On 03/12/2023 20:25, Matthew Geier wrote:
> On 4/12/23 03:40, Recliner wrote:
> In principle, driverless trains are much simpler to implement than
>> driverless road vehicles, and quite a few metro lines are already
>> driverless. So, politicians like BoJo don't want to pay the existing
>> drivers less; they want to eliminate most of those jobs altogether.
>> Indeed,
>> that day will probably come, sooner or later, but they'd like to
>> accelerate
>> the process.
>>
>
> And the higher the wages of the drivers, the faster this will happen as
> the business case looks better.
> Drivers are getting more expensive, the technology to replace them is
> getting cheaper.
>
> It's just a matter of time when the two graphs cross over.
>
> My local rail unions waged a successful campaign against driver-only
> operation over the last couple of years - but I think their win has only
> bought forward the point where the cost of automation crosses the cost
> of crew. If they had accepted DOO, the justification for replacing one
> skilled and trained crew instead of two skilled and trained crew could
> have delayed the automation push by years. Now the business case for
> automation has the cost of 2 crew to offset the cost not one.
> I guess that's has bought forward the cost justifications for automation
> 10-15 years.
> (We already have a 'digital railway' program in flight, using ETCS to do
> level 2 ATP - and that will provide a baseline for more automation)
>
> Id day they have one the battle but lost the war.

The problem occurs when you need a person on the spot to do something
other than drive, e.g. deal with an emergency. I think the best they
will do (from a financial rather than staff needs angle) is to replace
the driver by a lower-skilled worker as done on the DLR.

On Sun, 3 Dec 2023 21:19:54 +0000, Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:

>On 03/12/2023 20:25, Matthew Geier wrote:
>> On 4/12/23 03:40, Recliner wrote:
>> In principle, driverless trains are much simpler to implement than
>>> driverless road vehicles, and quite a few metro lines are already
>>> driverless. So, politicians like BoJo don't want to pay the existing
>>> drivers less; they want to eliminate most of those jobs altogether.
>>> Indeed,
>>> that day will probably come, sooner or later, but they'd like to
>>> accelerate
>>> the process.
>>>
>>
>> And the higher the wages of the drivers, the faster this will happen as
>> the business case looks better.
>> Drivers are getting more expensive, the technology to replace them is
>> getting cheaper.
>>
>> It's just a matter of time when the two graphs cross over.
>>
>> My local rail unions waged a successful campaign against driver-only
>> operation over the last couple of years - but I think their win has only
>> bought forward the point where the cost of automation crosses the cost
>> of crew. If they had accepted DOO, the justification for replacing one
>> skilled and trained crew instead of two skilled and trained crew could
>> have delayed the automation push by years. Now the business case for
>> automation has the cost of 2 crew to offset the cost not one.
>> I guess that's has bought forward the cost justifications for automation
>> 10-15 years.
>> (We already have a 'digital railway' program in flight, using ETCS to do
>> level 2 ATP - and that will provide a baseline for more automation)
>>
>> Id day they have one the battle but lost the war.
>
>The problem occurs when you need a person on the spot to do something
>other than drive, e.g. deal with an emergency. I think the best they
>will do (from a financial rather than staff needs angle) is to replace
>the driver by a lower-skilled worker as done on the DLR.

That's effectively what SN has done: guards have been replaced by OBSs. All but one of the existing guards accepted a
transfer to the new roles, and retained their pay and conditions, but new recruits may be offered less. Trains that had
guards still have OBSs, but in the future, if the OBS doesn't turn up, the train may still be able to run.

In message <ukiakn$2tpd9$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:33:27 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:

>>> Virtually all trains outside of the former NSE area, and Glasgow Suburban
>>> services, can't run without a guard (by various job titles but 'guard' is
>>> the Rule Book definition) on board, I think?
>>>
>>> Are there any other DOO areas?
>> Well, the trains you mention above are probably only a third of
>>those running.

>> However, several other areas show up in searches of DOO disputes,
>>such as Northern, Merseyrail and West Midlands Trains.
>
>All of the mentioned "TOCs" retain "guards".

