Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,397
|
Post by Chris M on Dec 26, 2016 17:52:34 GMT
--- From the D Stock formation report thread--- Thinking about it, the D-Stock, and the 1995/1996 trains too, had their Passenger Door Opening (PDO) buttons sealed up on refurbishment, but PDO is back on the new S-Stock trains, and as I am led to believe, the Crossrail Class 345 will also have PDO facilities! It seems to be a Yo-Yo mode that TFL and their predecessors LRT, LT and LPTB have, in rolling out PDO and subsequently removing it, Remember the 1938 stock and CO/CP stock all had PDO when new, but was subsequently abandoned upon a subsequent refurbishment? Thinking about it, the D-Stock, and the 1995/1996 trains too, had their Passenger Door Opening (PDO) buttons sealed up on refurbishment, but PDO is back on the new S-Stock trains, and as I am led to believe, the Crossrail Class 345 will also have PDO facilities! It seems to be a Yo-Yo mode that TFL and their predecessors LRT, LT and LPTB have, in rolling out PDO and subsequently removing it, Remember the 1938 stock and CO/CP stock all had PDO when new, but was subsequently abandoned upon a subsequent refurbishment? Technology advances and the controls are more reliable. Failures in the past would lead to trains going out of service. Now the position of a door not closing can be located from the cab. --- The DLR trains have always had passenger door opening, and that doesn't seem to have many problems. A few weeks back I was on a train where the doors didn't open when I pushed the button to get on so boarded through an adjacent doorway and didn't think much more of it. Then a couple of stations later I saw someone else try and it didn't open for them either. At the station after that I went to the doorway and the inside buttons did work. As the PSA wasn't in the same car I phoned TfL customer services and reported the problem, giving the unit and door number. They simply said they'd let the maintenance people know. I also happened to see a member of staff on the platform when I alighted and so mentioned it to them too. Their reaction was simply that the contacts would just need cleaning, and they'd let the depot know. I presume a door failing to close would be a far more serious issue, but I'm not sure whether PDO buttons will make any difference to that failure rate?
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Dec 26, 2016 18:19:17 GMT
I'm pretty sure that the mechanism(s) for global door open/close operations would be engineered to a significantly higher standard than the passenger operation system and would always have priority so that they would still close no matter what the state of the passenger switching.
|
|
|
Post by br7mt on Dec 26, 2016 19:36:03 GMT
I think S Stock has the door open buttons as the doors automatically close after a period of time in order to preserve the saloon temperature and thus reduce HVAC energy consumption. In that instance you need the door open buttons at long dwell locations such as terminii.
95 and 96TS doors don't have quite the same function, some door leaves on a car stay open providing partial retention of heat in winter, so the buttons aren't needed.
Regards,
Dan
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Dec 26, 2016 21:22:27 GMT
S stock has full passenger door control isolated at the moment. They can open the doors when trains are held at places like Aldgate where the timed close cuts in.
|
|
|
Post by stapler on Dec 27, 2016 8:16:41 GMT
To experience the full horrors of timed close, go to Platforms 1-2 at Stratford, where the LO trains are like a cacaphonous musical box each time the auto close operates on any of the doors in the walk-through units....
|
|
|
Post by silenthunter on Jul 8, 2017 17:11:00 GMT
I was in Vienna recently and their local trains, as well as trams, have a 'door ordering' system. If you're getting at the next station, you can press a door open button ahead of time and that door will open automatically when the doors are released.
I thought that was a neat innovation to copy.
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,225
|
Post by rincew1nd on Jul 8, 2017 17:33:20 GMT
The same happens on Manchester's trams. You can press the button on either side of the tram and the appropriate side door opens upon arriving in the platform.
|
|
Fahad
In memoriam
Posts: 459
|
Post by Fahad on Jul 8, 2017 18:24:22 GMT
You can even do it from the outside, nowhere near a station
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 19:57:35 GMT
I was in Vienna recently and their local trains, as well as trams, have a 'door ordering' system. If you're getting at the next station, you can press a door open button ahead of time and that door will open automatically when the doors are released. I thought that was a neat innovation to copy. The same can be done with Croydon's trams
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jul 8, 2017 21:10:12 GMT
You can even do it from the outside, nowhere near a station Mod comment: Althougb we would advise against anyone going near a tram other than when it's at an official stop. Let's not have anyone getting hurt.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 8, 2017 21:41:43 GMT
I wondered would Door Ordering be utilised for the new DLR Trains due to be procured, or indeed for the new trains on Crossrail's Elizabeth Line??
|
|
|
Post by tjw on Jul 9, 2017 7:59:21 GMT
One of the Swiss EMU double deck stock has a better system, press the button before the stop, and then as the train finally slows the doors start to open, so they are fully open when the train stops. If you are quick you can hop off in the second before it stops...
