|
|
Post by 35b on Jul 23, 2018 21:27:12 GMT
Does this apply at Kennington? the Rulebooks apply to the whole of London Underground unless there is a specific exception for Kennington in the Northern Line supplement or anywhere else. Thanks. I ask because I haven’t observed the same level of checking at Kennington as is being suggested ought to be in place. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 23, 2018 21:33:28 GMT
the Rulebooks apply to the whole of London Underground unless there is a specific exception for Kennington in the Northern Line supplement or anywhere else. Thanks. I ask because I haven’t observed the same level of checking at Kennington as is being suggested ought to be in place.
Worth remembering that the Kennington reversing loop used to be colour-light signalled and remains fit for passenger use.
Not that you particularly should stay on a train terminating at Kennington (West End) and reversing via the loop (remember there's also a siding which is not suitable for passengers). First of all, nobody but an enthusiast is likely to want to spend a few minutes travelling only to end up back where they started but now pointing in the wrong direction. And secondly, while it should only take a few minutes to get round you could be left in the loop for a nice long time.
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Jul 23, 2018 22:26:21 GMT
At risk of provoking ire - what is the big issue with over-carrying passengers? As I understand it, trains don't tend to wait in the sidings for very long in any case (stepping back etc)? If passengers do end up being over-carried, as long as it's made clear that they'll soon be taken back (for example by the driver when walking back through) to prevent panic, it shouldn't cause that many issues surely? I've never quite understood the convention in recent years of avoiding reversing sidings because of this requirement (to check for passengers before using them). Many other countries transport systems seem to avoid this? Am I missing something? Well there are a few things to bear in mind. Passengers do not belong in depots, they are potentially dangerous environments. Passengers do not want to be in depots/sidings, they want to be where they want to be. Trains aren't meant to wait in the sidings/depots for very long, but if there is a problem you might want to leave the train where it is for a few hours. It shouldn't cause that many issues if the person is a nice, reasonable person. But if the person is an angry impatient drunk and it's not a depot but a siding, you don't wanna be stuck on a train with that person and no way out. We have had reports on these boards of assaults in the Kennington reversing loop if my memory serves. There have been incidents. A gentleman attempting to alight from a train at Liverpool Street reported slipped between the cars and fell to his death. At Queen's Park when this innovation was attempted on the Bakerloo a young kid remained on the train into Queen's Park North Sheds, slipped between the cars and headed off up the track to retrieve something. At Waterloo, for example, the moves in and out are controlled by shunt signals. Passengers are not meant to be knowingly carried over shunt moves without authorisation as these moves are not signalled to the same standards of safety. Additional safety mechanisms required for main aspects to clear may be omitted in the case of shunt signals.
Points in depots and sidings do not always have facing point locks required for passenger-carrying lines. so, if you find a passenger on the train in Waterloo depot, insist the points are clipped and scotched before you come back out with a passenger on board.  I am a former Waterloo ASLEF branch committee member in BR days. |
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 24, 2018 0:48:00 GMT
Does this apply at Kennington? the Rulebooks apply to the whole of London Underground unless there is a specific exception for Kennington in the Northern Line supplement or anywhere else. There is, it’s in the Northern Line supplement. Personally I find the whole issue of detrainments rather muddled, to the point of being laughable. The need to do a physical detrainment arose following the Liverpool Street incident, which I can fully understand. Yet detrainment staff were withdrawn at Kennington on the basis that it’s a colour-light move. Where’s the relevance to someone falling between cars? The loop is just as likely as a siding for this to happen, in fact perhaps more so as the train is moving for longer and perhaps at a higher speed round a sharply curved section of line. I can understand staff concerns about such accidents, although at the end of the day it’s for the company to decide what level of risk it is prepared to take. Then we hear mention of facing point locking. If the company is happy for passengers to be taken over such points - at slow speed - then that’s their problem. Provided the Rule Book reflects this then I don’t see why drivers should be overly bothered about that. At the end of the day in the very unlikely event that something goes wrong it’s Mike Brown’s problem not theirs. No one bats an eyelid when a wrong direction move is done over such a set of points under various methods of degraded working. I don’t hear much objection to OSN101, so it’s hard to argue against carrying people over such points in one situation but not in another. What I can understand, and agree with, is the risk for a driver to be stuck on an empty train with potentially aggressive or troublesome people. There have certainly been a few unpleasant incidents in the loop at Kennington over the years since the detrainment staff were withdrawn. Personally I’d prefer to have detrainment staff, but evidently not enough people cared enough to make a fuss when they were taken away (or were able to articulate a decent case to keep them). The company needs to make up its mind whether it’s worried or not about the risk of people attempting to self-detrain, and the unions need to decide exactly what it is they object to about not having detrainment staff. If it’s a problem in one place then how come no issue seems to have been made about Kennington? I don’t buy any argument that at Kennington drivers don’t need to change ends, as any number of scenarios could require the driver to have to walk through the train. If the unions want full detrainment then they need to articulate a consistent reason why they actually want it! |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 24, 2018 4:13:01 GMT