On some services, and at the present rate, not for much longer.
--
Roland Perry

In message <uki7mk$2tbe9$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:43:16 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>On 03/12/2023 12:12, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <ukhp78$2r9di$1@dont-email.me>, at 11:36:08 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>> Virtually all trains outside of the former NSE area, and Glasgow
>>>>>Suburban
>>>>> services, can't run without a guard (by various job titles but
>>>>>'guard' is
>>>>> the Rule Book definition) on board, I think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there any other DOO areas?
>>>>
>>>> Well, the trains you mention above are probably only a third of those
>>>> running.
>>>>
>>>> However, several other areas show up in searches of DOO disputes, such
>>>> as Northern, Merseyrail and West Midlands Trains.
>>>>
>>>> But why do you need a guard *and* platform dispatch staff?
>>>
>>> Lots of stations have trains with guards and platform dispatch staff -
>>> especially the busy ones.

>> But is it an unnecessary luxury?
>
>No.

Please show your working.
--
Roland Perry

In message <RSZaN.12603$iIT1.9386@fx15.ams1>, at 11:44:49 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <SvZaN.12602$iIT1.4864@fx15.ams1>, at 11:20:18 on Sun, 3 Dec
>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ukg999$2gvt7$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:58:01 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 19:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>> In message <ukfmmi$2e6sa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:40:50 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dec 2023,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just settled  their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sarcastic  comment to the effect I'd not noticed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in the  Spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in  the spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you wish to provide a bumptious commentary on the rail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> industry without looking very silly, you do need to make some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has  confirmed this afternoon
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that his opinion is nothing new has just been  agreed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one this week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as very few of them are RMT members.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyway).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've seen increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s
>>>>>>>>>>>> point - the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and
>>>>>>>>>>>> dispatch staff amongst many others), they aren’t employed just
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no
>>>>>>>>>>>dispatch staff
>>>>>>>>>>> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
>>>>>>>>>>> manned is a poison pill for all the others.
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
>>>>>>>>>> intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines
>>>>>>>>>> that can be operated solely by a driver.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> I don't think I saw any platform dispatchers at Stansted Airport.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> There'll be risk assessments for every relevant train type (and length)
>>>>>>>> on every platform on every railway station. For instance IETs must
>>>>>>>> have a dispatcher at Carmarthen and some were cancelled recently
>>>>>>>> because none were available.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I'm sure there will be such risk assessments, but I'm challenging the
>>>>>>> sweeping statement made about specifically terminus stations.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Kings Lynn for example is served by 1tph OPO service, and I wouldn't
>>>>>>> expect them to employ a dispatcher. Similarly I think the terminus
>>>>>>> platforms at Cambrridge (for the trains to Norwich) are self-dispatched
>>>>>>> by the driver/guard, even if some of the through platforms [mainly
>>>>>>> trains to/from London] do have dispatchers.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that
>>>>>> can be operated only by the driver. There’s more to RMT TOC jobs
>>>>>> than cleaning the toilets, which appeared to be Roland’s original
>>>>>> position. Larger stations probably require staff to supervise
>>>>>> evacuations/other emergencies. I imagine this to be the case at
>>>>>>Stansted.
>>>>>
>>>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all.
>>>>>
>>>>> Last time I was at Littleport I met a railway employee who'd driven all
>>>>> the way from Downham Market to assist one wheelchair passenger onto a
>>>>> London-bound train. In the grand scheme of things, it would have saved
>>>>> them a fortune to pay for a taxi to Ely, where they do normally have
>>>>> station staff.
>>>>
>>>> I don’t, but you can’t practically run a railway service if the more
>>>> important/larger stations on the route need to be staffed.
>>>
>>> Don't RMT members also maintain, prepare and check the trains before they
>>> can enter service? Don't they sell and check tickets, and supervise
>>> barrier lines? Don't they provide passenger assistance? Don't they unlock
>>> the doors and turn on the station lights?
>>
>> Barriers can be locked open, ticket offices can be unstaffed (even if
>> not permanently, plenty are only open for a short period of the day) and
>> it only takes one person to unlock the concourse doors and switch the
>> lights on.
>
>Do the trains prepare themselves?

In message <ukil5f$30356$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:33:03 on Sun, 3 Dec
2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that can be
>>> operated only by the driver. …
>>
>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all…
>
>Lines != stations. I don’t think I need to point out the implications.

