First Group win South West franchise

[John M Upton]

I cannot press the Agree button too many times here!!!

[Gwiwer]

But the DafT people have to justify their existence somehow, surely?

[bbishop]

But the DafT people have to justify their existence somehow, surely?

 

Yes, by f*cking up the South eastern franchise.  Their plans are for all Hayes, main line and Sidcup loop to go to Charing Cross, and all Bexleyheath, North Kent and Greenwich to go to Cannon Street.  So not only Southern and Thameslink passengers trolling through the undercroft at London Bridge, but also 50% of Charing Cross and Cannon Street passengers.  Chaos will ensue.

 

Bill

[Covkid]

What a disruptive bunch of people the RMT  seem to be, picking fights with every train company ,are they building up to a national strike it really is a sinister moment in time.I know that many members of this union post on here and I am not tarring everyone with the same brush please understand I am looking at this from a passengers point of view.Change is something that happens but another person on the train is promised in all of the disputes so what is the problem or is this a political event by by Mr Cash it certainly seems to look that way.Perhaps if passengers could sue unions for disruption caused the world might be more equal?

 

 

I am assuming that the next time you fly anywhere on a commercial jet you will be quite happy with just a captain in the left hand seat, and a bank of ipad screens. To turn in a profit the flight is operated COO (Captain only) and the cockpit door is locked so you have no access. You will be expected to react to all the onboard safety announcements, and should there be any kind of emergency you are basically on your Jack Jones.

 

No ?  I didn't think so. So why would a Thameslink service with two or three times as many passengers as an A380 not have staffing of a remotely similar nature ? 

  

don't even think about any kind of cabin service 

[caradoc]

The point has to be made, yet again; DOO trains have run in Britain for over 30 years. If the RMT was to provide concrete evidence that this method of working is inherently unsafe, with a measurable and significant increase in accidents since its adoption, I for one would wholeheartedly support their case. The fact that they have not presented such evidence leads one to believe that it simply does not exist.

 

My local line has been DOO since 1986 and I do not feel in any way 'unsafe' using these trains. I would agree however that some services are simply not suited to DOO, and I would include heavily-laden, long (more than 8 cars, say) commuter services in this category. The RMT has, IMHO, weakened its case by its blanket opposition to all DOO, rather than focusing on realistic issues like trains such as those. The logical extension of RMT policy is surely to instruct its members not to work on or with (in any way), or indeed travel on, any DOO services; AFAIK they have not (yet) done this. Had the RMT based its case on passenger assistance, along with ensuring that their Guard members have their conditions, rates of pay and earnings protected, they would have built a far stronger campaign.  

[jjb1970]

No ?  I didn't think so. So why would a Thameslink service with two or three times as many passengers as an A380 not have staffing of a remotely similar nature ?

The obvious reasons would include the fact that an A380 will fall out of the sky and kill everybody on-board (and potentially a lot on the ground) if the pilot drops a klanger and that (rightly or wrongly) people on long haul flights have very different expectations for on-board service than those on a commuter train. An airliner pilot has six degrees of freedom to control. So I don't think it is really a meaningful comparison to compare a Desiro City with an A380.

[Coryton]

The obvious reasons would include the fact that an A380 will fall out of the sky and kill everybody on-board (and potentially a lot on the ground) if the pilot drops a klanger and that (rightly or wrongly) people on long haul flights have very different expectations for on-board service than those on a commuter train. An airliner pilot has six degrees of freedom to control. So I don't think it is really a meaningful comparison to compare a Desiro City with an A380.

 

We're getting a bit off topic here but....

 

Controlling both a train and a plane are skilled jobs, but there are a lot more variables involved in flying a plane (if you are ever on a plane where they let you listen to air traffic control on your headphones, hearing what goes on on the approach to a busy multi-runway airport should give you some appreciation for what the job involves).

 

Current airliners are designed to be operated by a flight deck crew of two. This may change one day- we no longer need flight engineers...or navigators...or radio operators. But it's not just legislation or public opinion that's putting two people up front on an A380 or even a 737.

 

But even if the plane can be operated by a single pilot, what happens if they are incapacitated? A dead-man's handle on a plane isn't very useful. So - until we automate the whole flight process reliably enough that we don't actually need a pilot, each plane needs to carry its own backup because you can't get someone else on the plane when you need it.

 

As for flight attendants...in a "crash landing" there can be a very short window of time to get everyone out before it's too late and that needs sufficient flight attendants to get everyone to do the right thing quickly enough. A train accident is somewhat different and it's unlikely that you will need to evacuate everyone in 40 seconds before the train goes up in flames.

 

Of course if we replaced flight attendants with automated announcements and vending machines, the fatality rate for air travel would still probably be much lower than for rail transport never mind road transport...but people don't think that way and a 747 full of incinerated passengers who didn't evacuate a plane fast enough make the news unlike the same number dead on the roads over a period of time.

