Driverless Underground Trains

[The Ham]

The RMT are threatening to strike over the use of driver-less underground trains:

http://www.rail.co/2012/09/27/tube-union-threatens-to-strike-over-driverless-train-plans/

Tube union threatens to strike over driverless train plans

RMT is to ballot members over proposals to introduce driverless trains onto London’s Tube network.

In July, the rail union leaked an internal LU document which showed possible plans to transfer the Jubilee Line to driverless operation within three years, with the scope for other deep level tube lines to follow.

RMT general secretary Bob Crow said: “RMT reiterates this union’s complete opposition to driverless trains. Every train must have a driver, to ensure the safe and effective running of the Underground.

“Plans to scrap drivers or reduce their driving duties are risking safety, services and jobs and are motivated by saving money and undermining trade unionism.

“We will be campaigning for a massive yes vote in this ballot and with further packages of tube staffing and service cuts expected to be unveiled by the Mayor and TfL shortly.

“RMT is on high alert to use every weapon in our armoury to resist attacks on our members and the safe running of the tube network.”

 

[Tiny Tim]

Deja Vu. I presume that the 'driverless' trains proposed will still have a 'conductor' operating the doors and able to act in emergencies, as happens on the DLR. In reality, drivers of many non-DLR services do little more than this.

 

[Class377/5]

Deja Vu. I presume that the 'driverless' trains proposed will still have a 'conductor' operating the doors and able to act in emergencies, as happens on the DLR. In reality, drivers of many non-DLR services do little more than this.

There's some major differences between the Tube and DLR. For a start all the DLR tunnels have a walk way. Tubes don't. Think trying to get from one end to the other in peak. Not a great idea.

 

[thelem]

There's some major differences between the Tube and DLR. For a start all the DLR tunnels have a walk way. Tubes don't. Think trying to get from one end to the other in peak. Not a great idea.

What difference does that make if we assume that the number of staff on board is not going to change?

The main difference here will surely be that a conductor who isn't responsible for driving the train can be paid less, which is what RMT are striking about, under the guise of "safety, services and jobs" (OK, I'll give him the third, but not the first two).

 

[AndyLandy]

I can't help but notice the irony that driverless trains can't go on strike... :/

 

[Bald Rick]

Bob and the boys evidently have withdrawal symptoms since they have had to be on best behaviour over the summer.

There's a good, balanced article on this subject in last month's Modern Railways.

 

[ainsworth74]

There's a good, balanced article on this subject in last month's Modern Railways.

Yes that was a very good article. I thought one of the more interesting points raised there was that if you were building the LU today you would build it to be a driverless system, but you'd also build all the tunnels to have walkways enabling easy/quick access for staff to trains in the event of an incident and to make evacuation easier as well. Though of course we have the railway we have not the one we'd like. So I do think that as far as a driverless Tube goes I'd only really be comfortable with ATO rather than a totally driverless system.

 

[MCR247]

But I fail to see the safety argument that LUL tunnels don't have walkways. If all we are talking about is replacing drivers with conductors (like the DLR) then what difference is there in evacuation?

 

[A-driver]

There is no surprise that the unions are against this - their job is to protect their members livelihoods. A news story would be if they supported it!

The tearm driverless trains and strike/union busting trains that Boris goes on about is utter rubbish. There will still be staff on board, no question of getting rid if them. They may not actually drive the train or sit in the front cab all the time but if they go on strike then no trains will move, sane as drivers now.

If they hire loads of train captains on low wages then they will all sign up to the RMT who will then go into negotiations to improve salary etc and then we have strikes again. ATO is a good idea in many respects but all this talk of driverless tubes and ending bob crows influence on London is utter rubbish and just Tory propagander.

 

[Class377/5]

Yes that was a very good article. I thought one of the more interesting points raised there was that if you were building the LU today you would build it to be a driverless system, but you'd also build all the tunnels to have walkways enabling easy/quick access for staff to trains in the event of an incident and to make evacuation easier as well. Though of course we have the railway we have not the one we'd like. So I do think that as far as a driverless Tube goes I'd only really be comfortable with ATO rather than a totally driverless system.

You've hit an important point here, what would people feel safe with. ATI is one thing but driver not knowing what's going on at the front (suicides, accidents) and an ATO train with no driver to over ride things would end differently.

