|
|
Post by jamesb on Jul 13, 2020 21:06:30 GMT
I observed a terminating train getting taken out of service today.
There were two members of staff using the porter buttons to close the doors, one working from the back towards the front, and one working from the middle towards the front.
The staff member closing the rear carriage doors reached the middle, and was called back to one of the rear carriages by a customer on the platform. In response, the member of staff stood facing the driver continuously waving her arms above her head.
In the meantime, the member of staff closing up the front half reached the first carriage and held one arm up briefly and turned to walk to towards the rear of the platform. As soon as he turned, he saw the member of staff waving her arms, and said "no no no no", briefly waved his arm, and the train pulled away.
When the train was about 1/3 out of the platform, the member of staff at the back gave up and stopped waving her arms.
(I think) that someone had left a personal belonging in the train. There was no harm done. And I'm not criticising anyone. But it did make me think of the role of station assistants and how important a seemingly mundane and repetitive task can be - especially when 99% of the time nothing happens.
|
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Jul 13, 2020 21:24:25 GMT
Arms waved above the head is an emergency stop signal, the driver should not have moved'
Had there been a person on the train I would have expected the member of station staff to take further action to prevent the train moving, probably using the Butterfly cocks, or whatever they are called now, to open a set of doors and prevent the train moving.
if the driver was relying on mirrors to see the station staff it is possible that the first member of staff obstructed views of the second.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamesb on Jul 13, 2020 22:15:37 GMT
It felt like a unfortunate culmination of circumstances, rather than anyone not doing what they should have.
Two people dispatching a train without communicating with each other (one says stop, the other says go) seemed like a factor- as you said, one may have obstructed the other, which makes sense since one was considerably taller than the other.
It is frustrating to watch something happening in front of you, knowing that the train is about to move when (for whatever reason) it shouldn't, and feeling powerless to do anything about it!
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 14, 2020 9:45:42 GMT
Arms waved above the head is an emergency stop signal, the driver should not have moved' Had there been a person on the train I would have expected the member of station staff to take further action to prevent the train moving, probably using the Butterfly cocks, or whatever they are called now, to open a set of doors and prevent the train moving. if the driver was relying on mirrors to see the station staff it is possible that the first member of staff obstructed views of the second. Operating a "manual door valve" (I think that's its official title) is not an approved method of stopping a train from moving. The member of station staff did the right thing by waving their arms above their head, it doesn't matter what the other member of staff was doing, if both aren't indicating that its safe to proceed the driver should not move the train. 100% driver error |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,747 
|
Post by class411 on Jul 14, 2020 9:55:17 GMT
Seems to be a systemic failure there.
If the signal for "stop, don't move" is waving arms above head, the signal for "all clear", should absolutely not involve any arm moving above head level. That really is a accident waiting to happen.
What if a passenger was fallen, partly trapped in a door, and a short CSA at the back of the train, trying to signal the driver, was blocked from view by a larger, nearer, CSA waving a arm in the air?
The system as it seems to be being described is extremely badly designed (it could even be ad hoc), and should be investigated and replaced.
|
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Jul 14, 2020 13:36:00 GMT
Arms waved above the head is an emergency stop signal, the driver should not have moved' Had there been a person on the train I would have expected the member of station staff to take further action to prevent the train moving, probably using the Butterfly cocks, or whatever they are called now, to open a set of doors and prevent the train moving. if the driver was relying on mirrors to see the station staff it is possible that the first member of staff obstructed views of the second. Operating a "manual door valve" (I think that's its official title) is not an approved method of stopping a train from moving. The member of station staff did the right thing by waving their arms above their head, it doesn't matter what the other member of staff was doing, if both aren't indicating that its safe to proceed the driver should not move the train. 100% driver error 100% agree, however in an extreme emergency , someone trapped by coat etc., I would have no hesitation in doing it. |
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Jul 14, 2020 14:46:10 GMT
Hmm - To me it does sound like the driver may have simply misunderstood the signal being given - as a hurry up instead?