The implication is you don't seem to recognise how many stations are one
just one line.
--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <RSZaN.12603$iIT1.9386@fx15.ams1>, at 11:44:49 on Sun, 3 Dec
> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <SvZaN.12602$iIT1.4864@fx15.ams1>, at 11:20:18 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <ukg999$2gvt7$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:58:01 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 19:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukfmmi$2e6sa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:40:50 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dec 2023,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just settled  their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sarcastic  comment to the effect I'd not noticed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in the  Spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in  the spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you wish to provide a bumptious commentary on the rail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> industry without looking very silly, you do need to make some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has  confirmed this afternoon
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that his opinion is nothing new has just been  agreed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one this week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as very few of them are RMT members.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyway).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've seen increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>> point - the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> dispatch staff amongst many others), they aren’t employed just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no
>>>>>>>>>>>> dispatch staff
>>>>>>>>>>>> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
>>>>>>>>>>>> manned is a poison pill for all the others.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
>>>>>>>>>>> intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines
>>>>>>>>>>> that can be operated solely by a driver.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think I saw any platform dispatchers at Stansted Airport.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There'll be risk assessments for every relevant train type (and length)
>>>>>>>>> on every platform on every railway station. For instance IETs must
>>>>>>>>> have a dispatcher at Carmarthen and some were cancelled recently
>>>>>>>>> because none were available.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm sure there will be such risk assessments, but I'm challenging the
>>>>>>>> sweeping statement made about specifically terminus stations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kings Lynn for example is served by 1tph OPO service, and I wouldn't
>>>>>>>> expect them to employ a dispatcher. Similarly I think the terminus
>>>>>>>> platforms at Cambrridge (for the trains to Norwich) are self-dispatched
>>>>>>>> by the driver/guard, even if some of the through platforms [mainly
>>>>>>>> trains to/from London] do have dispatchers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that
>>>>>>> can be operated only by the driver. There’s more to RMT TOC jobs
>>>>>>> than cleaning the toilets, which appeared to be Roland’s original
>>>>>>> position. Larger stations probably require staff to supervise
>>>>>>> evacuations/other emergencies. I imagine this to be the case at
>>>>>>> Stansted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Last time I was at Littleport I met a railway employee who'd driven all
>>>>>> the way from Downham Market to assist one wheelchair passenger onto a
>>>>>> London-bound train. In the grand scheme of things, it would have saved
>>>>>> them a fortune to pay for a taxi to Ely, where they do normally have
>>>>>> station staff.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don’t, but you can’t practically run a railway service if the more
>>>>> important/larger stations on the route need to be staffed.
>>>>
>>>> Don't RMT members also maintain, prepare and check the trains before they
>>>> can enter service? Don't they sell and check tickets, and supervise
>>>> barrier lines? Don't they provide passenger assistance? Don't they unlock
>>>> the doors and turn on the station lights?
>>>
>>> Barriers can be locked open, ticket offices can be unstaffed (even if
>>> not permanently, plenty are only open for a short period of the day) and
>>> it only takes one person to unlock the concourse doors and switch the
>>> lights on.
>>
>> Do the trains prepare themselves?
>
> Define what you mean by "prepare". If for example you mean cleaning the
> toilets and litter picking, there's plenty of evidence that on many
> services none of that is done overnight.

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <ukil5f$30356$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:33:03 on Sun, 3 Dec
> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that can be
>>>> operated only by the driver. …
>>>
>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all…
>>
>> Lines != stations. I don’t think I need to point out the implications.
>
> The implication is you don't seem to recognise how many stations are one
> just one line.

