Jobsworth driver

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

I was sitting in a Great Northern train at Finsbury Park this afternoon when
a Thameslink train pulled in and a couple of women ran out to catch our train.
Now a normal person in the cab would have waited for them to get on, but no,
not the one in our train - he shut the doors in their faces.

So either:
A) He wasn't monitoring the platforms when he shut the doors or
B) He's a complete jobsworth tit and waiting 5 seconds beyond the booked leaving
time was Not On.

Either way it was a pretty obnoxious thing to do. Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

[Scott]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
I was sitting in a Great Northern train at Finsbury Park this afternoon when
a Thameslink train pulled in and a couple of women ran out to catch our train.
Now a normal person in the cab would have waited for them to get on, but no,
not the one in our train - he shut the doors in their faces.
A) He wasn't monitoring the platforms when he shut the doors or
B) He's a complete jobsworth tit and waiting 5 seconds beyond the booked leaving
time was Not On.
Either way it was a pretty obnoxious thing to do. Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

In the old days, did some guards on London Underground not perfect a
technique where if a passenger tried to block the doors with a
briefcase it was possible to open and shut the doors so as to leave
the briefcase on the train and the passenger on the platform?

[Basil Jet]

Post by Scott

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
I was sitting in a Great Northern train at Finsbury Park this afternoon when
a Thameslink train pulled in and a couple of women ran out to catch our train.
Now a normal person in the cab would have waited for them to get on, but no,
not the one in our train - he shut the doors in their faces.
A) He wasn't monitoring the platforms when he shut the doors or
B) He's a complete jobsworth tit and waiting 5 seconds beyond the booked leaving
time was Not On.
Either way it was a pretty obnoxious thing to do. Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

In the old days, did some guards on London Underground not perfect a
technique where if a passenger tried to block the doors with a
briefcase it was possible to open and shut the doors so as to leave
the briefcase on the train and the passenger on the platform?

There's a fundamental difference between waiting for passengers on a
tube line that is close to theoretical maximum headway and waiting for
passengers on the half-hourly train to Bayford.

[NY]

There's a fundamental difference between waiting for passengers on a tube
line that is close to theoretical maximum headway and waiting for
passengers on the half-hourly train to Bayford.

I was once waiting on the platform for a train, along with a lot of other
people - probably a bit more than normal. The train was a couple of minutes
late. It stopped, opened its doors, let a few people on and then closed them
after about 10 seconds and set off. There was plenty of space inside the
train, so it looks as if the driver/guard thought "I'm late so I'm only
going to make a token gesture of stopping but not long enough for everyone
to get on". Passengers weren't running to catch the train: they were already
on the platform and queuing at each train door when the doors were
unceremoniously closed.

What is the normal advice when a train is running late and there are a lot
of passengers to get on but also a lot of space on the train? Is it normal
for doors to be closed after a token time, even though there are more
passengers still waiting to get on and space to accommodate them?

The next train (half an hour later) was very full, but the train waited for
long enough to get as many people on as possible, only closing the doors
when there was no more standing room. Some people were delayed by an hour:
they didn't get on the first train because it set off after only a few
seconds, and they didn't get on the second train because there wasn't enough
space.

[MikeS]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of tits
as well.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Roland Perry]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return guards to
all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return guards to
all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs travel
by train into London.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on
strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return
guards to all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs
travel by train into London.

If we return to the workers' paradise that was BR in the 70's, why would
drivers, and signalmen be striking because the nationalised BR wouldn't
give them the pay rise they demanded?

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on
strike  for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

 A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return
guards to  all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs
travel by train into London.

If we return to the workers' paradise that was BR in the 70's, why would
drivers, and signalmen be striking because the nationalised BR wouldn't
give them the pay rise they demanded?

Stop trying to be rational, the comrades don't like it.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:37:21 +0000

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on
strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return
guards to all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs
travel by train into London.

If we return to the workers' paradise that was BR in the 70's, why would
drivers, and signalmen be striking because the nationalised BR wouldn't
give them the pay rise they demanded?

When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too often
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the lot
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number of
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend and
they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.

Thats the kind of leadership we need in this country, not the emasculated
idiots and whining women we seem to end up with now.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:37:21 +0000

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on
strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return
guards to all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs
travel by train into London.

If we return to the workers' paradise that was BR in the 70's, why would
drivers, and signalmen be striking because the nationalised BR wouldn't
give them the pay rise they demanded?

When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too often
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the lot
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number of
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend and
they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.

Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over
half of which is done on trains with other crews (training with
instructors, route learning with regular crews). Sack *everyone* at once
and you're going to find it very difficult to run any trains at all for at
least a year, and probably at least three years before you can run anything
like a full service.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 15:37:21 +0000

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on
strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return
guards to all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs
travel by train into London.

If we return to the workers' paradise that was BR in the 70's, why would
drivers, and signalmen be striking because the nationalised BR wouldn't
give them the pay rise they demanded?

When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too often
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the lot
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number of
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend and
they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.

Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over
half of which is done on trains with other crews (training with
instructors, route learning with regular crews). Sack *everyone* at once
and you're going to find it very difficult to run any trains at all for at
least a year, and probably at least three years before you can run anything
like a full service.

More or less what actually happened with the Air Traffic Controllers in
the States, flights were reduced by about 50% for several months and it
was 10 years before the system finally recovered, ironically after
having to introduce many of the reforms the Controllers were striking
for in the first place.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too often
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the

lot

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number

of

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend and
they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.

Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over

It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.
The other 17 months being required is no doubt down to antiquated union rules
that haven't changed since the victorian era.

[Charles Ellson]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too often
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the

lot

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number

of

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend and
they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.

Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over

It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.
The other 17 months being required is no doubt down to antiquated union rules
that haven't changed since the victorian era.

No, it took you 4 days to learn how to steer a bus. It takes much
longer than that to learn how to drive any road vehicle due to the
different circumstances that can be experienced. Some people never
learn.

[NY]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?

The largest vehicle I've driven was a long wheelbase Mercedes Sprinter van
(from a van hire place when we were moving house), having only driven a car
until then. Reversing it onto our drive was nerve-wracking, even with the
aid of a reversing camera: I'm so used to having the view through the rear
window via a rear-view mirror, in addition to the door mirrors. Remembering
to drive slightly beyond a right-angle turn before starting to steer, so as
to avoid clipping the kerb with the back wheels, was something I *usually*
did right but occasionally misjudged.

By the third day it held no terrors for me, and I even managed to parallel
park it (obviously in a longer slot than for my car!) on the first go -
thank goodness for the passenger door mirror, angled downwards, to see when
the rear wheel is about to touch the kerb, so as to determine when to start
steering hard right to tuck the front end in.

Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel felt
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position for
steering the van.



But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

[Recliner]

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?
The largest vehicle I've driven was a long wheelbase Mercedes Sprinter van
(from a van hire place when we were moving house), having only driven a car
until then. Reversing it onto our drive was nerve-wracking, even with the
aid of a reversing camera: I'm so used to having the view through the rear
window via a rear-view mirror, in addition to the door mirrors. Remembering
to drive slightly beyond a right-angle turn before starting to steer, so as
to avoid clipping the kerb with the back wheels, was something I *usually*
did right but occasionally misjudged.
By the third day it held no terrors for me, and I even managed to parallel
park it (obviously in a longer slot than for my car!) on the first go -
thank goodness for the passenger door mirror, angled downwards, to see when
the rear wheel is about to touch the kerb, so as to determine when to start
steering hard right to tuck the front end in.
Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel felt
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position for
steering the van.
But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?
The largest vehicle I've driven was a long wheelbase Mercedes Sprinter van
(from a van hire place when we were moving house), having only driven a car
until then. Reversing it onto our drive was nerve-wracking, even with the
aid of a reversing camera: I'm so used to having the view through the rear
window via a rear-view mirror, in addition to the door mirrors. Remembering
to drive slightly beyond a right-angle turn before starting to steer, so as
to avoid clipping the kerb with the back wheels, was something I *usually*
did right but occasionally misjudged.
By the third day it held no terrors for me, and I even managed to parallel
park it (obviously in a longer slot than for my car!) on the first go -
thank goodness for the passenger door mirror, angled downwards, to see when
the rear wheel is about to touch the kerb, so as to determine when to start
steering hard right to tuck the front end in.
Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel felt
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position for
steering the van.
But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Recliner

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?
But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.

