Northern line near collision
 

In message
"John Rowland" wrote:

Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
"John Rowland"
wrote:


So many opinions, so few facts. Why don't we discuss how many angels
can dance on the head of a pin?



42

In a 9 * 6 formation?



of course.

--
Graeme Wall
This address is not read, substitute trains for rail.
Transport Miscellany at http://www.greywall.demon.co.uk/rail/index.html

Northern line near collision
 

John Rowland wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
"John Rowland"
wrote:


So many opinions, so few facts. Why don't we discuss how many
angels can dance on the head of a pin?



42

In a 9 * 6 formation?

Only if you have 13 fingers.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Northern line near collision
 

On 15 Jun, 13:56, Boltar wrote:

He should know that edgware and barnet are in the same direction
however. No matter how many excuses people make for this guy he made a
fundamental mistake which a regular commuter wouldn't have made ,
never mind a driver who should know better, and he could have caused a
major crash. Ergo he should get the boot. Though knowing what the
unions are like I expect he won't. Maybe he'll just be sent on Squash
leave or something.

B2003

One assumes you do not, or never have worked in an industry where you
can make an error that affects other people. Either that or are you
one of the lucky ones in life never to have made a mistake and needed
support ?

There was some debate at the start of this thread as to whether or not
the RAIB should be involved. For the sake of all those on the train,
and those involved this can only be a good thing IMO. All staff
involved will be interviewed (although by law i believe, some may
decline the RAIBs questions ?). Any recorded conversations will
normally also be revealed.

Perhaps, it may be possible, to use your tone, that somebody else
might "get the boot" for giving the driver a wrong instruction /
order. In which case the drivers union fees might actaully have come
in useful and the unions will arrange for some "squash leave" to
compensate him for being put in that position.

Perhaps he really did make a monumental mistake, either way it can
only be a good thing that the RAIB are involved so that all of the
speculation of this thread can be nicely put to rest in a PDF file in
a few months time.

Perhaps you can have the last laugh, as this appears to be your
stance, perhaps something else will be revealed.

Richard

Northern line near collision
 

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 10:19:02 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

John Rowland wrote:
Graeme Wall wrote:
In message
"John Rowland"
wrote:


So many opinions, so few facts. Why don't we discuss how many
angels can dance on the head of a pin?



42

In a 9 * 6 formation?

Only if you have 13 fingers.

Eleven, and two thumbs. :)

Northern line near collision
 

Northern line near collision
 

On 16 Jun, 12:08, wrote:
One assumes you do not, or never have worked in an industry where you
can make an error that affects other people. Either that or are you
one of the lucky ones in life never to have made a mistake and needed
support ?

Everyone makes mistakes , but in some jobs in certain situations you
just don't. Perhaps thats unfair but thats just tough. If an airline
pilot took off in the wrong direction into the path of an oncoming
plane (and somehow survived) he be kicked out of his job so fast he'd
probably be flying without the aid of an aircraft. Same for plenty of
other professions. When you have peoples lives in your hands you DO
NOT make these sort of mistakes and if you do you can kiss your job -
and possible your arse - goodbye.

Perhaps, it may be possible, to use your tone, that somebody else
might "get the boot" for giving the driver a wrong instruction /
order. In which case the drivers union fees might actaully have come
in useful and the unions will arrange for some "squash leave" to
compensate him for being put in that position.

Oh give it a rest. If I drove the wrong way down a one way street that
I'm supposed to know well because I've trained on it, it would be my
responsibility if I almost caused an accident whether someone told me
to do it or not. Besides which , we're constantly told how these
drivers are "professionals". Well professionals don't make fundamental
mistakes like this and if they do perhaps they should just be replaced
by trained monkeys for a lot less money (but possibly more bananas).

B2003

Northern line near collision
 

On Sat, 16 Jun 2007 13:13:55 -0700, Boltar
wrote:

Everyone makes mistakes , but in some jobs in certain situations you
just don't. Perhaps thats unfair but thats just tough. If an airline
pilot took off in the wrong direction into the path of an oncoming
plane (and somehow survived) he be kicked out of his job so fast he'd
probably be flying without the aid of an aircraft. Same for plenty of
other professions. When you have peoples lives in your hands you DO
NOT make these sort of mistakes and if you do you can kiss your job -
and possible your arse - goodbye.

