CJG wrote:
If DLR can run without drivers. Why can't the Victoria line have the
drivers turfed out of the cab and down checking tickets.
I know there is a higher frequency of trains on Victoria than DLR. But
surely if DLR can run safety with no drivers then underground lines
can?

DLR trains have a train captain (or whatever they're now called) whose
duties include opening and closing the doors, and making sure that this is
done safely. He can do this from any of a number of points on the train
because the trains are short and the trains were designed that way.

On the tube, trains are much longer, hence TV is needed to enable the train
operator to close the doors safely with full visibility of the platform
(some of which are curved, unlike DLR). In practice this means that the
screens are either in the cab or at the front of the platform. Duplicate
screens and other equipment could be provided elsewhere in principle, but I
don't see how the extra cost could be justified.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

"Richard J." wrote:
CJG wrote:
If DLR can run without drivers. Why can't the Victoria line have the
drivers turfed out of the cab and down checking tickets.
I know there is a higher frequency of trains on Victoria than DLR. But
surely if DLR can run safety with no drivers then underground lines
can?

... Duplicate screens and other equipment could be provided elsewhere
in principle, but I don't see how the extra cost could be justified.

Do DLR trains get less internal vandalism than tube trains because the
train crew wanders around instead of staying locked in a cab?

Colin McKenzie

"Colin McKenzie" wrote in message
...
"Richard J." wrote:
CJG wrote:
If DLR can run without drivers. Why can't the Victoria line have the
drivers turfed out of the cab and down checking tickets.
I know there is a higher frequency of trains on Victoria than DLR. But
surely if DLR can run safety with no drivers then underground lines
can?

... Duplicate screens and other equipment could be provided elsewhere
in principle, but I don't see how the extra cost could be justified.

Do DLR trains get less internal vandalism than tube trains because the
train crew wanders around instead of staying locked in a cab?

It would appear so ...

In message , Colin McKenzie
writes
Do DLR trains get less internal vandalism than tube trains because the
train crew wanders around instead of staying locked in a cab?

I can't say I use DLR that often. Maybe three times a month at most. But
they do seem a lot less vandalised than LU trains.
--
CJG