Does this apply at Kennington? I suspect that will depend on how you define "terminating". Also, what about S Stock which are not fitted with porter buttons - but an alternate system? Terminating in this case means going out of passenger service From observing S Stock going out of service at Barking staff press one of the door open/closed buttons for two or three seconds and that closes the all the doors on that car. Its the same as porter buttons. A union is only as good as its members, at Leytonstone both local reps are opposed to removing detrainment staff at Waterloo and its up to the drivers whether they accept it or not. If the Northern Line drivers accepted the removal of staff at Kennington then there isn't much the union can do although there's no reason the drivers can't raise the issue again, If the drivers at Leytonstone agree with it then its going to require extensive amendment to the W&C Line Supplement before it can go ahead. <<superteacher: Posts merged.>>
|
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Jul 24, 2018 5:56:31 GMT
the Rulebooks apply to the whole of London Underground unless there is a specific exception for Kennington in the Northern Line supplement or anywhere else. There is, it’s in the Northern Line supplement. Personally I find the whole issue of detrainments rather muddled, to the point of being laughable. The need to do a physical detrainment arose following the Liverpool Street incident, which I can fully understand. Yet detrainment staff were withdrawn at Kennington on the basis that it’s a colour-light move. Where’s the relevance to someone falling between cars? The loop is just as likely as a siding for this to happen, in fact perhaps more so as the train is moving for longer and perhaps at a higher speed round a sharply curved section of line. I can understand staff concerns about such accidents, although at the end of the day it’s for the company to decide what level of risk it is prepared to take. Then we hear mention of facing point locking. If the company is happy for passengers to be taken over such points - at slow speed - then that’s their problem. Provided the Rule Book reflects this then I don’t see why drivers should be overly bothered about that. At the end of the day in the very unlikely event that something goes wrong it’s Mike Brown’s problem not theirs. No one bats an eyelid when a wrong direction move is done over such a set of points under various methods of degraded working. I don’t hear much objection to OSN101, so it’s hard to argue against carrying people over such points in one situation but not in another. What I can understand, and agree with, is the risk for a driver to be stuck on an empty train with potentially aggressive or troublesome people. There have certainly been a few unpleasant incidents in the loop at Kennington over the years since the detrainment staff were withdrawn. Personally I’d prefer to have detrainment staff, but evidently not enough people cared enough to make a fuss when they were taken away (or were able to articulate a decent case to keep them). The company needs to make up its mind whether it’s worried or not about the risk of people attempting to self-detrain, and the unions need to decide exactly what it is they object to about not having detrainment staff. If it’s a problem in one place then how come no issue seems to have been made about Kennington? I don’t buy any argument that at Kennington drivers don’t need to change ends, as any number of scenarios could require the driver to have to walk through the train. If the unions want full detrainment then they need to articulate a consistent reason why they actually want it! Thank you, that answers both my initial and subsequent questions. In the context of such detrainment staff not being required elsewhere, and with the inconsistency within the Underground, I struggle to see why it is as serious as is being made out, while accepting that it’s not ideal. |
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 24, 2018 6:41:35 GMT
There is, it’s in the Northern Line supplement. Personally I find the whole issue of detrainments rather muddled, to the point of being laughable. The need to do a physical detrainment arose following the Liverpool Street incident, which I can fully understand. Yet detrainment staff were withdrawn at Kennington on the basis that it’s a colour-light move. Where’s the relevance to someone falling between cars? The loop is just as likely as a siding for this to happen, in fact perhaps more so as the train is moving for longer and perhaps at a higher speed round a sharply curved section of line. I can understand staff concerns about such accidents, although at the end of the day it’s for the company to decide what level of risk it is prepared to take. Then we hear mention of facing point locking. If the company is happy for passengers to be taken over such points - at slow speed - then that’s their problem. Provided the Rule Book reflects this then I don’t see why drivers should be overly bothered about that. At the end of the day in the very unlikely event that something goes wrong it’s Mike Brown’s problem not theirs. No one bats an eyelid when a wrong direction move is done over such a set of points under various methods of degraded working. I don’t hear much objection to OSN101, so it’s hard to argue against carrying people over such points in one situation but not in another. What I can understand, and agree with, is the risk for a driver to be stuck on an empty train with potentially aggressive or troublesome people. There have certainly been a few unpleasant incidents in the loop at Kennington over the years since the detrainment staff were withdrawn. Personally I’d prefer to have detrainment staff, but evidently not enough people cared enough to make a fuss when they were taken away (or were able to articulate a decent case to keep