Compass railtour from Cardiff to Accrington Sat 23/07/05 turned into a
bus tour after train cancelled at Warrington due to no forward Driver
so all passengers put on buses home.

exjims@aol.com wrote in news:1122403432.366672.86830
@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com:


> Compass railtour from Cardiff to Accrington Sat 23/07/05 turned into a
> bus tour after train cancelled at Warrington due to no forward Driver
> so all passengers put on buses home.


Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one 47-passed 
train driver. 

Rick.

Rick Hughes wrote:


> Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one 47-passed 
> train driver. 


As a general question, are the various locos or DMUs so different that someone 
who can drive one, can't drive another. I know this is the case with airliners 
but as far as I know isn't the case with buses, lorries and vertainly not cars.

Not trying to stir up an argument, just genuinely interested.

--
David

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:30:25 +0100, David Morgan wrote in
<dc6306$lsu$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, seen in uk.railway:

> Rick Hughes wrote:
> 
> > Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one 47-passed 
> > train driver. 
> 
> As a general question, are the various locos or DMUs so different that someone 
> who can drive one, can't drive another. 


They can be, yes. 

To take an example affecting me, before CT drivers were allowed to
handle the ex-MML class 170/1 units, we had to be given conversion
training as there are various differences between 170/1 and our own
170/5 & /6. 

Only took an hour or so, but until we had it we weren't allowed to
touch the things.

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:47:12 +0100, Ross  wrote:


>On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:30:25 +0100, David Morgan wrote in
><dc6306$lsu$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, seen in uk.railway:
>> Rick Hughes wrote:
>> 
>> > Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one 47-passed 
>> > train driver. 
>> 
>> As a general question, are the various locos or DMUs so different that someone 
>> who can drive one, can't drive another. 
>
>They can be, yes. 
>
>To take an example affecting me, before CT drivers were allowed to
>handle the ex-MML class 170/1 units, we had to be given conversion
>training as there are various differences between 170/1 and our own
>170/5 & /6. 
>
>Only took an hour or so, but until we had it we weren't allowed to
>touch the things.


And would you consider that to be reasonable?
-- 
Tessy @ nospam.com
Life is complex: it has real and imaginary parts

Tessy wrote:


> And would you consider that to be reasonable?


Without knowing the details, I would say it could well be reasonable,
yes.

If I drive a different car to my usual one, there might be a few
occasions when I signal my intention to turn by washing the
windscreen, or when I vent my irritation on other drivers by giving
them a blast on the heated rear window, but all in all, it's not
likely to cause any serious problems.
But I am only responsible for my own safety.

If I drive a train that is different to one that I am passed on [1],
things change. Yes, I could probably still drive a train that was
similar to it, and could probably complete the day's schedule without
too much bother, but "probably" isn't good enough. I am responsible
for the safety of hundreds of paying passengers; I have to know
exactly what I am doing. If I accidentally trip a safety device and
the train grinds to a halt and won't budge, that's not acceptable. If
I misjudge the different braking characteristics and overshoot a
station or a red signal, that's not acceptable.

[1] Hypothetically assuming that I could drive any train...

-- 
                          Stevie D
    \\\\\       /////     Bringing dating agencies to the
   \\\\\\\__X__///////    common hedgehog since 2001 - "HedgeHugs"
___\\\\\\\'/ \'///////_____________________________________________

>But I am only responsible for my own safety.
>

An underestimate, I fear.

Guy Gorton

Stevie D wrote:

>But I am only responsible for my own safety.


Why? Do you not care about other road users?

-- 
Neil Sunderland
Braunton, Devon

Please observe the Reply-To address

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:59:23 GMT, Tessy wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:47:12 +0100, Ross  wrote:
>>To take an example affecting me, before CT drivers were allowed to
>>handle the ex-MML class 170/1 units, we had to be given conversion
>>training as there are various differences between 170/1 and our own
>>170/5 & /6. 
>>
>>Only took an hour or so, but until we had it we weren't allowed to
>>touch the things.
> 
> And would you consider that to be reasonable?


The question implies you think it isn't. Why?

-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p14104759.html
(31 138 at Birmingham New Street, Oct 1987)

Chris Tolley wrote:


>> And would you consider that to be reasonable?
> 
> The question implies you think it isn't. Why?


