On Jun 15, 3:55 pm, Christopher A.Lee wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:02:49 +0100, "John Rowland"





wrote:
Christopher A.Lee wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 12:25:02 +0100, "John Rowland"
wrote:

Kev wrote:

Something doesn't ring true here. I am an occassional user of Camden
but I think that even I would know which platform I was on and if I
was about set off in the wrong direction. Some how a driver gets out
of a train in the Edgware platform but then gets in the back of a
train in the HB platform and drives off SB. Wouldn't he have noticed
something odd about the directions he took on foot. We are not
talking a non underground savvy tourist here.

He might never set foot on the station.

However he would have known the platforms from the cab.

Passengers who use the station know that the northbound platforms are at the
same depth as each other, and the southbound platforms are at the same depth
as each other. I don't expect a driver would necessarily know that.

That's not what I meant.

He would have seen all the platforms from the cab ever since he had
been driving on the Northern Line. Even if he did not know the details
the same way a passenger would, by the time he got into the wrong cab
he should have known something was wrong because it didn't look like
what he expected to see.

There have been suggestions it could have been a shunting move, which
doesn't make sense unless both trains were being reversed, which is
possible if the previous blocks on each route to the rear were clear.
But they weren't.

And in any case, shouldn't this require some kind of wrong line order?
The signalling certainly doesn't permit this.

It's my guess he was disoriented and confused. Especially if the
subway took him to that end of the train. But he should have realised
when he didn't see what he would have expected



One thing about this, on the Barnet Branch, the platform is to the
left of the train if you are facing the front, and on the Edgware
branch it's to the right.

So it is true that if the driver left the train from a platform where
the platform was to one side of the train and got in the cab on the
other platform where it appeared to be to the same side of the train,
he would be going the other way.

On Jun 14, 5:12 pm, Christopher A.Lee wrote:
On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:57:44 GMT, "Jack Taylor"
wrote:

Christopher A.Lee wrote:

This was in the evening rush hour so it was potentially disastrous.

On a Sunday? ;-)

You're right, I didn't check the day.



Camden Town is rather busy on a Sunday.

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

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

On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 10:38:34 -0700, MIG
wrote:

On Jun 15, 4:00 pm, Christopher A.Lee wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007 13:39:16 +0100, Tom Anderson





wrote:
On Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Roland Perry wrote:

In message .com, at
04:42:05 on Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Kev remarked:

It seems odd that on reaching the HB platform he didn't think to turn
back on the direction he had headed from the train in the Edgware
platfom. How many times had this driver driven a train through Camden.

Isn't it simpler than that?

1) The drivers switched trains, and unless they both left them in some
nondirectional state with red lights at both ends, the new driver would have
had to reverse the trains "direction" in that respect.

2) The driver's end of the platforms have either CCTV monitors or large
mirrors. These are very easy to recognise.

Plus, the guy is a Northern line driver, and so presumably knows the whole
thing like the back of his hand. Any explanation which involves him not
being sure where he was strikes me as highly dubious.

I conclude that the driver thought he had been told to reverse.

Is that possible? Is there a crossover he could have been heading for? Our
survey (of Tubeprune's Northern line signalling diagrams):

http://www.trainweb.org/tubeprune/Ca...wn-lct5-10.gif

Says yes - there's one just north of Mornington Crescent; does that fit
with the description of the incident?

If it was a shunting move to get him onto the correct route, this
wouldn't be necessary.

Both trains would have to reverse through the junction and wait for
the correct routes.

But the story is the were taking the simpler option. to swap the crew
and passengers between each train.

After which they would both have continues each others' journeys.-



They wouldn't though, would they. They'd be continuing their own
journey.

Sorry, I phrased that badly - that's what I meant.

That is, driver due to end up at Edgware goes into the Barnet
platform, so swaps trains so that he will still end up in Edgware, and
vice versa.

That would make sense. If the driver thought he was meant to reverse
the train to get back to the correct route, there would be no reason
for the drivers to swap trains.

On 15 Jun, 18:20, The Jinx wrote:

The driver made a mistake because he is a human, like you (maybe) and
I.
Unfortunately mistakes are made and just becuase his job is more
safety critical role does not reduce the fact that he is going to make
a mistake.

