Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 15, 2006 5:08:22 GMT
Why has it taken nearly 150 years to put in a co-acting starter at cab level there? ;D
Still, better late than never methinks. I always thought you had a bad view of the starter there.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196 
|
Post by Tom on Dec 16, 2006 19:34:05 GMT
Because until about six years ago LU didn't take SPADs and SPAD risks particularly seriously.
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Dec 16, 2006 21:10:59 GMT
In LU's defense, we have a very good train protection system in place so SPAD's were less of an issue.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Dec 16, 2006 22:10:05 GMT
True.
|
|
|
|
Post by edb on Dec 18, 2006 12:25:56 GMT
Why has this suddenly become an important issue?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 18, 2006 13:18:28 GMT
It hasn't suddenly become important - ever since the removal of train guards in lieu of OPO, I believe a large number of measures have been taken to prevent SPADs. Co-acting signals are simply one of those measures.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Dec 18, 2006 19:25:39 GMT
It hasn't suddenly become important - ever since the removal of train guards in lieu of OPO, I believe a large number of measures have been taken to prevent SPADs. Co-acting signals are simply one of those measures. Not really. There was a SPAD mitigation project about six or seven years ago which primarily addressed multi-SPAD signals that also had compromised overlaps across SSL and JNP. Some lines did little projects in the interim (I can think of two on the Bakerloo). However OPO has been around for a lot longer than six or seven years. LU's attitudes towards signal sighting were traditionally not that great and until a few years ago a driver passing a signal at danger without authority wasn't that uncommon. However, with the requirement to submit SPAD figures to HMRI, a large influx of new and inexperienced train operators and (I believe) a change in the disciplinary policy towards T/Ops involved in SPAD incidents, it has suddenly become even more important. (Oh, and LU have got some money available to fund all the work.) |
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Dec 18, 2006 20:02:44 GMT
Plus, the media has got a lot more info now and the punters now know what a SPAD is. Also, people love their 15 minutes of fame by spilling the beans. Faxes and emails make it easy to leak info. I once remember a very senior meeting where the MD said, "We can't do that, the Evening Standard wouldn't like it." The ES used to get the minutes!
|
|
|
|
Post by stanmorek on Dec 20, 2006 23:34:03 GMT
Was onboard a LU train that applied the emergency brakes on monday night.
Until reading DD's website I would've been none the wiser.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 23, 2006 21:17:58 GMT
Also not forgetting that a SPAD does cause a delay and in PPP world, delays cost £££'s and then the scramble as to whom is to blame for the £££'s
|
|
|
|
Post by stanmorek on Dec 23, 2006 22:33:48 GMT
I gather there was or still a current problem with signal bobbing where the aspects sometimes flicker from one to another?
|
|