But I fail to see the safety argument that LUL tunnels don't have walkways. If all we are talking about is replacing drivers with conductors (like the DLR) then what difference is there in evacuation?

Well you can only evacuate a train from the front or rear but a train captain is unlikely to be positioned there. Train captains are placed near a set of doors on the DLR for a reason, to help get off the train if needed. Also note most of the DLR platforms are fairly straight. This isn't so with the Tube so you need to be more towards the middle to see more of your train. So in peak its very difficult to get to either end. There a very good safety reason from being in the middle, you can see either end equally.

Current policy of using cameras is all good and well but LUL position them somewhere free of obstruction but if your doing it from a doorway you can't guarantee that.

Also remember that the driver may receive messages about the incident or hear general messages that shouldn't be overheard by the public. Try getting staff informed in the mile of a carriage without letting the passengers know what's going on. Let alone getting asked by everyone what's going on when he's trying to hear. Yes this can apply to the DLR but passenger numbers are far greater on the Tube with longer trains.

Answering your question on what's the different in an evacuation. Well the FL walkway are well lit flag slabs of concrete. As someone who walked from Woolwich Arsenal to the evacuation point just on the south bank of the river prior to opening I can tell you its clear that its a good suitable walking route. Try doing that in a tunnel with four tracks. Let alone trying to get up the other end.

Now most people can do it. What about those in wheelchairs? Elderly? Other disabilities? They are always going to struggle to get down the tracks due to the rails. You seem to be thinking like a lot of people do, I can do it so where's the problem. Well not everyone can do it and those than plan things on the railway must prove they safety go over to a new method of working.

No you may say this is no different from today but with no drivers cab as Boris is talking about you then have the problem of where is the emergency kit placed? Driver may need to travel up and down the train getting the equipment where in a cab he can talk to passengers then take what he needs with him. If he's cabless then its all going to take longer to sort out, 'is dibble delaying the response and endangering people.

Also note in a major emergency the drivers cab could be used as a Safe place for those the that cannot get down the tracks until further help can come. Boris open plan Tube trains would offer no protection. Think fumes from a fire. Cab would offer some protection, especially if assistance is on its way.

 

[maniacmartin]

In a collision the driver's cab might be the first place to be smashed. Surely the staff member is more likely to survive and be in a position to assist if they're in the centre of the train where they can reach most places more quickly. In rush hour, they'd still have problems getting to the rear of the train if they're stationed in a cab at the front.

Regarding radios and passengers overhearing, all the better as far as I'm concerned. I find it extremely irritating as a passenger being kept in the dark about delays because no-one is allowed or can be bothered to tell me about them, so I don't have a chance to travel by an alternative route. In any case, I'm sure PSAs (to use a DLR term) could have earpieces that prevent casual eavesdropping.

I don't think the where the staff member is places in the carriage has any bearing on how easy (or hard) it is to walk along tracks. With the same headset, the PSA could communicate with passengers and emergency kit could be placed in locked cupboards near the centre of the train where the PSA is. Staff members would also be able to render non-emergency assistance, such as directions and general information face to face with passengers.

I would trust a well-designed computer to drive a train more than a human. The DLR is an example of what can be acheieved, and its only major accidents (excluding bombing) both occurred when the trains were driven in manual mode.

 

[WinterChief]

What the unions need to do is realise that LUL want driverless trains, accept it and deal with their current members making sure they have jobs to be moved to - like what is happening in France. The more the unions protest against driverless trains, the worse off the members will be. LU will do it regardless of the unions actions, it has got to that point and the unions are loosing their grip.

What will happen is the procedure for deciding an evacuation will change. At the moment LU have a policy that if people are stuck on a train for an hour you need to start de-training. The procedure will be changed so that only in exceptional circumstances will people be de-trained. Say a bomb going off, or a tunnel collapse, an on train fire, etc, where your looking at deaths directly related to an incident on the train.

For minor one hour delays like signal failures, trespassers and a person ill on a train, etc. You deal with the problem within an hour and if it continues - Trains behind it will couple up and you can de-train via another train. This does mean staff will have to be present (as with any other detrainment) but that is easy as usually a manager or group of managers will arrive at a station to help out, nothing really changes as LU de-train via trains all the time. Within 30 minutes you could make a decision to keep people on the trains or take them off.

