|
Post by drainrat on Sept 21, 2018 11:14:15 GMT
One key difference between the Piccadilly and the Bakerloo however is that most stations on the Picc have multi-home signals whereby if a train is departing a platform another train can follow up quite close behind. The Bakerloo only has ordinary running signals between stations (excluding those places with drawups), meaning that if a train has departed a platform it will be a bit longer before the following train enters the platform because it has further to travel and thus will have built up a bit more speed. I seem to remember there being a few multi home signal areas in tunnel section on Bakerloo π€
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Sept 21, 2018 11:00:00 GMT
A briefing yesterday (posted on another forum) states that the train was inspected and no wrong side failure was found with the interlock/or other door closing process; however the train is still under investigation as to why only some (not all) doors were open. Iβm aware that on some stocks it is possible for the driver to βflickβ the open buttons and not all the doors open. So, if this is true, then it was a door irregularity, which explains why it's still being investigated, still. Speaking to several Jubbly drivers, procedure was supposedly carried out, and it seems clear the announcement was mistaken, the driver was only aware of no pilot light and the procedural announcement was heard as "the driver knew the doors were open......"....... This always had the potential when they changed the procedure 10+ yrs ago π‘
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Sept 20, 2018 4:15:43 GMT
I want my railways (operated) by the people for the people. It's staggering how airports, the DLR and other similar railways manage to get away without killing or injuring people. Without people and for the people π³
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Sept 19, 2018 20:49:22 GMT
But anyone can walk in to most maintenance depots unchallenged, passengers walk through staff accommodation quite frequently, security gates at many supposed 'secure' locations broken, left wide open etc. etc. we live in an illusion of heightened security, to me, it's never really been any better/worse than it ever was I'm afraid and TfL, like any other hungry corporate see security as an area for cost cutting π¬ Station staff on platforms? I really can't help but think that this shouldn't be a massive issue. Drivers are already far less accessible than most other staff. I know that it's an emotional subject but sometimes a dispassionate look is required. I agree, it isn't practical to place drivers in 'Fort Knox', maintenance on J doors isn't always a priority, I can get into any driving cab without a key, I know how to, it isn't difficult, and passengers aware too
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Sept 19, 2018 17:51:09 GMT
But serious as the risk of an attack on a driver is, there is also the real threat of easy access to a cab being used by those intent on causing death and destruction. It beggars belief that at a time of heightened security alert, Transport for London refuse to take this threat seriously. That bit alone is quite astonishing. But anyone can walk in to most maintenance depots unchallenged, passengers walk through staff accommodation quite frequently, security gates at many supposed 'secure' locations broken, left wide open etc. etc. we live in an illusion of heightened security, to me, it's never really been any better/worse than it ever was I'm afraid and TfL, like any other hungry corporate see security as an area for cost cutting π¬
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Sept 19, 2018 17:21:54 GMT
Wasnt the loop a colour light move? Yes, I believe so. The issue with carrying passengers while traversing the loop has more to do with the potential for trains to sit in it for extended periods before resuming service - causing any over carried passengers to panic.
I seem to remember that a lot of passengers purposely stayed on the train π Yes, I believe so. The issue with carrying passengers while traversing the loop has more to do with the potential for trains to sit in it for extended periods before resuming service - causing any over carried passengers to panic.