them). The company needs to make up its mind whether it’s worried or not about the risk of people attempting to self-detrain, and the unions need to decide exactly what it is they object to about not having detrainment staff. If it’s a problem in one place then how come no issue seems to have been made about Kennington? I don’t buy any argument that at Kennington drivers don’t need to change ends, as any number of scenarios could require the driver to have to walk through the train. If the unions want full detrainment then they need to articulate a consistent reason why they actually want it! Thank you, that answers both my initial and subsequent questions. In the context of such detrainment staff not being required elsewhere, and with the inconsistency within the Underground, I struggle to see why it is as serious as is being made out, while accepting that it’s not ideal. There is, of course, one further reason why detrainment staff are valuable, which is that overcarried passengers have a habit of pulling handles. The Northern gets a hell of a lot of delay minutes caused by this at Kennington, especially as it just has to be the disabled buttons operated which many drivers don’t seem to be able to reset, or more than one handle pulled and one gets missed causing the driver to have to go back a second time. If you go to travel north on the CX branch and there’s a massive wait to the first train, chances are the cause is a passenger alarm activation in the loop. Again, this is LU’s problem however, not really a reason for union action in my view - although it reflects badly on LU that these constant avoidable delays are evidently considered a price worth paying. |
|
cso
Posts: 1,043 
|
Post by cso on Jul 24, 2018 7:28:11 GMT
From observing S Stock going out of service at Barking staff press one of the door open/closed buttons for two or three seconds and that closes the all the doors on that car. Its the same as porter buttons. I have only ever seen the driver closing the doors on an S-Stock with their equivalent of Porter Buttons... never station staff. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 24, 2018 7:39:32 GMT
From observing S Stock going out of service at Barking staff press one of the door open/closed buttons for two or three seconds and that closes the all the doors on that car. Its the same as porter buttons. I have only ever seen the driver closing the doors on an S-Stock with their equivalent of Porter Buttons... never station staff. There's LU station staff at Barking, they've got an office at the east end of Platform 3/west end of Platform 2. I've seen them closing the rear cars while the driver closes the front two cars. |
|
|
|
Post by John Tuthill on Jul 24, 2018 9:52:25 GMT
I remember it being done when the 38s were running 38 stock didn’t have a PA system, unless you count a shouting guard as one! I was referring to the practice of the guard checking the car and then using the external button to close the doors. No doubt when he got to the front, he would walk back through the train ready for the next trip north. |
|
|
|
Post by ducatisti on Jul 24, 2018 11:59:09 GMT
It would be funny if LU management met their Waterloo at, errrr, Waterloo...
|
|
rincew1nd
Administrator
Junior Under-wizzard of quiz
Posts: 10,286
|
Post by rincew1nd on Jul 24, 2018 12:50:28 GMT
It would be funny if LU management met their Waterloo at, errrr, Waterloo... Thanks for that guess what I'm now singing to myself! Click here if embedded tweet fails to display. |
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 24, 2018 12:59:31 GMT
I suspect that will depend on how you define "terminating". Also, what about S Stock which are not fitted with porter buttons - but an alternate system? Terminating in this case means going out of passenger service From observing S Stock going out of service at Barking staff press one of the door open/closed buttons for two or three seconds and that closes the all the doors on that car. Its the same as porter buttons. A union is only as good as its members, at Leytonstone both local reps are opposed to removing detrainment staff at Waterloo and its up to the drivers whether they accept it or not. If the Northern Line drivers accepted the removal of staff at Kennington then there isn't much the union can do although there's no reason the drivers can't raise the issue again, If the drivers at Leytonstone agree with it then its going to require extensive amendment to the W&C Line Supplement before it can go ahead. <<superteacher: Posts merged.>>
As I say, I’m not disagreeing that detrainment staff should be provided - there are definitely valid arguments from a passenger safety, driver safety and performance point of view. However the union needs to come up with a coherent reasoning for why they want it, not just some vague mutterings about safety which can easily be argued down - especially when we have a location which has not been detraining for over a decade without anything too awful having happened, albeit a lot of delay minutes through handles being pulled. Realistically I suspect most Northern drivers aren’t that bothered about the Kennington situation. Certainly if the procedure changed to drivers having to walk back then I suspect many or most would regard that as dispreferable to today. In reality there wouldn’t be time for that without wrecking the timetable. There is a small niche of drivers who do have an issue, mainly those who have had nasty encounters with punters in the loop (including a few breaking into their cab and being aggressive) - however we’re only talking about a handful. With hindsight I’m amazed the company managed to get away with changing the procedure, not that long after Liverpool Street. It’s amazing how quickly LU’s corporate revolving door goes round and forgets things! |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 24, 2018 13:16:21 GMT
The unions don't need to come up with a coherent argument because the procedure is right there in London Underground's own Rulebook 8, Section 3.3, if you fail to follow the rules then you open yourself up to disciplinary procedure and I certainly don't trust management not to blame the driver if there were an accident or injury.
