|
Doctor Gideon Ceefax
|
 |
« Reply #75 on: January 18, 2009, 11:03:05 » |
|
No one has told me what the benefit to the traveling public DOO▸ is?
Reduced costs which helps marginal services keep running. Less chance of cancellation due to no show of guard. On board staff can give passengers 100% of their attention instead of having to close the doors every few minutes which can be easily and safely carried out by the driver. If DOO was to come in, then it would be the marginal services first for the chop! Who's going to spend money on CSR▸ / mirrors / full track circuiting and all the other equipment to run a limited service 1 car train? Cheaper to employ a guard on that, unless you dilute the requirements for DOO, which definitely would impede safety. Or alternatively run a bus... What onboard staff? Very few DOO trains always have onboard staff. Usually you get the odd ticket collector or RPI▸ on for part of the journey on maybe between 1 in 5 and 1 in 10 journeys if that? The cancellation argument is poor anyway, and is generally due to either poor rostering, man management, decreases in the number of relief crews or serious delays. And drivers can be just as affected by this. By that logic we may as well make everything automated, so drivers aren't needed, in case they are a no show and the service is cancelled! |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
G.Uard
|
|
« Reply #76 on: January 18, 2009, 11:03:52 » |
|
] to stay by the panel until the train has left the platform.
No they do not. That requirement was removed from the rule book about 3 years ago. That was to bring it in line with DOO▸ where the driver is not required / able to keep a look out after the train has left the platform I can't dispute your point ref the rule book, (and obviously, from your comments, working practice is different on the high speed side). However, West guards work to the above standard, (as imposed by competence management). It must be a local instruction, but all training and assessment rides are based on this practice and a guard would fail, were he/she not to follow suite. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Doctor Gideon Ceefax
|
|
« Reply #77 on: January 18, 2009, 11:06:39 » |
|
] to stay by the panel until the train has left the platform.
No they do not. That requirement was removed from the rule book about 3 years ago. That was to bring it in line with DOO▸ where the driver is not required / able to keep a look out after the train has left the platform I can't dispute your point ref the rule book, (and obviously, from your comments, working practice is different on the high speed side). However, West guards work to the above standard, (as imposed by competence management). It must be a local instruction, but all training and assessment rides are based on this practice and a guard would fail, were he/she not to follow suite. It is a local instruction, and applies to 180's as well. As for HST▸ 's and coaching stock the guard has to have his head out of the window and remain by the door control (or a position where he can apply the emergency brake) until the last vehicle has left the platform. |
|
|
|
« Last Edit: January 18, 2009, 11:12:53 by Doctor Gideon Ceefax »
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
gaf71
|
|
« Reply #78 on: January 18, 2009, 11:31:24 » |
|
] to stay by the panel until the train has left the platform.
No they do not. That requirement was removed from the rule book about 3 years ago. That was to bring it in line with DOO▸ where the driver is not required / able to keep a look out after the train has left the platform Last time I looked, this was in my Rule Book, so thats why I do it! Time to update your rule book then. Its up to date, I actually clarified this with a competency manager on my last assesment ride, and was assured it is still part of our rules. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
autotank
|
|
« Reply #79 on: January 18, 2009, 11:37:55 » |
|
No one has told me what the benefit to the traveling public DOO▸ is?
Reduced costs which helps marginal services keep running. Less chance of cancellation due to no show of guard. On board staff can give passengers 100% of their attention instead of having to close the doors every few minutes which can be easily and safely carried out by the driver. If DOO was to come in, then it would be the marginal services first for the chop! Who's going to spend money on CSR▸ / mirrors / full track circuiting and all the other equipment to run a limited service 1 car train? Cheaper to employ a guard on that, unless you dilute the requirements for DOO, which definitely would impede safety. Or alternatively run a bus... What onboard staff? Very few DOO trains always have onboard staff. Usually you get the odd ticket collector or RPI▸ on for part of the journey on maybe between 1 in 5 and 1 in 10 journeys if that? The cancellation argument is poor anyway, and is generally due to either poor rostering, man management, decreases in the number of relief crews or serious delays. And drivers can be just as affected by this. By that logic we may as well make everything automated, so drivers aren't needed, in case they are a no show and the service is cancelled! I'm talking about marginal weekend and late night/early morning services. I don't think anybody is seriously suggesting DOO on the Far North Line yet but it definately makes sense on most track circuited FGW▸ routes. Mirrows shouldn't be that expensive (but I bet they are because they are to do with the railway!) Just because I'm a fan of DOO doesn't mean I don't think most medium/long distance trains shouldn't have a member of staff on board. By making trains DOO the customer experience can be improved! There is always the risk of a humans not showing. By reducing the requirement of people to run a service in half it will definately reduce the instances of cancellation due to no shows. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Doctor Gideon Ceefax
|
|
« Reply #80 on: January 18, 2009, 12:00:24 » |
|
No one has told me what the benefit to the traveling public DOO▸ is?