The cab does offer a safe place for people to stand. The S Stock cab wall is fireproof on both sides, but if you have 1500 odd people and a fire, at that rate of people pushing through that cab door you are looking at casualties anyway. And it can't imagine they'd get that many people out that quickly off the train.

I would also put PED's in at every station to ensure one unders were reduced as much as possible, and try to secure most bridges.

The DLR is a fine example of how things are done and when you think about it, you don't need emergency tunnels with walkways to de-train people. In extreme emergencies you de-train normally by sending staff down. In all the other cases you just remotely (or it would automatically do it) couple up to the train in front and open both front train doors. Keep doing this until you reach a station (Which is usually never more than 2/3 trains).

The argument what people will feel safe with, well, lifts used to have an operator on board, now they don't and 99.99% of people get on one without even thinking what's going to happen if it gets stuck. Governments can't change anything to make something unsafe, by law.

However I do think the latest trains to be driverless will have an operator on board, but seeing a 2020 document, I am not so sure!

 

[exile]

It will take many years and millions of pounds of investment for the technology for driverless trains to be rolled out so I have no idea why the RMT is making an issue of this now. DLR has shown that the idea works in principle.

 

[Manchester77]

I'd imagine that the new generation train being talked about would probably be built for driverless operation but operate with diver to begin with.

 

[trentside]

I'd imagine that the new generation train being talked about would probably be built for driverless operation but operate with diver to begin with.

I think the intention is that the S Stock will be the last trains delivered with conventional drivers cabs.

 

[notadriver]

In a collision the driver's cab might be the first place to be smashed. Surely the staff member is more likely to survive and be in a position to assist if they're in the centre of the train where they can reach most places more quickly. In rush hour, they'd still have problems getting to the rear of the train if they're stationed in a cab at the front.

Regarding radios and passengers overhearing, all the better as far as I'm concerned. I find it extremely irritating as a passenger being kept in the dark about delays because no-one is allowed or can be bothered to tell me about them, so I don't have a chance to travel by an alternative route. In any case, I'm sure PSAs (to use a DLR term) could have earpieces that prevent casual eavesdropping.

I don't think the where the staff member is places in the carriage has any bearing on how easy (or hard) it is to walk along tracks. With the same headset, the PSA could communicate with passengers and emergency kit could be placed in locked cupboards near the centre of the train where the PSA is. Staff members would also be able to render non-emergency assistance, such as directions and general information face to face with passengers.

I would trust a well-designed computer to drive a train more than a human. The DLR is an example of what can be acheieved, and its only major accidents (excluding bombing) both occurred when the trains were driven in manual mode.

I think I can drive my train better and more comfortably than a computer can thank you !

 

[ainsworth74]

I think I can drive my train better and more comfortably than a computer can thank you !

Good for you. Unfortunately that doesn't change the fact that LU are wanting to deploy driverless technology on their services. Also, as a passenger, I've never noticed a difference between travelling on a ATO service or a driver operated service on the Tube.

 

[notadriver]

Good for you. Unfortunately that doesn't change the fact that LU are wanting to deploy driverless technology on their services. Also, as a passenger, I've never noticed a difference between travelling on a ATO service or a driver operated service on the Tube.

I agree ATO is ideal for tube operations. I'm not so sure about the mainline though.

 

[AndrewP]

Bob Crow must wake up on a morning and think what can I call a strike about today?

The problem is that because it seems that strikes are suggested too early they are devalued when they are a valid and logical course of action.

 

[Mojo]

No you may say this is no different from today but with no drivers cab as Boris is talking about you then have the problem of where is the emergency kit placed? Driver may need to travel up and down the train getting the equipment where in a cab he can talk to passengers then take what he needs with him. If he's cabless then its all going to take longer to sort out, 'is dibble delaying the response and endangering people.

But at present if there is a failure the train operator sometimes needs to walk through the train and lift seats or open cabinets either as part of the fault-finding process or to isolate something in order to get the train moving.

 

[maniacmartin]

I think I can drive my train better and more comfortably than a computer can thank you !

