.

I can't accept that at all, the Guard had his/her finger on the bell for instant reaction, GSM-R needs to be relayed by a dispatcher ?, no contest
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Ok - but if you looked at that objectively and did a risk assessment , what sort of risk would you import?

I don't believe there is any risk at all, my only interest is reacting to an emergency with all possible speed, if someone has to sit behind a desk working out risk assessments against people lives I want no part of it
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It's really unacceptable that such technology isn't already present, given that it already exists.

As a dirt cheap alternative, would a whistle code work?

The Driver is the only one with a whistle that could be heard on an accelerating diesel train

 

[Moonshot]

I can't accept that at all, the Guard had his/her finger on the bell for instant reaction, GSM-R needs to be relayed by a dispatcher ?, no contest

Always assuming that a guard sees the same as a despatcher, which we know they dont.

Just off the top of my head, I would have thought that a retractable mirror viewed by the guard would be sufficient. Certainly this was used by drivers of old model Metrolink trams, though nowadays they have cameras on side of vehicles

 

[fowler9]

Can we split the discussion about ATO from the discussion about DOO, please.



Let me get this straight. You're more concerned about the fact that there might not be a court case than you are about the difference a guard can make in a situation like this.

You cannot change the outcome from this specific situation. However, if the guard had discharged his duties correctly there almost certainly wouldn't have been any incident.

O L Leigh

Just to clarify, I don't agree with DOO for multiple reasons. In the case of the girl who died in Liverpool the guard got nailed to the wall. He made a mistake and his life got ruined along with the lives of other people not to mention the lass who died. I am not more concerned with a court case, merely saying that if it was DOO would there even have been one? If not why not? Just asking questions. The most important thing is the safety of me, you and the staff.

 

[Moonshot]

I can't accept that at all, the Guard had his/her finger on the bell for instant reaction, GSM-R needs to be relayed by a dispatcher ?, no contest
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


I don't believe there is any risk at all, my only interest is reacting to an emergency with all possible speed, if someone has to sit behind a desk working out risk assessments against people lives I want no part of it
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---


The Driver is the only one with a whistle that could be heard on an accelerating diesel train

I think you are missing the point. so, what could happen to a guard if he or she stuck their head out of a train window whilst on the move down a platform? Is there , for example , a potential for some idiot who has just missed the train taking a swing at the guard whilst passing? Can you see what I m getting at ?

As so often stated on this forum, mitigating one risk often introduces another

 

[PermitToTravel]

I can't accept that at all, the Guard had his/her finger on the bell for instant reaction, GSM-R needs to be relayed by a dispatcher ?, no contest

Sorry for the confusion - I was talking about a hypothetical system similar to the LU one, where the button on the platform will stop the train without any human intervention, and is accessible by staff and passengers

The Driver is the only one with a whistle that could be heard on an accelerating diesel train

Oh

 

[O L Leigh]

I think you are missing the point. so, what could happen to a guard if he or she stuck their head out of a train window whilst on the move down a platform? Is there , for example , a potential for some idiot who has just missed the train taking a swing at the guard whilst passing? Can you see what I m getting at ?

As so often stated on this forum, mitigating one risk often introduces another

OMFG!!! Now we really are down to the hair-splitting level. Just what sort of risk are you imagining here? How many guards who currently look out of a droplight are having punters taking swings at them? We're talking about an established method of working that demonstrably works and ensures safety against an imagined threat.

This thread truly is at risk of leaving the real world entirely.

O L Leigh

 

[Moonshot]

OMFG!!! Now we really are down to the hair-splitting level. Just what sort of risk are you imagining here? How many guards who currently look out of a droplight are having punters taking swings at them? We're talking about an established method of working that demonstrably works and ensures safety against an imagined threat.

This thread truly is at risk of leaving the real world entirely.

O L Leigh

An imagined threat?? Hmmmmm thats interesting bearing in mind I actually do look out of a droplight when one is fitted.......but anyway the point I was making was this as I stated....." If you took an objective look at that scenario, what risk would you import ?"

 

[O L Leigh]

An imagined threat?? Hmmmmm thats interesting bearing in mind I actually do look out of a droplight when one is fitted.

Then you're ideally placed to answer the question about how many times a guard has to duck a swing when leaning out of the droplight.

But anyway the point I was making was this as I stated....." If you took an objective look at that scenario, what risk would you import ?"

Yes I got your point. But you were the one who illustrated it with what I consider to be a very weak example of why looking out of a droplight might be importing risk. Compared to the proven safety benefits of having someone on the train with a clear and unrestricted view of the platform capable of stopping it immediately if a situation were to arise, these small imagined risks really are splitting hairs.

O L Leigh

 

[Moonshot]

Then you're ideally placed to answer the question about how many times a guard has to duck a swing when leaning out of the droplight.



Yes I got your point. But you were the one who illustrated it with what I consider to be a very weak example of why looking out of a droplight might be importing risk. Compared to the proven safety benefits of having someone on the train with a clear and unrestricted view of the platform capable of stopping it immediately if a situation were to arise, these small imagined risks really are splitting hairs.

