OPO at Oakwood!

Did they get rid of those boxes for the CCTV that are obstructing the 'Green Stripe' stopping mark and if not any ideas when?

DOC

Depends which you mean - the previous empty monitor casing has been removed, and the old CCTV box has gone - I'm unsure if the new one is sited differently enough to maake a difference.

Re: OP. Excuse possibly a naive comment, but shouldn't the mirror view have been physically tested before the job was "signed off" as being up to spec? I assume it was done in non-traffic hours, hence in the dark at this time of year? A person on the platform with a torch and a walkie-talkie with a 100m range communicating with the "driver" should have been able to confirm the correct optical alignment of the mirror after installation in a matter of a few minutes. Paradoxically, such a test might have been made even easier in the dark?

Won't even dare to comment on it being apparently a long-outstanding problem.

Do wonder if the platform mirrors and associated equipment essential to safe train operation are the responsibility of a privatized, hived-off company.....

Anyone care to enlighten me please?

cheers.

Wish I could, but no-one stationside that I've spoken to knows why on earth they didn't bother to test it.

Unfortunately I'm rather limited in that I've only ever worked under PPP so I'm unsure what the direct experience was for people before it - I also didn't even live in London. Whilst in an ideal world there would hopefully not be the split, the biggest single problem in the whole mess is government, who are willing to do pretty much anything so long as the expense is off their books.

Oh, I'm aware of that - but they can at least pretend they aren't to the voting public. "Look! It's all being paid for by the private sector! *snicker, snicker, cough cough*"

The new system was checked out with the first train and was found not to be right, so was not brought into use. OPO has to be checked with a train present and it is really hard to get a train in a platform during engineering hours without booking weeks in advance.

couldn't they have just stabled a train in the platform overnight or did they need access to the track?

The thing is the person who is responsible for the work on LU's side isn't the one controlling the cash, and money transfers between LU and the Infracos all the time. If something isn't right, it gets added to a snagging list and until the snag list is dealt with the project can't be closed out, thus delaying final payment.

Also, the scenario you describe requires early current (extra money), shorter engineering hours (less time and greater risk of overrun = extra money in fines), a train to be prepped early, train crew or test crew (more money for someone to come in early on overtime or even more if test crew have to be booked) etc etc.

Simply, the most eonomic way is to let the first train do the testing and go from there. Money definately won't change hands if it isn't commissioned though.

I thought that a few T'Ops were on "night shifts" whereby they drove the last train then had a 4 hour break or something before the first train? Couldn't they just take a train out earlier? Ad for the engineerign work, schedule slightly less that day, and surely it can't cost that much to turn the leccy on a bit earlier.

Hmm. Again, why not outstable a train to the platform overnight? As for staff pay, if their shift is 10 hours or whatever sure pay them 10 hours - but if they're sent home after 9 hours, why should they get 10 hours pay?

It all depends upon the contractor! Many subcontractors once had a policy of expecting staff to turn up for night duty at their own expense but only paying them if they actually worked the shift or for the number of hours that they did work. In some cases this meant that if too many higher grade staff were on hand they had the choice to go home without pay or work at a lower rate commensurate with the available work. This was prevalent amongst track subcontractors just as working both the night and the following day shift was and at times when mandatory training was due to work the night before the day training shift too! There was little job security and little loyalty either !

As far as the main contractors are concerned staff are paid per shift whether there is work to do or not. Generally the maximum working time in any night shift is 4 hours but when possessions and / or engineering trains are required it can take so long to make the necessary protection arrangements that actual working time can be as little as one hour. Running trains on current or at all in engineering hours is not the simple task some may think it is!

Protection is often delayed by line controllers moving trains about to balance stock, duty depot managers moving trains about to ensure they are on the correct tracks for next day's service, carriage cleaners in sidings requiring current to remain on until they have finished their cleaning, late running as a result of earlier failures and other delaying incidents, the business of making the necessary isolations, disconnections etc before being able to take a possession, and unrelated and uncoordinated other work (SABRE failure) in the vicinity. The list is not exhaustive but there are so many ways that a job will be cancelled and the staff will be sent home!

It is not the fault of the staff if they attend for duty and are not given work to do! The lack of contingency in a situation where a job is cancelled is a management failing rather than a staff failing. However, goodwill is a key factor in railway work and as the management know to their cost there needs to be give and take in the system for it to work at all. Loyalty and morale have always been the mainstay of the engineering departments and even though they are private companies today that same dedication to the job exists amongst the majority of the 'family' who take the rough along with the smooth!

Brian

Oakwood is above ground and directly next to Cockfosters depot - trains can enter the depot from either platform at Oakwood as well as Cockfosters.

What an intriguing thread has developed.

A bit suspect as being the mere tip of an iceberg.

undergroundgal, shame I'd get done for numerous civil and criminal prosecutions if I offered to lend you a couple of spanner and socket sets, and adjustable wrenches, so you could actually get the problem sorted properly.

Presumably, like signal heads, the mirror supports are capable of accurate adjustment in situ.

So I'd better not offer, then :-(

Is the mirror realigned correctly yet, since your OP of Nov 7th?

Cheers.

:-)