On Sun, 4 Nov 2007, Richard J. wrote:

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2007, Mr Thant wrote:

On 1 Nov, 20:48, Mizter T wrote:
Wonder if any of the Central line drivers might like to try doing
this?!

I read a story online somewhere (can't find it now) about a
Victoria Line driver getting out of his train when stuck at a red
signal, but without deactivating the ATO. As soon as the signal
cleared, the train restarted itself, narrowly missing him.

So Vic trains under ATO don't need a hand on a dead man's handle?
This i did not know. That seems like a funny decision.

No it's not. If you had a dead man's handle on the Vic and the driver
had a heart attack, the train would stop in the tunnel with nobody on
board able to radio for assistance or talk to the passengers. Without a
dead man's handle, the ATO would drive the train *safely* to the next
station where the driver and passengers could more easily and quickly be
attended to. Which would you prefer?

In that hypothetical situation, no dead man's handle. In the hazardous
situation that actually happened, a dead man's handle. You can make
hypothetical arguments either way - and probably find real-life cases too.
However, the fact that trains with dead man's handles have operated in
London for over a century without, as far as i know, the kind of situation
you describe having led to any casualties indicates to me that it's a
generally quite safe way of operating a train.

It would be interesting to know how many times dangerous situations have
been avoided through the use of the dead man's handle - driver sees an
obstruction and the line and releases it, sort of thing. With ATO, the
driver can presumably stop the train by some positive action, so he
wouldn't be powerless in that kind of situation; however, if he had become
incapacitated, he would be unable to take that action. An extreme case, i
know, and one rendered particularly unlikely by the entirely underground
nature of the Victoria line!

tom

--
First man to add a mixer get a shoeing! -- The Laird

It would not surprise me to find out, however, that drivers need to keep
their hand on the controller or the emergency brake when they come into a
station. This, of course, depending on which side of the cab they stand.

"Tom Anderson" wrote in message
.li...

So Vic trains under ATO don't need a hand on a dead man's handle? This i
did not know. That seems like a funny decision.

tom

--
In-jokes for out-casts

I read about this earlier on this group.

If a driver dies in the cab and releases the dead man's handle, the line
controller will at first try to contact him to see why he hasn't reset and
continued on his way (It does happen that hands occasionally just slip off
the controller.).

If that is unsuccessful the line controller will then link into the train's
PA and request that any LUL employee on board come forward and see what's
happened.

Failing that, IIRC, they might send somebody down to see what's wrong.

"Richard J." wrote in message
news
No it's not. If you had a dead man's handle on the Vic and the driver had
a heart attack, the train would stop in the tunnel with nobody on board
able to radio for assistance or talk to the passengers. Without a dead
man's handle, the ATO would drive the train *safely* to the next station
where the driver and passengers could more easily and quickly be attended
to. Which would you prefer?
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, wrote:

"Richard J." wrote in message
news
No it's not. If you had a dead man's handle on the Vic and the driver
had a heart attack, the train would stop in the tunnel with nobody on
board able to radio for assistance or talk to the passengers. Without
a dead man's handle, the ATO would drive the train *safely* to the next
station where the driver and passengers could more easily and quickly
be attended to. Which would you prefer?

If a driver dies in the cab and releases the dead man's handle, the line
controller will at first try to contact him to see why he hasn't reset
and continued on his way (It does happen that hands occasionally just
slip off the controller.).

If that is unsuccessful the line controller will then link into the
train's PA and request that any LUL employee on board come forward and
see what's happened.

Failing that, IIRC, they might send somebody down to see what's wrong.

As in the train behind comes forward and does a push-out or sends over a
new driver or something. Is it possible to couple two trains in the tunnel
and have the relieving driver drive the double train from the front?

But the point is that this all takes a lot of time - with the current ATO
situation, the train would simply drive itself to the next station on its
own.