“… on just one line…”? Let me be boringly explicit: just because some
stations don’t need staff to handle trains that doesn’t mean the whole line
can be operated without non-driving staff. You and Tweed were talking
about different things.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <RSZaN.12603$iIT1.9386@fx15.ams1>, at 11:44:49 on Sun, 3 Dec
> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <SvZaN.12602$iIT1.4864@fx15.ams1>, at 11:20:18 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <ukg999$2gvt7$2@dont-email.me>, at 21:58:01 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2023, Coffee <martin.coffee@round-midnight.org.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 19:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukfmmi$2e6sa$1@dont-email.me>, at 16:40:50 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukfi7h$2dgni$1@dont-email.me>, at 15:24:33 on Sat, 2 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>> Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On 02/12/2023 15:11, Tweed wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <3ooaN.13$XUo2.1@fx14.ams1>, at 17:06:07 on Fri, 1
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Dec 2023,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <ukcqk6$1t8ro$1@dont-email.me>, at 14:29:26 on
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> In message <IPhaN.87461$OAC8.26087@fx09.ams1>, at
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fri, 1 Dec
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Despite recent rumours to the contrary here, the RMT has
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> just settled  their ongoing dispute.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There were no such rumours here.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Don't be ridiculous, in the last couple of weeks you
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> sarcastic  comment to the effect I'd not noticed the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in the  Spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Nice try, but no cigar!
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It was pointed out that the RMT dispute with Network Rail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> was settled in  the spring.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That "small print" was omitted.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> No it wasn't. You just didn't understand the difference. If
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you wish to provide a bumptious commentary on the rail
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> industry without looking very silly, you do need to make some
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yet more lies.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Indeed our laid-back friend has  confirmed this afternoon
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> that his opinion is nothing new has just been  agreed.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> There has been an ongoing (until yesterday) RMT dispute with
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> most of the TOCs.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, most of us understand that. There's just one refusenik.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Yes, you.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You seem not to know the difference between the RDG and NR.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> It's preposterous to suggest any people here don't know that
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The RMT had different disputes with both and separate series
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> strikes. The NR dispute was settled months ago, and the RDG
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> one this week. And, no, that won't stop the drivers' strikes
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> as very few of them are RMT members.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> What surprises me is how much disruption the
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> RMT-who-work-for-TOCs
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> caused, when I agree so few are train drivers (outside TfL
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> anyway).
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't need to cancel a train just because an RMT person who
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> might have cleaned the toilet on board is on strike. And yes,
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I've seen increasing numbers of trains with toilets locked out
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Lots of services depend on a guard and platform dispatch staff.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> And they all depend on signal staff.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>> But the signal staff settled long ago. But back to Roland’s
>>>>>>>>>>>>> point - the RMT-who-work-for-TOCs are needed (see guards and
>>>>>>>>>>>>> dispatch staff amongst many others), they aren’t employed just
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>> The majority of stations round here are unmanned, so no
>>>>>>>>>>>> dispatch staff
>>>>>>>>>>>> to go on strike. What I don't know is if the one station which *is*
>>>>>>>>>>>> manned is a poison pill for all the others.
>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>> Yes but the terminus station is likely to need staff as will a few
>>>>>>>>>>> intermediate larger stations. There aren’t many railway lines
>>>>>>>>>>> that can be operated solely by a driver.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> I don't think I saw any platform dispatchers at Stansted Airport.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> There'll be risk assessments for every relevant train type (and length)
>>>>>>>>> on every platform on every railway station. For instance IETs must
>>>>>>>>> have a dispatcher at Carmarthen and some were cancelled recently
>>>>>>>>> because none were available.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> I'm sure there will be such risk assessments, but I'm challenging the
>>>>>>>> sweeping statement made about specifically terminus stations.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Kings Lynn for example is served by 1tph OPO service, and I wouldn't
>>>>>>>> expect them to employ a dispatcher. Similarly I think the terminus
>>>>>>>> platforms at Cambrridge (for the trains to Norwich) are self-dispatched
>>>>>>>> by the driver/guard, even if some of the through platforms [mainly
>>>>>>>> trains to/from London] do have dispatchers.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that
>>>>>>> can be operated only by the driver. There’s more to RMT TOC jobs
>>>>>>> than cleaning the toilets, which appeared to be Roland’s original
>>>>>>> position. Larger stations probably require staff to supervise
>>>>>>> evacuations/other emergencies. I imagine this to be the case at
>>>>>>> Stansted.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Last time I was at Littleport I met a railway employee who'd driven all
>>>>>> the way from Downham Market to assist one wheelchair passenger onto a
>>>>>> London-bound train. In the grand scheme of things, it would have saved
>>>>>> them a fortune to pay for a taxi to Ely, where they do normally have
>>>>>> station staff.
>>>>>
>>>>> I don’t, but you can’t practically run a railway service if the more
>>>>> important/larger stations on the route need to be staffed.
>>>>
>>>> Don't RMT members also maintain, prepare and check the trains before they
>>>> can enter service? Don't they sell and check tickets, and supervise
>>>> barrier lines? Don't they provide passenger assistance? Don't they unlock
>>>> the doors and turn on the station lights?
>>>
>>> Barriers can be locked open, ticket offices can be unstaffed (even if
>>> not permanently, plenty are only open for a short period of the day) and
>>> it only takes one person to unlock the concourse doors and switch the
>>> lights on.
>>
>> Do the trains prepare themselves?
>
> Define what you mean by "prepare". If for example you mean cleaning the
> toilets and litter picking, there's plenty of evidence that on many
> services none of that is done overnight.