Theres a difference between a mistake and a complete cock-up. We're
not talking about him overshooting a shation by a few metres , he
almost caused a head on collision by driving the wrong way when it
should have been bloody obvious he was going the wrong way. He might
be human but he's also supposed to be trained and if he can't get
something as fundamental as the direction correct he shouldn't be in
the job.

B2003

On 15 Jun, 21:40, Boltar wrote:
Theres a difference between a mistake and a complete cock-up. We're
not talking about him overshooting a shation by a few metres , he
almost caused a head on collision by driving the wrong way when it
should have been bloody obvious he was going the wrong way. He might
be human but he's also supposed to be trained and if he can't get
something as fundamental as the direction correct he shouldn't be in
the job.

What are you going to do about it?

chunky munky wrote:
On Jun 14, 9:20 pm, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article .com,
Boltar writes

One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal
at that end of the platform.
You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he
do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that
must mean green"?

Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing
- means red.

Having said that, I can't offhand think of any LU station that
doesn't have a starting signal at the end of the platform.

There is a rumour that there was a Fixed Red Light but this was
"bagged" over.

In a post elsewhere in this thread, I said that there is a "STOP" disc
on the tunnel wall at the southbound end of the High Barnet northbound
platform at Camden Town. When I looked more carefully at the photo I
took this afternoon, I noticed that there is indeed an object just north
of the Stop disc that seems to have a plastic bag over it. Is this
perhaps the fixed red light that you mentioned? Anyone know how long it
has been like that?

Photo at http://rjnews.fotopic.net/p42305755.html

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On Jun 15, 10:03 pm, "Richard J." wrote:
chunky munky wrote:
On Jun 14, 9:20 pm, "Clive D. W. Feather" c...@on-the-
train.demon.co.uk wrote:
In article .com,
Boltar writes

One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal
at that end of the platform.
You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he
do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that
must mean green"?

Um, no signal *does* mean green. Unlit signal - not the same thing
- means red.

Having said that, I can't offhand think of any LU station that
doesn't have a starting signal at the end of the platform.

There is a rumour that there was a Fixed Red Light but this was
"bagged" over.

In a post elsewhere in this thread, I said that there is a "STOP" disc
on the tunnel wall at the southbound end of the High Barnet northbound
platform at Camden Town. When I looked more carefully at the photo I
took this afternoon, I noticed that there is indeed an object just north
of the Stop disc that seems to have a plastic bag over it. Is this
perhaps the fixed red light that you mentioned? Anyone know how long it
has been like that?

Photo athttp://rjnews.fotopic.net/p42305755.html

--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)


There was a rumour going round that a FRL had indeed been bagged over
(probably a wiring fault that is too expensive for Tube Lines - who
are worse than Metromess- to repair). I wonder if there was a
trainstop to go with the FRL?????

Hopefully the Train Operator won't be sacked but either put on a
Corrective Action Plan or at very worst reduced in grade.

chunky munky wrote:
On Jun 15, 10:03 pm, "Richard J."
wrote:
chunky munky wrote:

There is a rumour that there was a Fixed Red Light but this was
"bagged" over.

In a post elsewhere in this thread, I said that there is a "STOP"
disc on the tunnel wall at the southbound end of the High Barnet
northbound platform at Camden Town. When I looked more carefully
at the photo I took this afternoon, I noticed that there is indeed
an object just north of the Stop disc that seems to have a plastic
bag over it. Is this perhaps the fixed red light that you
mentioned? Anyone know how long it has been like that?

Photo athttp://rjnews.fotopic.net/p42305755.html

There was a rumour going round that a FRL had indeed been bagged
over (probably a wiring fault that is too expensive for Tube Lines
- who are worse than Metromess- to repair). I wonder if there was
a trainstop to go with the FRL?????

Sorry, I forgot to look. The original photo is very grainy when
enhanced, but I can't see any sign of a trainstop (it would be on the
other side of the track to the bagged "signal" of course).

Hopefully the Train Operator won't be sacked but either put on a
Corrective Action Plan or at very worst reduced in grade.

Is that comment based on knowledge that hasn't been revealed here of why
he did what he did? If not, then surely at the very worst he was
grossly negligent and would need to be sacked. I'm not saying that is
the case, as there might be mitigating circumstances, but there are
serious issues of public safety here that override any considerations of
sympathy with an individual's career.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

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?