So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Marland]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Recliner

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?
But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.

So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?

Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.


GH

[Charles Ellson]

Post by Marland

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?
But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.

So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?

Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.

Not in London then where you get twats ringing the bell 0.1sec after
the bus has left the previous stop.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Marland
Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.

Not in London then where you get twats ringing the bell 0.1sec after
the bus has left the previous stop.

Is there some approved timescale for omnibus campanology of which I'm
somehow unaware?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[John Ray]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Is there some approved timescale for omnibus campanology of which I'm
somehow unaware?

I always wait for the next stop to be announced on the PA system, which
means that, very often, I don't get the chance to ring the bell.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by John Ray

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Is there some approved timescale for omnibus campanology of which I'm
somehow unaware?

I always wait for the next stop to be announced on the PA system, which
means that, very often, I don't get the chance to ring the bell.

Could spend all day riding backwards and forwards on some routes waiting
for a PA announcement!


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Charles Ellson]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 22:29:09 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by John Ray

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Is there some approved timescale for omnibus campanology of which I'm
somehow unaware?

In the past you would have got the rough end of the conductor's tongue
if the bus wasn't a decent distance away from the previous stop as it
was effectively treated as equivalent to pulling the alarm on a train.

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by John Ray
I always wait for the next stop to be announced on the PA system, which
means that, very often, I don't get the chance to ring the bell.

Could spend all day riding backwards and forwards on some routes waiting
for a PA announcement!
Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Bevan Price]

Post by Charles Ellson
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 22:29:09 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Is there some approved timescale for omnibus campanology of which I'm
somehow unaware?

In the past you would have got the rough end of the conductor's tongue
if the bus wasn't a decent distance away from the previous stop as it
was effectively treated as equivalent to pulling the alarm on a train.

In plenty of places outside London, you got shouted at by the conductor
if you dared to touch the bell - that was his / her job. It was a bit of
a shock when I started to work in London and found out that I was
expected to ring the bell myself.

[Chris J Dixon]

Post by Bevan Price

Post by Charles Ellson
In the past you would have got the rough end of the conductor's tongue
if the bus wasn't a decent distance away from the previous stop as it
was effectively treated as equivalent to pulling the alarm on a train.

In plenty of places outside London, you got shouted at by the conductor
if you dared to touch the bell - that was his / her job. It was a bit of
a shock when I started to work in London and found out that I was
expected to ring the bell myself.

Back when all buses used to have conductors, where I come from in
Barnsley, passengers were never supposed to ring the bell
themselves. You were expected to notify the conductor. If they
were upstairs, you had to make your way to the open platform and
shout up the stairs to them.

However, when I was at college in Salford it was expected that
passengers would ring the bell themselves. Forgetting which rule
was in force could be problematic, though I suppose missing your
stop was generally worse than being told off.

Chris

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by John Ray

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Is there some approved timescale for omnibus campanology of which I'm
somehow unaware?

I always wait for the next stop to be announced on the PA system, which
means that, very often, I don't get the chance to ring the bell.

Could spend all day riding backwards and forwards on some routes waiting
for a PA announcement!

Assuming the bus has it fitted, ours never did, we were lucky to get
bells that worked (most of the time anyway, unless the scrotes had
ripped out the buttons and the wiring).

[Marland]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Marland
Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.

Not in London then where you get twats ringing the bell 0.1sec after
the bus has left the previous stop.

Is there some approved timescale for omnibus campanology of which I'm
somehow unaware?

Although I haven’t used one for some years now Southampton passengers
seemed to be very reluctant to use the bell to the extent that visitors to
the City sometimes remarked about it.
The technique seemed to be that someone wishing to alight at the next stop
would get up from their seat
and just lurk a few feet behind the driver who took that as the signal they
wished to get off .
I rang the bell once and the effect wasn’t that much different to that
created by trying to start a conversation on the London Underground.

Any other places where the use of the Bell was similarly disdained.

GH

[MissRiaElaine]

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by Marland
Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.

Not in London then where you get twats ringing the bell 0.1sec after
the bus has left the previous stop.

I had that in Birmingham as well, it's not just a London thing. Also
people standing just behind the cab waiting to get off and NOT ringing
the bell, then complaining when the bus doesn't stop.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On 24 Nov 2019 13:51:40 GMT

Post by Marland

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon

2

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used

to

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by NY
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?
But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.

So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?

Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.

You have to do bloody role play on the test - examiner pretends hes a
passenger - ding ding etc - pull up gently to at the correct stopping point
open/close doors, check Mrs Pensioner hasn't falled over in the aisle etc.
And miss the stopping point and that IIRC is a serious fault which = fail.

With a lorry test , as long as you can keep it on the road, don't clip the
scenery and don't hit anyone you'll probably pass though with the Class 1
test you have to reverse with a trailer which isn't easy. God knows how the
aussie drivers reverse a double or triple.

[Charles Ellson]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On 24 Nov 2019 13:51:40 GMT

Post by Marland

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Recliner

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that
involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon

2

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Recliner

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more
weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used

to

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Recliner

Post by NY
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?
But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.

So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?

Boltar may be a natural at vehicle handling which not all people are so the
physical driving was ticked off on the first day, the rest were spent
learning what the ringing sound was as the bus approached a stop.

You have to do bloody role play on the test - examiner pretends hes a
passenger - ding ding etc - pull up gently to at the correct stopping point
open/close doors, check Mrs Pensioner hasn't falled over in the aisle etc.
And miss the stopping point and that IIRC is a serious fault which = fail.
With a lorry test , as long as you can keep it on the road, don't clip the
scenery and don't hit anyone you'll probably pass though with the Class 1
test you have to reverse with a trailer which isn't easy. God knows how the
aussie drivers reverse a double or triple.

One at a time or just "go around"?

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
With a lorry test , as long as you can keep it on the road, don't clip the
scenery and don't hit anyone you'll probably pass though with the Class 1
test you have to reverse with a trailer which isn't easy. God knows how the
aussie drivers reverse a double or triple.

I strongly suspect that they don’t reverse them because it’s got to be near
enough impossible, surely?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:09 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:22:23 -0000 (UTC)

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?
But that is nowhere near as extreme as driving a bus which is wider still
and a lot longer. If you only had prior experience of driving a car, then
I'm impressed that you passed a bus test on day 5.

Neil also has an HGV licence — maybe he got that before driving the bus?

I did.

So you already had (a) experience of driving road vehicles (b) experience
of driving large road vehicles. 5 days to learn that the front wheels are
further back and that you have to look out for passengers?

Admittedly once you can drive a lorry there isn't much extra to driving a
bus apart from stopping points and being smoother with the throttle and brake.
Turns out people don't like being flung about like a container full of carrots.
Pity someone doesn't tell TfLs bus drivers.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:13:31 -0000

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?

Articulated HGV so I had a bit of a prior advantage.

Post by NY
Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel felt
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position for
steering the van.

Driving a lorry is like driving a large car for me. Driving a bus is wierd
however because you're about a meter in front of the steering wheels so you
have to leave turning movements later than feels normal.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:13:31 -0000

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?