15 mins in the loop used to be quite common, and after the tragedy at Liverpool St? on the central trains had to be tipped out for a while though this did not last. Colour light or not is not relevant to the issues being discussed here. No, as I pointed out earlier, shearing effect overlooked as train swings, no way of knowing if any one is over carried etc. etc. however, to me as someone who was a part of the initial discussions, colour light was/is very much relevant to the discussion, but my asking was in question to you raising about the loop, so I added about queens pk which lead to asking about colour lights. The reason colour lights is very much relevant to this discussion imo is because of strategy and rollouts to other locations. Now, even though turnarounds on 5rd Waterloo depot procedure is via rear cab clear light, we do have procedure on other roads which requires us to walk through the train and alight at the bank end of the train. A lot of reversing moves for us drain drivers who can be on the Central line on any given day are via colour light, Debden, Woodford 21rd, Newbury pk etc. and at these locations, flash n dash is very much a likelihood and then other issue raised before can ensue. Detraining on Central line trains never ceased, it certainly did last <<superteacher: consecutive posts merged.>>
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Sept 17, 2018 21:54:06 GMT
Going back 20 odd years there was an incident on the Northern at Kennington involving a guard flashing the interior lights and a passenger being injured, I think it had to do with him falling in the flashing lights, after this the process was banned. It was never official policy to do this. Passengers used to be overcarried into the loop quite frequently and there was no requirement for staff to check the trains. About the same time at Queen's Park northbound bakerloo line there was a safety notice from the Duty Train Managers (DTMs) which was a bit facetious stating something like 'we sell tickets to our passengers, unfortunately we don't sell them carrots to see better in the dark....do NOT turn your lights off when detaining, anyone caught doing this will be disciplined. Going back 20 odd years there was an incident on the Northern at Kennington involving a guard flashing the interior lights and a passenger being injured, I think it had to do with him falling in the flashing lights, after this the process was banned. It was never official policy to do this. Passengers used to be overcarried into the loop quite frequently and there was no requirement for staff to check the trains. Wasnt the loop a colour light move? <<superteacher: consecutive posts merged.>>
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Sept 17, 2018 19:41:59 GMT
Unless it has been proposed so the unions object and someone high up can blame them for the project not working rather than having to admit it was a stupid idea. Or is that too cynical? Nah, never, I'd say nearest to mark I've been told that the original plan was to start "flash & dash" on Saturday 8th September but that was cancelled and there will now be a trial on two Saturdays, 29th September and 6th October. During the week station staff will still be on the platform as usual. Management claims "in the unlikely event that a customer stays on the train, IICBs and canopy barriers prevent the customer leaving the train" - IICBs being Inner Inter Car Barriers or "dragons teeth" introduced after they tried "flash & dash" on the Bakerloo Line and "canopy barriers" are the blocks above the end of car doors introduced after the Holland Park incident. Quite amusing that managers seem to have forgotten that passengers have another way of leaving the train despite ASLEF and RMT currently balloting drivers on all lines over the issue of cab security. In the bumf produced to 'alleviate' our fears, it was claimed a Liverpool st incident (a number of us still remember this) would be avoided by the teeth barriers ('dragons teeth' mean something different to me π) as the person was killed by the carriage swing whilst train took the bend, in effect, the shearing effect, which the teeth wouldn't prevent. Now, the W&C passengers are a smart lot and it wouldn't be long before a few of them saw a 'niche in the market' thus no need to wait on the ramps, this btw happens on a daily basis and not a twice yearly event as the review tried to tell us, telling passengers to pull the PA - Passenger Alarm - would be pointless when it was the intent to go in and out the depot so they already had a seat and didn't have to wait. Now, our handover procedure at Waterloo is by way of a rear cab clear plunger so trains depart quicker, we'd be none the wiser if there was an over carry and so proving the management point that there would be no over carries as no one would see if there were passengers on the train. It's 'ostrich' management, burying heads in sand π Its not so much incompetence, more a complete lack of imagination. They want to cut costs and the easiest cuts to make are to station staff, they keep falling back on the same idea because they can't think of anything else, maybe if they keep trying it will work one day. Obviously they're far more intelligent than train drivers because they are paid so much more than us. I don't believe it was cutting station staff, evidently it was more a relocation exercise. They have a project on the station and rather than employing more staff for the project, they were just going to move the staff from detrainments to the project π <<superteacher: consecutive posts merged.>>
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Jun 6, 2018 11:59:34 GMT
Or that some leverage was gained over the rep(s)
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on May 11, 2018 21:28:57 GMT
All 3 platforms will still be in use. 14 & 15 will have drivers 'stepping back', 13 will come in and the same driver will take the train out. I would see a possible issue with trains coming in 'out of sync' as it would mean a train coming in on the wrong platform, thus throwing the 'stepping back' out of kilter e.g a driver due to step back on 15 has his/her next train no. coming in on 13, but this could happen under the current TT as well I guess At the western end of platforms 15 and 14 is an Office / drivers room this is maned by a manager who can deal with any reforms due to trains arriving in the wrong order in to Stratford and thus stepping back will only use these two platforms for most of the time , please study the new working time table and you will see how platform 13 is only used for a few trains . Hmm, was a lot easier when I was a Stratford/NOG driver π
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on May 10, 2018 18:19:14 GMT
A few years ago there was engineering work from Leytonstone to Newbury Park and round to Hainault via Woodford. I ended up doing Newbury Park to Hainault shuttles on a Sunday afternoon, reversing off Platform 1 through the siding onto the inner road over and over and over....
