Suspended due to h&s reasons?

Hmm........

Well it's certainly rather mysterious that all is now well again. Perhaps it's now been realised that with the best will in the world, the design of the CTBC on a C stock is as safe as it can be. It's never been questioned before, nor been the result of a mishap (that I know of anyway) in almost 30 years - so let's be realistic, just what are the chances of something so drastic ever happening? You've most likely got more chance of winning the lottery jackpot.

Anyway, yes the D stock brought improved design - but, well, lets's have a list of questions I've thought up:

• what about the 67ts on the Vic, 72ts on the Bakerloo and the 73ts on the Picc? Ok I haven't got the first clue as to whether or not these stocks are anywhere near close to having a similar issue, but is it possible they may have a similar inherent design issue?
  
• Has this type of CTBC on any rail stock (NR or LUL) ever had this type of design?
  
• If there is another stock with the same potential issue (current or long since dead), was it ever implicated in an incident of the type envisaged in this thread?
  

I suspect the answers will be yes, yes, and no - so what was the last 24 hours really all about?

Not on the C stock, Dave.

I've driven C stock (granted it was unrefurbished and in the dim and distant past). If dropped, the TBC would lock in the raised position until moved back to Off and Release.

Well 72 stock on Bakerloo doesn't have this feature and I've never felt the lack.

I was pondering this last night, it's interesting that on the District the use of the TBC for worried (i.e. a step down from emergency) braking is not allowed when over here it's perfectly acceptable. I remember two IOs commenting on the efficacy of briefly dropping and relatching the handle when the train is going a mite too fast in the platform. Please note: 'a mite'. Natch, emergency would be used if there were actual problems.

There have been a couple of comments from Bakerloo drivers that it is frowned upon by the management but I've used it during a TD-whatever (driving test) and not an eyelid was batted.

So not only do we have differences in "safety" features on the trains but we have differences in accepted driving styles.

No. By pushing the brakes to emergency both brakes (EP and Westinghouse) are deployed and if the train is going at certain speeds then also the Rheo brake. By letting go of the handle only the deadman is going off. Oddly enough, some peeps were discussing this the other day and they reckon after some experimenting with empty trains that the difference in braking ability might be as much as a full car. In an emergency that might be a significant difference.

Possibly a driver might push the handle the wrong way if they were stressed but to be honest, braking becomes instinctive after a while. Rounding a corner to see an unexpected red somewhat hones instinctive braking in the right direction. People might make a mistake in the same way that the driver of a car might press down on the accelerator in error but I think the frequency of that happening must be quite small in either case.

Not sure how other TBCs are arranged but for 72s the shutdown/emergency distinction doesn't really matter. When shutting down the train the TBC is pushed into emergency to discharge trainline air. Until that is discharged it's not possible to put it into the shutdown position. So in reality, emergency and shutdown are the same thing or if you put it another way, shutdown doesn't exist until emergency has happened. Not a great explanation but it probably gets the general idea across.

Thank's for the explanation! What I meant was, when the TBC was designed, why was it not designed so that when you release it, you get all the full emergency brakes... So that, to save every second, all the driver has to do, if he is stunned by a sudden obstruction, is release the handle to apply the emergency brakes. Maybe this isn't relevant, because it would make no difference anyway... I just wondered...

72's and C69/77's have identical TBC's. In fact the mechanics of the 2 trains are pretty much identical bar a few differences like reverse lockout (72 only), door mcb's (C) instead of fuses (72), the fact that you don't have to change fuses on C stock but you do on 72's etc. Having driven both stocks there is absolutely no difference in the TBC so I would say that it is entirely possible the same thing could happen on the Bakerloo Line.

Holy thread revival batman!

It takes longer to get trains through the station, so they get rid of the circles so they can cope without the H&C/District getting screwed?

Just a guess/.