Articulated HGV so I had a bit of a prior advantage.

Post by NY
Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel felt
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position for
steering the van.

Driving a lorry is like driving a large car for me. Driving a bus is wierd
however because you're about a meter in front of the steering wheels so you
have to leave turning movements later than feels normal.

Unless you're driving a half-cab or an Optare Solo :)

Bin lorries and some other specialist vehicles share the 'cab well forward'
position of a bus.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Charles Ellson]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:10 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:13:31 -0000

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?

Articulated HGV so I had a bit of a prior advantage.

Post by NY
Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel felt
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position for
steering the van.

Driving a lorry is like driving a large car for me. Driving a bus is wierd
however because you're about a meter in front of the steering wheels so you
have to leave turning movements later than feels normal.

Unless you're driving a half-cab or an Optare Solo :)
Bin lorries and some other specialist vehicles share the 'cab well forward'
position of a bus.

Often built by the same company - Dennis. Another of their design
oddities is cabs very close to the ground, usually on airport vehicles
but also see on some refuse vehicles.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Charles Ellson
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:10 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Driving a lorry is like driving a large car for me. Driving a bus is wierd
however because you're about a meter in front of the steering wheels so you
have to leave turning movements later than feels normal.

Unless you're driving a half-cab or an Optare Solo :)
Bin lorries and some other specialist vehicles share the 'cab well forward'
position of a bus.

Often built by the same company - Dennis. Another of their design
oddities is cabs very close to the ground, usually on airport vehicles
but also see on some refuse vehicles.

Other than airport vehicles which have to fit under things, it's all for
the same reason - quick and easy access of people (be they staff or
passengers) into the vehicle.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Charles Ellson]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 21:00:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Charles Ellson
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:10 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Driving a lorry is like driving a large car for me. Driving a bus is wierd
however because you're about a meter in front of the steering wheels so you
have to leave turning movements later than feels normal.

Unless you're driving a half-cab or an Optare Solo :)
Bin lorries and some other specialist vehicles share the 'cab well forward'
position of a bus.

Often built by the same company - Dennis. Another of their design
oddities is cabs very close to the ground, usually on airport vehicles
but also see on some refuse vehicles.

Other than airport vehicles which have to fit under things, it's all for
the same reason - quick and easy access of people (be they staff or
passengers) into the vehicle.

Many airport vehicles tend to have equipment/structures which overhang
the cab. The great majority of refuse vehicles have conventional
height cabs including ones built by Dennis. AFAIR entry/egress is not
necessarily easier as the design causes the wheel arch to intrude into
the rear of the cab doorway and thus reduces the available width at
the bottom in what in photographs seems to be the shorter of two cab
lengths. Photographs also show that the rear door pillar is often
forward of the rear of the driver's seat thus preventing exiting by
simply turning through 90deg and stepping out.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 23:33:10 +0000

Post by Charles Ellson
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 21:00:07 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Other than airport vehicles which have to fit under things, it's all for
the same reason - quick and easy access of people (be they staff or
passengers) into the vehicle.

Many airport vehicles tend to have equipment/structures which overhang
the cab. The great majority of refuse vehicles have conventional
height cabs including ones built by Dennis. AFAIR entry/egress is not
necessarily easier as the design causes the wheel arch to intrude into
the rear of the cab doorway and thus reduces the available width at
the bottom in what in photographs seems to be the shorter of two cab
lengths. Photographs also show that the rear door pillar is often
forward of the rear of the driver's seat thus preventing exiting by
simply turning through 90deg and stepping out.

Unlike in the railway industry - when road rules are made the driver is the
last person considered. In the USA truck drivers get nice large cabs and a long
bonnet thats a useful crumple zone in a crash. In the EU with its dumb
overall length rules the tractor unit and hence cab is made as short as
possible so the trailer can be as long as possible in the rules. So all there
is between you and whatever you hit is the windscreen and dashboard. Doesn't
matter if its a car, it does if its another lorry or a tree.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 19:38:33 +0000

Post by Charles Ellson
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:10 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 23:13:31 -0000

Post by NY

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2
or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks for
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.

What sort of vehicles had you driven before then? Were you already used to
driving anything larger than a standard Ford Cortina size of car?

Articulated HGV so I had a bit of a prior advantage.

Post by NY
Driving an ordinary car felt very weird afterwards - the steering wheel

felt

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by NY
so high up, when I'd got used to the elbows-resting-on-my-knees position

for

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by NY
steering the van.

Driving a lorry is like driving a large car for me. Driving a bus is wierd
however because you're about a meter in front of the steering wheels so you
have to leave turning movements later than feels normal.

Unless you're driving a half-cab or an Optare Solo :)
Bin lorries and some other specialist vehicles share the 'cab well forward'
position of a bus.

Often built by the same company - Dennis. Another of their design
oddities is cabs very close to the ground, usually on airport vehicles
but also see on some refuse vehicles.

In London they're becoming more common because of a rule Mr Mayor brought in
about visibility of cyclists in the cab. Which is fair enough I suppose.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 22:30:15 +0000

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too

often

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the

lot

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number

of

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend

and

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.

Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over

It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks

for

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.
The other 17 months being required is no doubt down to antiquated union rules
that haven't changed since the victorian era.

No, it took you 4 days to learn how to steer a bus. It takes much
longer than that to learn how to drive any road vehicle due to the
different circumstances that can be experienced. Some people never
learn.

The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car test
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

[m***@round-midnight.org.uk]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 22:30:15 +0000

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too

often

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the

lot

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number

of

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend

and

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.

Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over

It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks

for

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.
The other 17 months being required is no doubt down to antiquated union rules
that haven't changed since the victorian era.

No, it took you 4 days to learn how to steer a bus. It takes much
longer than that to learn how to drive any road vehicle due to the
different circumstances that can be experienced. Some people never
learn.

The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car test
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

My cousin did his HGV test using all that was available... A tank
transported loaded with a tank.

Apparently he mounted the kerb several times and bent a few bollards but
still passed.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 10:58:07 +0000

Post by m***@round-midnight.org.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car

test

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

My cousin did his HGV test using all that was available... A tank
transported loaded with a tank.
Apparently he mounted the kerb several times and bent a few bollards but
still passed.

I'm guessing that was a while back, he wouldn't get away with that today.

[m***@round-midnight.org.uk]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 10:58:07 +0000

Post by m***@round-midnight.org.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car

test

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

My cousin did his HGV test using all that was available... A tank
transported loaded with a tank.
Apparently he mounted the kerb several times and bent a few bollards but
still passed.

I'm guessing that was a while back, he wouldn't get away with that today.

Only about 10 years ago.

It depends exactly where and why that happened!

[Marland]

Post by m***@round-midnight.org.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 10:58:07 +0000

Post by m***@round-midnight.org.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car

test

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

My cousin did his HGV test using all that was available... A tank
transported loaded with a tank.
Apparently he mounted the kerb several times and bent a few bollards but
still passed.

I'm guessing that was a while back, he wouldn't get away with that today.

Only about 10 years ago.
It depends exactly where and why that happened!

The military have different rules don’t they? ICBW but aren’t the age
limits lower to obtain a licence for large vehicles for personnel serving
in the forces. And at various times since motorised vehicles replaced
horses
when the need demanded it a military test was basically not much more than
can you make it move ,can you steer it ,can you stop it. Pass any two
,well done lad you are now a driver. Though during WW2 driving tests were
suspended for civilians as well and many people took advantage that a
driving permit or provisional licence issued could for a short time
afterwards be converted to a full licence without any further test.
Explains a lot of the dire driving standards encountered from that
generation over the following decades especially when they became elderly
know it alls ,at least those reaching those years now will normally have
passed a test at some time.

