Driver only trains - safe??

[austinbob]

Are there any definitive and independent studies confirming that Driver only trains are safe (enough).
Mods - this is not intended to be political - I would really like to know.

[woodbury22uk]

I think that the Office of Rail and Road report is independent. They are the arbiters of safety on the railways and from my first hand dealings with them they are more likely to be cautious when examining safety issues, where their vested interest is not having passenger injury accidents.

There are already plenty of Driver Only Operation lines around the country, about one third of all passenger trains across 11 train operators without thinking about freight trains. I am struggling to think of an accident where the driver being the only one in control of the train was the determining issue.

[austinbob]

I think that the Office of Rail and Road report is independent. They are the arbiters of safety on the railways and from my first hand dealings with them they are more likely to be cautious when examining safety issues, where their vested interest is not having passenger injury accidents.

Thanks for that - its just that if you look at the ORR web site they quote "ORR is a non-ministerial government department with around 280 staff and a budget of about £30m each year"
So they are a government department!! - Is that truely independent?
Do you know if there are any other independent departments/reports?

[Claude Dreyfus]

I know these guys are also a government department, but have a look through here...

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/raib-current-investigations-register/rail-accident-investigation-branch-current-investigations

The RAIB are obliged to investigate any incident reported; even near misses.

[woodbury22uk]

Bob

Everyone is paid by someone. I think experience on London Underground, Chiltern, Thameslink, etc. is the best guide you will get. Anyone who is truly independent will still need to gather evidence from non-independent sources and evaluate it against safety, operational and financial yardsticks.

[austinbob]

Thanks for the replies folks..
Probably best to end this thread now afore the Mods get upset about political content.

Thanks again...

[Snowwolflair]

There are answers technical and human.  But two I think matter are:

Some trains cannot be single operated and some have been designed or modified to be so.  The question has to be asked are the technical modifications and designs good enough on a design by design basis and will maintenance be up to the task.  If a toilet does not work they shut it off, if a camera does not work do they switch it off and try to do without rather than withdraw the train.

There is a big upgrade in personal risk with single operation as there is no one else to blame if something goes wrong.  There are hundreds of industrial accidents where the report concludes that bad or miscommunication was to blame.  One man operation means that person takes full responsibility and the consequences if something goes wrong, and you can see why drivers wont want that, particularly if manslaughter by negligence is involved.  I'm specifically thinking of post incident with passengers wandering on the track etc

I remember being on a Paddington to Didcot service where the driver overshot Didcot station by about 200 ft.  This was about 1990 and pre the double locking of coach doors on the HST units.  Half the train jumped onto the track and walked back to the station.  On that train there was a driver a guard and a buffet staff of two and the four of them could not stop what happened so do numbers make a difference - not sure.

[D1042 Western Princess]

I am writing here as a retired Guard/Train Manager who worked for BR, Thames Trains and FGW on everything from loco and coaches, HSTs to 166 DMUs, along with various Southern electric EMUs both in Guard and Driver Only operation and my opinion is a firm no DOO is not 'safe'.

I feel that the railway/Department for Transport is only considering the operational side of the 'argument' - but that is only one aspect.

I feel on any train where passengers are carried there must be a member of staff who can be contacted in order to deal with the everyday questions e.g. "Where do I change for Oxford?" to lost property, passengers behaving badly (loud music or other anti social behaviour) to even threatening others (one of my last trains before retirement was carrying a man with a knife threatening other passengers; he was arrested but had a Guard not been there to alert the police?).

I believe that there are many points which are simply not being taken into account - the Guard on a passenger train does much more than close doors and goes back to his newspaper which, from the reports I'm reading, seems to be what some sections seem to think.

[pctrainman]

I totally fail to see how you can discuss the railways and exclude Politics from that discussion because to do so means you have no meaningful discussion .

[austinbob]

I totally fail to see how you can discuss the railways and exclude Politics from that discussion because to do so means you have no meaningful discussion .

My original post was a question not an invitation to discussion.
'Are there any definitive and independent studies confirming that Driver only trains are safe (enough)?'.
Hence, in the light of some of the responses I have suggested this thread be ended. Perhaps I shouldn't have asked the question in the first place.

[Snowwolflair]

I totally fail to see how you can discuss the railways and exclude Politics from that discussion because to do so means you have no meaningful discussion .

The best way to head off politicians, and all the other campaigning interested parties, is get you facts straight, your technology sound and make them look stupid for not accepting the blindingly obvious.

Politicians as a breed thrive on bluff, "the stuff bulls produce", bravado and misdirection so make them swallow the facts, but make sure they are copper bottomed facts.

[pctrainman]

So in asking a question you are not inviting a discussion ? I should'nt hold your breath whilst waiting for a reply then .

[Newportnobby]

I am writing here as a retired Guard/Train Manager who worked for BR, Thames Trains and FGW on everything from loco and coaches, HSTs to 166 DMUs, along with various Southern electric EMUs both in Guard and Driver Only operation and my opinion is a firm no DOO is not 'safe'.

I feel that the railway/Department for Transport is only considering the operational side of the 'argument' - but that is only one aspect.

I feel on any train where passengers are carried there must be a member of staff who can be contacted in order to deal with the everyday questions e.g. "Where do I change for Oxford?" to lost property, passengers behaving badly (loud music or other anti social behaviour) to even threatening others (one of my last trains before retirement was carrying a man with a knife threatening other passengers; he was arrested but had a Guard not been there to alert the police?).

I believe that there are many points which are simply not being taken into account - the Guard on a passenger train does much more than close doors and goes back to his newspaper which, from the reports I'm reading, seems to be what some sections seem to think.

That's one of the most sensible, lucid discussion points I've heard since this whole sorry episode began last year.

[Sprintex]

I totally fail to see how you can discuss the railways and exclude Politics from that discussion because to do so means you have no meaningful discussion .

It's easy, you stick to the facts about railway procedure and leave out the whys and wherefores of who made the rules and whether it ties in with your own beliefs or not

So far people seem to have kept to the right track so if anyone can answer Austinbob 's question?


Paul

[Bealman]

Totally agree.... try catching trains in NSW Australia. Ain't no politics here, mate....just a bad service.

They generally run on time, but are just awful to be on.