On 24/11/2019 10:50, wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 22:30:15 +0000
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:34:10 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too
often
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the
lot
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number

of
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend
and

they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.


Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over

It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves

having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks
for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.
The other 17 months being required is no doubt down to antiquated union rules
that haven't changed since the victorian era.

No, it took you 4 days to learn how to steer a bus. It takes much
longer than that to learn how to drive any road vehicle due to the
different circumstances that can be experienced. Some people never
learn.

The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car test
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

My cousin did his HGV test using all that was available... A tank
transported loaded with a tank.

Apparently he mounted the kerb several times and bent a few bollards but
still passed.

wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
NY wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:34:10 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that
involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around
parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more
weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month
tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?


But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.



So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 22:30:15 +0000
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:34:10 +0000 (UTC), wrote:

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC)
Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too
often
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the
lot
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number

of
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend
and

they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.


Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over

It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves

having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks
for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.
The other 17 months being required is no doubt down to antiquated union rules
that haven't changed since the victorian era.

No, it took you 4 days to learn how to steer a bus. It takes much
longer than that to learn how to drive any road vehicle due to the
different circumstances that can be experienced. Some people never
learn.

The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car test
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.



And yet with the same breath you dismiss train driving as 'pulling levers'.
Surely you realise that the train driving assessment is just as strict, if
not more so?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:13:31 -0000
"NY" wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:34:10 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that
involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around
parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more
weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month
tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?

Articulated HGV so I had a bit of a prior advantage.

Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel felt
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position for
steering the van.

Driving a lorry is like driving a large car for me. Driving a bus is wierd
however because you're about a meter in front of the steering wheels so you
have to leave turning movements later than feels normal.


Unless you're driving a half-cab or an Optare Solo

Bin lorries and some other specialist vehicles share the 'cab well forward'
position of a bus.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
NY wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:34:10 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that
involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around
parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more
weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month
tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?


But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.



So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?



Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.


GH

On 24/11/2019 09:26, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 24/11/2019 08:39, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 23/11/2019 22:41, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 22/11/2019 21:58, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:

Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?


The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.

† Quote:
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.

Â…

That's a quote from what?


I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80 c15

[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]



Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.


I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.


Why McDonnell? He is going to be the one who removes Corbyn from the
leadership, regardless of which way the election goes.


He's already said they'd both go if they lose. He wants a young,
inexperienced front-woman to be the new leader, with him pulling the
strings. He prefers to operate in the shadows.

For example, this is what Kate Hoey says of him:

The Shadow Chancellor, she says, “has become quite a nasty, devious figure
behind the scenes�; McDonnell is the one pulling the strings now. “After a
while, Jeremy realised that he was losing and he just seems to have given
in.�


He was always the one pulling the strings. He might not remain shadow
chancellor, though I wouldn't bet on it. He can always reluctantly agree
to remain in post just to oversea the leadership changes and then allow
the new leader to keep him on.


Could be, but I think he might prefer not to have a formal shadow cabinet
role.

It has financial advantages and better access to policy documents.


If the polls are even half-right, Labour is set for another miserably long
stint in opposition, and may only have around 200 seats in the Commons, so
being in the Shadow Cabinet won't count for much.

It could be that the long-forecast split between the centre-left moderates
and Momentum finally happens after the meltdown. McDonnell might be more
interested in fighting that war with the hated Blairites than with coming
up with economic policies that no-one cares about.

True but he would want to do that from a position of at least notional
power in the party.


Corbyn is 70, and looks much older. He looks like he belongs in a
retirement home, not No 10. Mcdonnell is 68, and probably won't be fighting
the next election.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/11/election-2019-a-guide-to-what-the-polls-mean-and-what-they-dont



Depends when it is, if there is a hung parliament the next election
might not be that far away.

--
Graeme Wall
This account not read.

Graeme Wall wrote:
On 24/11/2019 09:26, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 24/11/2019 08:39, Recliner wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
On 23/11/2019 22:41, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 22/11/2019 21:58, Recliner wrote:
Roland Perry wrote:

Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?


The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.

† Quote:
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.

Â…

That's a quote from what?


I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.


https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80 c15

[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]



Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.


I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.


Why McDonnell? He is going to be the one who removes Corbyn from the
leadership, regardless of which way the election goes.


He's already said they'd both go if they lose. He wants a young,
inexperienced front-woman to be the new leader, with him pulling the
strings. He prefers to operate in the shadows.

For example, this is what Kate Hoey says of him:

The Shadow Chancellor, she says, “has become quite a nasty, devious figure
behind the scenes�; McDonnell is the one pulling the strings now. “After a
while, Jeremy realised that he was losing and he just seems to have given
in.�


He was always the one pulling the strings. He might not remain shadow
chancellor, though I wouldn't bet on it. He can always reluctantly agree
to remain in post just to oversea the leadership changes and then allow
the new leader to keep him on.


Could be, but I think he might prefer not to have a formal shadow cabinet
role.

It has financial advantages and better access to policy documents.


If the polls are even half-right, Labour is set for another miserably long
stint in opposition, and may only have around 200 seats in the Commons, so
being in the Shadow Cabinet won't count for much.

It could be that the long-forecast split between the centre-left moderates
and Momentum finally happens after the meltdown. McDonnell might be more
interested in fighting that war with the hated Blairites than with coming
up with economic policies that no-one cares about.

True but he would want to do that from a position of at least notional
power in the party.


Corbyn is 70, and looks much older. He looks like he belongs in a
retirement home, not No 10. Mcdonnell is 68, and probably won't be fighting
the next election.

https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/11/election-2019-a-guide-to-what-the-polls-mean-and-what-they-dont



Depends when it is, if there is a hung parliament the next election
might not be that far away.


Sure, but the polls are strongly suggesting a clear Tory majority. The lead
has stayed consistently at 10%+, unlike last time. Labour could get an even
worse result than Foot achieved in 1983 (not surprising, as Corbyn is a
much worse leader than Michael Foot). That would be bound to unleash the
pending civil war in Labour.

On 24 Nov 2019 13:51:40 GMT, Marland
wrote:

Anna Noyd-Dryver wrote:
wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
NY wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:34:10 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that
involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around
parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more
weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month
tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?


But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.



So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?



Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.

Not in London then where you get ****s ringing the bell 0.1sec after
the bus has left the previous stop.

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:10 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver
wrote:

wrote:
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:13:31 -0000
"NY" wrote:
"Charles Ellson" wrote in message
...
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:34:10 +0000 (UTC), wrote:
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that
involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around
parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more
weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month
tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?

Articulated HGV so I had a bit of a prior advantage.

Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel felt
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position for
steering the van.

Driving a lorry is like driving a large car for me. Driving a bus is wierd
however because you're about a meter in front of the steering wheels so you
have to leave turning movements later than feels normal.


Unless you're driving a half-cab or an Optare Solo

Bin lorries and some other specialist vehicles share the 'cab well forward'
position of a bus.

Often built by the same company - Dennis. Another of their design
oddities is cabs very close to the ground, usually on airport vehicles
but also see on some refuse vehicles.

Charles Ellson wrote:
On 24 Nov 2019 13:51:40 GMT, Marland
wrote:


Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.

Not in London then where you get ****s ringing the bell 0.1sec after
the bus has left the previous stop.


Is there some approved timescale for omnibus campanology of which I'm
somehow unaware?


Anna Noyd-Dryver