Obelix Posted February 19, 2018 Share Posted February 19, 2018 It was an example of a company trying to save money, that ended up costing them more. I believe guards do have some responsibility in regard to couplings, but I don't know what happened in that case. Really? You mean you know that the direct result of some action that occured has been because they were saving money and that cost them more? Or perhaps wait for the RAIB report on the incident? Also - might be news - but EVERY properly run company tries to save money. Thats a simple fact and not something you should be waving around like you ahve a golden ticket to corporate malfeasance. A Board that doesnt try to same money and be prudent with the company funds is in fact legally derelict in their duties! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
El Cid Posted February 19, 2018 Author Share Posted February 19, 2018 (edited) I’d rather have a train with a guard on it but.... Are there any stats on the safety aspects. Are there more injuries or deaths on driver-only trains? Driver only trains are more modern, they need CCTV for the driver to be able to view the passengers that are boarding, trains and platforms are not always straight. Tube trains would be a good example, can you compare a tube train with hardly any gap between the train and platform? People with disabilities are sometimes helped by the guard, into the station and into the train, will the driver do that? Not the same issue on modern stations. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-20339630 Edited February 19, 2018 by El Cid Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now