On mainline services I have noted similar ambiguity concerns (because people do sometimes wave or shout if they spot a friendly face among other alighting passengers) but at least on the mainline they have attempted to address this by issuing their platform staff with an oversize ping pong bat which is probably easier to spot. However I still wonder why they did not choose a bat with a red face and a green face - as that might better avoid ambiguity as to what the despatch staff are intending to communicate to the driver or other platform staff.
|
|
|
|
Post by 35b on Jul 14, 2020 16:11:55 GMT
Fair, but surely safety first requires that if there’s any doubt the driver waits until there’s a clear and unambiguous signal?
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 15, 2020 9:30:45 GMT
Hmm - To me it does sound like the driver may have simply misunderstood the signal being given - as a hurry up instead? On mainline services I have noted similar ambiguity concerns (because people do sometimes wave or shout if they spot a friendly face among other alighting passengers) but at least on the mainline they have attempted to address this by issuing their platform staff with an oversize ping pong bat which is probably easier to spot. However I still wonder why they did not choose a bat with a red face and a green face - as that might better avoid ambiguity as to what the despatch staff are intending to communicate to the driver or other platform staff. I doubt if there could have been any misunderstanding, both arms waved above the head so they cross over is one of the recognised signals for an emergency stop There is no signal for "hurry up". There are three recognised signals that station staff can use to indicate that it is safe to proceed on the Tube (or at least there are three I can think of). - An arm raised above the head, held steady - A baton raised above the head held steady - A green hand lamp held steady, level with or in front of the cab Anything else, like waving one hand, waving a baton, is ambiguous and should not be accepted as a signal that it is safe to proceed. Coloured lights aren't shown from the middle of the train because sometimes CCTV isn't reliable enough to show the correct colour and the same would apply with coloured batons. |
|
|
|
Post by tom73 on Jul 17, 2020 14:30:06 GMT
May I suggest a whistle blown an agreed number of times in quick succession to indicate an emergency in such a situation. Waving arms is not ideal in any situation as anyone can wave their arms.
|
|
|
|
Post by nig on Jul 17, 2020 15:34:16 GMT
May I suggest a whistle blown an agreed number of times in quick succession to indicate an emergency in such a situation. Waving arms is not ideal in any situation as anyone can wave their arms. And by the time you find your whistle the train has gone also you might not hear whistle over public announcements cab radio air con going cab door shut other trains moving in area. If is train pulling away and halfway in tunnel you still got in cab monitors on most lines it is a emergency sign anyone can use it does not have to be station staff if they see a danger and the driver should stop |
|
|
|
Post by tjw on Jul 17, 2020 20:47:40 GMT
May I suggest a whistle blown an agreed number of times in quick succession to indicate an emergency in such a situation. Waving arms is not ideal in any situation as anyone can wave their arms. And by the time you find your whistle the train has gone also you might not hear whistle over public announcements cab radio air con going cab door shut other trains moving in area. If is train pulling away and halfway in tunnel you still got in cab monitors on most lines it is a emergency sign anyone can use it does not have to be station staff if they see a danger and the driver should stop Under the old BR Rule book (my copy is 1950!) the stop signal was both arms raised above the head or if in a vehicle one arm moved up and down (Rule 51) A Red lamp or any lamp waved violently was also a stop signal (Rule 50). Also 3 sharp blasts of a whistle is also a stop signal... Our rules for Station staff were to have your whistle ready as you saw the train out... Although we had Guards that would be able to stop the train by dropping handle (ie opening the Vacuum or air pipe). The Guard was supposed to check the signals and keep an eye on the Station staff just in case the signal was put back or the staff gave an emergency stop signal. You are right that some station staff had great difficulty blowing a whistle 3 times and raising their hands! While it was not approved some station staff would turn the butterfly at can't rail height to stop a train, it usually worked depending on the size of the hole opened in the train pipe! Anyway this is all long gone... Was never issued with a LU rule book so do not know if they had different rules... |
|
|
|
Post by rheostar on Jul 24, 2020 8:07:26 GMT
Operating a "manual door valve" (I think that's its official title) is not an approved method of stopping a train from moving. The member of station staff did the right thing by waving their arms above their head, it doesn't matter what the other member of staff was doing, if both aren't indicating that its safe to proceed the driver should not move the train. 100% driver error Totally agree. Station staff should never try to stop a train by operating a butterfly cock. They could be putting themselves in danger by trying to operate the cock as the train's moving off. If the driver didn't see the member of staff waving their hands above their head then it's a driver error. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,786
