Baby on Board

The Standard article says that the train stopped partially in the station, but the driver then had to continue to Gloucester Road for "safety" reasons. Can anyone explain the technical reason why the relevant door could not be opened to allow mother and child to be reunited there and then? What is the point of stopping the train if the problem cannot be resolved? The mother must have been absolutely distraught when the train moved away for second time.

Did he "find out what the problem is"?

If he didn't, then as you say, he should be on a fast track to a dole queue, however, if he did find out and then carried on to the next station as per rule book, I wouldn't like to be in his position if the child had been abducted. NOT a very easy position for the T/Op to be in.

The T/Op and the station staff carried out their duties by the book. The person at fault is the person who put their child on a train and then got off! What a ridiculous statement to place the blame on the T/Op and suggest he or she should be sacked for someone else's stupidity!

@ linecontroller

Nobody has suggested anyone else should be sacked for somebody's stupidity > > although the guard on Merseyside was.

You state that the woman got on the train and then got off. Is this a fact?

You also state as a fact that "the T/Op and platform staff carried out their duties by the book". That is the question I asked, you are the only person to answer, and thank you for your answer. Then the T/Op shouldn't be sacked, should he.

I have asked questions and the statements of fact are yours.

@ rincew1nd

Thank you. I only read the BBC article which suggests that the woman didn't actually board the train. Already, there is a conflict of what is being stated as being fact. As none of us were there, perhaps it would be better if the thread was to be locked pending the outcome.

My personal view is that the guard on Merseyside who has been convicted of manslaughter has been treated very unfairly. If that had happened down in London, I suggest there could have been more BBC type publicity to have got a campaign to get him cleared.

I was a little annoyed by the attempt to immediately blame the px when the various reports are not consistent. (OTH, I would not blame the t/op to any great extent without a lot more reliable information).

It reminded me of an occasion at White City last year where the driver closed the doors on a frail old lady whose dog was on the train whilst she was still on the platform on the other end of the lead! I held open the door I was standing by to force a reopen and she got on without further incident.

Then some daft woman then started going on at me for causing a delay. I pointed out that I had done it because an old lady was in difficulty but she kept going on.

Fortunately I kept my temper and just continued answering her as if she was a rather slow child who needed everything explained in the simplest terms and she eventually shut up.

Not a pleasant experience, though, as I can imagine the old lady becoming quite distressed if she had been separated from her dog (or, worse, if she hadn't let go of the lead and the train had started moving).

Again, probably not the driver's fault as the platform was quite crowded and his line of sight was likely to have been blocked.

Seems to be the season for such things as in platform/train interface incidents - Waikanae Station yesterday morning.

ps. I hope you're using the modern definition of 'egregious' = very bad, rather than the not-so-old version where 'egregious' = very good.

I've only known that happen once, and I was the victim/culprit.

My g/f needed to ask a member of the station staff something but he was busy chatting on his mobile so I made my way to the train. This was a Sunday afternoon with very little activity but, nonetheless, the driver closed the doors as g/f was just a couple of feet from them. Naturally I held them open but I was a little late and only left a small gap. I expected that the driver would open the doors and we'd be on the way in a couple of seconds but, no, he came on the PA and started whining about delaying the train. By this time someone had moved over to help me with the door and eventually my g/f squeezed through and we were off.

When we got to our station the doors opened and the driver hadn't stopped the train properly so that we were behind the 'passengers must not pass this point' barrier. So I pulled the emergency handle and we moved up the carriage and we detrained. I do hope he didn't have to walk all the way back down the train (C Stock).

Yes, I think we are all well aware that it's not something that you are supposedto do, but it's one of those things that happens on just about every train, every day, and I honestly don't see why I should have to suffer delays day after day because other people do it AND suffer yet further delay because I then decide to be the odd one out.



She's my g/f, not my Siamese twin.



Erm, she did. That's why she wasn't on the train.



They should probably be grateful the the driver got a chance to clear his head. Given that he was unable to bring the train to a properly controlled station stop lord only knows what he might have done further on.

She was only a few feet behind me. Which made it doubly annoying that the driver closed the doors on her. Particularly as it was a Sunday and there would be a longer than usual wait for the next train.

It's actually very unusual behaviour a Hammersmith. A lot of drivers will repeatedly open the doors as people appear on the platform. Closing them in people's faces is very rare.



There was only one intervening station and I do not habitually monitor driver's stopping accuracy (and given the lack of a datum I could not have done so even had I wanted to). I noticed at our stop because we were facing a barrier which would have made it unsafe to get off. Given the extreme bolshieness of the driver earlier I did not want to risk his closing the doors and driving off before we got to the next set.



Well, me and the driver, between us.



ETA: Thinking about this (it happened quite a few years ago), I wonder if the driver deliberately stopped short. There are presumably index marks at each station and he stopped a good 3 metres short. I have never, ever, known a train stop short to the extent that one set of doors where not safely usable at this station, either before or since, and I've been using it for over twenty years. (Although he would have no reason to suppose that just because the late arrivals got on at the doors nearest the end of the platform they would necessarily want to use those getting off.)

Well, as I said, it was some years ago and it was only yesterday that the thought occurred. And the driver would have no reason to assume that the person who'd got on late would necessarily want to use those doors.

I'm surprised that something as old as C Stock even knows where it is on the platform but, safety switch or not, the train did stop so far behind the correct position that the rear doors could not be safely used (and yet the opened) and the driver must have been aware that he was way off the correct stopping position, and yet he was quite happy to just open the doors without correcting the situation.

So it was an odd journey on two accounts: firstly I've never known a driver delay a train by refusing to cycle the doors and, instead, harangue passengers on the P.A. and secondly I've never known (or at least, noticed), a train stop that far out of position.

So was he stupid or incompetent? Or both?

You say (and I agree) that there was no way he couldn't have known, and yet he did not correctly re-position the train and simply opened the doors leaving one set in a potentially dangerous position. Had someone actually got off there and the doors closed behind them they would have been trapped in a very narrow gap between the train and the barrier. Had they been in any way incapacitated - drunk or suffering from some disability or injury - this could have placed them in a very dangerous situation.



Only if his stupidity was such that, when he reached the handle, he did not notice the dangerous position in which he'd stopped the train.



I would consider a driver who is sufficiently incompetent to fail to stop at the correct position (by some metres), fail to correct his mistake, and then open the doors in a way that could have put passengers at risk to qualify as an 'emergency waiting to happen'.



Well, I'd say the driver was the one who caused the overwhelming part of the delay.

Normal driver:

1) Does not close the doors in someone's face on an empty platform on a Sunday afternoon.
2) Cycles the doors if someone is holding them open.
3) Stops the train in a safe position.

Total delay: about 2 seconds to recycle the doors.

Our hero on the H&C

1) Shuts the doors in someone's face.
2) Harangues the entire train for a couple of minutes until px manages to get on.
3) Stops the train well short of the correct position and opens the doors that are not safe to alight from.

Had he behaved as any other driver seems to manage to behave it would have caused a two second delay.

As it was his various actions probably led to a delay of several minutes.