ISTM that the way forward might be for the control room to be able to
override the deadman remotely, i suppose via the ATO codes. They'd need
some way to be able to ascertain the condition of the driver - CCTV would
be nice but probably implausible (unless there's more bandwidth down there
than i knew about), the cab radio might be enough - to make sure they're
not overriding a legitimate stopping of the train, though.

tom

--
We start here and head south.

Tom Anderson wrote

hypothetical arguments either way - and probably find real-life cases
too.
However, the fact that trains with dead man's handles have operated
in
London for over a century without, as far as i know, the kind of
situation
you describe having led to any casualties indicates to me that it's a

generally quite safe way of operating a train.

But throughout most of that "over a century" those trains were not OPO
(One Person Operated) so there was little downside to the policy of
"stop and let the guard sort it out".

Safety engineers now have to consider what the passengers might get up
to in panic if they think themselves trapped.

A reliable video, audio and telemetry link to the control room might
change the balance yet again.

--
Mike D

On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 22:04:41 +0000, Tom Anderson wrote:

I read a story online somewhere (can't find it now) about a Victoria
Line driver getting out of his train when stuck at a red signal, but
without deactivating the ATO. As soon as the signal cleared, the train
restarted itself, narrowly missing him.

So Vic trains under ATO don't need a hand on a dead man's handle? This i
did not know. That seems like a funny decision.

Hmm. Never been on the DLR?

On 5 Nov, 21:55, Tom Anderson wrote:
As in the train behind comes forward and does a push-out or sends over a
new driver or something. Is it possible to couple two trains in the tunnel
and have the relieving driver drive the double train from the front?

The procedure is known as "leap-frogging" which involves the train
operator of the train behind stopping short of the rear of the first
train, going forward to investigate and, if nescessary, moving the
first train forward. Subsequent trains repeat this, until a relief
operator is on-site.

On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, asdf wrote:

On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 22:04:41 +0000, Tom Anderson wrote:

I read a story online somewhere (can't find it now) about a Victoria
Line driver getting out of his train when stuck at a red signal, but
without deactivating the ATO. As soon as the signal cleared, the train
restarted itself, narrowly missing him.

So Vic trains under ATO don't need a hand on a dead man's handle? This i
did not know. That seems like a funny decision.

Hmm. Never been on the DLR?

Certainly not! It's a deathtrap!

tom

--
But for [Flavor Flav's] "YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BOYYYYYYYYYY"s alone he should
be given Rap Legend status. -- Nate Patrin, ILX

On Tue, 6 Nov 2007, wrote:

On 5 Nov, 21:55, Tom Anderson wrote:

As in the train behind comes forward and does a push-out or sends over
a new driver or something. Is it possible to couple two trains in the
tunnel and have the relieving driver drive the double train from the
front?

The procedure is known as "leap-frogging" which involves the train
operator of the train behind stopping short of the rear of the first
train, going forward to investigate and, if nescessary, moving the first
train forward. Subsequent trains repeat this, until a relief operator is
on-site.

Utterly mental. APPROVED!

tom

--
But for [Flavor Flav's] "YEAAAAAAAAAAAAAH BOYYYYYYYYYY"s alone he should
be given Rap Legend status. -- Nate Patrin, ILX

On Nov 6, 6:14 pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Mon, 5 Nov 2007, asdf wrote:
On Sun, 4 Nov 2007 22:04:41 +0000, Tom Anderson wrote:

I read a story online somewhere (can't find it now) about a Victoria
Line driver getting out of his train when stuck at a red signal, but
without deactivating the ATO. As soon as the signal cleared, the train
restarted itself, narrowly missing him.

So Vic trains under ATO don't need a hand on a dead man's handle? This i
did not know. That seems like a funny decision.

Hmm. Never been on the DLR?

Certainly not! It's a deathtrap!


Funnily enough, when I saw the heading as the thread started, I
wondered if one had fallen off.

Has anyone arrived at Crossharbour from the south recently (sitting
near the front)? They rock so violently now that I am getting
nervous. I don't think it was always like that.