GH

[NY]

Post by Marland
Though during WW2 driving tests were
suspended for civilians as well and many people took advantage that a
driving permit or provisional licence issued could for a short time
afterwards be converted to a full licence without any further test.
Explains a lot of the dire driving standards encountered from that
generation over the following decades especially when they became elderly
know it alls ,at least those reaching those years now will normally have
passed a test at some time.

I didn't know that the civilian driving test was suspended during WWII -
presumably to free up examiners to do war work, and to remove all the
bureaucracy of administering the tests. However very few civilians would
have been able to get petrol unless they were in a reserved occupation.

Apart from the WWII window of opportunity, the youngest person who has not
passed a test would have been 17 in 1935, so they'd be born in 1918 and
therefore 101 now. And the youngest person who would have slipped through
the WWII window would have been 17 in 1945 and therefore 91. Assuming that
the age of starting to drive was 17 in those days as well.

I think a lot of the problem with driving standards is not due to lack of
test, but to bravado and overconfidence (mainly in the young), or being
completely oblivious of surroundings and car controls (mainly in the
elderly) - in both cases, I'm making very broad-brush generalisations.
Intoxication and falling asleep at the wheel probably applies to most ages.

As I understand it, a lot of the cases of drivers (usually elderly) who
accidentally drive/reverse into shop fronts is because they confuse the
accelerator and brake in an automatic car, and then press the accelerator
instead of the brake when they realise they are out of control.


My grandpa was still driving right up until he died (*) when he was in his
mid 90s. He was very choosy about when/where he drove - out of rush hour, on
rural roads rather than busy urban roads. The last time I rode with him, I
was impressed with his standard of driving: he didn't cut corners when
pulling out from side roads, he got up to nearly the speed limit without too
much dawdling, he was cautious but not hesitant at junctions. The only
"funny" was that he had a habit of slipping the car into neutral and
coasting as he was approaching a junction or when going downhill, which I
think was a carry-over from wartime petrol rationing days as a fuel-saving
measure. Nowadays with fuel injection it would actually work against you: if
you stay in gear, the ECU detects that the car is in over-run and cuts the
fuel completely, whereas in neutral a bit of fuel is needed to keep the
engine idling. The instantaneous fuel consumption display on my car's trip
computer shows this: when coasting in neutral, the consumption is about 200
mpg, whereas in gear with no throttle it is 999 ("infinite") mpg.


(*) And that was complications from a fall when he was shopping, not in a
car crash ;-)

[Charles Ellson]

Post by NY

Post by Marland
Though during WW2 driving tests were
suspended for civilians as well and many people took advantage that a
driving permit or provisional licence issued could for a short time
afterwards be converted to a full licence without any further test.
Explains a lot of the dire driving standards encountered from that
generation over the following decades especially when they became elderly
know it alls ,at least those reaching those years now will normally have
passed a test at some time.

I didn't know that the civilian driving test was suspended during WWII -
presumably to free up examiners to do war work, and to remove all the
bureaucracy of administering the tests. However very few civilians would
have been able to get petrol unless they were in a reserved occupation.

Saving fuel was a significant reason IIRC.
<snip>

[ColinR]

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by NY

Post by Marland
Though during WW2 driving tests were
suspended for civilians as well and many people took advantage that a
driving permit or provisional licence issued could for a short time
afterwards be converted to a full licence without any further test.
Explains a lot of the dire driving standards encountered from that
generation over the following decades especially when they became elderly
know it alls ,at least those reaching those years now will normally have
passed a test at some time.

I didn't know that the civilian driving test was suspended during WWII -
presumably to free up examiners to do war work, and to remove all the
bureaucracy of administering the tests. However very few civilians would
have been able to get petrol unless they were in a reserved occupation.

Saving fuel was a significant reason IIRC.
<snip>

Do not know about military / civilian licences, but the idea that
driving tests were stopped during the war is correct.
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/history-of-road-safety-and-the-driving-test/history-of-road-safety-the-highway-code-and-the-driving-test

[m***@round-midnight.org.uk]

Post by Marland

Post by m***@round-midnight.org.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 10:58:07 +0000

Post by m***@round-midnight.org.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car

test

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

My cousin did his HGV test using all that was available... A tank
transported loaded with a tank.
Apparently he mounted the kerb several times and bent a few bollards but
still passed.

I'm guessing that was a while back, he wouldn't get away with that today.

Only about 10 years ago.
It depends exactly where and why that happened!

The military have different rules don’t they? ICBW but aren’t the age
limits lower to obtain a licence for large vehicles for personnel serving
in the forces. And at various times since motorised vehicles replaced
horses

The age is lower in the forces but only for driving military vehicles
and you are only given a military driving permit which cannot be used
with a private vehicle.

I'm not sure what the arrangements for getting a civil licence these
days. They were conducted by the military but that may have changed.
These "incidents" occurred during this conversion.

Post by Marland
when the need demanded it a military test was basically not much more than
can you make it move ,can you steer it ,can you stop it. Pass any two
,well done lad you are now a driver. Though during WW2 driving tests were
suspended for civilians as well and many people took advantage that a
driving permit or provisional licence issued could for a short time
afterwards be converted to a full licence without any further test.
Explains a lot of the dire driving standards encountered from that
generation over the following decades especially when they became elderly
know it alls ,at least those reaching those years now will normally have
passed a test at some time.
GH

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 22:30:15 +0000

Post by Charles Ellson

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
When the air traffic controllers in the USA pushed their luck once too

often

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
and went out on strike for the umpteenth time in the 80s, Reagan fired the

lot

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
of then AND banned them for working for the federal government for a number

of

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
years yet planes kept flying. We should do the same with train staff - its
not exactly a hard job physically or mentally no matter what they pretend

and

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
they could be replaced pretty quickly. Certainly quicker than air traffic
controllers.

Several months to train a guard and 12-18 months to train a driver; over

It took me 4 days to learn to drive a bus - test on the 5th. And that involves
having to actually steer the vehicle through narrow streets and around parked
vehicles, not something train drivers have to worry about. So I reckon 2 or 3
days to learn to push a lever backwards and forwards and get a feel for
braking under different loads (no different to an HGV) and a few more weeks

for

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
for learning signals, basic trouble shooting and some routes. A month tops.
The other 17 months being required is no doubt down to antiquated union rules
that haven't changed since the victorian era.

No, it took you 4 days to learn how to steer a bus. It takes much
longer than that to learn how to drive any road vehicle due to the
different circumstances that can be experienced. Some people never
learn.

The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car test
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

And yet with the same breath you dismiss train driving as 'pulling levers'.
Surely you realise that the train driving assessment is just as strict, if
not more so?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:09 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car

test

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

And yet with the same breath you dismiss train driving as 'pulling levers'.
Surely you realise that the train driving assessment is just as strict, if
not more so?

I can imagine being a steam locomotive driver was a bugger of a job. Physically
hard and you had to get the feel of the engine under different loads. I suspect
driving a modern freight loco is still tricky (although not physically) as you
could be just driving the loco itself or have 2000 tons behing you.

Driving a computer controlled EMU though that won't allow you to play silly
buggers with the throttle and brake, doesn't change much in behaviour from
empty to full load, doesn't have to be steered and when it goes wrong needs
a technician with a laptop to turn up anyway? Don't tell me thats particularly
hard.

Seems to me the only hard part of being a modern EMU driver is the shift work
aspect of the job, other than that - piece of piss.

[Bevan Price]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:09 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev and
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car

test

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

And yet with the same breath you dismiss train driving as 'pulling levers'.
Surely you realise that the train driving assessment is just as strict, if
not more so?

