Driverless trains on the Tube?

[Pickman's model]

Nice side-tracking. Now I've blown your entire argument out of the water your focusing on some irrelevancy.

no, you haven't blown my entire argument out of the water. what you've done is to introduce a whole NEW argument, on top of the former one, which is that you're a mendacious little toad. you stated above (in the post quoted in 111) that an article already quoted had said one manual and one automated train. so i reread the whole article, plus comments, about the 1987 incident. this did not mention the 1991 one. you repeat your lie - and in fact redouble it - when you say that this wiki article had already been posted. i've asked you where: you've not been able to show me. so i think that counts as two lies, leaving aside your hyperbole.

 

[Pickman's model]

Lying?? I just posted the fucking accident report..............

"Because I already said about a million times"

have you said that about a million times? no, you haven't.

 

[Citizen66]

It's a report from 2009!

 

[Bungle73]

You mean a report about a different incident in 2009?

Ah................

Well it is the first link that cones up if you type in "West India Quay crash" into Google. Nevertheless the Wiki article still states that a human was driving in 1991 incident, which is what I have been saying all along.

 

[Citizen66]

Ah................

Well it is the first link that cones up if you type in "West India Quay crash" into Google. Nevertheless the Wiki article still states that a human was driving in 1991 incient, which is what I have been saying all along.

You said the report blamed human error. But you cited the wrong report.

 

[Pickman's model]

Ah................

Well it is the first link that cones up if you type in "West India Quay crash" into Google. Nevertheless the Wiki article still states that a human was driving in 1991 incident, which is what I have been saying all along.

so why were you lying about this wiki article having been posted earlier in the thread?

 

[salem]

FFS what is the relevance of a minor shunt with no injuries over 20 years ago?

Thread successfully derailed on a minor technicality

 

[Pickman's model]

FFS what is the relevance of a minor shunt with no injuries over 20 years ago?

Thread successfully derailed on a minor technicality

it's the crash which bungle said never happened.

 

[Bungle73]

so why were you lying about this wiki article having been posted earlier in the thread?

So every time someone makes a mistake they're "lying" are they? I was 100% sure I got it from here.

 

[tony heath]

‘No derailment on the DLR has yet resulted in serious consequences but the
potential for such an outcome is apparent, particularly if the derailed train fouls
the adjacent line and is struck by a train running in the opposite direction’

http://www.raib.gov.uk/cms_resources.cfm?file=/090622_R162009_Deptford_Bridge.pdf

 

[Bungle73]

it's the crash which bungle said never happened.

Low speed collision, where no one was hurt, does not equal "serious incident" in my book.

Docklands Light Railway (Collision)
Ms. Gordon : To ask the Secretary of State for Transport if he will make a statement about the collision of two trains on the docklands light railway on 22 April and its implications for the safety of the public.

Mr. Freeman : The Health and Safety Executive's railway inspectorate has reported that there was a sideways collision between two trains which converged at a junction on the northern approach to West India Quay station at approximately 7.20 am. A train arriving from Stratford struck the leading coach of a train from Tower Gateway. The latter train was under manual control due to a trackside equipment failure at Westferry station.

This was a low-speed collision, and I was glad to learn that no serious injuries were sustained.

Docklands light railway is urgently investigating the accident. Until the cause is established, and any necessary remedial action taken, additional controls have been implemented to strengthen the existing procedure for emergency manual operation.

I have asked the railway inspectorate to keep me informed of developments.

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199091/cmhansrd/1991-04-25/Writtens-4.html

You also seem to be having a big problem understanding what "as far as I can remember" means......

 

[Pickman's model]

So every time someone makes a mistake they're "lying" are they? I was 100% sure I got it from here.

you seem to make a lot of 'mistakes'

 

[Pickman's model]

Low speed collision, where no one was hurt, does not equal "serious incident" in my book.



http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm199091/cmhansrd/1991-04-25/Writtens-4.html

You also seem to be having a big problem understanding what "as far as I can remember" means......

this could have been a simple 'but what about this' followed by 'you're right, i'd forgotten that'. instead you have quibbled and dissembled and imo lied on this thread to avoid having to say 'i'd forgotten about that'.

 

[Pickman's model]

You also seem to be having a big problem understanding what "as far as I can remember" means......

fuck me you're a dishonest cunt. the 'as far as i can remember' was the THIRD sentence of your first post on this thread. the SECOND was "When was the last time there was a crash on the DLR?", which has been answered - and in your FIRST post on this thread, before you began shuffling the goalposts, there was no mention of 'serious incident'.

 

[Bungle73]

this could have been a simple 'but what about this' followed by 'you're right, i'd forgotten that'. instead you have quibbled and dissembled and imo lied on this thread to avoid having to say 'i'd forgotten about that'.

You are so desperate to shoe-horn one minor innocent from over 20 years ago into this discussion aren't you? Even though it has zero relevance what what is being discussed here.

 

[Pickman's model]

You are so desperate to shoe-horn one minor innocent from over 20 years ago into this discussion aren't you? Even though it has zero relevance what what is being discussed here.

why do you ask questions when you go on to dispute the answers? as for one incident, i raised two - to which a third has been added on this page. what has been to me particularly interesting is how dishonest you're prepared to be about this.