It was almost as pointless and monotonous as working the Waterloo & City on a Saturday Ahem, I love working the drain on a Saturday πΈ
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on May 10, 2018 18:14:52 GMT
Probably more dodgy dealings from their east end TFC rep π€ TFC? Sorry, Trains Functional Council. Full time release rep who negotiate train operator industrial issues. When local issues and disputes cannot be solved, they are raised through negotiation machinery to the TFC, where they are discussed with General Managers, Directors et al rather than local duty managers or Train Operations Managers
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on May 10, 2018 18:12:59 GMT
Time will tell if the platform is physically closed off, but I can't see any reason to. Morden platform 2 isn't blocked off in the peaks, and there's always the possibility of the platform being used at short notice for any one of many reasons. And of course with Fit For The Future, it's not like there's many staff around to be playing around with barriers! I suppose that if the platform is still needed 'just in case' then perhaps a physical blockage is less likely. All 3 platforms will still be in use. 14 & 15 will have drivers 'stepping back', 13 will come in and the same driver will take the train out. I would see a possible issue with trains coming in 'out of sync' as it would mean a train coming in on the wrong platform, thus throwing the 'stepping back' out of kilter e.g a driver due to step back on 15 has his/her next train no. coming in on 13, but this could happen under the current TT as well I guess
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on May 10, 2018 18:01:32 GMT
It's okay, people on the Internet say that staff experience counts for nothing, so that's all that matters. π€·πΌββοΈ I haven't said anything to suggest what you are inferring... I don't have any statistics to support my claims but then as far as I'm aware London Underground doesn't have any statistics to support their claims that the service needs expanding. It would be interesting to listen to their reasons. What reasons have they given staff? What I do have is 15 years empirical observation as a Central Line tube driver of knowing when we are busy or when we aren't busy plus 20 years experience as a London Underground employee to know that management are completely incompetent and couldn't run a bath if their lives depended on it. I asked whether you had access to data which I couldn't see - not, as implied to ignore someones previous experience - but because I have found the opposite to be true so I was surprised. The trains appear well loaded to me, but of course, I am just a passenger. It's all about traffic light targets and LCH and footfalls etc. etc. Where there is a place of pink fluffy clouds, rainbow coloured skies, purple seas and kaleidoscope unicorns where the only people who are able to see this reality are junior and middle TfL management, as they see us in operational grades living in the world of the shades of grey and their lords and masters in senior management flying up in the air π
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on May 10, 2018 17:52:40 GMT
Jubilee line drivers are being balloted over increased Saturday working, I was under the impression that aslef had secured a deal where there would be no more increases in weekend work, presumably I was wrong. I also wonder if more services are required on a Saturday, and if this is a good use of the stretched finances of the underground? Probably more dodgy dealings from their east end TFC rep π€
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on May 10, 2018 17:42:29 GMT
Regarding a train sitting on mainline, it is tempting to see a potential bottleneck that could be solved by building a 20 road to the west of the mainline, parallel to where the 21 road is. With a 20 road, the returning Hainault branch train will not have to use the mainline when there is another train using the 21 road to get to the sidings and back. I think the cost of building would far outweigh the potential bottleneck, with the delay being negligible. Never known this to happen in my time (well, the days I've worked). Why do you think it would be called '20 rd'? In keeping with the area more likely to be either 22 or 24 rd π€
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on May 8, 2018 11:49:10 GMT
Platform 4 or even platform 1 to siding might be a bit more unusual though? Platform 4 to siding is fairly common. yep, done it today
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Apr 19, 2018 11:04:10 GMT
White City middle platform to reversing siding?
Quite a common one, mind you, 'common' is all perspective I guess
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Apr 19, 2018 11:03:42 GMT
I did a West to East at Queensway couple weeks back Yeah done that, once when the job was up the wall and once when we were having engineering works. What's unusual is its a 10kph limit so if you're in RM you have to watch your speed very carefully
I've thought of one that must be almost unknown, the West to East shunt at North Acton where you go off platform 1, over the points and the come back onto Platform 2. It used to a rusty rail move on a Leytonstone duty on Sunday morning but a lot of times Wood Lane didn't bother with it.
There's also the East to West shunt at Northolt off Platform 2 to Platform 1, haven't done that one either
Was the first time I did it, when I started on Central the 92ts didn't fit through the gap at the crossover, so they had to widen it when they realised they were going to start using it again.
Have done all the other moves at some stage, was often done during the phase post Chancery Lane derailment and they wanted to move a lot of trains around out of place.
