In article , Charles Ellson
writes
I haven't got the details of the Camden Town incident
to hand but one thing possibly missed by the driver was that before he
set off he failed to check the platform starter;

He appears to have checked it in the CCTV monitor rather than out of the
window (and the report implies this wasn't a totally unreasonable thing
to do). You get the same monitor views in both cabs.

--
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:

On 15 Apr, 19:56, Charles Ellson wrote:
I haven't got the details of the Camden Town incident
to hand but one thing possibly missed by the driver was that before he
set off he failed to check the platform starter; had he done so then
its absence should have indicated something was wrong. For practical
purposes he seems to have compounded the event by doing a one-man
"ding-ding and away".

He checked the platform repeater in the in-cab CCTV.

(which is against the rules, but not a SPAD)

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:37:50 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

On 15 Apr, 19:56, Charles Ellson wrote:
I haven't got the details of the Camden Town incident
to hand but one thing possibly missed by the driver was that before he
set off he failed to check the platform starter; had he done so then
its absence should have indicated something was wrong. For practical
purposes he seems to have compounded the event by doing a one-man
"ding-ding and away".

He checked the platform repeater in the in-cab CCTV.

(which is against the rules, but not a SPAD)

But clearly not the same as checking the signal which was not in front
of him.

On Tue, 15 Apr 2008 12:37:50 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

I haven't got the details of the Camden Town incident
to hand but one thing possibly missed by the driver was that before he
set off he failed to check the platform starter; had he done so then
its absence should have indicated something was wrong. For practical
purposes he seems to have compounded the event by doing a one-man
"ding-ding and away".

He checked the platform repeater in the in-cab CCTV.

(which is against the rules, but not a SPAD)

But presumably passing the fixed 'STOP' sign is a SPAD?

On Apr 15, 8:37 pm, wrote:
On 15 Apr, 19:56, Charles Ellson wrote:

I haven't got the details of the Camden Town incident
to hand but one thing possibly missed by the driver was that before he
set off he failed to check the platform starter; had he done so then
its absence should have indicated something was wrong. For practical
purposes he seems to have compounded the event by doing a one-man
"ding-ding and away".

He checked the platform repeater in the in-cab CCTV.

(which is against the rules, but not a SPAD)

You'd think he might have remembered which side the platform was on
and which door he got out of when he arrived. Was the man half asleep?

B2003

On 16 Apr, 13:28, Boltar wrote:
You'd think he might have remembered which side the platform was on
and which door he got out of when he arrived. Was the man half asleep?

But the problem was that he did remember. Camden has two northbound
platforms in essentially an island formation, albeit separated by
passageways. When he switched to other train he got in what have
looked to him like the same end, but was actually the south end.

U

--
http://londonconnections.blogspot.com/
A blog about transport projects in London

Boltar wrote:
On Apr 15, 8:37 pm, wrote:
On 15 Apr, 19:56, Charles Ellson wrote:

I haven't got the details of the Camden Town incident
to hand but one thing possibly missed by the driver was that before he
set off he failed to check the platform starter; had he done so then
its absence should have indicated something was wrong. For practical
purposes he seems to have compounded the event by doing a one-man
"ding-ding and away".
He checked the platform repeater in the in-cab CCTV.

(which is against the rules, but not a SPAD)

You'd think he might have remembered which side the platform was on
and which door he got out of when he arrived. Was the man half asleep?

B2003

The RAIB report explains how this occurred and is well worth a read.
Basically an unusual crew change took place at Camden Town so the driver
did not get out of the train and back into it but came from another
platform. In those circumstances it is inevitable that such a mistake
happen eventually. This has been accepted and procedures detailed in
the RAIB report should prevent this happening again.

On Apr 16, 2:15 pm, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 16 Apr, 13:28, Boltar wrote:

You'd think he might have remembered which side the platform was on
and which door he got out of when he arrived. Was the man half asleep?

But the problem was that he did remember. Camden has two northbound
platforms in essentially an island formation, albeit separated by
passageways. When he switched to other train he got in what have
looked to him like the same end, but was actually the south end.

Oh I see , I thought he went back into the same train after going for
a pee or something. Still , even so , it seems a strange mistake to
make.

B2003

In article
,
Boltar writes
I haven't got the details of the Camden Town incident
[...]
You'd think he might have remembered which side the platform was on
and which door he got out of when he arrived. Was the man half asleep?

He was changing from one northbound platform to the other. On one of
them you turn right from the passageway to get to the cab and the
platform is on the right when you're in the cab. On the other you turn
left from the passageway and the platform is on your left. However,
drivers don't normally change trains there, and the cab is forward of
the headwall so you can't see the platform anyway.

I suggest you read the report.

--
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:

On Wed, 16 Apr 2008 07:02:16 -0700 (PDT), Boltar
wrote:

On Apr 16, 2:15 pm, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 16 Apr, 13:28, Boltar wrote:

You'd think he might have remembered which side the platform was on
and which door he got out of when he arrived. Was the man half asleep?

But the problem was that he did remember. Camden has two northbound
platforms in essentially an island formation, albeit separated by
passageways. When he switched to other train he got in what have
looked to him like the same end, but was actually the south end.

Oh I see , I thought he went back into the same train after going for
a pee or something. Still , even so , it seems a strange mistake to
make.

Not with the lack of the visual references surrounding an open air
station which would make the result of such a momentary aberration
"upstairs" rather more obvious. The scenery in a tube station is 100%
manufactured and consequentially many of the visual references at
different locations can be similar if not identical.