Maybe he thinks Ross would need more time :-)

-- 
Chris Game

"Imagination is more important than knowledge."
		-- Albert Einstein

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 08:57:42 GMT, Chris Game wrote:

> Chris Tolley wrote:
> 
>>> And would you consider that to be reasonable?
>> 
>> The question implies you think it isn't. Why?
> 
> Maybe he thinks Ross would need more time :-)


"he"? 
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p14486545.html
(20 309 and 37 612 at Crag Bank, 6 Apr 2005)

"David Morgan"  wrote in message news:dc6306$lsu$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...

> Rick Hughes wrote:
>
> > Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one
47-passed
> > train driver.
>
> As a general question, are the various locos or DMUs so different that
someone
> who can drive one, can't drive another. I know this is the case with
airliners
> but as far as I know isn't the case with buses, lorries and vertainly not
cars.
>
> Not trying to stir up an argument, just genuinely interested.


My seafaring qualifications entitle me to drive anything from a fishing boat
to a super tanker with any configuration of propeller, rudder and  thruster
controls. But I think I'd want to watch it being done for a day before I
took over !

Don.

On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:59:23 GMT, Tessy wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:

> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:47:12 +0100, Ross  wrote:
> 
[...]
> >To take an example affecting me, before CT drivers were allowed to
> >handle the ex-MML class 170/1 units, we had to be given conversion
> >training as there are various differences between 170/1 and our own
> >170/5 & /6. 
> >
> >Only took an hour or so, but until we had it we weren't allowed to
> >touch the things.
> 
> And would you consider that to be reasonable?


I assume (from your wording) you are inferring that you think it
wasn't. 

The differences were small, but significant in their own way. 
The time allowed was reasonable enough to tell us what they were.

-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:09:59 +0100 someone who may be "Don Burgess"
 wrote this:-


>My seafaring qualifications entitle me to drive anything from a fishing boat
>to a super tanker with any configuration of propeller, rudder and  thruster
>controls. But I think I'd want to watch it being done for a day before I
>took over !


Story from the 1950s, revealed in the Proceedings of the US Naval
Institute.

A journalist from the Virginia Pilot newspaper who was in the US
Naval Reserve was undertaking his annual cruise onboard a
battleship. He was asked what he did by the captain and said. The
captain mis-heard the reply and so asked him to take the ship down
the river to the sea. The journalist thought this was an initiative
test and so did as requested without further ado. He hugged every
buoy and light, but made it. It was only a lot later that the
captain went white as a sheet when he discovered that the journalist
was not a river pilot.

On the railways in the days of steam drivers and firemen drove
anything they came across, finding out what was different by
speaking to people and experimenting. I suspect that learning at the
moment on the railways is excessive, but don't see any advantage in
going back to those days.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

"Don Burgess"  wrote in message 
news:dc7q22$3iv$1@newsg1.svr.pol.co.uk...

>
> "David Morgan"  wrote in message news:dc6306$lsu$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk...
>> Rick Hughes wrote:
>>
>> > Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one
> 47-passed
>> > train driver.
>>
>> As a general question, are the various locos or DMUs so different that
> someone
>> who can drive one, can't drive another. I know this is the case with
> airliners
>> but as far as I know isn't the case with buses, lorries and vertainly not
> cars.
>>
>> Not trying to stir up an argument, just genuinely interested.
>
> My seafaring qualifications entitle me to drive anything from a fishing 
> boat
> to a super tanker with any configuration of propeller, rudder and 
> thruster
> controls. But I think I'd want to watch it being done for a day before I
> took over !


