Just come off the DLR at Tower Gateway at 19.33 tp be exact. Between
Limehouse and TG the train captain was sitting at the front with the
console open supposedly monitoring the operation of the train. However
during all of that time he actually sat there texting on his mobile
phone, with his attention fully on the message he was typing, and he
only stopped doing this when we drew into the TG platform. Bearing in
mind that there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting, is this acceptable behaviour? SB.

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:26:09 -0800 (PST), SB
wrote:

Just come off the DLR at Tower Gateway at 19.33 tp be exact. Between
Limehouse and TG the train captain was sitting at the front with the
console open supposedly monitoring the operation of the train. However
during all of that time he actually sat there texting on his mobile
phone, with his attention fully on the message he was typing, and he
only stopped doing this when we drew into the TG platform. Bearing in
mind that there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting, is this acceptable behaviour? SB.

He probably was just using the front console to do the doors. This is
quite common when trains are either very busy (so he can ensure there
is room for him to do the doors) or very quiet (so he can sit down).

Unless he was holding the "joystick" (power controller), he probably
had nothing at all to do until the next station.

Remember that the DLR is fully automated other than the doors.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as SB
gently breathed:

Bearing in
mind that there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting, is this acceptable behaviour? SB.

Slight difference though, in the cases in the US, the driver was
actually driving the train. On the DLR, unless working in emergency
manual mode (where the train captain actually handles the power
controller thingie), it's all fully automated.

At the time the DLR was built, it was felt that the public wouldn't
accept totally automated, staffless trains. Hence the provision of the
train captains to be a staff presence on board without having to have
actual drivers.

"SB" wrote in message
...
Just come off the DLR at Tower Gateway at 19.33 tp be exact. Between
Limehouse and TG the train captain was sitting at the front with the
console open supposedly monitoring the operation of the train. However
during all of that time he actually sat there texting on his mobile
phone, with his attention fully on the message he was typing, and he
only stopped doing this when we drew into the TG platform. Bearing in
mind that there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting, is this acceptable behaviour? SB.

As it is considered acceptable for the train to be driven under computer
control without the train captain's supervision, then in general I would
have thought that it was acceptable for him to be doing other things. In
the US incidents to which you refer, was the train under the control of the
driver, or under computer control?
--
David Biddulph

On Nov 30, 9:26*pm, SB wrote:


there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting,



???

''A number of fatal crashes in the US due to the drivers texting,
'' ????

Surely that is an exaggeration - assuming you are talking about train
drivers.

There was one recent major incident ... ummm a year or so [?] back.
What others have there been ? I don't recall reports of that one
incident refering to other texting by train drivers at all, never mind
resulting in fatalities.

--
Nick

"Pyromancer" wrote in message
...
Upon the miasma of midnight, a darkling spirit identified as SB
gently breathed:

Bearing in
mind that there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting, is this acceptable behaviour? SB.

Slight difference though, in the cases in the US, the driver was actually
driving the train. On the DLR, unless working in emergency manual mode
(where the train captain actually handles the power controller thingie),
it's all fully automated.

At the time the DLR was built, it was felt that the public wouldn't accept
totally automated, staffless trains. Hence the provision of the train
captains to be a staff presence on board without having to have actual
drivers.

The passenger service assistant (aka train captain) more often stands at a
doorway, so can't supervise the track ahead. Except in manual mode the
'driving' duties are merely to press a couple of buttons to close the doors
and start the train at each station. On one occasion the PSA managed to
press the buttons but strand herself on the platform when the doors shut and
the train started. The train proceeded perfectly safely under computer
control to he next station.

Peter

On Mon, 30 Nov 2009 13:48:50 -0800 (PST), D7666
wrote:

''A number of fatal crashes in the US due to the drivers texting,
'' ????

Surely that is an exaggeration - assuming you are talking about train
drivers.

There was one recent major incident ... ummm a year or so [?] back.
What others have there been ? I don't recall reports of that one
incident refering to other texting by train drivers at all, never mind
resulting in fatalities.

It was the Metrolink crash in Los Angeles. One too many.

SB wrote:

Just come off the DLR at Tower Gateway at 19.33 tp be exact. Between
Limehouse and TG the train captain was sitting at the front with the
console open supposedly monitoring the operation of the train. However
during all of that time he actually sat there texting on his mobile
phone, with his attention fully on the message he was typing, and he
only stopped doing this when we drew into the TG platform. Bearing in
mind that there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting, is this acceptable behaviour? SB.

It may be unacceptable to be texting while working, (a question which
his supervisor can answer) but if so, it won't be because it's likely to
cause a crash.

If your question is genuine - which is to say, if you really had a
concern that he was being negligent controlling the train - one wonders
why your own sense of self-preservation did not lead you to ask him
there and then.
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p9632958.html
(43 091 at Cardiff Central, 30 Jun 1999)

SB wrote:
Just come off the DLR at Tower Gateway at 19.33 tp be exact. Between
Limehouse and TG the train captain was sitting at the front with the
console open supposedly monitoring the operation of the train. However
during all of that time he actually sat there texting on his mobile
phone, with his attention fully on the message he was typing, and he
only stopped doing this when we drew into the TG platform. Bearing in
mind that there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting, is this acceptable behaviour? SB.

You are the editor of the Daily Mail, and I claim my £5!
--
Brian
"Fight like the Devil, die like a gentleman."
www.imagebus.co.uk/shop

Brian Watson wrote:

SB wrote:
Just come off the DLR at Tower Gateway at 19.33 tp be exact. Between
Limehouse and TG the train captain was sitting at the front with the
console open supposedly monitoring the operation of the train. However
during all of that time he actually sat there texting on his mobile
phone, with his attention fully on the message he was typing, and he
only stopped doing this when we drew into the TG platform. Bearing in
mind that there have been a number of fatal crashes in the US due to
the drivers texting, is this acceptable behaviour? SB.

You are the editor of the Daily Mail, and I claim my £5!

The Daily Mail has an editor? I just thought it had a baying mob.
--
http://gallery120232.fotopic.net/p13857132.html
(33 034 at London Waterloo, Sep 1979)