Something no one in the media or on here seems to have mentioned is
that the only reason the drivers are noticing so many tripcock
failures is that so many of these overpaid agitators are going
through red lights! Perhaps while they're fixing the trains they should
consider getting the drivers retrained. How exactly can you miss a red
light in a slow tube train usually (on the northern line) in a dark
tunnel?
They don't have to worry about other traffic , roadside distractions,
steering etc like a bus driver but if a bus driver went through a red
light
I don't think anyone would have much time for him blaming the bus for
not putting its brakes on!

B2003

Boltar wrote:
Something no one in the media or on here seems to have mentioned is
that the only reason the drivers are noticing so many tripcock
failures is that so many of these overpaid agitators are going
through red lights!

Perhaps the reason it hasn't been noticed is that your assumption is
false. The fault is said to occur when trains are driven through a red
light very slowly, as happens for example in the case of a track circuit
or signal failure where a driver is given permission to do so. The
procedure is to go forwards slowly, get tripped, reset the tripcock and
proceed at slow speed to the next signal or for 3 minutes, or something
(I forget the details). It's been found that in these circumstances,
the tripcock can reset itself without stopping the train.

If you have up-to-date info on the number of SPADs on LU, please quote
numbers and source.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

Boltar...you been on holiday or, perish the thought, everything been going
as you liked for a while. I've missed your abrasive people hating comments
recently, welcome back.

The reason so many have been highlighted recently is......... They have been
testing them. Hence every train tested means a number of failures hence the
situation we are in. Its got nothing to do with them all SPADing.
Why hasn't it been picked up before? Probably because the trip cock test
that has to be done by every train leaving a depot or terminus, so, many
times a day. It is a test to ensure the arm is not missing or out of
alignment with the train stop at the signal. It doesn't operate the trip
cock. If it did the arm would miss a train stop thereby rendering the train
capable of going past a red. In these cases the arm is correctly aligned, it
just doesnt open the valve. So the normal trip cock test works fine.
Also, judging a red in the dark with no referance points isn't that easy.
Thats where line knowledge comes in. If it wasn't for the profesionalism of
the drivers, or operators, trains would SPAD all the time. And we would have
found the tripcock problem years ago......

The qustion Boltar you should be asking is how much will the contactor pay
for the disruption. Will it make a huge dent in profits.....if they get
found to be contributing to the delay at all. I have no idea how the system
works....perhaps other do and could enlighten us.

Mal

"Richard J." wrote in message
.uk...
Boltar wrote:
Something no one in the media or on here seems to have mentioned is
that the only reason the drivers are noticing so many tripcock
failures is that so many of these overpaid agitators are going
through red lights!

Perhaps the reason it hasn't been noticed is that your assumption is
false. The fault is said to occur when trains are driven through a red
light very slowly, as happens for example in the case of a track circuit
or signal failure where a driver is given permission to do so. The
procedure is to go forwards slowly, get tripped, reset the tripcock and
proceed at slow speed to the next signal or for 3 minutes, or something
(I forget the details). It's been found that in these circumstances,
the tripcock can reset itself without stopping the train.

If you have up-to-date info on the number of SPADs on LU, please quote
numbers and source.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In article ,
(Mal) wrote:

The qustion Boltar you should be asking is how much will the contactor
pay for the disruption. Will it make a huge dent in profits.....if
they get found to be contributing to the delay at all. I have no idea
how the system works....perhaps other do and could enlighten us.

It's contractors plural isn't it? Don't Alstom provide and maintain
these trains for LU on the never-never?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Mal) wrote:

The qustion Boltar you should be asking is how much will the
contactor pay for the disruption. Will it make a huge dent in
profits.....if they get found to be contributing to the delay at
all. I have no idea how the system works....perhaps other do and
could enlighten us.

It's contractors plural isn't it? Don't Alstom provide and maintain
these trains for LU on the never-never?

It's my understanding that the original Alstom contract was passed to
Tube Lines, who now have Alstom as their subcontractor.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In message .com,
Boltar writes
Something no one in the media or on here seems to have mentioned is
that the only reason the drivers are noticing so many tripcock failures
is that so many of these overpaid agitators are going through red
lights! Perhaps while they're fixing the trains they should consider
getting the drivers retrained. How exactly can you miss a red light in
a slow tube train usually (on the northern line) in a dark tunnel? They
don't have to worry about other traffic , roadside distractions,
steering etc like a bus driver but if a bus driver went through a red
light I don't think anyone would have much time for him blaming the bus
for not putting its brakes on!
Perhaps if you tried driving a tube train instead of pontificating like
Conor, you'd be wiser, and have no need to say anything.
--
Clive

On 13 Oct 2005 14:52:37 -0700, "Boltar"
wrote:

Something no one in the media or on here seems to have mentioned is
that the only reason the drivers are noticing so many tripcock
failures is that so many of these overpaid agitators are going
through red lights!

One would hope that such a safety critical feature is tested on a
regular basis, rather than it taking a SPAD for anyone to notice there
is something wrong.

In article ,
(Richard J.) wrote:

Colin Rosenstiel wrote:
In article ,
(Mal) wrote:

The qustion Boltar you should be asking is how much will the
contactor pay for the disruption. Will it make a huge dent in
profits.....if they get found to be contributing to the delay at
all. I have no idea how the system works....perhaps other do and
could enlighten us.

It's contractors plural isn't it? Don't Alstom provide and maintain
these trains for LU on the never-never?

It's my understanding that the original Alstom contract was passed to
Tube Lines, who now have Alstom as their subcontractor.

That figures with something in an LU press release mentioning both.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

In message , asdf
writes
One would hope that such a safety critical feature is tested on a
regular basis, rather than it taking a SPAD for anyone to notice there
is something wrong.
They used to be tested on every trip both northbound and southbound,
like Leicester Sq. Is this no longer done?
--
Clive

Clive wrote:
In message .com,
Boltar writes
Something no one in the media or on here seems to have mentioned is
that the only reason the drivers are noticing so many tripcock failures
is that so many of these overpaid agitators are going through red
lights! Perhaps while they're fixing the trains they should consider
getting the drivers retrained. How exactly can you miss a red light in
a slow tube train usually (on the northern line) in a dark tunnel? They
don't have to worry about other traffic , roadside distractions,
steering etc like a bus driver but if a bus driver went through a red
light I don't think anyone would have much time for him blaming the bus
for not putting its brakes on!
Perhaps if you tried driving a tube train instead of pontificating like
Conor, you'd be wiser, and have no need to say anything.
--
Clive
He seems to have made a perfectly valid comment that requires an
answer, I would certainly like to know the answer. On the one hand you
have these highly trained, safety critical £32000pa or is it £35000pa
drivers, who should be capable of stopping a train at a signal. Or are
they irresponsible idiots who require a safety device to stop them at a
signal so that they can concentrate on their ipod.
Surely the purpose of the tripcock wasn't as a safety device just to
save the embarrassment of negligent drivers.
Kevin