Skipping stops due to fatility

[whole diary]

[grahame]

06:50 Worcester Foregate Street to Oxford due 08:12

This train has been revised.It will no longer call at: Shipton, Ascott-Under-Wychwood, Finstock and Combe.This is due to a fatality. Last Updated: 17/03/2009 04:44

I'm scratching my head.  Why should a suicide cause the halts train to not stop at the halts?  When is the next train ? 

[willc]

Looks like a train was provided from Oxford, not Reading depot, due to the line closure after a death on the tracks overnight at Culham. Looks like the only Turbo available was a three-car, which is not allowed to stop at these four stations.

[G.Uard]

I don't work 165/6s, but in the west, when using say 3 or 4 car sets which are too long for a platform, we board pax via the front local door, leaving the remaining doors locked shut.  (This occurs at Melksham and Avoncliff as a matter of routine).  I am surprised that this facility is apparantely not available/used??? on the turbos.  Would this be due to local rules or just a design difference?

[IanL]

0852 from Worcester to Paddington also cancelled until Oxford where it started. Bus for me this morning.

[inspector_blakey]

Because the Turbos are designed for DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) they don't have "local" doors as such: there are no guard's panels in the passenger saloon at all. When they run with guards the doors are operated by the driver who is under instruction from the guard using buzzer codes (similar to the Adelantes, I guess).

The only way round this would be for the guard to allow pax to board/alight via the rear cab door, but I don't know if this gets platformed when a three-car unit appears vice two-car. Clearly boarding and alighting through the driver's cab would not be an option.

[willc]

Rules are rules and the rule here is that three-car sets do no stop at the Cotswold Line halts - though it does sometimes seem to get bent for Ascott, where the platform is about two and two-thirds coaches long.

Melksham/Avoncliffe type operation is also allowed on the Birmingham-Stratford-upon-Avon line, at The Lakes, I think, where the driver will get out and open the front pair of doors from the platform using the butterfly switch on the 150s that work the line. I assume the 172s for LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) will have SDO^▸ (Selective Door Opening) to overcome this problem.

[IndustryInsider]

Because the Turbos are designed for DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) they don't have "local" doors as such: there are no guard's panels in the passenger saloon at all. When they run with guards the doors are operated by the driver who is under instruction from the guard using buzzer codes (similar to the Adelantes, I guess).

The only way round this would be for the guard to allow pax to board/alight via the rear cab door, but I don't know if this gets platformed when a three-car unit appears vice two-car. Clearly boarding and alighting through the driver's cab would not be an option.

It's a silly situation and one that there is NO NEED to have in place on non-DOO trains like the Cotswold Line services. The Guard could quite easily locally open a door using the external butterfly handle after exiting the train via the back cab door. All that would be needed is a 3-car stop board off of the platform edge so as the driver would know where exactly to stop so the rear vehicle is on the platform. Operating instructions prevent this from happening though.

It was discussed quite recently in the following thread: http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4309.0

[G.Uard]

Because the Turbos are designed for DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) they don't have "local" doors as such: there are no guard's panels in the passenger saloon at all. When they run with guards the doors are operated by the driver who is under instruction from the guard using buzzer codes (similar to the Adelantes, I guess).

The only way round this would be for the guard to allow pax to board/alight via the rear cab door, but I don't know if this gets platformed when a three-car unit appears vice two-car. Clearly boarding and alighting through the driver's cab would not be an option.

Thanks for that 

I must get down and have a close look next time I see a Turbo at WOS^» (Worcester Shrub Hill - next trains)

Strong rumours BTW^▸ (by the way) that the Malverns are to be dropped by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) West services from the May timetable.

[rogerw]

They're showing on the journey planner for late May at the moment

[Timmer]

Strong rumours BTW^▸ (by the way) that the Malverns are to be dropped by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) West services from the May timetable.

That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if that was to happen G.Uard as I have often wondered why 'West' services go that far since the days when this started under Wessex Trains.

[super tm]

Strong rumours BTW^▸ (by the way) that the Malverns are to be dropped by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) West services from the May timetable.

That wouldn't surprise me in the slightest if that was to happen G.Uard as I have often wondered why 'West' services go that far since the days when this started under Wessex Trains.

They go that far because otherwise the unit would sit around at Worcester.  There is no requirement in the franchise but the cost of doing so is only fuel and wear and tear on the units.  Staff are already there.

Just checked and the National Rail website shows they are still running in May so that rumour must be false.

[Andy W]

Out of interest why don't they lock the end carriage off and keep it out of use then run as a 2 coach train?

[G.Uard]

Steady on guys, I did say the demise of the West 'Malvern Link'   was a rumour

I know that it is showing on the JP at the moment and also that the 'extension' was thought preferable to sitting in the sidings.  This section of line is covered pretty comprehensively by LM^▸ (London Midland - recent franchise) though and if as rumoured, their WOS^» (Worcester Shrub Hill - next trains)-GCR^» (Gloucester - next trains) services are retimed from May, we may yet see a change. 

Back in the depth of winter, I did moot the possibility of an Unfounded Rumours and Gossip section, (rather than just a thread).  The idea was that stories such as these could be posted and discussed as possibilities, not hard facts or done deals.  Many 'depot' rumours come to nothing, but others hold a grain, (or more), of truth.

[IndustryInsider]

Out of interest why don't they lock the end carriage off and keep it out of use then run as a 2 coach train?

That was discussed in the following thread Andy (from the 4th post onwards)... http://www.firstgreatwestern.info/coffeeshop/index.php?topic=4309.0

[devon_metro]

Because the Turbos are designed for DOO^▸ (Driver-Only Operation (that is, trains which operate without carrying a guard)) they don't have "local" doors as such: there are no guard's panels in the passenger saloon at all. When they run with guards the doors are operated by the driver who is under instruction from the guard using buzzer codes (similar to the Adelantes, I guess).

The only way round this would be for the guard to allow pax to board/alight via the rear cab door, but I don't know if this gets platformed when a three-car unit appears vice two-car. Clearly boarding and alighting through the driver's cab would not be an option.

Thanks for that 

I must get down and have a close look next time I see a Turbo at WOS^» (Worcester Shrub Hill - next trains)

Strong rumours BTW^▸ (by the way) that the Malverns are to be dropped by FGW^▸ (First Great Western) West services from the May timetable.

I don't know how long it takes to do Worcester - Great Malvern, although it would no doubt probably mean an incoming service can form the previous service at Worecester? (thus leaving some units spare)