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Apr 18, 2018 13:55:01 GMT
I did a West to East at Queensway couple weeks back
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Apr 14, 2018 9:01:11 GMT
I would say it depends how many trains in the area moving through. If there are trains between Sth Woodford-Woodford and Buckhurst Hill-Woodford, then it makes sense to move it east so it wouldn't hold up the service on both roads
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Apr 14, 2018 8:47:21 GMT
I've seen it done many times, never done myself though, and the train just picks up in service. If the train was going into the sidings from the EB track, then it would usually go in from South Woodford
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Apr 14, 2018 8:40:18 GMT
I once saw a train move from east of the eastbound platform (platform 3) just outside the station, across the points and into the westbound platform (platform 2). I can't quite recall where it went next - I assume into the sidings.
Could've just gone west
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Apr 14, 2018 8:02:33 GMT
Why only ballot Acton? Surely if this is a network wide issue then all ASLEF drivers and RMT should of been balloted As far as I'm aware its not an issue on the Central but then we're an ATO line so we don't have much of a SPAD problem. It could just be Acton Town management who are trying to be clever with the procedures while Upminster, Barking and the rest are playing by the book. Divide and Conquer
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 21, 2017 5:34:35 GMT
Used for storage now
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 19, 2017 16:42:32 GMT
So the ballot return was poor, not much of a mandate, don't think the promises of overtime working gained momentum π¬
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 19, 2017 9:39:44 GMT
No, it was when the train side of jube platforms were caged off, I pulled into platform 13 and needed toilet, when it was old cabin in car park and was stopped getting back on train after I'd finished. The young posh lad with the perm hairstyle just used to say "are you sure you're the driver and not just wanting a go on the train?", never really knew if he was messing around or not π We called him "Sideshow Bob" Haha, I always imagined him doing the job as a bit of fun as he went back to his huge stately home in the evening to check up on the accumulation of his trust funds. Always had a smile though
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 18, 2017 8:46:15 GMT
Phew, was staking my reputation on that one π
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 17, 2017 20:44:23 GMT
IIRC the reason for LOB EB repeater being "timed" was that it was visible too early and would impede headway when at caution, so was set to "pop-up" when at caution. This was later modified so that it always "popped-up" as the drivers got used to creeping if they couldn't see it! The problem with signal sighting in the past is that the sighting point is calculated, and if this is not then proved to be valid for all circumstances, the problems which drainrat reports can arise. Yes, first module of the old rules and regs course introduced to drivers the four factors of signal placement: speed of the fastest train, weight of the heaviest train, gradient, and for the life of me I cannot remember the fourth, but I think it was braking capacity. The first that was raised by test train ops for the JLE was that it appeared - rightly or wrongly - a lot of calculations were made without consideration of the above, which was proved at the North Greenwich outer home signal, however, the problem wasn't the placement of the outer home, it was the distance of the repeater from the outer home. As was the case with the attitude at the time, there was a reluctance to admit to getting it wrong, so the adaptations drivers made to deal with it was to approach the repeater at slower speeds until they saw the repeater aspect, thus impeding head ways through North Greenwich, the main impact being the affect on trains per hour through Canary Wharf WB, thus not meeting the agreements made with Canary Wharf PLC, which I believe was ultimately the reason why the repeater was repositioned and not because of the increased risk of a SPAD. As a member of signal sighting from 2004-2009, I understand that the technical application doesn't always fit hand in glove with the practical running. Before the setting up of the signal sighting on the jube, there was very much a mindset that the technical plans were infallible, in spite of the contradictions that practical running threw up, t/ops were left to deal with the impracticalities. It took a while for the company to realise that drivers can provide insightful feedback on signal sighting, but now we have had a fair number of signals repositioned as a result of driver involvement. Seems a no brainer now, but it took a lot of fighting to get to that stage. Interesting point, one of the points in the ballot of the safety strikes of 2001 was setting up signal sighting committees, strangely the good old Evening Standard reported it as being over the lack of tea making facilities, and the travelling public do like to be spoon fed media 'truths'
|
|
|
Post by drainrat on Oct 17, 2017 19:27:26 GMT
During test train working between Stratford-North Greenwich, I was once refused access back onto my own train by a member of station staff at Stratford who is now a driver at Leytonstone and a forum member here π That must have been when the window over Plat. 13 shattered and there was still a large chunk of glass hanging precariously in the frame. The station supervisor sent out a cleaner to sweep up the broken glass on the floor until I pointed out that it could come down on him any time. Oh how I miss being a stations H&S Rep............not. No, it was when the train side of jube platforms were caged off, I pulled into platform 13 and needed toilet, when it was old cabin in car park and was stopped getting back on train after I'd finished. The young posh lad with the perm hairstyle just used to say "are you sure you're the driver and not just wanting a go on the train?", never really knew if he was messing around or not π
|
|