The Bakerloo drivers initially accepted a change to the procedures but after numerous incidents they went back to the Rulebook, closing the doors on the porter buttons which caused serious delays to the timetable. Management eventually relented and brought back station staff to assist at Queen's Park. Obviously the Northern has been more fortunate but all it will take is one serious incident and I suspect the whole thing would become contentious.
|
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 24, 2018 13:25:22 GMT
The unions don't need to come up with a coherent argument because the procedure is right there in London Underground's own Rulebook 8, Section 3.3, if you fail to follow the rules then you open yourself up to disciplinary procedure and I certainly don't trust management not to blame the driver if there were an accident or injury. The Bakerloo drivers initially accepted a change to the procedures but after numerous incidents they went back to the Rulebook, closing the doors on the porter buttons which caused serious delays to the timetable. Management eventually relented and brought back station staff to assist at Queen's Park. Obviously the Northern has been more fortunate but all it will take is one serious incident and I suspect the whole thing would become contentious. It’s quite easy for LU to change the Rule Book - they only have to enter a few lines like they’ve done in the Northern Line Supplement. Whilst there would doubtless be “consultation” the final decision is LU’s. I agree something will probably happen at Kennington some time. One could say it already has if we include people breaking into cabs and assaulting drivers - it’s defintely happened more than once. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 24, 2018 15:13:56 GMT
From Rulebook 5, Movement of trains due to unusually circumstances, Section 12 Carrying customers over shunt signalled moves.
That is pretty straightforward, train drivers cannot take passengers over a shunt signal without authority from the signaller. We'd need major revisions of the Waterloo & City Line Supplement to make the proposed procedure even acceptable by LU's own standards.
|
|
|
|
Post by croxleyn on Jul 24, 2018 17:40:58 GMT
I've never been to Kennington, but if the train's for the loop, are any announcements made after departure, i.e. "The next station is Kennington (northbound), this train is for Charing Cross" etc. It would reassure passengers they weren't going to get stuck. You wouldn't want the ultimate destination as that could confuse a foreigner or drunkard.
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,758
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 24, 2018 17:54:53 GMT
I've seen a YouTube video which shows scrolling messages on the DMI and there were probably PA announcements too but I can't remember for certain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2018 0:32:16 GMT
I've seen a YouTube video which shows scrolling messages on the DMI and there were probably PA announcements too but I can't remember for certain. This shows what message is shown on the DMI. It's a rather long winded way of saying "the next station is kennington" which would perhaps cause less panic and confusion as it would make it seem as if it's normal approach to the next station. It's good to see they mention those that need level boarding though. Judging from other videos, I don't believe there is a pre-recorded announcement played. Just realised this thread is supposed to be about the W&C so I apologise |
|
|
|
Post by superteacher on Jul 25, 2018 6:10:25 GMT
Indeed. Whilst the comparison to Kennington detrainment (or otherwise) is relevant, let’s not drift into a general discussion about the loop. Thanks.
|
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on Jul 25, 2018 9:03:43 GMT
I did a couple of shifts with a Central Line Instructor Operator a couple of years ago and we reversed at Newbury Park. At that time, and it may be different now, the procedure was to make announcements and to flash the lights on and off to encourage passengers to leave the train and then close the doors in the normal way. Maybe the trial came to an end but you are required to change ends there although I seem to a have some recollection of it being a colour light move?