Reduced costs which helps marginal services keep running. Less chance of cancellation due to no show of guard. On board staff can give passengers 100% of their attention instead of having to close the doors every few minutes which can be easily and safely carried out by the driver. If DOO was to come in, then it would be the marginal services first for the chop! Who's going to spend money on CSR▸ / mirrors / full track circuiting and all the other equipment to run a limited service 1 car train? Cheaper to employ a guard on that, unless you dilute the requirements for DOO, which definitely would impede safety. Or alternatively run a bus... What onboard staff? Very few DOO trains always have onboard staff. Usually you get the odd ticket collector or RPI▸ on for part of the journey on maybe between 1 in 5 and 1 in 10 journeys if that? The cancellation argument is poor anyway, and is generally due to either poor rostering, man management, decreases in the number of relief crews or serious delays. And drivers can be just as affected by this. By that logic we may as well make everything automated, so drivers aren't needed, in case they are a no show and the service is cancelled! I'm talking about marginal weekend and late night/early morning services. I don't think anybody is seriously suggesting DOO on the Far North Line yet but it definately makes sense on most track circuited FGW▸ routes. Mirrows shouldn't be that expensive (but I bet they are because they are to do with the railway!) Just because I'm a fan of DOO doesn't mean I don't think most medium/long distance trains shouldn't have a member of staff on board. By making trains DOO the customer experience can be improved! There is always the risk of a humans not showing. By reducing the requirement of people to run a service in half it will definately reduce the instances of cancellation due to no shows. As for marginal late night services or whatnot, DOO trains run more or less 24 hours between London and Reading. DOO trains could easily also do this to Oxford or Bedwyn, but don't, presumably as the company rightly or wrongly believes there is no business case for it. Indeed one of the companies than run more or less 24 hours a day is Transpennine Express, which does have guards. But on these long haul intercity trips, the guards aren't opening / closing doors every few minutes are they. And besides once the companies realise they only need one person on board, they can start getting rid of other onboard staff, and have just the driver and no one else on board. Take the Kings Lynn line as an example. This used to be intercity loco and coaches. It is now basically an outer surburban service, where maybe a few RPO's jump on now and then. DOO has hardly improved that! Cross Country services have cut back on catering considerably, so now there is generally no catering beyond 8pm. Now imagine they didn't have to have guards either. Are they really going to bother having a roving ticket collector on these trains? It would not be unrealistic to suggest that you could find yourself travelling on Birmingham to Bournemouth, or Bristol to Leeds, with no other staff, other than a driver onboard... Your assumption is that companies will still keep staff on doing the commercial side of the guard's duties on all the trains that are DOO. History has shown otherwise. In general what happens when DOO occurs, is that a large number of staff either retire or move to other depots. Those that remain either get a shot at applying for drivers jobs, or become RPO's. They aren't just going to turn every guard into a travelling ticket collector on every train. Even if the companies did actually do this, the savings would not be that great, as you'd still be paying someone between at least 18 to 20 grand a year to be on every train (assuming their role would include overseeing catering, fares, and basic safety). Of course it could be outsourced and done on the cheap, but then that would hardly improve things for the travelling passenger. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
dog box
|
|
« Reply #81 on: January 18, 2009, 12:42:43 » |
|
good on you autotank for reaching the grade of driver on a steamer, but you should remember your passengers are there for a good day out and you are not likely to encounter miscreants are you .
i can understand your thought processs because on most preserved lines the guard is really just ceremonial, with the driver having full responsibility for the train, and there does sometimes exist an atmosphere shall we say between the footplate and guard i think there is a long standing rather derogratory rhyme going about,
On the big railway as you call it, The Driver and Guard work as a team to ensure safe operation of the train , FGW▸ HSS▸ Guards are also trained shunters and can be called to perform this duty in times of break down /failure.
DOO▸ does not improve the passenger experience at all, and i would expect most passengers welcome a fully trained guard on board who they know will lead in a crisis.
do you know there 15 reasons to evacuate an HST▸ Coach whilst in service, all guards need to know this and perform the necessry procedures associated
.