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 24, 2020 10:12:14 GMT
It seems like a simple procedure to help avoid one issue brought up here would be to require the staff member nearest the driver to look any other staff on the platform and confirm they are not signalling danger before making any signal to the driver. That is assuming that this isn't already the case of course.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 24, 2020 10:14:42 GMT
It seems like a simple procedure to help avoid one issue brought up here would be to require the staff member nearest the driver to look any other staff on the platform and confirm they are not signalling danger before making any signal to the driver. That is assuming that this isn't already the case of course. How would you propose doing that when there's only one member of station staff on duty? And let's keep this real by not suggesting that they employ more station staff as we all know that is never going to happen. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,786
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 24, 2020 10:23:00 GMT
It seems like a simple procedure to help avoid one issue brought up here would be to require the staff member nearest the driver to look any other staff on the platform and confirm they are not signalling danger before making any signal to the driver. That is assuming that this isn't already the case of course. How would you propose doing that when there's only one member of station staff on duty? I wouldn't, which is why I phrased it as "any other staff on the platform" not "the other staff...". I would expect staff working on the platform to know how many people are working with them on that platform at the current time. The issue this is intended to prevent is a safe-to-proceed signal being given by one member of staff while a different member of staff was giving a danger signal. This is an issue that cannot happen when there is only one member of staff on the platform. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 24, 2020 10:35:10 GMT
If you have more than one member of staff closing up a train and one (or more) is giving the "right" while another is signalling an emergency stop then the driver shouldn't move but if the driver isn't looking then it doesn't matter if the station staff are doing the can-can.
Although I'd pay to see that on the in cab CCTV
|
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,786
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 24, 2020 10:37:36 GMT
Indeed, but if the driver sees both a danger and a proceed signal then they are more likely to go than if they only see a danger signal. It also reduces the chances of one member of staff inadvertently blocking the driver's view of another member of staff.
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 24, 2020 10:57:47 GMT
Indeed, but if the driver sees both a danger and a proceed signal then they are more likely to go than if they only see a danger signal. It also reduces the chances of one member of staff inadvertently blocking the driver's view of another member of staff. If a driver sees a danger signal they act on that regardless of what anyone else is signalling. The driver's view is on CCTV from cameras above platform level, the station staff are going to be at least a car apart so I don't see how one member of staff could block the driver's view of another unless one is the BFG and the other is welcoming you to Munchkinland. |
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Jul 24, 2020 11:41:45 GMT
we don't know the location, it could be mirrors
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Jul 24, 2020 13:37:09 GMT
I didn't think we had mirrors on the Tube
|
|
|
|
Post by Dstock7080 on Jul 24, 2020 14:39:21 GMT
I didn't think we had mirrors on the Tube Those Lines without in-cab TV monitors, Bakerloo and Piccadilly, rely on platform mounted monitors and mirrors. |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,786
|
Post by Chris M on Jul 24, 2020 14:48:07 GMT
If a driver sees a danger signal they act on that regardless of what anyone else is signalling. The issue here is that the driver (almost certainly) did not see the danger signal but (equally almost certainly) did see a proceed signal. We don't know why it happened, but the proposal I suggest would be a simple and (near*) zero cost method of reducing (but not eliminating) the liklehood of this happening. Given that the consequences could be serious (e.g. trap and drag) I don't understand your opposition. *The only costs would be of informing staff of the change and updating any written material detailing the relevant procedures. These costs would be required for any changes, large or small. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Jul 26, 2020 12:54:20 GMT
Where trains terminate at intermediate stations on a regular basis there should be signs visible from the cab that show the number of platform staff (either S1 or S2) so that the driver is aware of how many to look out for.
