Cityrail guards are history - it's only a matter of time now...

Firstly, It will not be until the S sets are phased out in 2013 (PPP's will
be all rolled out by 2013) as it would cost way too much to convert them to
driver only and the cost can't be justified for a short period. Then
millions would have to be spent upgrading Tangaras, both the cameras and
also all passenger information systems. Stations would also need better
indicators. M sets are already set up for it, just have to add cameras and
make them work. Then lastly they would have to offer guards a payout which
is what I want.
I feel the govt. will come out and say that they can't afford to spend the
money on Railcorp that needs spending and they will sell it off, just like
Sydney Ferries and Electricity.

Matthew Geier wrote:

>
> However I think the Government won't have the guts to take on the rail
> unions directly - they will sell off Cityrail and leave it's new owners
> to the dirty work.
>

Exactly the opposite occurred in Victoria where the guards were got rid
of in 1995, then it was privatised, thus letting the private operators
gain one supposed benefit that a government owned system never really got.

Similar things occurred with the privatisation of the gas, electricity &
water distribution, where large amounts of tax payer funds were spent
improving infrastructure, than sold off to private ventures for their gain.

Look up the history of Hillside Trains & Bayside Trains, also Yarra
Trams & Swanston Trams. All a short lived step to a privatised system,
based on Thatcher's/Major's failed model in Britain.


Kevin Martin

"Matthew Geier" <matthew@no.sleeper.no.apana.no.org.no.au> wrote in message
news:4849bbc4$0$13947$afc38c87@news.optusnet.com.a u...
>
> The government might be too scared to take on the rail unions,

The current NSW government don't seem to care for any unions at the moment.

On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:11:35 GMT, x@x.x (Fish Womper) wrote:

[---]

>If it were feasible to remove guards it would have been done many
>years ago.

It's already been done, in some countries.

"Andrew Price" <ajprice@free.fr> wrote in message
news:2aet44hr7jmknevkf6n4cacgre9aqtdaaq@********...
> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:11:35 GMT, x@x.x (Fish Womper) wrote:
>
> [---]
>
>>If it were feasible to remove guards it would have been done many
>>years ago.
>
> It's already been done, in some countries.

Yes, but the Sydney system is unique in the world. Are trains are longer,
carry more people and the bright sparks who built it put curved platforms
everywhere.

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 04:40:28 +1000, Uncle Joe wrote:

> "Andrew Price" <ajprice@free.fr> wrote in message
> news:2aet44hr7jmknevkf6n4cacgre9aqtdaaq@********...
>> On Tue, 10 Jun 2008 05:11:35 GMT, x@x.x (Fish Womper) wrote:

>>>If it were feasible to remove guards it would have been done many years
>>>ago.

>> It's already been done, in some countries.

> Yes, but the Sydney system is unique in the world.

Doesn't look that unique to me... We have more in common with a number
of other Urban railways I've ridden than we are different. Many of them
are now DOO.

Claiming something can be done as 'we are unique' is just 'not invented
here' syndrome repackaged. Every rail system can claim it's unique, as
each has some historical or geographical reason for being different. But
far to often it's used as an argument for keeping to status quo or re-
inventing something at great cost (Tcard).



> Are trains are
> longer, carry more people and the bright sparks who built it put curved
> platforms everywhere.

None of these are true. I've seen other urban systems with longer trains
(12 cars), and many have curved platforms as well.
Passenger numbers are more difficult - but in terms of people moved per
hour we are probably only average. Some of the metro systems that run 8
car single deckers probably have far more people on the move at any one
time than Sydney ever could. Sydney just has them clumped more than
normal due to 8 car DD trains at relatively low frequency.

And most places where I have noticed 'guards' they are more conductors
than guards, they patrol the trains and often collect fares as well.
Sydney had to employ a whole new extra 'class' of people to 'patrol' our
trains, so now we have 4 or more staff on trains at times.

>
> Doesn't look that unique to me... We have more in common with a number
> of other Urban railways I've ridden than we are different. Many of them
> are now DOO.

The ones I have ridden overseas have all been true Metro Style, Single
deckers with more doors that allow people to get on and off quicker. Where
are the ones that are like ours in size etc, I would like to research these
systems.