My experiences from a passenger point of view:

Well yes it's true that computers don't drive in the same way as humans. My experiences of travelling on the Victoria, Jubilee and DLR are that there only seem to be a few modes:
Brake, Coast, Slow or Fast , and no smooth transitions between them, so to maintain a constant slowish speed, the computer is constantly alternating between slow and coasting, which isn't as smooth as if a human was driving. This is very noticeable on the DLR which can be a jerky ride, but to be honest I don't think many passengers notice or care.

Jubilee line trains enter platforms a lot quicker than human-driven trains, and slam on and adjust the brakes at exactly the right time to line up with the platform (though sometimes undershoot too), whereas that takes some experience to get just right for a human, so they often pull in slower, but not at the glacially slow speed of a DLR train at a terminus platform.

Human-driven trains can be faster at opening the doors though! The Piccadilly doors are frequently usually halfway open before the train has come to a complete stop

 

[notadriver]

Tube driving and train driving are different as are the driving techniques taught.

 

[causton]

Human-driven trains can be faster at opening the doors though! The Piccadilly doors are frequently usually halfway open before the train has come to a complete stop

I don't think that will be the case in newer stocks... however I am pretty sure it happened a tiny bit on an 09 stock the other day, about half a second before it was completely stopped!

I personally think that if driverless trains are rolled out to a further extent, they should be on light rail/Tube-style services. I would be happy with a driverless tube train but think it's not as beneficial for a 100mph fast train!

 

[A-driver]

People seem to be getting things a but confused here. The issue is not with automation. This is already in operation on LUL trains and will be soon on parts of the mainline network. Boris' plans for the tube is to go driverless-get rid of the staff to try to stand up to the unions. That's the issue-not having staff.

The difference between a human or machine driving the train isn't really in question-a computer will generally be better in many circumstances, especially in a self contained underground network. Of course humans are better than some elements but as I say, computers also have advantages.

Us train drivers are not paid 45k+ a year to drive a train-as in pull the levers to make the thing move. That part is dead easy and with a few practice runs any one will get the hang of how the brakes handle etc. We are paid for our knowledge, ability to deal with no end if situations, to notice problems a computer won't, to take charge in emergency or out of course situations etc.

Further roll out of ATO is a good thing-it is faster, more economical, not at risk from human error etc but you still need trained experienced staff on able to take control of situations. Aircraft fly themselves, take off and land pretty much un aided but you still need a highly trained pilot at the front keeping an eye on things.

 

[notadriver]

Doesn't ASLEF oppose the introduction of ATO generally ? If introduced it means deskilling the driver which means they can be paid less with massive erosion of terms and conditions and are more easily replaceable. I believe this is what will happen once the entire tube goes ATO.

 

[maniacmartin]

Doesn't ASLEF oppose the introduction of ATO generally ? If introduced it means deskilling the driver which means they can be paid less with massive erosion of terms and conditions and are more easily replaceable. I believe this is what will happen once the entire tube goes ATO.

Indeed, my impression was that Boris/TfL want DLR-style staff who I am sure are paid much less than Tube drivers

 

[A-driver]

Indeed, my impression was that Boris/TfL want DLR-style staff who I am sure are paid much less than Tube drivers

But are still members of unions such as the RMT just like current drivers are. And so if he thinks he will win his war with the unions and be remembered as the mayor who ended strikes on London Underground then he may be very wrong...

 

[notadriver]

Indeed, my impression was that Boris/TfL want DLR-style staff who I am sure are paid much less than Tube drivers

Only 9k less as a matter of fact !

 

[hippo1]

The plan for "Driverless Trains" if you read the LU document includes no
provision "Train Captains" or any staff to be on board Trains.
The vision is to totally de staff the Underground with disregard for safety
and no real improvement in capacity. Good old Tories.

 

[Mojo]

The plan for "Driverless Trains" if you read the LU document includes no
provision "Train Captains" or any staff to be on board Trains.
The vision is to totally de staff the Underground with disregard for safety
and no real improvement in capacity. Good old Tories.

What have the Tories got to do with it?

The document that was released last year was written by a department within London Underground as a discussion paper to generate ideas based on the need to reduce headcount and save money.

The paper states that a new 'Train Attendant' role could be created, noting that not all trains would have staff on board.