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Jul 9, 2017 8:24:34 GMT
One of the Swiss EMU double deck stock has a better system, press the button before the stop, and then as the train finally slows the doors start to open, so they are fully open when the train stops. If you are quick you can hop off in the second before it stops... Has someone kidnapped the Swiss safety elf?
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,397
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 9, 2017 9:25:35 GMT
I wondered would Door Ordering be utilised for the new DLR Trains due to be procured, or indeed for the new trains on Crossrail's Elizabeth Line?? I suspect that whichever of passenger open and central open is deemed to be the best for dwell time will be used on Crossrail. I have a vague recollection of reading something saying it would be central opening in the core and passenger operation elsewhere, like Thsmeslink. I've not been on a Class 345 yet though. I expect the DLR to continue with passenger opening unless the manufacturer can't meet the reliability target without central open.
|
|
|
Post by crusty54 on Jul 9, 2017 9:51:30 GMT
The 345s have passenger opening doors.
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Jul 9, 2017 11:34:43 GMT
Passenger opening and platform edge doors creates so many possible PTI issues, including the risk of someone being trapped between the PEDs and the train.
The plan is for (like Thameslink) passenger opening at either end and driver operated in the core section.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jul 9, 2017 11:37:11 GMT
Passenger opening and platform edge doors creates so many possible PTI issues, including the risk of someone being trapped between the PEDs and the train. The plan is for (like Thameslink) passenger opening at either end and driver operated in the core section. I remember when something similar was done with the 1992 stock - the doors were driver operated from White City to Leytonstone.
|
|
|
Post by tjw on Jul 9, 2017 17:59:21 GMT
Has someone kidnapped the Swiss safety elf? Only a few years ago, we all had the option of opening the droplight and opening the door, and alight when the train was slowing. Q. How many passengers alighted from moving trains each day? Q. How many accidents were there each day? I suspect that per passenger the risk was very low, and we are still allowed to open our car doors whenever we feel like so it can't be too much of a problem. The system in use in the UK only allows the doors to be released once the train has stopped, this causes a delay, and this is in addition to how modern trains crawl into platforms... if they ran a 4 SUB in the same way it would have been empty by the time it stopped. With the Swiss system I suspect that once the brakes are fully applied the doors are released, and so are capable of opening in the last second or so of the trains movement. In almost all cases the train will be stopped before anyone alights, how is this unsafe? N.B. I think with one of the Paris metro EMUs you can do the same thing. Also with Railways we have capacity... with each delay due to safety systems we limit the capacity. How many people have to use a less safe method of transport because of the lack of capacity? What is the cost? What is the benefit? In the U.K. we are happy to export risk, once it is off railway property we can ignore it... But by exporting the risk is it increased?
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 9, 2017 20:40:42 GMT
Passenger opening and platform edge doors creates so many possible PTI issues, including the risk of someone being trapped between the PEDs and the train. The plan is for (like Thameslink) passenger opening at either end and driver operated in the core section. I remember when something similar was done with the 1992 stock - the doors were driver operated from White City to Leytonstone. That must have been before I started as a TOp in 2003, the rotary switch in the cab of the 1992ts that selects either "passenger open" or "operator open" is permanently left in "operator open" mode, a few times when I've switched it to "passenger open" in bad weather it hasn't worked as it and the door buttons don't get maintained.
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jul 9, 2017 21:14:28 GMT
I remember when something similar was done with the 1992 stock - the doors were driver operated from White City to Leytonstone. That must have been before I started as a TOp in 2003, the rotary switch in the cab of the 1992ts that selects either "passenger open" or "operator open" is permanently left in "operator open" mode, a few times when I've switched it to "passenger open" in bad weather it hasn't worked as it and the door buttons don't get maintained. I think it was late 1990's, because passenger open was abandoned completely in 2001 I believe.