[Gwiwer]

A place to be around noon tomorrow might be Waterloo (Windsor side).  5Z40 is on its way up as we speak and about 2 - 3 minutes early.

Edited September 3, 2017 by Gwiwer

[4630]

Already posted #567 yesterday.

[Southernman46]

A place to be around noon tomorrow might be Waterloo (Windsor side).  5Z40 is on its way up as we speak and about 2 - 3 minutes early.

http://www.rmweb.co.uk/community/index.php?/topic/125922-south-western-railway-livery-launch/

[phil-b259]

What he said. Is it really too much to ask that DafT leave operational and safety matters to people that know what they're talking about and for the railways to be allowed to get on with things?

 

Someone ought to develop a "Fantasy Railway manager" computer game to....

 

(i) Let front line staff relieve the stress of real life by setting up an alternate reality where the likes of the excellent Roger Ford, and our own Stationmaster are in charge.

(ii) Let those at the DfT (particularly the politically motivated ones like Mr Wilkinson) get their fix by 'taking on' the industry (and in the words of this said individual 'breaking' staff resistance for political ends)

(iii) Let those bodies that seem to have lots of money to spend on useless projects / research (e.g. some of the RSSB stuff) do so without needing to bother ordinary folk with their nonsense

(iv) let passengers who seem to think they are experts at running a railway do just that and satisfy their ego rather than taking it out on staff.

[jjb1970]

I'll admit that what I'm about to say is purely speculative, but I do worry that DafT will inhibit good leaders from wanting to work in the passenger rail sector. I know fine fellows like that nice Mr Cash of the RMT think all leaders are rapacious sociopaths motivated by subjugating the working classes and skimming as much out of the system as they can but in my experience the really good leaders are primarily motivated by opportunities to exercise their judgement, to take responsibility for things and to be a decision maker rather than just doing as they're told. Yes, they expect to be financially well rewarded, but the drive that makes some excell and go to the top is not just about money.

Really, are people of that callibre going to be happy to be DafT button pushers, there to do as they're told by drones in Marsham St? I've seen the interaction between civil servants and industry in marine and energy and that is bad enough but at least leaders in marine and energy can tell the mandarins to go and whistle on many things and aren't there to just ask how high when somebody at DafT say's jump. Even in defence, the relationship between the MoD and their suppliers can be difficult but there is nothing like the interference in mundane matters that seems increasingly the norm when it comes to DafT and the railways.

Will that matter? I think it will, as despite what people think leading a major business isn't as easy as it looks and good leaders don't fall off trees. If you cultivate a culture that leads high callibre people looking elsewhere then the railways will suffer.

[Clay Country]

A first look at the new livery on a 444:

 

https://flic.kr/p/X9gL7o

[Gwiwer]

A first look at the new livery on a 444:

 

https://flic.kr/p/X9gL7o

 

It's had its own thread for a while now South Western Railway livery launch

[royaloak]

The point has to be made, yet again; DOO trains have run in Britain for over 30 years.

And the reply has to be posted, yet again, that DOO was introduced onto a shrinking network with passenger numbers in freefall to try and reduce costs and prevent line closures, I dont remember any 12 coach DOO trains running back then either.

 

The screens/mirrors were positioned in such a way that the driver had a reasonable chance of seeing anything stuck in the doors, unlike now where the on board cameras give a very limited view of the doors, and probably the most relevant thing, passengers were expected to largely be responsible for their own actions, none of which is applicable to Today's railway.

[caradoc]

And the reply has to be posted, yet again, that DOO was introduced onto a shrinking network with passenger numbers in freefall to try and reduce costs and prevent line closures, I dont remember any 12 coach DOO trains running back then either.

 

The screens/mirrors were positioned in such a way that the driver had a reasonable chance of seeing anything stuck in the doors, unlike now where the on board cameras give a very limited view of the doors, and probably the most relevant thing, passengers were expected to largely be responsible for their own actions, none of which is applicable to Today's railway.

 

Which is why I made this point in my full, unedited post: 'some services are simply not suited to DOO, and I would include heavily-laden, long (more than 8 cars, say) commuter services in this category'.

 

Do you believe that the services currently running as DOO should go back to having a Guard, in every case across the UK ?

[royaloak]

Do you believe that the services currently running as DOO should go back to having a Guard, in every case across the UK ?

I want the services to be operated in the safest and best way relevant to the type of route they are operating.

 

So basically you are happy for an 8 coach train carrying over 1000 people to be operated DOO.

Would you be happy to be the one person responsible for that train and all the passengers now we are aware that the CPS like to prosecute staff (Guard ZEE) for passengers blatant stupidity?