I can imagine being a steam locomotive driver was a bugger of a job. Physically
hard and you had to get the feel of the engine under different loads. I suspect
driving a modern freight loco is still tricky (although not physically) as you
could be just driving the loco itself or have 2000 tons behing you.
Driving a computer controlled EMU though that won't allow you to play silly
buggers with the throttle and brake, doesn't change much in behaviour from
empty to full load, doesn't have to be steered and when it goes wrong needs
a technician with a laptop to turn up anyway? Don't tell me thats particularly
hard.
Seems to me the only hard part of being a modern EMU driver is the shift work
aspect of the job, other than that - piece of piss.

Nonsense. I have never driven a real train, but I was once allowed to
drive a dmu simulator. The most difficult part was knowing when / where
to apply the brakes for checks or station stops. And that involved just
one check and one (simulated) station.

Dependent on the extent of their route knowledge, drivers may need to
know the locations of dozens of stations, numerous signals and speed
restrictions - at daylight - in good or bad visibility, or at night -
and then need to be able to judge the best places to apply brakes -
often on several types of unit - and in all sorts of weather conditions.
In addition, they need to be prepared for short term temporary speed limits.

So it is not as easy as you might think.

[NY]

Dependent on the extent of their route knowledge, drivers may need to know
the locations of dozens of stations, numerous signals and speed
restrictions - at daylight - in good or bad visibility, or at night - and
then need to be able to judge the best places to apply brakes - often on
several types of unit - and in all sorts of weather conditions. In
addition, they need to be prepared for short term temporary speed limits.
So it is not as easy as you might think.

I have nothing but admiration for train drivers, having to remember the
route to a much greater extent than a driver of a car or lorry who are able
to stop in much shorter distances and who drive largely by sight - it is
considered safe for a car to be driven on a road that the driver has never
seen before, without "route knowledge".

I have enough difficulty remembering the *order* and *spacing* of landmarks
and hazards on a route that I drive frequently. I can remember *what* they
are, but not necessarily where or how far apart. And that's because there is
no need to remember them, because I'm driving according to what I can see is
safe ahead.

It's probably a memory skill that is similar to a London cabbie's
"knowledge": fewer junctions but much more detailed knowledge of braking
points and gradients.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:33:39 -0000

Post by NY

Dependent on the extent of their route knowledge, drivers may need to know
the locations of dozens of stations, numerous signals and speed
restrictions - at daylight - in good or bad visibility, or at night - and
then need to be able to judge the best places to apply brakes - often on
several types of unit - and in all sorts of weather conditions. In
addition, they need to be prepared for short term temporary speed limits.
So it is not as easy as you might think.

I have nothing but admiration for train drivers, having to remember the
route to a much greater extent than a driver of a car or lorry who are able
to stop in much shorter distances and who drive largely by sight - it is
considered safe for a car to be driven on a road that the driver has never
seen before, without "route knowledge".
I have enough difficulty remembering the *order* and *spacing* of landmarks
and hazards on a route that I drive frequently. I can remember *what* they
are, but not necessarily where or how far apart. And that's because there is
no need to remember them, because I'm driving according to what I can see is
safe ahead.

OTOH train drivers don't have to:
- steer
- maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front
- keep in lane
- manouver in tight spaces
- know dozens of road signs and act accordingly
- reverse while looking in mirrors
- get the timing right pulling out from junctions
- merge with fast moving traffic on a motorway
- worry about height restrictions (for lorry and bus)

But they have to be good at judging braking distance. BFD. If that was all
driving a road vehicle entailed everyone would pass first time after a 30 min
lesson.

[Roland Perry]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
- steer
- maintain a safe distance from the vehicle in front

https://www.gov.uk/government/news/train-collision-at-neville-hill

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
- keep in lane
- manouver in tight spaces
- know dozens of road signs and act accordingly
- reverse while looking in mirrors
- get the timing right pulling out from junctions
- merge with fast moving traffic on a motorway
- worry about height restrictions (for lorry and bus)

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:23:24 +0000

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:09 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev

and

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car

test

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

And yet with the same breath you dismiss train driving as 'pulling levers'.
Surely you realise that the train driving assessment is just as strict, if
not more so?

I can imagine being a steam locomotive driver was a bugger of a job.

Physically

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
hard and you had to get the feel of the engine under different loads. I

suspect

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
driving a modern freight loco is still tricky (although not physically) as

you

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
could be just driving the loco itself or have 2000 tons behing you.
Driving a computer controlled EMU though that won't allow you to play silly
buggers with the throttle and brake, doesn't change much in behaviour from
empty to full load, doesn't have to be steered and when it goes wrong needs
a technician with a laptop to turn up anyway? Don't tell me thats

particularly

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
hard.
Seems to me the only hard part of being a modern EMU driver is the shift work
aspect of the job, other than that - piece of piss.

Nonsense. I have never driven a real train, but I was once allowed to
drive a dmu simulator. The most difficult part was knowing when / where
to apply the brakes for checks or station stops. And that involved just
one check and one (simulated) station.

So? A bit of practice and no doubt it becomes 2nd nature.

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Dependent on the extent of their route knowledge, drivers may need to
know the locations of dozens of stations, numerous signals and speed
restrictions - at daylight - in good or bad visibility, or at night -
and then need to be able to judge the best places to apply brakes -
often on several types of unit - and in all sorts of weather conditions.
In addition, they need to be prepared for short term temporary speed limits.

And thats different to the experience of driving a road vehicle how exactly?

[Charles Ellson]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Mon, 25 Nov 2019 16:23:24 +0000

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sun, 24 Nov 2019 11:55:09 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
The test for a commercial vehicle is a LOT harder than a car. You don't get
away with many mistakes and the test enviroment is a lot more varied. Kev

and

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Trace might scrape through driving their corsa a bit erratically on a car

test

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
but they'd be failed in minutes on an HGV or bus test.

And yet with the same breath you dismiss train driving as 'pulling levers'.
Surely you realise that the train driving assessment is just as strict, if
not more so?

I can imagine being a steam locomotive driver was a bugger of a job.

Physically

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
hard and you had to get the feel of the engine under different loads. I

suspect

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
driving a modern freight loco is still tricky (although not physically) as

you

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
could be just driving the loco itself or have 2000 tons behing you.
Driving a computer controlled EMU though that won't allow you to play silly
buggers with the throttle and brake, doesn't change much in behaviour from
empty to full load, doesn't have to be steered and when it goes wrong needs
a technician with a laptop to turn up anyway? Don't tell me thats

particularly

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
hard.
Seems to me the only hard part of being a modern EMU driver is the shift work
aspect of the job, other than that - piece of piss.

Nonsense. I have never driven a real train, but I was once allowed to
drive a dmu simulator. The most difficult part was knowing when / where
to apply the brakes for checks or station stops. And that involved just
one check and one (simulated) station.

So? A bit of practice and no doubt it becomes 2nd nature.

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Dependent on the extent of their route knowledge, drivers may need to
know the locations of dozens of stations, numerous signals and speed
restrictions - at daylight - in good or bad visibility, or at night -
and then need to be able to judge the best places to apply brakes -
often on several types of unit - and in all sorts of weather conditions.
In addition, they need to be prepared for short term temporary speed limits.

And thats different to the experience of driving a road vehicle how exactly?

You can't swerve out of trouble if you get it wrong.

[Bevan Price]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on
strike  for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

 A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return
guards to  all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs
travel by train into London.

If we return to the workers' paradise that was BR in the 70's, why would
drivers, and signalmen be striking because the nationalised BR wouldn't
give them the pay rise they demanded?

