PASSINGER (OR IS IT CUSTOMER) DOOR CONTROL

I work in the business of making big computerised systems work together, so my way of thinking about things tends to be a little - shall we say - different. If GPS and axel-counters are already providing the inputs for the selective door open, then it should be an easy job to extend it to the passenger controls. Might as well make the most of the technology that is there.

If the problem is the passengers then build the system so that passenger control only happens at a time/place where a few extra seconds reaction time won't hurt the service. Or make it blatently obvious that a different rule exists at this station to reduce the time. For example a button marked 'push to open' on the door that flashes only on a station where it needs to be pressed. Maybe even allow it to be pressed in advance for the next station like Tramlink. If you can't fix the users, then fix the system! People will learn, just as I learnt the Tramlink doors.

If the S stock does have air conditioning then LU will have to change their minds anyway if they want it to work properly. Keeping the doors closed is as much about keeping the cold in as keeping the heat in. I like the way the class 357 EMUs always try to keep their doors closed. If nobody passes through a door for a minute or so it gets closed automatically. It will reopen again via the open button for another minute if required. This keeps the air conditioning working properly on a long stand at Fenchurch Street rather then wasting a load of energy trying to work with doors open.

Although a side effect is you do get tourists hurling themselves at doors closing well before departure time thinking they are about to miss their train, but that's the entertainment for the regular passengers

The problem as I see it with bowchurch's ideas I think is that although unquestionably all that he says can be achieved (and in many ways already is on TOC Rolling Stock), the philosophy of operations on LU is somewhat different.

We're a rapid transit system - get 'em on fast, get em'off fast, get the train moving in the shortest possible time - we're not looking at dwell times in minutes, we're working in seconds.

I really cannot see the benefit of adding that amount of kit which will not reduce dwell times and will only confuse the passengers.

Yes, of course, the regulars will get used to it but I stick by my position that the visitors to the system will be confused.

Also, I am a believer (at least when it comes to train equipment) in the 'keep it as simple as possible' school of thought; the more complex things are made, the more there is to go wrong (and if it can, it will) and the more this will cause delays. Again - there are not long gaps between trains where the driver or whoever can have 'space' to resolve a problem - he has a train right behind him that is now being delayed; and the one behind that - and the one behind that etc. etc.

I have to say that if I were a gambling man I would not put any money on pax open/close being a feature on the S Stock.