This is true.

It did occur to me, when my bus shot past the stop because the driver
"forgot" on Friday, that that kind of thing happens on the buses all
the time, and the only penalty for it is a moan from the passenger(s)
affected. On t'railway, it would be a far more serious offence.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Northern line near collision
 

Boltar wrote:

Everyone makes mistakes , but in some jobs in certain situations you
just don't. ... and if you do you can kiss your job goodbye.

Only the most Neanderthal management would take that approach. It is
much more sensible to determine the causes of the "mistake". If the same
kind of circumstances are likely to arise again, then in the case of
most people, the fact that they have done something incorrectly once and
discovered the consequences will generally make them avoid that
particular course of action in future.

Of course, incompetent staff shouldn't be mollycoddled, but proper
monitoring is what management is about. Poor employees will have files
containing more than one piece of evidence about poor performance. Good
employees will have good files, and one blemish shouldn't necessarily
lead to that file being closed.

And don't push any of that guff about there being plenty of other people
willing to do that particular job. Of two people, one of whom is a total
stranger, while the other is a person in whom the company has invested
thousands in training, only a fool would automatically assume that the
stranger is a better bet than the trained worker. (Sadly, I have known
many people with that opinion in middle management.)

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632959.html
(43 095 at London Kings Cross, 1982)

Northern line near collision
 

On 17 Jun, 09:15, Chris Tolley wrote:
employees will have good files, and one blemish shouldn't necessarily
lead to that file being closed.

If he'd been going a bit faster and had a collision and killed
himself, the other driver and possibly some passengers too, would you
still just consider it a "blemish"? And don't say "well he didn't".
That was down to pure luck the other train had stopped, not any action
on his part.

B2003

Northern line near collision
 

On 17 Jun, 15:36, Boltar wrote:
On 17 Jun, 09:15, Chris Tolley wrote:

If he'd been going a bit faster and had a collision and killed
himself, the other driver and possibly some passengers too, would you
still just consider it a "blemish"? And don't say "well he didn't".
That was down to pure luck the other train had stopped, not any action
on his part.

I'd hardly call the fact that a train was standing at a signal showing
a red aspect due to the section ahead being occupied "pure luck".

Northern line near collision
 

Boltar wrote:

On 17 Jun, 09:15, Chris Tolley wrote:
employees will have good files, and one blemish shouldn't necessarily
lead to that file being closed.

If he'd been going a bit faster and had a collision and killed
himself, the other driver and possibly some passengers too, would you
still just consider it a "blemish"? And don't say "well he didn't".
That was down to pure luck the other train had stopped, not any action
on his part.

If those things had happened, debating sacking would be rather odd.

--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632928.html
(40 187 at Crewe Locomotive Works, 22 Sep 1979)

Northern line near collision
 

"Chris Tolley" wrote in message
...
Boltar wrote:

If he'd been going a bit faster and had a collision and killed
himself, the other driver and possibly some passengers too, would you
still just consider it a "blemish"? And don't say "well he didn't".
That was down to pure luck the other train had stopped, not any action
on his part.

If those things had happened, debating sacking would be rather odd.

While on the face of it the incident appears to be entirely down to the
driver, we need the RAIB inquiry to assess the psychological factors into
why it happened and recommend ways of preventing a recurrence. Only when
that has been done can a fair assessment be made of the driver's
culpability.

Peter

Northern line near collision
 

In article .com,
chunky munky writes
Stations without station starters are Croxley (Southbound) and
Chesham, some others do have them a fair way out of the platform.

Chesham surprises me. After all, Mill Hill East has a starter.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Tel: +44 20 8495 6138 (work) | Web: http://www.davros.org
Fax: +44 870 051 9937 | Work:
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Northern line near collision
 

On Jun 17, 11:30 pm, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article .com,
chunky munky writes

Stations without station starters are Croxley (Southbound) and
Chesham, some others do have them a fair way out of the platform.

Chesham surprises me. After all, Mill Hill East has a starter.