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,225
|
Post by rincew1nd on Jul 9, 2017 22:04:01 GMT
Edit to add: The below applies to (what is now) the mainline/Network Rail rather than the UndergrounD, however I'm sure the same principle generally hold sway. Has someone kidnapped the Swiss safety elf? Only a few years ago, we all had the option of opening the droplight and opening the door, and alight when the train was slowing. Q. How many passengers alighted from moving trains each day? Q. How many accidents were there each day? Passengers falling from train doors was identified as an issue in the late 80s/early 90s. HSE conducted an investigation and their report is available here. From a brief reading of the report I can't answer your first question, but as for your second: The report goes on to look at incidents involving falls from doors where death or injury resulted. The report states: The HSE's analysis of these incidents established that the Southern region had more accidents that the other region, that there were more accidents on Fridays than other days of the weeks and that there were two peak times for accidents to occur: 5pm-8pm and between 11pm and midnight. In 33% of incidents the passenger had been drinking, though only 20% were deemed to be "drunk". It's worth noting that the analysis identified that 11 incidents were recorded as suicide by the Coroner, and that incidents where a person was injured after climbing out through a door window were excluded. 15 incidents involved a person travelling without a tickets and "in 13 incidents the person apparently mistook the train door for a the toilet." 2400 incidents in one year is about 50 a week. Between 1984 and 1991 the lowest number of fatalities following a fall from a train door was 14 in 1989 (highest: 26 in 1987). There was a passenger fatality in August 2016 ( a rail enthusiast leaning out of a drop-light whilst in motion struck his head on a line-side structure), prior to this the only passenger fatality was the derailment at Greyrigg which is now over ten years ago. OK, so now there are fewer slam-door trains on the network, but two deaths (from any cause) in ten years versus at least 14 a year (falling from a door).... I know which I prefer!
|
|
cso
Posts: 1,043
|
Post by cso on Jul 9, 2017 22:22:18 GMT
I thought the slam door stock still running on the mainline now all had door interlocking on them... at least Chiltern's "Banbury Set" does.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,397
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 9, 2017 22:47:38 GMT
While everybody I'm sure does not want to return to the high level of deaths, the statistics you quote are for all instances of passengers falling out of slam doors while the train is in motion, rather than just those that happened when the train was arriving into a station at walking pace or slower - which is what is being discussed on this thread. I do know that some of the injuries caused by people alighting from slam-door trains was the result of them getting hit by the doors, either after misjudging the speed of the train or while waiting on the platform. I don't know either number or proportion that were of this type, but this sort of incident is physically impossible with sliding doors.
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,225
|
Post by rincew1nd on Jul 9, 2017 23:58:27 GMT
the statistics you quote are for all instances of passengers falling out of slam doors while the train is in motion, rather than just those that happened when the train was arriving into a station at walking pace or slower - which is what is being discussed on this thread. A perfectly valid point. HSE considered this: Source63 incidents over eight years is nearly eight a year, though I completely accept that these numbers probably include passengers attempting to alight from the train when it was still travelling at a fair pace, rather than just that final second before it stops. My thinking behind seeking out this report was because I can't think how you could have a electrical central door locking system that prevents opening when between stations but will permit opening (on the correct side only) when the train is in motion but about to stop.