Don't they make you hand over to a Pilot when it gets tricky. (excluding the 
small bit near Dover)

KW

In article <dc6306$lsu$1@newsg2.svr.pol.co.uk>, David Morgan <david@vang
uard2.freeserve.co.uk> writes

>Rick Hughes wrote:
>
>> Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one 47-passed 
>> train driver. 
>
>As a general question, are the various locos or DMUs so different that someone 
>who can drive one, can't drive another. I know this is the case with airliners 
>but as far as I know isn't the case with buses, lorries and vertainly not cars.
>
>Not trying to stir up an argument, just genuinely interested.
>
>--
>David

Yes, and unlike other forms of transport he has to have prior route
knowledge as well and AFAIK if he/she goes 6 months without going on a
route has to have a refresher course.
-- 
Alan

In article , Stevie D
 writes

>If I drive a train that is different to one that I am passed on [1],
>things change. Yes, I could probably still drive a train that was
>similar to it, and could probably complete the day's schedule without
>too much bother, but "probably" isn't good enough. I am responsible
>for the safety of hundreds of paying passengers; I have to know
>exactly what I am doing. If I accidentally trip a safety device and
>the train grinds to a halt and won't budge, that's not acceptable. If
>I misjudge the different braking characteristics and overshoot a
>station or a red signal, that's not acceptable.

Bus and Coach  drivers carry fare paying passengers, apart from
requiring a Public Service Vehicle (PSV) Licence I am not aware that
specific training is given to a driver per type of vehicle
My local Stagecoach bus route has been equipped with new 04 reg double
deckers should the drivers have been pre-trained, similarly the London
coach link is new longer and bigger double deck 04 coaches (longer than
a London Red Bus) were they specifically retrained, I envy them
negotiating London's traffic driving through West/Centrol London to
reach Victoria.
-- 
Al

Alan Osborn wrote:


>>As a general question, are the various locos or DMUs so different that
>>someone who can drive one, can't drive another. I know this is the case
>>with airliners but as far as I know isn't the case with buses, lorries and
>>vertainly not cars.
>>
>>Not trying to stir up an argument, just genuinely interested.
>>
>>--
>>David
> Yes, and unlike other forms of transport he has to have prior route
> knowledge as well and AFAIK if he/she goes 6 months without going on a
> route has to have a refresher course.


Also "Not trying to stir up an argument, just genuinely interested", I'm
curious as to how and how much route familiarity affects the driving.  

Is all the functionality equivalent to "steering" controlled by people
outside the train?

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:53:50 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:

> I'm curious how and how much route familiarity affects the driving. 


Warning signs for speed restrictions are generally not illuminated, and
therefore cannot be seen at any useful distance in the dark or in some
adverse weather conditions. That's when route knowledge makes a huge
difference. Ditto signals, which may not be lit for some reason or
other. And then there's accidentally being sent the wrong way...
  

> Is all the functionality equivalent to "steering" controlled by people
> outside the train?


It is as long as the train stays on the rails. ;-) Or if you want a
serious answer, some points are operated by staff who descend from the
train to do so and then remount.
-- 
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632929.html (D213, Tyseley, Oct 1987)

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:32:58 GMT someone who may be Chris Tolley
 wrote this:-


>Warning signs for speed restrictions are generally not illuminated, and
>therefore cannot be seen at any useful distance in the dark or in some
>adverse weather conditions.


Such warning signs, which are only provided for severe speed
restrictions, used to be illuminated. However, in these days of
headlights they are instead made out of reflective material. There
is also a warning in the cab which the driver must acknowledge to
avoid the train being halted.

Most signs at speed restriction are now made in the same way and in
most conditions more visible than the old cutout signs. One of the
times they are not is when sticky snow is blown against them.



-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

> > Compass railtour from Cardiff to Accrington Sat 23/07/05 turned into a
> > bus tour after train cancelled at Warrington due to no forward Driver
> > so all passengers put on buses home.
>
> Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one 47-passed
> train driver. 
> 
> Rick.


And with route knowledge.

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:32:58 GMT, Chris Tolley 
wrote:


>On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:53:50 +0100, Adam Funk wrote:
>> I'm curious how and how much route familiarity affects the driving. 
>
>Warning signs for speed restrictions are generally not illuminated, and
>therefore cannot be seen at any useful distance in the dark or in some
>adverse weather conditions. That's when route knowledge makes a huge
>difference. Ditto signals, which may not be lit for some reason or
>other. And then there's accidentally being sent the wrong way...
>  

Not forgetting the bits where the track deviates from straight and
level which in some cases could come as a nasty (and often potentially
lethal) surprise to a stranger driving something with a stopping
distance of several hundred yards.
                                                             _______
 +---------------------------------------------------+      |\\   //|
 | Charles Ellson: charles@e11son.demon.co.uk        |      | \\ // |
 +---------------------------------------------------+      |  > <  |
                                                            | // \\ |
                                              Alba gu brath |//___\\|

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 18:50:32 +0100 someone who may be Charles Ellson
 wrote this:-


>Not forgetting the bits where the track deviates from straight and
>level which in some cases could come as a nasty (and often potentially
>lethal) surprise to a stranger driving something with a stopping
>distance of several hundred yards.