O L Leigh

Not really splitting hairs.....I m actually doing what a lot of people do who are involved in carrying out risk assessments, which have become increasingly popular over the last 25 years or so. So using my example , how many other ways can you think of a guard getting an injury whilst looking out of a droplight?? Its this sort of methodology that underpins risk assessments, some of which may look absurd, but I cant argue with the fact that the railway environment in 2014 is a lot safer than it was in 1980!!

 

[LowLevel]

I would suggest I have far more chance of having my head taken off by Network Rail's poorly maintained lineside foliage while checking the route at junctions than being punched by a punter

 

[O L Leigh]

So using my example , how many other ways can you think of a guard getting an injury whilst looking out of a droplight??

Apart from getting a slap? Almost none. There are no obstructions that close to the train for a guard to risk being struck. About the biggest risk is a fault with the droplight itself, as I'm aware of at least one DOO driver who has been "chinned" by his droplight.

However, compare that to the benefit of having an unobstructed view of the platform and the chance to be able to intervene if something bad happens. Then contrast that to DOO despatch where there is no vigilance whatsoever away from staffed platforms and, even where there is staff, no way to stop a train once it has been given the RA.

I would suggest I have far more chance of having my head taken off by Network Rail's poorly maintained lineside foliage while checking the route at junctions than being punched by a punter

Assuming that you're a guard and that therefore it is not your job to be looking out of the window to check that your train is correctly routed, I am assuming that you are suggesting that the risk is zero.

O L Leigh

 

[Moonshot]

Apart from getting a slap? Almost none. There are no obstructions that close to the train for a guard to risk being struck. About the biggest risk is a fault with the droplight itself, as I'm aware of at least one DOO driver who has been "chinned" by his droplight.

However, compare that to the benefit of having an unobstructed view of the platform and the chance to be able to intervene if something bad happens. Then contrast that to DOO despatch where there is no vigilance whatsoever away from staffed platforms and, even where there is staff, no way to stop a train once it has been given the RA.

O L Leigh

Which isnt exclusive to drivers!!!!

Re your point about stopping a train once RA has been given.......the example you gave from the RAIB website indicated that a passenger using PASSCOM actually stopped the train....isnt this why PASSCOMS are fitted in the first place?

 

[O L Leigh]

Indeed. Which is why I always held the droplight down while carrying out despatch duties. For every risk there is a means to mitigate it's chance to do harm.

Yes there are passcoms that can stop the train, but one of the problems also highlighted by the report is that they weren't used until it was already too late because the passengers didn't really know what they were meant to do. Had there been a despatcher on the platform together with a guard on the train to see what had happened the train would have been stopped much quicker. As it was the train travelled far further than it should because the driver was unaware of what happened. Had the person fallen immediately rather than being dragged along the platform, had the person not had a friend that they were putting onto the train, had the incident gone unnoticed by the passengers on the train, it is possible that the passcom may not have been operated at all.

O L Leigh

 

[TOCDriver]

At the end of the day it can all be summed up in two simple sentences thus:
1:If H&S is your priority, then DOO is a no no
2: If money saving is your priority then DOO is very much a yes.

The driver has enough to be concentrating on inbetween stops. Our beloved railway masters and trainers are all too keen to be constantly ramming down our throats the factors that can create a SPAD incident, especially those risks and factors that may present themselves during a station stop. If there's one thing that can increase the chance of a SPAD, it is DOO.

 

[Moonshot]

Indeed. Which is why I always held the droplight down while carrying out despatch duties. For every risk there is a means to mitigate it's chance to do harm.

Yes there are passcoms that can stop the train, but one of the problems also highlighted by the report is that they weren't used until it was already too late because the passengers didn't really know what they were meant to do. Had there been a despatcher on the platform together with a guard on the train to see what had happened the train would have been stopped much quicker. As it was the train travelled far further than it should because the driver was unaware of what happened.

O L Leigh

Which was exactly the scenario at the James Street incident.

As many have pointed out , there is no such beast as a risk free activity, so then it just becomes an argument of cost/benefit analysis.

 

[O L Leigh]

No-one is arguing that the railways will ever be risk free. However, that does not mean that we should be blind to risk or ignore it where it exists. Nor does one incident where a guard failed to do his job properly (for which he has lost not only his living but his liberty too) undermine the principle of a safe method of working. This death would almost certainly have happened had the line been DOO, but the chances of it happening would have been greatly reduced otherwise.

But all this has been said before, and frequently. I know I've said this myself on more than one occasion.

O L Leigh

 

[Carlisle]

. This death would almost certainly have happened had the line been DOO,

James St was obviously a tragic incident for all concerned that I hope never happens again but surely it's impossible to make predictions unless we knew exactly what method of dispatch would have been employed there had it been under DOO conditions

 

[NSEFAN]

James St was obviously a tragic incident for all concerned that I hope never happens again but surely it's impossible to make predictions unless we knew exactly what method of dispatch would have been employed there had it been under DOO conditions

I believe in this case, it was determined that the passenger was so drunk that they would have likely leaned back or fallen against the train and would have died anyway. The only reason the guard was guilty was because he gave 2 dings before the passenger had stopped leaning on the train. Presumably the same would apply to any driver using DOO who accelerates the train with a passenger leaning against it.