I doubt that nationalisation would make much difference to the railways
- we will still have our "wonderful" DfT to organise everything
"perfectly" (a.k.a. make a "bo-locks")

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on
strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return
guards to all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs
travel by train into London.

If we return to the workers' paradise that was BR in the 70's, why would
drivers, and signalmen be striking because the nationalised BR wouldn't
give them the pay rise they demanded?

Yes, but with a bigger impact (national rather than regional) thus more
likely to get the desired result?


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Roland Perry]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on
strike for
a month soon

That's guards, not drivers.

A wonderful advert for Labour's manifesto commitment to return
guards to all trains. Whose side are these strikers on, exactly?

All part of Cash's self-appointed class war, after all only toffs
travel by train into London.

If we return to the workers' paradise that was BR in the 70's, why would
drivers, and signalmen be striking because the nationalised BR wouldn't
give them the pay rise they demanded?

Yes, but with a bigger impact (national rather than regional) thus more
likely to get the desired result?

Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.

† Quote:
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.

…

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.


<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>

[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

Post by Recliner
I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

The Times article I cited.

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner
I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

[Charles Ellson]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.

[Recliner]

Post by Charles Ellson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.

I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.

I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.

Why McDonnell? He is going to be the one who removes Corbyn from the
leadership, regardless of which way the election goes.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.

I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.

Why McDonnell? He is going to be the one who removes Corbyn from the
leadership, regardless of which way the election goes.

He's already said they'd both go if they lose. He wants a young,
inexperienced front-woman to be the new leader, with him pulling the
strings. He prefers to operate in the shadows.

For example, this is what Kate Hoey says of him:

The Shadow Chancellor, she says, “has become quite a nasty, devious figure
behind the scenes”; McDonnell is the one pulling the strings now. “After a
while, Jeremy realised that he was losing and he just seems to have given
in.”

<https://www.telegraph.co.uk/politics/2019/11/23/john-mcdonnell-nasty-devious-figure-behind-scenes-kate-hoey/>

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.

I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.

Why McDonnell? He is going to be the one who removes Corbyn from the
leadership, regardless of which way the election goes.

He's already said they'd both go if they lose. He wants a young,
inexperienced front-woman to be the new leader, with him pulling the
strings. He prefers to operate in the shadows.
The Shadow Chancellor, she says, “has become quite a nasty, devious figure
behind the scenes”; McDonnell is the one pulling the strings now. “After a
while, Jeremy realised that he was losing and he just seems to have given
in.”

He was always the one pulling the strings. He might not remain shadow
chancellor, though I wouldn't bet on it. He can always reluctantly agree
to remain in post just to oversea the leadership changes and then allow
the new leader to keep him on.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.

I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.

Why McDonnell? He is going to be the one who removes Corbyn from the
leadership, regardless of which way the election goes.

He's already said they'd both go if they lose. He wants a young,
inexperienced front-woman to be the new leader, with him pulling the
strings. He prefers to operate in the shadows.
The Shadow Chancellor, she says, “has become quite a nasty, devious figure
behind the scenes”; McDonnell is the one pulling the strings now. “After a
while, Jeremy realised that he was losing and he just seems to have given
in.”

He was always the one pulling the strings. He might not remain shadow
chancellor, though I wouldn't bet on it. He can always reluctantly agree
to remain in post just to oversea the leadership changes and then allow
the new leader to keep him on.

Could be, but I think he might prefer not to have a formal shadow cabinet
role.

If the polls are even half-right, Labour is set for another miserably long
stint in opposition, and may only have around 200 seats in the Commons, so
being in the Shadow Cabinet won't count for much.

It could be that the long-forecast split between the centre-left moderates
and Momentum finally happens after the meltdown. McDonnell might be more
interested in fighting that war with the hated Blairites than with coming
up with economic policies that no-one cares about.

Corbyn is 70, and looks much older. He looks like he belongs in a
retirement home, not No 10. Mcdonnell is 68, and probably won't be fighting
the next election.

<https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/11/election-2019-a-guide-to-what-the-polls-mean-and-what-they-dont>

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.

I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.

Why McDonnell? He is going to be the one who removes Corbyn from the
leadership, regardless of which way the election goes.

He's already said they'd both go if they lose. He wants a young,
inexperienced front-woman to be the new leader, with him pulling the
strings. He prefers to operate in the shadows.
The Shadow Chancellor, she says, “has become quite a nasty, devious figure
behind the scenes”; McDonnell is the one pulling the strings now. “After a
while, Jeremy realised that he was losing and he just seems to have given
in.”

He was always the one pulling the strings. He might not remain shadow
chancellor, though I wouldn't bet on it. He can always reluctantly agree
to remain in post just to oversea the leadership changes and then allow
the new leader to keep him on.

Could be, but I think he might prefer not to have a formal shadow cabinet
role.

It has financial advantages and better access to policy documents.

Post by Recliner
If the polls are even half-right, Labour is set for another miserably long
stint in opposition, and may only have around 200 seats in the Commons, so
being in the Shadow Cabinet won't count for much.
It could be that the long-forecast split between the centre-left moderates
and Momentum finally happens after the meltdown. McDonnell might be more
interested in fighting that war with the hated Blairites than with coming
up with economic policies that no-one cares about.

True but he would want to do that from a position of at least notional
power in the party.

Post by Recliner
Corbyn is 70, and looks much older. He looks like he belongs in a
retirement home, not No 10. Mcdonnell is 68, and probably won't be fighting
the next election.
<https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/11/election-2019-a-guide-to-what-the-polls-mean-and-what-they-dont>

Depends when it is, if there is a hung parliament the next election
might not be that far away.

[Recliner]

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Recliner

Post by Charles Ellson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 22:01:41 +0000, Graeme Wall

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.
The Labour Party is much better understood through its defeats than
through its victories, and not just because there are more of them. For a
party that was founded to be the parliamentary wing of organised labour it
has been signally unsuccessful. Of the 119 years that have elapsed since
Labour issued its first manifesto, it has spent only 33 of them in office
and 13 of those were won by the unperson Blair. There have been 31
elections and Labour has won a working majority just five times.
…

That's a quote from what?

I am always puzzled by why Labour wants the government (which is usually
Tory) to run the trains. “Put Chris Grayling in charge,” said nobody, ever.
<https://www.thetimes.co.uk/article/election-2019-labours-manifesto-is-mere-wishful-thinking-mflqs79sc?shareToken=0abbdeb43c9af906fbd956f843a80c15>
[In the 74 years since 1945, Labour has spent 24 years in power, 10 of
which were under the now-hated Blair. So, only 14 out of 74 years, 19%,
were under leaders the unions approve of. That proportion looks likely to
shrink.]

Yes the left have never forgiven Blair for making Labour electable.

Unfortunately for many people he also made them unelectable and they
decided to vote for real Tories. Labour are currently shackled by
Corbyn, at least until the time he stops collecting an arse full of
splinters from the fences that he sits on or they find someone else.

I assume he and McDonnell will have to go soon after the election.

Why McDonnell? He is going to be the one who removes Corbyn from the
leadership, regardless of which way the election goes.

He's already said they'd both go if they lose. He wants a young,
inexperienced front-woman to be the new leader, with him pulling the
strings. He prefers to operate in the shadows.
The Shadow Chancellor, she says, “has become quite a nasty, devious figure
behind the scenes”; McDonnell is the one pulling the strings now. “After a
while, Jeremy realised that he was losing and he just seems to have given
in.”

He was always the one pulling the strings. He might not remain shadow
chancellor, though I wouldn't bet on it. He can always reluctantly agree
to remain in post just to oversea the leadership changes and then allow
the new leader to keep him on.

Could be, but I think he might prefer not to have a formal shadow cabinet
role.

