Is this not yet another example of large companies cost cutting to the benefit of themselves and to the detriment of their clients.

That's probably the drivers' and guards' view of the situation, however the company's view is probably that other TOCs happily run driver-only trains so why "waste money" on extra staff that are not actually needed?

Again whether they are needed is the bone of contention and depends on many other circumstances as already mentioned - type of trains, staffing levels at stations, etc.


Paul

There was a story last week of a disabled lady, she was a disabled athlete I think, she got on a train with a disabled carriage to find the disabled toilet was not working and out of order. She could not get off the train at the next stop because the was no ramp and no one to help her and was forced to stay on the train and dirty herself, which must have been very distressing and embarrassing for her. It does not sound like there was a guard on the train but I am un-sure about that. This kind of shows you need at least one other person on a train.

Quote from: lil chris on January 08, 2017, 10:02:32 PM
This kind of shows you need at least one other person on a train.

Or alternatively one person manning the station


Paul

Quote from: javlinfaw7 on January 08, 2017, 12:23:37 PM
How long now till we get driverless trains?

We've already got them - 'people movers' at airports, the Docklands Light Railway and other examples.

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on January 09, 2017, 12:57:22 PM
We've already got them - 'people movers' at airports, the Docklands Light Railway and other examples.

I haven't been on the DLR for quite a while now, but when I used to use it regularly, the trains had a guard/conductor who would occasionally unlock the control panel at the pointy end and drive the train.

No idea why, though.

Quote from: Nick on January 09, 2017, 05:20:16 PM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on January 09, 2017, 12:57:22 PM
We've already got them - 'people movers' at airports, the Docklands Light Railway and other examples.

I haven't been on the DLR for quite a while now, but when I used to use it regularly, the trains had a guard/conductor who would occasionally unlock the control panel at the pointy end and drive the train.

No idea why, though.

Yes, a Train Captain (I think the DLR call them) and there would be two reasons as I understand it;
1/ the  computer's broken (again) 
2/ to keep in practice for when the  computer breaks down (again) 

ISTR that the Victoria Tube was meant to be automatic, but that the U****s demanded a driver & a dog ( the dog drives, and the driver feeds the dog!)?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victoria_line

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Automation_of_the_London_Underground

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on January 09, 2017, 11:30:30 PM

Quote from: Nick on January 09, 2017, 05:20:16 PM

Quote from: D1042 Western Princess on January 09, 2017, 12:57:22 PM
We've already got them - 'people movers' at airports, the Docklands Light Railway and other examples.

I haven't been on the DLR for quite a while now, but when I used to use it regularly, the trains had a guard/conductor who would occasionally unlock the control panel at the pointy end and drive the train.

No idea why, though.

Yes, a Train Captain (I think the DLR call them) and there would be two reasons as I understand it;
1/ the  computer's broken (again) 
2/ to keep in practice for when the  computer breaks down (again) 

Don't worry, in the brave new world of Big Data it wall all work fine. Until it doesn't, and we've sacked everyone who used to do it. It's the same reasoning that got everything working so perfectly now. Don't complain though, you'll be called a Luddite or a c@&&£ist. (No politics here....)

Just watched the film Howl.     This is why you need a guard, in case the driver gets eaten by a werewolf.   

Quote from: Snowwolflair on January 17, 2017, 11:44:26 AM
Just watched the film Howl.     This is why you need a guard, in case the driver gets eaten by a werewolf.   

At last! The truth! Now we can have hinest information announcements. I can hear them now:

"The 1430 from Waterloo has been delayed by a werewolf on the line. Services to Guildford are delayed indefinitely by a zombie incursion at Surbiton."

I knew that that rubbish about leaves and the wrong sort of snow was just a cover.   

Isn't this a trend that all transport sectors have been following for decades now?

A scheduled passenger flight in the 70's would typically have a cockpit crew of four - Pilot, Co-pilot, Engineer, and Navigator. Now the Engineer and Navigator have been digitized. Has the incidence of aircraft accidents increased since this change in cockpit crew numbers?

Buses and trams once had Drivers and Conductors, but now both commonly operate with only a Driver. Has the incidence of bus/tram accidents increased since this change in crew numbers?

As others have commented, several TOCs already commonly run without Guards. Has the incidence of accidents increased for those TOCs?

If any sector had seen even a nominal increase in accidents, we would know it. Even the internet conspiracy theorists don't seem to have twisted their knickers over this one. I make no comment on the moral implications of this trend, but to me it doesn't appear there is any negative impact on safety.

It is not about "accidents" it is about Safety.
One side seem to think (or pretend to) that they are one and the same, when they totally are not.

Especially with the "zombie incursion at Surbiton"   

How does one measure or quantify 'safety'?  Would it be wrong to say that a low incidence of accidents at my breakfast table, is indicative of my breakfast table being safe?