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 25, 2018 9:47:02 GMT
I did a couple of shifts with a Central Line Instructor Operator a couple of years ago and we reversed at Newbury Park. At that time, and it may be different now, the procedure was to make announcements and to flash the lights on and off to encourage passengers to leave the train and then close the doors in the normal way. Maybe the trial came to an end but you are required to change ends there although I seem to a have some recollection of it being a colour light move? I've worked the Central Line since 2003, that has never been the procedure at Newbury Park or anywhere else, it sounds as if you had a IOp who was too lazy to get up and close the doors on the porter buttons as per the Rulebook. From the inner rail platform to the siding is a coloured light move but the move back to the outer rail platform is a shunt move. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by class411 on Jul 25, 2018 9:59:06 GMT
What does a 'shunt move' actually mean? I had made an inference, but as it appears that it's something opposed to a 'coloured light move', I suspect my inference (that it was a movement that involved using track not used for passenger movements) was incorrect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jul 25, 2018 10:08:23 GMT
What does a 'shunt move' actually mean? . A shunt move by using shunt signals, is a caution/restricted speed movement from either: - depot or siding to running line - running line to depot or siding - movement from one running line to another - movements within sidings |
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Jul 25, 2018 11:29:51 GMT
I've seen a YouTube video which shows scrolling messages on the DMI and there were probably PA announcements too but I can't remember for certain. This shows what message is shown on the DMI. It's a rather long winded way of saying "the next station is kennington" which would perhaps cause less panic and confusion as it would make it seem as if it's normal approach to the next station. It's good to see they mention those that need level boarding though. Judging from other videos, I don't believe there is a pre-recorded announcement played. There is an announcement that plays just after the train enters the loop, however many/most drivers press the PA button to stop it - as there’s a general feeling that it encourages people to pull handles. That happens often enough as it is without people being encouraged! |
|
|
|
Post by PiccNT on Jul 25, 2018 11:36:05 GMT
I did a couple of shifts with a Central Line Instructor Operator a couple of years ago and we reversed at Newbury Park. At that time, and it may be different now, the procedure was to make announcements and to flash the lights on and off to encourage passengers to leave the train and then close the doors in the normal way. Maybe the trial came to an end but you are required to change ends there although I seem to a have some recollection of it being a colour light move? I've worked the Central Line since 2003, that has never been the procedure at Newbury Park or anywhere else, it sounds as if you had a IOp who was too lazy to get up and close the doors on the porter buttons as per the Rulebook. From the inner rail platform to the siding is a coloured light move but the move back to the outer rail platform is a shunt move. I believe it actually was some sort of trial as there were a couple of TU Health and Safety reps there monitoring the procedure. Maybe it was kicked into touch pretty quickly. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 25, 2018 11:48:11 GMT
Maybe it started and finished during one of two week periods I was on Annual Leave that year but I certainly do not recall being told we had to that at Newbury Park at any time in the last 15 years.
|
|
roythebus
Pleased to say the restoration of BEA coach MLL738 is as complete as it can be, now restoring MLL721
Posts: 1,275
|
Post by roythebus on Jul 26, 2018 0:25:33 GMT
What does a 'shunt move' actually mean? . A shunt move by using shunt signals, is a caution/restricted speed movement from either: - depot or siding to running line - running line to depot or siding - movement from one running line to another - movements within sidings Shunt moves do not necessarily have facing point locks (FPL), a pre-requisite for the passage of trains conveying passengers. Depot sidings sometimes have hand-worked point that will not have FPLs, which are used usually along with signal interlocking to prevent the movement of point blades under a train, thereby causing a derailment. I abhor the use of the term "customer" in the LT rule book, they are passengers. Look in any of the various railway laws and bye-laws, there is rarely a reference to "customers". After all, we have passenger trains and we have goods trains.; we have empty stock trains. I've never seen a customer train! FFS stop this gobbledegook. |
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Jul 26, 2018 5:50:46 GMT
Shunt moves do not necessarily have facing point locks (FPL), a pre-requisite for the passage of trains conveying passengers. Depot sidings sometimes have hand-worked point that will not have FPLs, which are used usually along with signal interlocking to prevent the movement of point blades under a train, thereby causing a derailment. I abhor the use of the term "customer" in the LT rule book, they are passengers. Look in any of the various railway laws and bye-laws, there is rarely a reference to "customers". After all, we have passenger trains and we have goods trains.; we have empty stock trains. I've never seen a customer train! FFS stop this gobbledegook. On that last point, the word “customer” acknowledges that they are people who pay for the service, and have a choice about who to travel with. “Passenger” does not. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Jul 26, 2018 7:10:36 GMT
the word “customer” acknowledges that they ……………. have a choice about who to travel with. If only...……… To me, the use of "customer" implies the organisation sees making money as the primary objective, rather than moving people. Although "self-loading cargo", or even "victim", may be nearer the mark on occasion, I would prefer to be treated as a "client". |
|
I am a former Waterloo ASLEF branch committee member in BR days.