On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 10:38:15 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <ukiakn$2tpd9$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:33:27 on Sun, 3 Dec
>2023, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>> Virtually all trains outside of the former NSE area, and Glasgow Suburban
>>>> services, can't run without a guard (by various job titles but 'guard' is
>>>> the Rule Book definition) on board, I think?
>>>>
>>>> Are there any other DOO areas?
>>> Well, the trains you mention above are probably only a third of
>>>those running.
>
>>> However, several other areas show up in searches of DOO disputes,
>>>such as Northern, Merseyrail and West Midlands Trains.
>>
>>All of the mentioned "TOCs" retain "guards".
>
>On some services, and at the present rate, not for much longer.

When did a UK service last go DOO?

In message <ukkb2f$3cqp8$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:53:03 on Mon, 4 Dec
2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:

>>> Do the trains prepare themselves?
>>
>> Define what you mean by "prepare". If for example you mean cleaning the
>> toilets and litter picking, there's plenty of evidence that on many
>> services none of that is done overnight.
>
>But if it’s done sometime then there are clearly staff who do it, and if
>they didn’t we’d be knee deep in rubbish.

I've been on early morning GA trains where the tables were covered in
beer cans and discarded food packaging. Someone can clear that up
afterwards, even if the long suffering public who want to use that same
table for their laptop.
--
Roland Perry

In message <2xibN.4829$XUo2.3759@fx14.ams1>, at 11:15:10 on Mon, 4 Dec
2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:

>>> Do the trains prepare themselves?
>>
>> Define what you mean by "prepare". If for example you mean cleaning the
>> toilets and litter picking, there's plenty of evidence that on many
>> services none of that is done overnight.
>
>The toilets in modern trains need more than just cleaning.

Which often doesn't happen because I suspect many of them which go
out-of-action are because of unemptied tanks.

The last two trains I wanted to use the toilet, had run out of paper.
Maybe grab some of the litter elsewhere on the train and wipe one's bum
with that instead?

>And what about the overnight servicing and checking of the trains? '

You need to tell us what servicing and checking that involves.
--
Roland Perry

In message <ukkbd8$3cs9e$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:58:48 on Mon, 4 Dec
2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ukil5f$30356$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:33:03 on Sun, 3 Dec
>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that can be
>>>>> operated only by the driver. …
>>>>
>>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all…
>>>
>>> Lines != stations. I don’t think I need to point out the implications.
>>
>> The implication is you don't seem to recognise how many stations are one
>> just one line.
>
>“… on just one line…”? Let me be boringly explicit: just because some
>stations don’t need staff to handle trains that doesn’t mean the whole line
>can be operated without non-driving staff.

But the whole transit of a specific train, on one line, might be able
to.

>You and Tweed were talking about different things.

Wouldn't be the first time the group should be renamed
uk.railway.cross-purposes
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:09:16 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <2xibN.4829$XUo2.3759@fx14.ams1>, at 11:15:10 on Mon, 4 Dec
>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>
>>>> Do the trains prepare themselves?
>>>
>>> Define what you mean by "prepare". If for example you mean cleaning the
>>> toilets and litter picking, there's plenty of evidence that on many
>>> services none of that is done overnight.
>>
>>The toilets in modern trains need more than just cleaning.
>
>Which often doesn't happen because I suspect many of them which go
>out-of-action are because of unemptied tanks.