|
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,747
|
Post by class411 on Jul 26, 2020 14:07:22 GMT
Where trains terminate at intermediate stations on a regular basis there should be signs visible from the cab that show the number of platform staff (either S1 or S2) so that the driver is aware of how many to look out for. They need them everywhere, because emergencies can occur at any station. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Jul 26, 2020 15:07:10 GMT
Where trains terminate at intermediate stations on a regular basis there should be signs visible from the cab that show the number of platform staff (either S1 or S2) so that the driver is aware of how many to look out for. They need them everywhere, because emergencies can occur at any station. Can only happen at stations with platform staff. At other stations the driver has to check the train if necessary. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,747
|
Post by class411 on Jul 26, 2020 17:48:27 GMT
They need them everywhere, because emergencies can occur at any station. Can only happen at stations with platform staff. At other stations the driver has to check the train if necessary. So, are you saying that at all other stations the driver always has a clear unimpeded view of the entire length of the train (using monitors and mirrors where available), and is able to do the job as effectively as platform staff? And that the platform staff are there solely to check for passengers remaining on the train. As I said earlier in the thread, there is a systemic failure, here. If the further staff member was trying to communicate that someone was trapped, the situation could have been far worse. LU should investigate this and do something about it before there is a serious injury and someone makes them. |
|
|
|
Post by Chris L on Jul 26, 2020 18:46:49 GMT
Can only happen at stations with platform staff. At other stations the driver has to check the train if necessary. So, are you saying that at all other stations the driver always has a clear unimpeded view of the entire length of the train (using monitors and mirrors where available), and is able to do the job as effectively as platform staff? And that the platform staff are there solely to check for passengers remaining on the train. As I said earlier in the thread, there is a systemic failure, here. If the further staff member was trying to communicate that someone was trapped, the situation could have been far worse. LU should investigate this and do something about it before there is a serious injury and someone makes them. I did not say that. The driver has to get out of the cab and walk down the train closing doors after confirming no passengers are in the car. (This is usually done by looking in a pair of cars at a time.) |
|
|
|
Post by nig on Jul 26, 2020 18:47:45 GMT
Can only happen at stations with platform staff. At other stations the driver has to check the train if necessary. So, are you saying that at all other stations the driver always has a clear unimpeded view of the entire length of the train (using monitors and mirrors where available), and is able to do the job as effectively as platform staff? And that the platform staff are there solely to check for passengers remaining on the train. As I said earlier in the thread, there is a systemic failure, here. If the further staff member was trying to communicate that someone was trapped, the situation could have been far worse. LU should investigate this and do something about it before there is a serious injury and someone makes them. what he is saying is you dont always have help from station staff when detraining especially on early morning and late stablers/reversers and have to close all the doors yourself and also depart the station by yourself |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,747
|
Post by class411 on Jul 26, 2020 20:12:05 GMT
So, are you saying that at all other stations the driver always has a clear unimpeded view of the entire length of the train (using monitors and mirrors where available), and is able to do the job as effectively as platform staff? And that the platform staff are there solely to check for passengers remaining on the train. As I said earlier in the thread, there is a systemic failure, here. If the further staff member was trying to communicate that someone was trapped, the situation could have been far worse. LU should investigate this and do something about it before there is a serious injury and someone makes them. I did not say that. The driver has to get out of the cab and walk down the train closing doors after confirming no passengers are in the car. (This is usually done by looking in a pair of cars at a time.) So, are you saying that at all other stations the driver always has a clear unimpeded view of the entire length of the train (using monitors and mirrors where available), and is able to do the job as effectively as platform staff? And that the platform staff are there solely to check for passengers remaining on the train. As I said earlier in the thread, there is a systemic failure, here. If the further staff member was trying to communicate that someone was trapped, the situation could have been far worse. LU should investigate this and do something about it before there is a serious injury and someone makes them. what he is saying is you dont always have help from station staff when detraining especially on early morning and late stablers/reversers and have to close all the doors yourself and also depart the station by yourself But I was talking about the general safety of a system that appears to allow a driver to depart unaware of the fact that there is something of which he needs to be aware because the system enables a staff member who is signalling STOP to be obscured by another staff member. It may have been a train that was leaving empty that hi-lighted the issue, but highlight it it has. What is rather disturbing is that no one really seems to care. i.e. no one has stated that there is not a systemic failure, and no one has agreed that it should be looked into. |
|