It has financial advantages and better access to policy documents.

Post by Recliner
If the polls are even half-right, Labour is set for another miserably long
stint in opposition, and may only have around 200 seats in the Commons, so
being in the Shadow Cabinet won't count for much.
It could be that the long-forecast split between the centre-left moderates
and Momentum finally happens after the meltdown. McDonnell might be more
interested in fighting that war with the hated Blairites than with coming
up with economic policies that no-one cares about.

True but he would want to do that from a position of at least notional
power in the party.

Post by Recliner
Corbyn is 70, and looks much older. He looks like he belongs in a
retirement home, not No 10. Mcdonnell is 68, and probably won't be fighting
the next election.
<https://www.theguardian.com/politics/2019/nov/11/election-2019-a-guide-to-what-the-polls-mean-and-what-they-dont>

Depends when it is, if there is a hung parliament the next election
might not be that far away.

Sure, but the polls are strongly suggesting a clear Tory majority. The lead
has stayed consistently at 10%+, unlike last time. Labour could get an even
worse result than Foot achieved in 1983 (not surprising, as Corbyn is a
much worse leader than Michael Foot). That would be bound to unleash the
pending civil war in Labour.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.

In the General Election, voters won't be looking over their shoulder at
the past, but hoping for a sustained brighter future.

One of the aspects of this campaign which I think might be different
from previous ones, however, is the way manifesto promises are not just
looked at from the point of view of being deliverable, but whether or
not they are deliverable within 5yrs.

[Recliner]

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.

In the General Election, voters won't be looking over their shoulder at
the past, but hoping for a sustained brighter future.

Was that not always so?

Post by Roland Perry
One of the aspects of this campaign which I think might be different
from previous ones, however, is the way manifesto promises are not just
looked at from the point of view of being deliverable, but whether or
not they are deliverable within 5yrs.

I don't see why this election is any different to previous elections in
that regard.

[Roland Perry]

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
Surely the desired result from he point of view of the workers is to
have a Labour government in power, and running the railways for the
workers. Why would they ever need to go on strike?

The odd thing is that UK governments are generally Tory-led†, so by
demanding government-owned railways, broadband, gas, electricity, etc, the
unions are, in effect, trying to ensure they will be working directly for
Tory ministers.

In the General Election, voters won't be looking over their shoulder at
the past, but hoping for a sustained brighter future.

Was that not always so?

Who disputed that?

Post by Recliner

Post by Roland Perry
One of the aspects of this campaign which I think might be different
from previous ones, however, is the way manifesto promises are not just
looked at from the point of view of being deliverable, but whether or
not they are deliverable within 5yrs.

I don't see why this election is any different to previous elections in
that regard.

Partly because there are many really long term projects being promised,
some of which quite naturally won't be showing much progress at all
after 5yrs. But also because of the way social media can stir up such
questions in the minds of the electorate.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of tits
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of tits
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I think
we know the answer to that.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of tits
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I think
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I think
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it was
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to believe
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC only
700.

[Graeme Wall]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I think
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it was
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to believe
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC only
700.

What bit of "or the stations" are you having trouble with?

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:56:34 +0000

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I

think

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it

was

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to

believe

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC

only

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
700.

What bit of "or the stations" are you having trouble with?

So you admit it is fitted to the trains then?

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:56:34 +0000

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I

think

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it

was

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to

believe

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC

only

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
700.

What bit of "or the stations" are you having trouble with?

So you admit it is fitted to the trains then?

Full DOO equipment is fitted to one [1] of SWR's 7 types of stock.

[1] 442s were retrofitted with non-compliant DOO equipment for Southern, I
don't know whether it's been removed during the SWR refurb but I imagine
so.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 17:05:27 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:56:34 +0000

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike

for

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I

think

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it

was

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to

believe

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC

only

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
700.

What bit of "or the stations" are you having trouble with?

So you admit it is fitted to the trains then?

Full DOO equipment is fitted to one [1] of SWR's 7 types of stock.

So they run that 1 type of train. Better than no type of train in service.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 17:05:27 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:56:34 +0000

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike

for

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I

think

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it

was

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to

believe

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC

only

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
700.

What bit of "or the stations" are you having trouble with?

So you admit it is fitted to the trains then?

Full DOO equipment is fitted to one [1] of SWR's 7 types of stock.

So they run that 1 type of train. Better than no type of train in service.

30 units out of a fleet of 400 to cover the entirety of SWR *ROTFL*

Are they even cleared for routes other than the ones they currently operate
on? (No I can't be bothered to wade through
<https://www.networkrail.co.uk/industry-and-commercial/information-for-operators/national-electronic-sectional-appendix/>
to find out)


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 17:50:07 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
So they run that 1 type of train. Better than no type of train in service.

30 units out of a fleet of 400 to cover the entirety of SWR *ROTFL*

So no trains at all is a better option is it? I suspect a lot of the
commuters might disagree.

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Are they even cleared for routes other than the ones they currently operate
on? (No I can't be bothered to wade through

Who cares? They can operate on the routes they ARE cleared for. Whats the
problem?

[Recliner]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 17:50:07 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
So they run that 1 type of train. Better than no type of train in service.

30 units out of a fleet of 400 to cover the entirety of SWR *ROTFL*

So no trains at all is a better option is it? I suspect a lot of the
commuters might disagree.

Perhaps you can tell us how your detailed, well-thought-out plan is
superior to what SWR is planning?
<https://www.southwesternrailway.com/plan-my-journey/rmt-industrial-action>

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 17:50:07 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
So they run that 1 type of train. Better than no type of train in service.

30 units out of a fleet of 400 to cover the entirety of SWR *ROTFL*

So no trains at all is a better option is it? I suspect a lot of the
commuters might disagree.

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
Are they even cleared for routes other than the ones they currently operate
on? (No I can't be bothered to wade through

Who cares? They can operate on the routes they ARE cleared for. Whats the
problem?

SWR drivers are not trained on DOO, they don't have an agreement for DOO,
the stations haven't been risk assessed for DOO.

To sort all that out will take way longer than a month, and trying to force
a DOO agreement on the drivers may result in them deciding to strike too.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Graeme Wall]

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:56:34 +0000

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I

think

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it

was

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to

believe

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC

only

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
700.

What bit of "or the stations" are you having trouble with?

So you admit it is fitted to the trains then?

Full DOO equipment is fitted to one [1] of SWR's 7 types of stock.
[1] 442s were retrofitted with non-compliant DOO equipment for Southern, I
don't know whether it's been removed during the SWR refurb but I imagine
so.

Talking of which, are the 442s ever going to reenter service?

[Graeme Wall]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 12:56:34 +0000

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I

think

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it

was

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to

believe

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC

only

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
700.

What bit of "or the stations" are you having trouble with?

So you admit it is fitted to the trains then?

It's not just a matter of where the door controls are.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I think
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it was
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to believe
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC only
700.

Class 707s, like all other stock introduced recently, has DOO cameras and
screens in the cab but as SWR don't use them they're probably not tested,
assessed and properly commissioned, and the drivers won't be DOO trained
anyway.

SWR’s older stock, 455-458, will have guard's door control equipment at
various locations including cabs, or the corridor behind the cab, and on
some stock at intermediate doors too. Drivers won't be trained on dispatch
etc, and the risk assessment of every platform and the high-risk areas of
each platform won't have been done with dispatch from the front cab in
mind. SWR's platforms presumably don't have the platform equipment required
for DOO with older stock like this, so if the safe dispatch procedure for a
certain platform involves dispatch from the middle of the train, you want
the driver to walk back to the middle, shut the doors and then walk back to
the front of the train? Hmmm...


