View Single Post
  #27   Report Post  
Old November 4th 07, 10:31 PM posted to uk.transport.london
Steve Dulieu Steve Dulieu is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2003
Posts: 232
Default DLR train makes a bit for freedom


"MIG" wrote in message
ps.com...
On Nov 4, 5:15 pm, Steve Fitzgerald ] wrote:
In message ,
writes

Is that actually possible, even if he did hang his bag on the CTBC?


Used to be before they redesigned the console (a cause of the incident
in question)

Based on what I know about the controllers on 73Ts, I would think that
airbrakes would release after the driver kicked the door shut. But I did
not
think that the motors would engage and the train would take off because
the
driver would have to move the controller at least two positions to get
to
shunt.


The TBC was left in a motoring position - so it motored!

How would the train have stopped at Holloway Road anyway, by being
tripped
at the starter?


Caught up to the train in front and was tripped on the station starter.



So ... he was about to start off and then realised that he couldn't
because a door hadn't shut properly, so the controller was in the "go"
position (I don't know any details of driving).

Would resetting the controller before getting out actually be more
effort than finding something to hang on it? That's the bit I don't
understand.

As far as is known, the driver habitually hung his bag from the CTBC to
avoid having to hold it down himself, the bag had most likely been hanging
on the CTBC since he had got on the train. When he let go of the CTBC this
also had the effect of pulling the CTBC into a motoring position meaning
that he only needed to touch it when he needed to brake coming into a
station. It was this blatant disregard for safety that got him sacked and
prosecuted. He left the cab to give a door on the leading car some
encouragement thinking that with the cab door open the cab door interlock
would prevent the train from moving. There are two versions of the story
from this point, V1 says that the cab door interlock was defective and
although the cut out switch was in the cut in position, when the passenger
door interlock made, the train motored off without him. V2 says that he
simply didn't notice that someone had operated the cab door cut out switch
to the cut out position with the same result once the passenger door
interlock made.

--
Cheers, Steve.
Change jealous to sad to reply.