Or water not topped up.

In either case, if the depot staff are on strike, trains are less likely to be available for service.

>
>The last two trains I wanted to use the toilet, had run out of paper.
>Maybe grab some of the litter elsewhere on the train and wipe one's bum
>with that instead?
>
>>And what about the overnight servicing and checking of the trains? '
>
>You need to tell us what servicing and checking that involves.

<https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/files/Publications/ACOP/GuidanceNotes/RDG-OPS-GN-007DepotGoodPractice.pdf>

In message <53hrmi9iv6gh9qe9dlfebal0acb2cs6tib@4ax.com>, at 12:24:31 on
Mon, 4 Dec 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 12:09:16 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <2xibN.4829$XUo2.3759@fx14.ams1>, at 11:15:10 on Mon, 4 Dec
>>2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>> Do the trains prepare themselves?
>>>>
>>>> Define what you mean by "prepare". If for example you mean cleaning the
>>>> toilets and litter picking, there's plenty of evidence that on many
>>>> services none of that is done overnight.
>>>
>>>The toilets in modern trains need more than just cleaning.
>>
>>Which often doesn't happen because I suspect many of them which go
>>out-of-action are because of unemptied tanks.
>
>Or water not topped up.
>
>In either case, if the depot staff are on strike, trains are less
>likely to be available for service.

No, they simply send the trains out with non-functional toilets.

>>The last two trains I wanted to use the toilet, had run out of paper.
>>Maybe grab some of the litter elsewhere on the train and wipe one's bum
>>with that instead?
>>
>>>And what about the overnight servicing and checking of the trains? '
>>
>>You need to tell us what servicing and checking that involves.
>
><https://www.raildeliverygroup.com/files/Publications/ACOP/GuidanceNotes
>/RDG-OPS-GN-007DepotGoodPractice.pdf>

That appears to be almost entirely about the H&S of depot workers,
not the works needed to be done to trains. Many trains don't stable
overnight in formal depots, anyway.
--
Roland Perry

In message <jlfrmi5cve6ff4ko5rcf98r2706fco32kf@4ax.com>, at 11:58:12 on
Mon, 4 Dec 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 10:38:15 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>
>>In message <ukiakn$2tpd9$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:33:27 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>2023, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>>
>>>>> Virtually all trains outside of the former NSE area, and Glasgow Suburban
>>>>> services, can't run without a guard (by various job titles but 'guard' is
>>>>> the Rule Book definition) on board, I think?
>>>>>
>>>>> Are there any other DOO areas?

>>>> Well, the trains you mention above are probably only a third of
>>>>those running.
>>
>>>> However, several other areas show up in searches of DOO disputes,
>>>>such as Northern, Merseyrail and West Midlands Trains.
>>>
>>>All of the mentioned "TOCs" retain "guards".
>>
>>On some services, and at the present rate, not for much longer.
>
>When did a UK service last go DOO?

There's clearly a lot of discussion about it between TOCs and the
unions. I don't have a date for your specific enquiry, so that
relieves you of the responsibility to do enough research to quibble
about it.
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 13:06:38 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:

>In message <jlfrmi5cve6ff4ko5rcf98r2706fco32kf@4ax.com>, at 11:58:12 on
>Mon, 4 Dec 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>On Mon, 4 Dec 2023 10:38:15 +0000, Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>
>>>In message <ukiakn$2tpd9$2@dont-email.me>, at 16:33:27 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>2023, Bevan Price <bevanprice666@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>
>>>>>> Virtually all trains outside of the former NSE area, and Glasgow Suburban
>>>>>> services, can't run without a guard (by various job titles but 'guard' is
>>>>>> the Rule Book definition) on board, I think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Are there any other DOO areas?
>
>>>>> Well, the trains you mention above are probably only a third of
>>>>>those running.
>>>
>>>>> However, several other areas show up in searches of DOO disputes,
>>>>>such as Northern, Merseyrail and West Midlands Trains.
>>>>
>>>>All of the mentioned "TOCs" retain "guards".
>>>
>>>On some services, and at the present rate, not for much longer.
>>
>>When did a UK service last go DOO?
>
>There's clearly a lot of discussion about it between TOCs and the
>unions.