>
> Claiming something can be done as 'we are unique' is just 'not invented
> here' syndrome repackaged. Every rail system can claim it's unique, as
> each has some historical or geographical reason for being different. But
> far to often it's used as an argument for keeping to status quo or re-
> inventing something at great cost (Tcard).

They can't get any new technology to work within the timeframe they
origanlly want, DOO will be the same. Our uniqueness means what works in
London, Washington etc may not work safely on our system

>
>
>
>> Are trains are
>> longer, carry more people and the bright sparks who built it put curved
>> platforms everywhere.
>
> None of these are true. I've seen other urban systems with longer trains
> (12 cars), and many have curved platforms as well.
> Passenger numbers are more difficult - but in terms of people moved per
> hour we are probably only average. Some of the metro systems that run 8
> car single deckers probably have far more people on the move at any one
> time than Sydney ever could. Sydney just has them clumped more than
> normal due to 8 car DD trains at relatively low frequency.


True, with more doors than our system, and maybe smarter passengers too.


>
> And most places where I have noticed 'guards' they are more conductors
> than guards, they patrol the trains and often collect fares as well.

Will not happen here because staff will be robbed as thugs and drunks rule

> Sydney had to employ a whole new extra 'class' of people to 'patrol' our
> trains, so now we have 4 or more staff on trains at times.


Within 10 years guards will be gone.

On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:11:15 +1000, "Uncle Joe" <bend@over.com> wrote:

>> Doesn't look that unique to me... We have more in common with a number
>> of other Urban railways I've ridden than we are different. Many of them
>> are now DOO.
>
>The ones I have ridden overseas have all been true Metro Style, Single
>deckers with more doors that allow people to get on and off quicker. Where
>are the ones that are like ours in size etc, I would like to research these
>systems.

Most of the Paris suburban trains are double-deckers. All have DOO.

"Andrew Price" <ajprice@free.fr> wrote in message
news:77c054pf1v5nj51d11puogt0927g2ileuf@********...
> On Wed, 11 Jun 2008 16:11:15 +1000, "Uncle Joe" <bend@over.com> wrote:
>
>>> Doesn't look that unique to me... We have more in common with a number
>>> of other Urban railways I've ridden than we are different. Many of them
>>> are now DOO.
>>
>>The ones I have ridden overseas have all been true Metro Style, Single
>>deckers with more doors that allow people to get on and off quicker. Where
>>are the ones that are like ours in size etc, I would like to research
>>these
>>systems.
>
> Most of the Paris suburban trains are double-deckers. All have DOO.

Thanks, I will do some research. Any others?

Uncle Joe wrote:
>> Doesn't look that unique to me... We have more in common with a number
>> of other Urban railways I've ridden than we are different. Many of them
>> are now DOO.
>
> The ones I have ridden overseas have all been true Metro Style, Single
> deckers with more doors that allow people to get on and off quicker. Where
> are the ones that are like ours in size etc, I would like to research these
> systems.
>
Am I missing something here? What is the link between DD trains and
whether or not they are DOO?

Surely the doors are where people get out of and the doors are all at
platform level regardless of whether SD or DD.

We are talking about a single guard who cannot check all doorways for
smooth flow. We are also not talking about slam door stock (like British
Rail's old stock) where platform staff were required to check doors were
closed before giving "Right way".

>
>> Claiming something can be done as 'we are unique' is just 'not invented
>> here' syndrome repackaged. Every rail system can claim it's unique, as
>> each has some historical or geographical reason for being different. But
>> far to often it's used as an argument for keeping to status quo or re-
>> inventing something at great cost (Tcard).
>
> They can't get any new technology to work within the timeframe they
> origanlly want, DOO will be the same. Our uniqueness means what works in
> London, Washington etc may not work safely on our system
>
Uniqueness sounds like an excuse for not doing something. Does not mean
guards ought to go, but shows that all things ought to be considered.

Melbourne lost its guards years ago, but the number of monitors with
their attendant screens and shutters on curved platforms (to suit
different length trains, does not mean that cutting guards saves all
their alleged costs. There are benefits of keeping them.

Kevin Martin