On Fri, 28 Sep 2007, www.waspies.net wrote:

Boltar wrote:
On Sep 27, 6:20 pm, John B wrote:
Sorry, I wasn't clear. I meant that double-manning *of C-stock* would
solve the "dysfunctional dead man's handle" problem. Double-manning A-
stock with H&C drivers would definitely still leave the "I don't know
how to work this train, and my mate over there doesn't know where he's
going" problem...

Surely by now it would be time to design a standard layout for train
controls?

It's not the layout thats the problem, unlike driving a car though
drivers are supposed to know what to do when something goes wrong, there
is no AA or RAC, C Stock, D Stock and A Stock are very different, C and
A are probably the most similar, but there are massive differences
between them, the problem may be sorted by the introduction of the new
sub surface stock the S stock (make your own mind up what the s will
stand for)but the issue of route knowledge will remain, drivers are
supposed to drive all of their route once every 6 months.

I didn't realise it was that infrequent. In that case, when the S stock
turns up, i hope LU will cross-train all SLL drivers on all those lines,
and possibly even have a single pool of drivers for them. That would allow
them to do this sort of emergency workaround pretty easily.

tom

--
Taking care of business