[x-posted to utl]

"Roland Perry" wrote:

In message ,
at 12:20:19 on Fri, 5 Aug 2011, Steve remarked:
I believe this was discussed on here at the time:
http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/current_investigations_register/110711_warren_street.cfm

"The RAIB’s preliminary examination has found that a sensitive edge
activation occurred at the previous station, Oxford Circus, which the
driver departed from by overriding the sensitive edge activation. The
activation did not clear when the train arrived at Warren Street station
because the platform was on the other side of the train, so the doors used
at Oxford Circus were not opened. In order to depart from Warren Street
station, the driver isolated safety systems which allowed the train to
move with the doors open. Once the train reached 8 km/h (5 mph) the doors
closed automatically, as designed."

Sensitive edge a bit too sensitive and thus liable to regular overrides?

I don't entirely follow the exact sequence of events regarding what happened
at Warren St (and the second override), but I imagine the full report will
set this out clearly.

On Fri, 5 Aug 2011 14:29:30 +0100
"Mizter T" wrote:
[x-posted to utl]

"Roland Perry" wrote:

In message ,
at 12:20:19 on Fri, 5 Aug 2011, Steve remarked:
I believe this was discussed on here at the time:

http://www.raib.gov.uk/publications/...ter/110711_war
en_street.cfm

"The RAIB’s preliminary examination has found that a sensitive edge
activation occurred at the previous station, Oxford Circus, which the

"preliminary examination" , ie looked at the computer logs.

driver departed from by overriding the sensitive edge activation. The
activation did not clear when the train arrived at Warren Street station
because the platform was on the other side of the train, so the doors used
at Oxford Circus were not opened. In order to depart from Warren Street
station, the driver isolated safety systems which allowed the train to
move with the doors open. Once the train reached 8 km/h (5 mph) the doors
closed automatically, as designed."

Sounds like that drivers job is toast. Cue another strike threat by the RMT.

Sensitive edge a bit too sensitive and thus liable to regular overrides?

They were a nightmare when they were first put into service. Presumably
Bombardier thought they could save money buy getting the general public
to do the testing for them. They've got the sorted now it seems.

B2003

wrote

Sounds like that drivers job is toast. Cue another strike threat by the
RMT.

They were a nightmare when they were first put into service. Presumably
Bombardier thought they could save money buy getting the general public
to do the testing for them. They've got the sorted now it seems.

Sounds like the set up for sensitive edge activation didn't allow for the
situation when it had to be overridden at one station and the platform was
the other side at the next station. Plus inadequate training of drivers.
Plus, perhaps, a driver trying tom do his best when the equipment didn't
work correctly and he was unwilling to fail the train, or delay it for an
unspecified time while he tried to get technical advice. If LUL modify the
trains and/or give the drivers additional training all well and good. If LUL
try to scapegoat this driver Bro. Crow would, IMHO, be entirely justified in
blowing the whistle.

Peter

In message , at 16:31:09 on
Fri, 5 Aug 2011, Peter Masson remarked:
Sounds like the set up for sensitive edge activation didn't allow for
the situation when it had to be overridden at one station and the
platform was the other side at the next station. Plus inadequate
training of drivers.

Didn't they spend about a year playing with these trains (and closing
the line while they did it)? It's not as if they are straight from the
factory and no-one has seen them before.
--
Roland Perry