In message . com,
" writes

I certainly did not mean to criticise the driver per se - at least he
was giving some information, which is precisely what, in my experience,
90% do not.

But as several hundred of us were crammed together in the stifling heat
for 7 or 8 minutes without movement, can you imagine the sighs of
contemptuous derision that met the news that the train ahead of us was
waiting for a driver?! It beggars belief that in the morning rush hour
a situation can arise where a train is effectively left abandoned at a
station, thus holding up the entire line, either because the outgoing
driver has left the train or because the incoming driver is not there -
FOR WHATEVER REASON? It's all very well to talk of meal reliefs and
the like, but in a properly managed railway the driver should be
waiting there to take over the train - even if it means he has to be
standing there for 10 minutes in case the train is early. Surely it is
within capabilities to have this arranged so that when, for example,
the train leaves West Brompton, the new driver is told to be on the
platform?

You're quite right - in principle. That is what happens when everything
is running fine. Once there are problems with the service, then drivers
get off late for their meal relief from their first half of duty and are
also often in the wrong places. They are still entitled to their unpaid
half hour break as it's their time, so they take it. There are also
restrictions on the number of hours we can drive without a break (4.25
hours) and once we reach that we must have a break. This then means
that they are not in place for their second half. Normal procedure in
these cases would be to get a spare driver to take over until such time
that the original driver is available. Of course, in the circumstances
you describe, they had probably run out of spares too. Of course, not
having a driver to take over doesn't stop the trains coming.

Of course, it's quite reasonable to assume that if a train is being
reformed, then the 'new' train has a driver available for it and I would
have thought that was a consideration in doing so. I can't comment on
why it would happen other than we get this sort of thing regularly on
the Picc too. I could suggest bad management, but I'm sure SD will put
me right on that score

I'm not saying any of this is right or making excuses, just trying to
give an explanation as to what may have been going on in the background.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

Steve Fitzgerald wrote:
In message . com,
" writes

I certainly did not mean to criticise the driver per se - at least he
was giving some information, which is precisely what, in my experience,
90% do not.

But as several hundred of us were crammed together in the stifling heat
for 7 or 8 minutes without movement, can you imagine the sighs of
contemptuous derision that met the news that the train ahead of us was
waiting for a driver?! It beggars belief that in the morning rush hour
a situation can arise where a train is effectively left abandoned at a
station, thus holding up the entire line, either because the outgoing
driver has left the train or because the incoming driver is not there -
FOR WHATEVER REASON? It's all very well to talk of meal reliefs and
the like, but in a properly managed railway the driver should be
waiting there to take over the train - even if it means he has to be
standing there for 10 minutes in case the train is early. Surely it is
within capabilities to have this arranged so that when, for example,
the train leaves West Brompton, the new driver is told to be on the
platform?

You're quite right - in principle. That is what happens when everything
is running fine. Once there are problems with the service, then drivers
get off late for their meal relief from their first half of duty and are
also often in the wrong places. They are still entitled to their unpaid
half hour break as it's their time, so they take it. There are also
restrictions on the number of hours we can drive without a break (4.25
hours) and once we reach that we must have a break. This then means
that they are not in place for their second half. Normal procedure in
these cases would be to get a spare driver to take over until such time
that the original driver is available. Of course, in the circumstances
you describe, they had probably run out of spares too. Of course, not
having a driver to take over doesn't stop the trains coming.

Of course, it's quite reasonable to assume that if a train is being
reformed, then the 'new' train has a driver available for it and I would
have thought that was a consideration in doing so. I can't comment on
why it would happen other than we get this sort of thing regularly on
the Picc too. I could suggest bad management, but I'm sure SD will put
me right on that score

I'm not saying any of this is right or making excuses, just trying to
give an explanation as to what may have been going on in the background.
--
Steve Fitzgerald has now left the building.
You will find him in London's Docklands, E16, UK
(please use the reply to address for email)

Thanks, Steve, for the information. I realise that we live in a far
from ideal world!

Can you believe that, until a couple of years ago, when someone on this
forum directed me to a an accurate line diagram, I believed that the
almost inevitable stop of Eastbound District Line trains approaching
Earl's Court from West Brompton was because I assumed that the
Westbound Ealing/Richmond line trains had to cross the path, West of
Earl's Court! I still find it hard to imagine how the cut-under is
fitted into such a short space.

Marc.