Any such deviation will have a speed restriction and a speed
restriction sign. If the restriction is severe enough to derail a
train then it will have a warning sign at braking distance.

There are pressures in both directions on route learning. Uniform,
fully braked and short trains mean there is (generally) less chance
of the train being scattered into several sections along the line
and causing disruption. Operating a two coach relatively powerful
DMU over a switchback line requires rather less in the way of route
knowledge than operating a coal train of 100-110 loose coupled
wagons. On the other hand removal of stations, signal boxes,
distinctive signals and other lineside location indicators has made
the lineside rather less distinctive to the extent that
disorientation (and sometimes a zombie like effect is reported) can
become a problem. This was recognised in ISTR the mid 1970s by
erecting trackside signs. I suspect that gadgets will never replace
route knowledge, not the least because gadgets tends to pack up in
emergency when route knowledge can become vital.

Traction knowledge may be amenable to gadgets and the various
attempts to standardise things (of which the earlier AC electric
locomotive cabs are an example) may reduce/eliminate this need. As I
said traction knowledge is a relatively modern concept.


-- 
 David Hansen, Edinburgh | PGP email preferred-key number F566DA0E
 I will always explain revoked keys, unless the UK government
 prevents me by using the RIP Act 2000.

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 08:07:24 GMT, Chris Tolley  wrote:


>On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:59:23 GMT, Tessy wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:47:12 +0100, Ross  wrote:
>>>To take an example affecting me, before CT drivers were allowed to
>>>handle the ex-MML class 170/1 units, we had to be given conversion
>>>training as there are various differences between 170/1 and our own
>>>170/5 & /6. 
>>>
>>>Only took an hour or so, but until we had it we weren't allowed to
>>>touch the things.
>> 
>> And would you consider that to be reasonable?
>
>The question implies you think it isn't. Why?


I don't think the question implies that I think it isn't.
-- 
Tessy @ nospam.com
Life is complex: it has real and imaginary parts

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:32:07 +0100, Ross  wrote:


>On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:59:23 GMT, Tessy wrote in
>, seen in uk.railway:
>> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:47:12 +0100, Ross  wrote:
>> 
>[...]
>> >To take an example affecting me, before CT drivers were allowed to
>> >handle the ex-MML class 170/1 units, we had to be given conversion
>> >training as there are various differences between 170/1 and our own
>> >170/5 & /6. 
>> >
>> >Only took an hour or so, but until we had it we weren't allowed to
>> >touch the things.
>> 
>> And would you consider that to be reasonable?
>
>I assume (from your wording) you are inferring that you think it
>wasn't. 


No, I am genuinely interested in whether you think it is 59 mins too long
or half a day too short.


>The differences were small, but significant in their own way. 
>The time allowed was reasonable enough to tell us what they were.



-- 
Tessy @ nospam.com
Life is complex: it has real and imaginary parts

wrote in message 
news:1122485619.213839.33010@g44g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...

>
>
>> > Compass railtour from Cardiff to Accrington Sat 23/07/05 turned into a
>> > bus tour after train cancelled at Warrington due to no forward Driver
>> > so all passengers put on buses home.
>>
>> Astonishing that six buses can be procured more easily than one 47-passed
>> train driver.
>>
>> Rick.
>
> And with route knowledge.
>


I wasn't aware that such bus drivers would need route knowledge!

Regards,

Fred.

www.thinkofanumber.com

"Fred Harris" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote

>
> I wasn't aware that such bus drivers would need route knowledge!
>

It shows the rail industry in a poor light when services have to be
bustituted, and the bus driver has such poor route knowledge that the
passengers have to tell him where to go (see uk.r passim), or, worse, he
takes the roof off a double-decker on a low rail bridge (happened in Kent a
year or so ago).

