On 03/04/17 11:58, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 03/04/2017 11:49, Martin Coffee wrote:
On 03/04/17 10:15, Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 09:21:10 on
Mon, 3 Apr 2017, e27002 aurora remarked:

As an aside, the events of that evening showed the value of having a
guard on board. Apparently, the driver went into shock. The card
called the BTP, and Network Rail. He saw that the driver was given
tea and comfort. As we lost heating and the lighting the guard dealt
with a sick passenger and a lady going into labour. The issue of the
role of guards needs careful attention before they are eliminated.

Now that almost everyone has a mobile phone passengers can call for an
ambulance for a lady going into labour. And if they are miles from a
station, that's what air ambulances are for.

The balance here is between the cost of guards on every train, every
day, the cost of sending an air ambulance to a scene like that about
once a month in the whole country.

In any event, many trains will still have a second member of staff on
board, to check tickets. It's just that they won't have the power to
close the doors, and have "guard - I'm paid twice as much" on the name
badge.
But some lines (and tunnels) don't have mobile coverage.

I travelled between Cardiff and Netley on Wednesday and Thursday and at

least 20% of that route has absolutely no mobile coverage but
fortunately still has a guard.

If a train is stranded without a functional driver then the situation
can serious especially if the signalling is such that the signaller
doesn't know exactly where the train is. I dread to think what might
happen if this is somewhere without mobile coverage.

If there is no mobile phone coverage, what is the guard going to do?

Network Rail have their own communication system which will work in
those areas.