It must be pretty difficult for there to be a train in front in either
case (or for the train in the station to have got past it on the way
in). If there's one coming the other way, there's a bigger problem
than just the train in the station leaving.

Northern line near collision
 

In article . com,
MIG wrote:
On Jun 17, 11:30 pm, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
Chesham surprises me. After all, Mill Hill East has a starter.

It must be pretty difficult for there to be a train in front in either
case (or for the train in the station to have got past it on the way
in). If there's one coming the other way, there's a bigger problem
than just the train in the station leaving.

It may have been left in place due to it's ability to regulate the
service; you don't want a train sitting just north of Finchley
Central for 15 minutes waiting for the time it is timetabled to
slot into the southbound service.

--
Shenanigans! Shenanigans! Best of 3!
-- Flash

Northern line near collision
 

On 17 Jun, 16:24, wrote:
On 17 Jun, 15:36, Boltar wrote:

On 17 Jun, 09:15, Chris Tolley wrote:
If he'd been going a bit faster and had a collision and killed
himself, the other driver and possibly some passengers too, would you
still just consider it a "blemish"? And don't say "well he didn't".
That was down to pure luck the other train had stopped, not any action
on his part.

I'd hardly call the fact that a train was standing at a signal showing
a red aspect due to the section ahead being occupied "pure luck".

If that stopped train had been running a bit late the train from
camden could have reached that signal before the other driver who
would not have been stopped at the signal before because at that time
the section in front *wasn't* occupied. I'll let you work out the
rest.

B2003

Northern line near collision
 

On 15 Jun, 07:33, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article .com,
writes

Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing -
means red.
Does it?
No signal when there should be one, as you pointed out = unlit signal
= red.

I'll have to think about this. There is no "where there should be one"
in railway signalling, but if a driver's route knowledge leads him to
think that there should be a signal at some landmark (in this case, the
headwall) then he should treat its absence as a danger.

There is on the underground. LU's signalling standards state that
every platform shall be provided with a platform starting signal. The
only locations that I'm aware of which are not compliant are Chesham,
Croxley SB and Kensington Olympia.

Northern line near collision
 

On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 05:38:25 -0700, wrote:

On 15 Jun, 07:33, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article .com,
writes

Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing -
means red.
Does it?
No signal when there should be one, as you pointed out = unlit signal
= red.

I'll have to think about this. There is no "where there should be one"
in railway signalling, but if a driver's route knowledge leads him to
think that there should be a signal at some landmark (in this case, the
headwall) then he should treat its absence as a danger.

There is on the underground. LU's signalling standards state that
every platform shall be provided with a platform starting signal. The
only locations that I'm aware of which are not compliant are Chesham,
Croxley SB and Kensington Olympia.

Aren't both these operated as though they were long sidings?

There was an accident in the USA a few years ago. Because of the
inertia of the heavy freight trains the distant is a long way before
the stop signal. But in this case there was a platform stop between
them. A commuter train stopped there and sped off because the engineer
forgot that the distant was at yellow, running through the stop signal
protecting a junction with the main line and colliding head on with an
Amtrak train.

Northern line near collision
 

There are near collisions everyday as the trains are only a few feet
apart when passing !

Nears dont count, its only the ones where people get mangled and
Netowork Rail lose their bonus tha tcount.

Northern line near collision
 

On 18 Jun, 15:52, Christopher A.Lee wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jun 2007 05:38:25 -0700, wrote:
On 15 Jun, 07:33, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article .com,
writes

Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing -
means red.
Does it?
No signal when there should be one, as you pointed out = unlit signal
= red.

I'll have to think about this. There is no "where there should be one"
in railway signalling, but if a driver's route knowledge leads him to
think that there should be a signal at some landmark (in this case, the
headwall) then he should treat its absence as a danger.

There is on the underground. LU's signalling standards state that
every platform shall be provided with a platform starting signal. The
only locations that I'm aware of which are not compliant are Chesham,
Croxley SB and Kensington Olympia.

Aren't both these operated as though they were long sidings?

Effectively, yes.

There is a home signal at Chesham, but it's associated with the speed
control more than anything else.
Likewise, there are only a handful (IIRC 2 or 3) of track circuits
tere, the main part of the branch back to Chalfont being catered for
by axle counters.