|
|
|
Post by MoreToJack on Jul 10, 2017 0:14:30 GMT
I thought the slam door stock still running on the mainline now all had door interlocking on them... at least Chiltern's "Banbury Set" does. Not necessarily - there must be a method of 'secondary door locking' but this doesn't have to be a full central door locking system. Many charter operators use carriages fitted with simple door bolts as the 'secondary door locking' system, monitored by a steward to ensure that the bolts are not operated. Certainly slam-door stock in day-to-day use (HSTs, the Banbury Set, previously the Chiltern Bubbles) is all fitted with a central door locking system, although this is not necessarily interlocked with the traction and braking systems on board. Of note, until its most recent overhaul at Eastleigh LU's 4TC set did not have central door locking, and operated with secondary bolts and carriage stewards (One per vestibule, as I understand it). During the 2013/14/15 steam runs utilising the Chesham set, no secondary door locking was provided, with one steward provided per compartment (per door in some instances) to ensure that the doors were not operated away from scheduled passenger stops.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Jul 10, 2017 8:31:23 GMT
Has someone kidnapped the Swiss safety elf? Only a few years ago, we all had the option of opening the droplight and opening the door, and alight when the train was slowing. Q. How many passengers alighted from moving trains each day? Q. How many accidents were there each day? I suspect that per passenger the risk was very low, and we are still allowed to open our car doors whenever we feel like so it can't be too much of a problem. The system in use in the UK only allows the doors to be released once the train has stopped, this causes a delay, and this is in addition to how modern trains crawl into platforms... if they ran a 4 SUB in the same way it would have been empty by the time it stopped. With the Swiss system I suspect that once the brakes are fully applied the doors are released, and so are capable of opening in the last second or so of the trains movement. In almost all cases the train will be stopped before anyone alights, how is this unsafe? N.B. I think with one of the Paris metro EMUs you can do the same thing. Also with Railways we have capacity... with each delay due to safety systems we limit the capacity. How many people have to use a less safe method of transport because of the lack of capacity? What is the cost? What is the benefit? In the U.K. we are happy to export risk, once it is off railway property we can ignore it... But by exporting the risk is it increased? I think you misunderstood my comment. It wasn't meant to imply I thought there was anything wrong with the Swiss system. Rather it was a jibe at some of the excesses of 'health and safety' that lead to ridiculous restrictions on things, just in case of a minor accident once a decade.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Jul 10, 2017 8:41:51 GMT
Way back when South Eastern still ran slam door trains and I commuted to London, I tended to travel at the front of a twelve carriage train (because it was less crowded there), and thus had to walk back along most of the platform at my destination.
On most days I (or other passengers) would need to push at least one door closed as it had been left ajar, or partially latched by other passengers.
During daylight hours this generally allowed the train to depart as it saved a porter (remember those) from having to make his way down the platform.
At night, when the porters could not always see the open doors, it sometimes meant giving the door a kick whilst the train was accelerating from the station.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,397
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 10, 2017 9:05:17 GMT
63 incidents over eight years is nearly eight a year, though I completely accept that these numbers probably include passengers attempting to alight from the train when it was still travelling at a fair pace, rather than just that final second before it stops. My thinking behind seeking out this report was because I can't think how you could have a electrical central door locking system that prevents opening when between stations but will permit opening (on the correct side only) when the train is in motion but about to stop. Given that the D stock and some other LU trains are/were able to do exactly this, I don't think the technology is a barrier at all. It just requires the detection to be a zone rather than a point (which it would be anyway) and to be linked to the train speed (which it would be anyway, just ~2mph rather than 0mph) and to prevent power being taken once the door opening has been initiated (which it would be anyway). The aim is not to allow alighting (or boarding) while the train is in motion, but to allow the doors to be fully open at the moment the train stops, saving 5-10 seconds dwell time.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,724
|
Post by class411 on Jul 10, 2017 9:44:50 GMT
63 incidents over eight years is nearly eight a year, though I completely accept that these numbers probably include passengers attempting to alight from the train when it was still travelling at a fair pace, rather than just that final second before it stops. My thinking behind seeking out this report was because I can't think how you could have a electrical central door locking system that prevents opening when between stations but will permit opening (on the correct side only) when the train is in motion but about to stop. Given that the D stock and some other LU trains are/were able to do exactly this, I don't think the technology is a barrier at all. It just requires the detection to be a zone rather than a point (which it would be anyway) and to be linked to the train speed (which it would be anyway, just ~2mph rather than 0mph) and to prevent power being taken once the door opening has been initiated (which it would be anyway). The aim is not to allow alighting (or boarding) while the train is in motion, but to allow the doors to be fully open at the moment the train stops, saving 5-10 seconds dwell time. Even ensuring that the doors were just starting to open as the train stopped would save a useful few hours a day.
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 10, 2017 12:07:26 GMT
Safety will always take priority over speed and doors opening before the train has fully stopped would increase the chance of accidents.
There have been faults on some trains, particularly D Stock, that meant that doors could be opened before the train had stopped but any driver caught pressing the "door open" buttons before they had stopped could be in serious trouble.
No Train Operating Company would be stupid enough to suggest it as they'd never get it past the ORR and even if they did they'd never get it past the insurers who'd hike the public liability premiums into infinity.
|
|