Bit of a scenario DOO Train crashes driver incapacitated, pouring with rain and dark ....HSTs do 125mph try being trackside at this speed , its a clean pair of trousers job for the inexperienced , also whats that nice loose red wire i have just seen, and isnt it thoughtful for the nice network rail to put a wooden box around that rail , oh dear i have just tripped over it in my wet coat , ok lets walk this way past that nice white plate on the wall with 2 red squares on it
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
All postings reflect my own personal views and opinions and are not intended to be, nor should be taken as official statements of first great western or first group policy
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #82 on: January 18, 2009, 15:07:32 » |
|
Dog box - On the SVR, the guard IS in charge of the train
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Tim
|
|
« Reply #83 on: January 20, 2009, 14:43:30 » |
|
I detect two seperate issues and arguements here. The first issue is should there be a second memeber of staff on the train with a high level of route knowledge, traction knowledge, fares and timetable information and detailed safety training? My answer to this is an unequivical yes! the presence of this extra person makes the train safer and customer service better. I am happy for such a person to be present and to be reasonably well paid in recognition of the responsibilty of their job. I am happy for this extra person to be called a guard. The second issue is not directly connected with the first. It is why does the guard have to be involved in routine train dispatch issues that could be handled by the driver, releasing the guard for other jobs? There does not seem to be any real safety arguement in favour of the guard opening the doors as opposed to the driver. I suspect that the real answer to that queston is that it the routine safety critical jobs were taken away from the guard, the rail unions would see (perhaps rightly) that as a first step in downgrading the guards role or even removing it. In my view that position is understandable but if there was more flexibilty in the role of the guard, then the guard could spend his time doing more commercially important things (checking tickets etc) which would surely make him more "valuable" to the TOC▸ accountants and more likely to be retained.  ? I am very gald that there are guards on my trains. I feel safer as a result. But it does seem to me that the job of dealing with the doors is something that guards cling to in part because of self interest (not that there is anything wrong with that - we all have mortgages to pay) |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #84 on: January 20, 2009, 15:37:25 » |
|
As for marginal late night services or whatnot, DOO▸ trains run more or less 24 hours between London and Reading. DOO trains could easily also do this to Oxford or Bedwyn, but don't, presumably as the company rightly or wrongly believes there is no business case for it.
Just to confirm the FGW▸ routes on which D.O.O. currently operates on all turbo operated services, regardless of the time of day. Paddington-Banbury (via Reading and Oxford) Oxford-Bicester Town Paddington-Greenford Slough-Windsor Maidenhead-Bourne End Twyford-Henley Reading-Bedwyn (via Newbury) Other trains, i.e. Adelantes/ HST▸ 's, can also run D.O.O. but not in passenger service. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
autotank
|
|
« Reply #85 on: January 20, 2009, 16:59:40 » |
|
What about Reading - Basingstoke?
Also what happened when 165/6's operated the Oxford - Bristol services?
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #86 on: January 20, 2009, 17:04:29 » |
|
What about Reading - Basingstoke?
Also what happened when 165/6's operated the Oxford - Bristol services?
Reading-Basingstoke is not D.O.O. - you'll always find a slightly bored Conductor/Senior Conductor on board. The Oxford-Bristol services also weren't operated with D.O.O. - though there were occasions when a Senior Conductor/Train Manager could not be resourced until Didcot, in which case the train was allowed to run as D.O.O. between Oxford and Didcot Parkway. |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
smokey
|
|
« Reply #87 on: January 20, 2009, 18:46:21 » |
|
I'm ALWAYS happier on a Train with a Guard, It's Safer, Friendlier and who helps when some Drunk Hooligans or Worse Teenage School Kids get on board, yes I know problems only occur on odd occasions. but I find it strange that autotank is fully behind DOO▸ yet works on a preserved line I doubt he's ever worked DOO.
I'm not even happy with Voyager Trains once the Guard (or Manager) closes the Doors who stops the Train IF somebody falls under it?
Technology Exists for a Jumbo Jet to fly with just ONE Pilot, But Do They?
WHY NOT!
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
Btline
|
|
« Reply #88 on: January 20, 2009, 19:42:19 » |
|
HSTs▸ are allowed DOO▸ ?  Sorry, that would be plain unsafe.
|
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
|
|
|
|
IndustryInsider
|
|
« Reply #89 on: January 20, 2009, 21:51:49 » |
|
HSTs▸ are allowed DOO▸ ? Sorry, that would be plain unsafe. When not in passenger service, yes. Why would that be unsafe? |
|
|
|
|
Logged
|
To view my GWML▸ Electrification cab video 'before and after' video comparison, as well as other videos of the new layout at Reading and 'before and after' comparisons of the Cotswold Line Redoubling scheme, see: http://www.dailymotion.com/user/IndustryInsider/ |
|
|
|