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Sat, 23 Nov 2019 16:59:14 -0000 (UTC)

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 17:39:52 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of

tits

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I

think

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
we know the answer to that.

They can't operate the trains OPO because the equipment to do so is not
fitted to the trains or the stations.

Really? So where do the guards close the doors from? Last time I looked it

was

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the drivers cab at the other end or in the middle and I find it hard to

believe

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
the new class 707s don't have it installed by default as they're just a DC

only

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
700.

Class 707s, like all other stock introduced recently, has DOO cameras and
screens in the cab but as SWR don't use them they're probably not tested,
assessed and properly commissioned, and the drivers won't be DOO trained
anyway.

So in all that intensive 12-18 months of training for this highly skilled lever
pushing job, they don't get shown how to open and close the doors? Pull the
other one.

Post by Clive Page
certain platform involves dispatch from the middle of the train, you want
the driver to walk back to the middle, shut the doors and then walk back to
the front of the train? Hmmm...

Better than no service at all. But then we both know those unionised clowns
wouldn't cross the picket line anyway so the point is moot.

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of tits
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I think
we know the answer to that.

SWR can't do DOO. They say they're planning to run 50% of services,
presumably using management/office staff as guards.

As for crossing or not crossing picket lines, I believe it's technically
secondary industrial action and therefore technically illegal, but also
AIUI most TOCs involved in similar disputes have said they won't take
action (beyond loss of a day's pay) against those of other grades who don't
cross picket lines.

Incidentally AIUI the RMT will be paying the striking guards to compensate
for loss of income; that won't of course apply to other grades.


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Charles Ellson]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of tits
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I think
we know the answer to that.

SWR can't do DOO. They say they're planning to run 50% of services,
presumably using management/office staff as guards.
As for crossing or not crossing picket lines, I believe it's technically
secondary industrial action and therefore technically illegal,

Only if they have been encouraged by their union. AFAIR the individual
members making individual decisions are a very different legal matter.
It is further complicated by the later introduction of the Human
Rights Act.

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver
but also
AIUI most TOCs involved in similar disputes have said they won't take
action (beyond loss of a day's pay) against those of other grades who don't
cross picket lines.
Incidentally AIUI the RMT will be paying the striking guards to compensate
for loss of income; that won't of course apply to other grades.
Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Anna Noyd-Dryver]

Post by Charles Ellson
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 20:46:17 -0000 (UTC), Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by Anna Noyd-Dryver

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 14:18:51 +0000

Post by Graeme Wall

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
On Thu, 21 Nov 2019 18:47:05 +0000

Post by MikeS

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Apparently you don't use Waterloo very often.

Not for years. But given the SWR drivers are planning to go on strike for
a month soon I can't say it surprises me to find out they're a bunch of tits
as well.

Do keep up, it's the guards that are striking.

Will any of the drivers cross the picket line and run the trains OPO? I think
we know the answer to that.

SWR can't do DOO. They say they're planning to run 50% of services,
presumably using management/office staff as guards.
As for crossing or not crossing picket lines, I believe it's technically
secondary industrial action and therefore technically illegal,

Only if they have been encouraged by their union. AFAIR the individual
members making individual decisions are a very different legal matter.
It is further complicated by the later introduction of the Human
Rights Act.

Thanks for the clarification! :)


Anna Noyd-Dryver

[Clive Page]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
I was sitting in a Great Northern train at Finsbury Park this afternoon when
a Thameslink train pulled in and a couple of women ran out to catch our train.
Now a normal person in the cab would have waited for them to get on, but no,
not the one in our train - he shut the doors in their faces.
A) He wasn't monitoring the platforms when he shut the doors or
B) He's a complete jobsworth tit and waiting 5 seconds beyond the booked leaving
time was Not On.
Either way it was a pretty obnoxious thing to do. Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

I believe that the drivers on the Thameslink route are specifically instructed by the management to do this.

A year or two back I made a formal complaint about a driver at Luton Airport Parkway deliberately closing the doors when lots of people were still boarding - and this was when there had been a platform alteration notified to passengers just a minute before the train arrival. I had fortunately been standing right by the steps to the overbridge and was capable of running up one flight and down the other, but anyone not being in the right place or not athletic enough (which was most of them) had no chance of changing platform. It must have been very obvious to the driver that he had been signalled into another platform at the last minute but he took no account of this and I expect he delighted in pulling away with only a fraction of the normal load. To my surprise and dismay the management backed him up - they said that avoiding even a few seconds of delay was more important than allowing passengers affected by a platform change to react to it.

[John Williamson]

Post by Clive Page
To my surprise
and dismay the management backed him up - they said that avoiding even a
few seconds of delay was more important than allowing passengers
affected by a platform change to react to it.

The cynic in me would suggest that the penalty for running late is more
than the loss due to passengers complaining.

[m***@round-midnight.org.uk]

Post by Clive Page

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
I was sitting in a Great Northern train at Finsbury Park this
afternoon when
a Thameslink train pulled in and a couple of women ran out to catch our train.
Now a normal person in the cab would have waited for them to get on, but no,
not the one in our train - he shut the doors in their faces.
A) He wasn't monitoring the platforms when he shut the doors or
B) He's a complete jobsworth tit and waiting 5 seconds beyond the booked leaving
    time was Not On.
Either way it was a pretty obnoxious thing to do. Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

I believe that the drivers on the Thameslink route are specifically
instructed by the management to do this.
A year or two back I made a formal complaint about a driver at Luton
Airport Parkway deliberately closing the doors when lots of people were
still boarding - and this was when there had been a platform alteration
notified to passengers just a minute before the train arrival.  I had
fortunately been standing right by the steps to the overbridge and was
capable of running up one flight and down the other, but anyone not
being in the right place or not athletic enough (which was most of them)
had no chance of changing platform.  It must have been very obvious to
the driver that he had been signalled into another platform at the last
minute but he took no account of this and I expect he delighted in
pulling away with only a fraction of the normal load.  To my surprise
and dismay the management backed him up - they said that avoiding even a
few seconds of delay was more important than allowing passengers
affected by a platform change to react to it.

That's interesting. Perhaps station stops where the passengers are not
able to board in such circumstances should be classified as a cancelled
stop?

This is also going to become more common as NR introduce more automatic
route setting.

[AnthonyL]

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
I was sitting in a Great Northern train at Finsbury Park this afternoon when
a Thameslink train pulled in and a couple of women ran out to catch our train.
Now a normal person in the cab would have waited for them to get on, but no,
not the one in our train - he shut the doors in their faces.
A) He wasn't monitoring the platforms when he shut the doors or
B) He's a complete jobsworth tit and waiting 5 seconds beyond the booked leaving
time was Not On.
Either way it was a pretty obnoxious thing to do. Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Many Nottingham NET tram drivers have the same bad habit, maybe they
are wannabee train drivers.

[b***@nowhere.co.uk]

On Fri, 22 Nov 2019 12:36:56 GMT

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
I was sitting in a Great Northern train at Finsbury Park this afternoon when
a Thameslink train pulled in and a couple of women ran out to catch our train.
Now a normal person in the cab would have waited for them to get on, but no,
not the one in our train - he shut the doors in their faces.
A) He wasn't monitoring the platforms when he shut the doors or
B) He's a complete jobsworth tit and waiting 5 seconds beyond the booked

leaving

Post by b***@nowhere.co.uk
time was Not On.
Either way it was a pretty obnoxious thing to do. Luckily twats like him seem
to be rarer these days.

Many Nottingham NET tram drivers have the same bad habit, maybe they
are wannabee train drivers.

Happens on the tube occasionally too. Last time it happened to me I just
shoved the door back open until myself and a couple of other people had got on.
Whether it would work with the doors on a mainline train I don't know.