[lmsforever]

I agree that one of the biggest problems facing the rail network and all who use it is DAFT  they come up with some of the most ridiculous ideas and edicts ever seen promulgated by people who seem to have no idea what the railways do.NR is being hobbled by them and the treasury so investment is on a downward spiral again not good news for anyone and we seem to be heading back to the bad old dayof no   investment.Daft seem to be preoccupied by remote control lorries and electric cars not the basics ,good roads no potholes and ease of use.railways that provide capacity for passengers and freight and don't recognise that there will not be enough electricity to run all these cars.The guys at the front line will get all the flack and largely it wont be there fault,I am not going down the RMT line as certain people get very heated by any adverse comments.The answer take transport out of politics and appoint people in the industry to actually plan and deliver projects that will benefit us all.

[The Stationmaster]

Which is why I made this point in my full, unedited post: 'some services are simply not suited to DOO, and I would include heavily-laden, long (more than 8 cars, say) commuter services in this category'.

 

Do you believe that the services currently running as DOO should go back to having a Guard, in every case across the UK ?

 

Interestingly it won't be long before 8 and 12 coach trains will be operating on a DOO(P) basis unless particular operator is drastically pursuing a major recruitment drive for people to undertake some sort of 'second onboard person' role.  And that will be on a route where DOO(P) operation has been taking place for c.20 years involving, in some instances, crush loaded trains - without a single operational safety incident of any kind.

 

Sorry but now I'm re-running the old record.  But don't overlook the fact that operating these trains is an operational safety matter and it requires the right infrastructure on the route as well as at stations and on the trains themselves.

[phil-b259]

I want the services to be operated in the safest and best way relevant to the type of route they are operating.

 

So basically you are happy for an 8 coach train carrying over 1000 people to be operated DOO.

Would you be happy to be the one person responsible for that train and all the passengers now we are aware that the CPS like to prosecute staff (Guard ZEE) for passengers blatant stupidity?

I would observe that the Guard in question was found 'not guilty' in a UK court and as such has set a legal president in that providing they are found to have complied fully with the necessary TOC roles regarding dispatch they will not be able to be found guilty in future.

 

Thus given the importance the U.K. common law legal system places on previous judgements to influence future prosocutions it is entirely reasonable to assume that the situation you mention is extremely unlikely to occur again.

Edited September 6, 2017 by phil-b259

[DavidB-AU]

South Western Railway brand launched in London

http://www.railwaygazette.com/news/single-view/view/south-western-railway-brand-launched-in-london.html

[caradoc]

I want the services to be operated in the safest and best way relevant to the type of route they are operating.

 

So basically you are happy for an 8 coach train carrying over 1000 people to be operated DOO.

Would you be happy to be the one person responsible for that train and all the passengers now we are aware that the CPS like to prosecute staff (Guard ZEE) for passengers blatant stupidity?

 

Given that one of the earliest, if not the first, routes to go DOO was Bedford/St Pancras in 1983 (after, guess what, a protracted industrial dispute), that situation has already occurred for over 30 years. Introduction of DOO on BR was not on lightly used rural routes in order to to safeguard their future but on busy commuter lines, such as BedPan as above, and in Scotland, Glasgow/Ayrshire and North Clyde for example, to reduce operating costs and by doing so justify investment in the railway. 

[The Stationmaster]

Given that one of the earliest, if not the first, routes to go DOO was Bedford/St Pancras in 1983 (after, guess what, a protracted industrial dispute), that situation has already occurred for over 30 years. Introduction of DOO on BR was not on lightly used rural routes in order to to safeguard their future but on busy commuter lines, such as BedPan as above, and in Scotland, Glasgow/Ayrshire and North Clyde for example, to reduce operating costs and by doing so justify investment in the railway. 

 

And, just as importantly in many places, in order to improve reliability due to ever persistent difficulties from the early 1970s onwards in recruiting and retaining (in employment) Guards.

[Gerald Henriksen]

So basically you are happy for an 8 coach train carrying over 1000 people to be operated DOO.

 

Why not?

 

Does an extra body really make things safer?  You still have only 1 person operating the doors, regardless of whether it is the driver or someone else.

 

Elevators/lifts carry far more people every day than take trains, and yet they have safely operated without human operators for a very long time.  Why should a train be so special that it needs multiple humans to operate?

 

Would you be happy to be the one person responsible for that train and all the passengers now we are aware that the CPS like to prosecute staff (Guard ZEE) for passengers blatant stupidity?

 

So are you saying no one should become a guard?

 

At some point, whether it be a guard, a driver, or a company that creates an entirely automated train, "someone" is responsible if there becomes a questionable incident, and DOO has nothing to do with what may happen.

 

If anything, given the general unreliability of human eyewitnesses, the move to onboard cameras with data being recorded should be safer (from a threat of legal repercussions) for the staff member than what has traditionally been the case, on the assumption that the staff member is doing their job properly.

[Southernman46]

Can I make the point that on an certain automatic railway - it is in fact the person at the front end that has ben dispensed with and the only person on the train is in actuality "the Guard" - operates doors and protects the train and its occupants, etc ............. GOO maybe ??