Peter

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 23:18:47 +0100, "Fred Harris"
<nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:


>I wasn't aware that such bus drivers would need route knowledge!


They don't, as is evidenced by many reports of passengers directing
replacement buses, or even having directed normal service buses on
occasions.

That is perhaps the point.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 16:29:40 +0100, Alan Osborn
 wrote:


>Bus and Coach  drivers carry fare paying passengers, apart from
>requiring a Public Service Vehicle (PSV) Licence I am not aware that
>specific training is given to a driver per type of vehicle
>My local Stagecoach bus route has been equipped with new 04 reg double
>deckers should the drivers have been pre-trained, similarly the London
>coach link is new longer and bigger double deck 04 coaches (longer than
>a London Red Bus) were they specifically retrained, I envy them
>negotiating London's traffic driving through West/Centrol London to
>reach Victoria.


I think you will find that, when a new type of vehicle comes into
service, the drivers will be given some form of familiarisation
training on that type.

Things like door opening systems, kneeling systems, gear changing,
etc., all vary from type to type. It may just be a sit in the driver's
seat and a trip round the yard or round the block, but it's unusual to
be sent out without some guidance.

On the other hand, ferry pilots during the 39-45 war often got into an
aircraft with a set of Pilot's Notes and set off. There were no
dual-control Spitfires or Hurricanes then either.
-- 
Terry Harper
Website Coordinator, The Omnibus Society
http://www.omnibussoc.org

On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 21:01:33 GMT, Tessy wrote in
, seen in uk.railway:

> On Wed, 27 Jul 2005 12:32:07 +0100, Ross  wrote:
> >On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:59:23 GMT, Tessy wrote in
> >, seen in uk.railway:
> >> On Tue, 26 Jul 2005 20:47:12 +0100, Ross  wrote:
> >> 
> >[...]
> >> >To take an example affecting me, before CT drivers were allowed to
> >> >handle the ex-MML class 170/1 units, we had to be given conversion
> >> >training as there are various differences between 170/1 and our own
> >> >170/5 & /6. 
> >> >
> >> >Only took an hour or so, but until we had it we weren't allowed to
> >> >touch the things.
> >> 
> >> And would you consider that to be reasonable?
> >
> >I assume (from your wording) you are inferring that you think it
> >wasn't. 
> 
> No, I am genuinely interested in whether you think it is 59 mins too long
> or half a day too short.


Fair enough. Your wording was terse enough that I wonder if there was
some mild sarcasm in there.

The answer is:- 

> >The differences were small, but significant in their own way. 
> >The time allowed was reasonable enough to tell us what they were.


-- 
Ross, Lincoln, UK

We're *not* afraid
http://www.werenotafraid.com

The reason the train was terminated short was due to the fact that the
FM driver did not sign the route over the East Lancashire line,why this
was not spotted until the day can only be guessed.

Once told (and I stand to be corrected) that in Germany,drivers
basically go anywhere,and travel with a full set of route diagarms,list
of speeds,signals etc.

AJF.

On 30 Jul 2005 06:18:23 -0700, "Bucket 25"
 wrote:


>Once told (and I stand to be corrected) that in Germany,drivers
>basically go anywhere,and travel with a full set of route diagarms,list
>of speeds,signals etc.


I recall this is called the "Buchfahrplan", and it is, as the name
would suggest, a ring-bound book showing the full layout of the line
in some detail.

I don't know if it completely substitutes for route knowledge, mind.

Neil

-- 
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
When replying please use neil at the above domain
'wensleydale' is a spam trap and is not read.

Neil Williams wrote:

> On 30 Jul 2005 06:18:23 -0700, "Bucket 25"
>  wrote:
>
> >Once told (and I stand to be corrected) that in Germany,drivers
> >basically go anywhere,and travel with a full set of route diagarms,list
> >of speeds,signals etc.
>
> I recall this is called the "Buchfahrplan", and it is, as the name
> would suggest, a ring-bound book showing the full layout of the line
> in some detail.
>
> I don't know if it completely substitutes for route knowledge, mind.
> 

The problem was that the FM driver forgot to bring his "Buchfahrplan"