The TOCs (ie, DfT) want it on some (commuter-type) routes, the unions don't. The unions go on strike to block it, and
usually win.

> I don't have a date for your specific enquiry, so that
>relieves you of the responsibility to do enough research to quibble
>about it.

Why don't you just admit that you have no idea when it was?

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <ukkbd8$3cs9e$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:58:48 on Mon, 4 Dec
> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ukil5f$30356$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:33:03 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>
>>>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that can be
>>>>>> operated only by the driver. …
>>>>>
>>>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all…
>>>>
>>>> Lines != stations. I don’t think I need to point out the implications.
>>>
>>> The implication is you don't seem to recognise how many stations are one
>>> just one line.
>>
>> “… on just one line…”? Let me be boringly explicit: just because some
>> stations don’t need staff to handle trains that doesn’t mean the whole line
>> can be operated without non-driving staff.
>
> But the whole transit of a specific train, on one line, might be able
> to.

Now who’s talking about edge cases?

>> You and Tweed were talking about different things.
>
> Wouldn't be the first time the group should be renamed
> uk.railway.cross-purposes

:-)

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

In message <ukklu9$3eihf$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:33 on Mon, 4 Dec
2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ukkbd8$3cs9e$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:58:48 on Mon, 4 Dec
>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ukil5f$30356$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:33:03 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that can be
>>>>>>> operated only by the driver. …
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all…
>>>>>
>>>>> Lines != stations. I don’t think I need to point out the implications.
>>>>
>>>> The implication is you don't seem to recognise how many stations are one
>>>> just one line.
>>>
>>> “… on just one line…”? Let me be boringly explicit: just
>>>because some stations don’t need staff to handle trains that
>>>doesn’t mean the whole line can be operated without non-driving staff.
>>
>> But the whole transit of a specific train, on one line, might be able
>> to.
>
>Now who’s talking about edge cases?

Dunno, but edge cases I can think of are LNER trains that don't travel
the ECML, or GN trains that don't travel the GN line (especially since
the outer suburbans to Peterborough are now branded Thameslink apart
from two per day).

>>> You and Tweed were talking about different things.
>>
>> Wouldn't be the first time the group should be renamed
>> uk.railway.cross-purposes
>
>:-)
>
>Sam
>

--
Roland Perry

Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
> In message <ukklu9$3eihf$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:33 on Mon, 4 Dec
> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>> In message <ukkbd8$3cs9e$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:58:48 on Mon, 4 Dec
>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>> In message <ukil5f$30356$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:33:03 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines that can be
>>>>>>>> operated only by the driver. …
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all…
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lines != stations. I don’t think I need to point out the implications.
>>>>>
>>>>> The implication is you don't seem to recognise how many stations are one
>>>>> just one line.
>>>>
>>>> “… on just one line…”? Let me be boringly explicit: just
>>>> because some stations don’t need staff to handle trains that
>>>> doesn’t mean the whole line can be operated without non-driving staff.
>>>
>>> But the whole transit of a specific train, on one line, might be able
>>> to.
>>
>> Now who’s talking about edge cases?
>
> Dunno, but edge cases I can think of are LNER trains that don't travel
> the ECML, or GN trains that don't travel the GN line (especially since
> the outer suburbans to Peterborough are now branded Thameslink apart
> from two per day).

A specific train on one line travelling DOO with no other staff isn’t an
edge case?

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 03/12/2023 15:05, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <uki0if$2sa3m$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:41:35 on Sun, 3 Dec
> 2023, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>>Perhaps the train also visits other, unstaffed stations where a guard
>>is needed, and this station is served by other, DOO trains which require
>>platform dispatch staff. Or it's just a long train on a bendy platform.
>
> A veritable confluence of edge cases! The thing about DOO trains is they
> are supposed to have CCTV along the train so a bendy platform doesn't
> matter. If anything it's a dispatcher who would have difficulty seeing
> the whole length of the train at once.

Do 165s and 168s have CCTV? (I don't know.)

Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
> On 03/12/2023 15:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <uki0if$2sa3m$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:41:35 on Sun, 3 Dec
>> 2023, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>>> Perhaps the train also visits other, unstaffed stations where a guard
>>> is needed, and this station is served by other, DOO trains which require
>>> platform dispatch staff. Or it's just a long train on a bendy platform.
>>
>> A veritable confluence of edge cases! The thing about DOO trains is they
>> are supposed to have CCTV along the train so a bendy platform doesn't
>> matter. If anything it's a dispatcher who would have difficulty seeing
>> the whole length of the train at once.
>
> Do 165s and 168s have CCTV? (I don't know.)
>

No; for DOO operation they rely on platform-mounted CCTV or mirrors.

Anna Noyd-Dryver

On 05/12/2023 21:22, Roger Lynn wrote:
> On 03/12/2023 15:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <uki0if$2sa3m$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:41:35 on Sun, 3 Dec
>> 2023, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>>> Perhaps the train also visits other, unstaffed stations where a guard
>>> is needed, and this station is served by other, DOO trains which require
>>> platform dispatch staff. Or it's just a long train on a bendy platform.
>>
>> A veritable confluence of edge cases! The thing about DOO trains is they
>> are supposed to have CCTV along the train so a bendy platform doesn't
>> matter. If anything it's a dispatcher who would have difficulty seeing
>> the whole length of the train at once.
>
> Do 165s and 168s have CCTV? (I don't know.)

Not on the 165s, don't know about the 168s but I would assume not.
--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

In message <uklhih$3j1t9$1@dont-email.me>, at 21:50:10 on Mon, 4 Dec
2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>> In message <ukklu9$3eihf$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:58:33 on Mon, 4 Dec
>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>> In message <ukkbd8$3cs9e$1@dont-email.me>, at 10:58:48 on Mon, 4 Dec
>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>> In message <ukil5f$30356$1@dont-email.me>, at 19:33:03 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>>> 2023, Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> remarked:
>>>>>>> Roland Perry <roland@perry.uk> wrote:
>>>>>>>> In message <ukhcsg$2peej$1@dont-email.me>, at 08:05:36 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>>>>>>> 2023, Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> The point is that there’s very few, if any, railway lines
>>>>>>>>>can be operated only by the driver. …
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> You overestimate the number of stations manned by anyone at all…
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Lines != stations. I don’t think I need to point out the
>>>>>>>implications.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The implication is you don't seem to recognise how many stations are one
>>>>>> just one line.
>>>>>
>>>>> “… on just one line…”? Let me be boringly explicit: just
>>>>> because some stations don’t need staff to handle trains that
>>>>> doesn’t mean the whole line can be operated without non-driving staff.
>>>>
>>>> But the whole transit of a specific train, on one line, might be able
>>>> to.
>>>
>>> Now who’s talking about edge cases?
>>
>> Dunno, but edge cases I can think of are LNER trains that don't travel
>> the ECML, or GN trains that don't travel the GN line (especially since
>> the outer suburbans to Peterborough are now branded Thameslink apart
>> from two per day).
>
>A specific train on one line travelling DOO with no other staff isn’t an
>edge case?

I wouldn't expect a station to be staffed just to service one or two
trains a day like that. Most likely they'd upgrade the platform
equipment to allow DOO operation.
--
Roland Perry

Graeme Wall <rail@greywall.demon.co.uk> wrote:
> On 05/12/2023 21:22, Roger Lynn wrote:
>> On 03/12/2023 15:05, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <uki0if$2sa3m$1@dont-email.me>, at 13:41:35 on Sun, 3 Dec
>>> 2023, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:
>>>> Perhaps the train also visits other, unstaffed stations where a guard
>>>> is needed, and this station is served by other, DOO trains which require
>>>> platform dispatch staff. Or it's just a long train on a bendy platform.
>>>
>>> A veritable confluence of edge cases! The thing about DOO trains is they
>>> are supposed to have CCTV along the train so a bendy platform doesn't
>>> matter. If anything it's a dispatcher who would have difficulty seeing
>>> the whole length of the train at once.
>>
>> Do 165s and 168s have CCTV? (I don't know.)
>
> Not on the 165s, don't know about the 168s but I would assume not.

As with LU trains, which are all OPO, the monitors or mirrors are on the
platforms. Most LU stations don't have platform staff, and the trains are
longer than 16x trains.