Jump to content

Talk:One-person operation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Reduction in the emphasis on the McNulty rapport

[edit]

Vast parts of this introduction to the McNulty rapport is about Network Rail - which is infrastructure and the maintenance of it. One-man operations on the other hand is solely about a practice used by train operation companies. The mention of Network rail can therefore be confusing to the reader.

The same is true about the mentioning of freight in this section, given the fact that McNulty doesn't recommend anything about one-man operations for freight companies - they all ready apply one-man operations. The reader can however be confused into believing this.

While I definitely appreciate the contributions made, certain parts of this introduction to the McNulty rapport belongs in a article on the McNulty Rapport itself.

It wasn't quite easy to cut the section out in "one clean cut" (in the lack of a better word) - sorry about the mess :-(.

- Henry

Henry1500 (talk) 21:00, 6 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The section reduced:

, —for the British government —including both passenger and freight- claiming that Network Rail was "30–50 per cent less efficient in terms of maintenance and renewals expenditure than comparable European railways(2011 & McNulty)."[1] Their report

References

  1. ^ "'Value for money' rail inquiry chief to speak at Derby conference". Railway News.
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on One-man operation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:14, 20 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Seems OK Dr Sludge (talk) 09:14, 3 July 2017 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on One-man operation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 12:33, 1 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on One-man operation. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 10:56, 2 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Safety

[edit]

It would be good if somebody could add information to the article re safety records of one person operation. --82.38.135.178 (talk) 10:18, 9 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Will ee what I can find - there is lots of emerging issues with DOO, focus appears to be shifting following the Jumperkine incident in Western Australia. there are also numerous issues referenced in New Zealand reports available form the Transport Accident Investigation Commission. The recent releases from the AAR in the US fail to address the inherent issues with DOO. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2001:8004:1640:10AB:CC80:E043:5380:DCB8 (talk) 04:05, 22 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Missing table of contents?

[edit]

This article doesn't seem to have a ToC but I'm not sure if there's a reason for that, and if not, how to add one. Selroh18 (talk) 09:22, 29 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:One-person_operation&oldid=1201602688"