Northern line near collision

On Jun 14, 6:52 pm, Boltar <boltar2....uk> wrote:
> On Jun 14, 4:34 pm, Christopher A.Lee <c...@> wrote:
>
>
>
> > One wonders why the motorman didn't notice there was no signal at that
> > end of the platform.
>
> You'd think he might have noticed something like that. What did he
> do , see there was no signal at all and just thought "ooh , that must
> mean green"? What a . I hope he's fired just like any bus or truck
> driver would be if they drove the wrong way down a main road though
> I'm sure Bob Crowe will crawl out from under his rock at some point
> and try and blame LU or Metronet for it.
>
> B2003

Something doesn't ring true here. I am an occassional user of Camden
but I think that even I would know which platform I was on and if I
was about set off in the wrong direction. Some how a driver gets out
of a train in the Edgware platform but then gets in the back of a
train in the HB platform and drives off SB. Wouldn't he have noticed
something odd about the directions he took on foot. We are not talking
a non underground savvy tourist here.

Kevin

Kev wrote:
>
> Something doesn't ring true here. I am an occassional user of Camden
> but I think that even I would know which platform I was on and if I
> was about set off in the wrong direction. Some how a driver gets out
> of a train in the Edgware platform but then gets in the back of a
> train in the HB platform and drives off SB. Wouldn't he have noticed
> something odd about the directions he took on foot. We are not talking
> a non underground savvy tourist here.

He might never set foot on the station.

In message <1181907725.891237.320760@q66g2000hsg. .com>, at
04:42:05 on Fri, 15 Jun 2007, Kev <kajr@mwfree.net> remarked:
>It seems odd that on reaching the HB platform
>he didn't think to turn back on the direction he had headed from the
>train in the Edgware platfom. How many times had this driver driven a
>train through Camden.

Isn't it simpler than that?

1) The drivers switched trains, and unless they both left them in some
nondirectional state with red lights at both ends, the new driver would
have had to reverse the trains "direction" in that respect.

2) The driver's end of the platforms have either CCTV monitors or large
mirrors. These are very easy to recognise.

I conclude that the driver thought he had been told to reverse.
--
Roland Perry

Boltar wrote:
>
> No matter how many excuses people make for this guy he made a
> fundamental mistake which a regular commuter wouldn't have made ,
> never mind a driver who should know better, and he could have caused a
> major crash. Ergo he should get the boot. Though knowing what the
> unions are like I expect he won't. Maybe he'll just be sent on Squash
> leave or something.

Put him on the W&C!

On 15 Jun, 16:19, Tom Anderson <t...@urchin.earth.li> wrote:


> But if the driver thought he was turning that train and taking it south
> again, he might have been heading for the crossover. That isn't what he
> was told to do, but there could have been a communications breakdown.

Like most incidents, this was a combination of errors - Driver given
wrong route; Driver accepted wrong route; Driver set off in wrong
direction.

It's also worth remembering that two drivers were at fault (assuming
that the driver given the wrong rout wasn't told to take it) - the
driver who set off in the wrong direction was the driver who had
swapped to the wrongly routed train.

So many opinions, so few facts. Why don't we discuss how many angels can
dance on the head of a pin?

On 15 Jun, 12:42, Kev <k...@mwfree.net> wrote:

> Then that is really scarey that a highly professional, well paid
> driver can't follow the simple signs that all the rest of us have to
> follow.
> Isn't the driver responsible for the safety of the passenger or does
> that only extend from the train to the platform where somebody else is
> responsible for evacuation in an emergency.

(Snipped Text above)

The driver made a mistake because he is a human, like you (maybe) and
I.
Unfortunately mistakes are made and just becuase his job is more
safety critical role does not reduce the fact that he is going to make
a mistake.

The best they can do is find out what lead the driver to make the
mistake and try and prevent it in the future.

How do your comments really help?

On Jun 14, 5:12 pm, Christopher A.Lee <c...@> wrote:
> On Thu, 14 Jun 2007 15:57:44 GMT, "Jack Taylor" <J...@Carney.co.uk>
> wrote:
>
> >Christopher A.Lee wrote:
>
> >> This was in the evening rush hour so it was potentially disastrous.
>
> >On a Sunday? ;-)
>
> You're right, I didn't check the day.



Camden Town is rather busy on a Sunday.

On 15 Jun, 13:56, Boltar <boltar2....uk> wrote:
>
> He should know that edgware and barnet are in the same direction
> however. No matter how many excuses people make for this guy he made a
> fundamental mistake which a regular commuter wouldn't have made ,
> never mind a driver who should know better, and he could have caused a
> major crash. Ergo he should get the boot. Though knowing what the
> unions are like I expect he won't. Maybe he'll just be sent on Squash
> leave or something.
>
> B2003

One assumes you do not, or never have worked in an industry where you
can make an error that affects other people. Either that or are you
one of the lucky ones in life never to have made a mistake and needed
support ?

There was some debate at the start of this thread as to whether or not
the RAIB should be involved. For the sake of all those on the train,
and those involved this can only be a good thing IMO. All staff
involved will be interviewed (although by law i believe, some may
decline the RAIBs questions ?). Any recorded conversations will
normally also be revealed.

Perhaps, it may be possible, to use your tone, that somebody else
might "get the boot" for giving the driver a wrong instruction /
order. In which case the drivers union fees might actaully have come
in useful and the unions will arrange for some "squash leave" to
compensate him for being put in that position.

Perhaps he really did make a monumental mistake, either way it can
only be a good thing that the RAIB are involved so that all of the
speculation of this thread can be nicely put to rest in a PDF file in
a few months time.

Perhaps you can have the last laugh, as this appears to be your
stance, perhaps something else will be revealed.

Richard

grid56126@ wrote:
>
> There was some debate at the start of this thread as to
> whether or not the RAIB should be involved.

I think the RNIB should be involved ;-)