Why do multiple units no longer have glass cabs?

[transmanche]

But that still doesn't justify the costs, redesigns and industrial relations issues involved in providing a forward view.

I don't think anyone's asking for existing units to changed. But there's no reason that future units could not be so designed. And if designed like the Metro stock (where the driver has privacy from the public) why would there be any industrial relations issues?

 

[A-driver]

I don't think anyone's asking for existing units to changed. But there's no reason that future units could not be so designed. And if designed like the Metro stock (where the driver has privacy from the public) why would there be any industrial relations issues?

No way you can get rid of full width cabs on the mainline, far too many times when you need a second person to sit it the cab for a start.

And I don't see any need for designing new units with a glass screen to view he cab and driver, there are no benifits of it and it will most likely just pee off the drivers! Why would you bother doing that?

 

[bramling]

That not too dissimilar to the cabs on T&W Metro stock. The cab is slightly less than half the width of the train and nowadays the glass in the driver's cab door is darkened so you can't see in (well you can just about make out a silhouette of the driver, but that's all).

Yet my experience as a passenger on the Metro (and DLR) is the opposite. Children and teenagers will invariably rush to try and get the front seat and many a guilty-looking adult will try to beat them to it... and I doubt that they're all enthusiasts!

Is it the case that the front seats on T&W Metro are more about providing as much passenger space as possible on a short train, rather than to give a forward view? (Genuine question as I don't know the answer).

 

[upnorth71]

I've watched Japanese train drivers driving and found it very interesting but can assure you I didn't report them on Twitter.

There was an instance where a passenger reported (and recorded on a cell phone camera) of a driver dozing off while driving on the mainline- it made the evening news here. Also a guard who was caught reading a comic book while on train duty. But in general no passenger-induced incidents occur, and most urban/suburban railway stock in Japan have quite large windows (giant in the case of JR West stock like the 223 series). In fact, some railways actually have the drivers put nameplates on the cab back windows for passengers to view. Also, at the beginning of runs or with crew changes, the guard announces over the PA system his/her name as well as the driver's.

One note about drawing blinds or darkening the windows- this is done in Japan not for privacy reasons, but to eliminate glare (which may inhibit proper reading of lineside signals or obstructions) from interior lighting getting into the driver's cabin either in tunnels or after it gets dark outside.

 

[Strat-tastic]

But that still doesn't justify the costs, redesigns and industrial relations issues involved in providing a forward view.

Bah! I think you just want it all to yourself

 

[transmanche]

No way you can get rid of full width cabs on the mainline, far too many times when you need a second person to sit it the cab for a start.

Amazingly, they manage to cope with that on T&W Metro.

It's quite a simple solution: simply leaving the driver's cab door open and chaining off the front section with a sign affixed to the chain saying 'do not enter'. And it works.

 

[A-driver]

Amazingly, they manage to cope with that on T&W Metro.



It's quite a simple solution: simply leaving the driver's cab door open and chaining off the front section with a sign affixed to the chain saying 'do not enter'. And it works.

That's up to them but removing the privacy of the cab especially for trainee drivers and during degraded working would be seen as a huge reduction of working conditions and certainly wouldn't ever get through the unions and workforce. Once again it's a case of no benefit to be gained from it and a huge downside of peeing off the entire workforce!

 

[transmanche]

That's up to them but removing the privacy of the cab especially for trainee drivers and during degraded working would be seen as a huge reduction of working conditions and certainly wouldn't ever get through the unions and workforce. Once again it's a case of no benefit to be gained from it and a huge downside of peeing off the entire workforce!

What an extremely touchy workforce!

 

[A-driver]

What an extremely touchy workforce!

Why? Why on earth should our workplace be opened up to the public looking over our shoulder and listening to what we are talking about? I can see no reason for it at all.

We are not in a job where we are in constant view of the public and we knew that when we signed up. Just because the Germans, Tyne and Wear metro or dlr have something why does that mean we as UK mainline drivers should have it imposed on us?

If you can come up with a benefit of see through cabs or open fronts then I'll listen but the only reason any one has come up with is because some passengers may like to see out the front-hardly a reason really!

 

[transmanche]

We are not in a job where we are in constant view of the public and we knew that when we signed up.

Surprisingly, sometimes jobs change. Lots of people with office jobs found that they were suddenly in open-plan offices and/or in plain view of the public. That's life.

If you can come up with a benefit of see through cabs or open fronts then I'll listen but the only reason any one has come up with is because some passengers may like to see out the front-hardly a reason really!

To quote you; why? Why does there have to be a "benefit"? There doesn't seem to be any disbenefit, only that you don't want it.

 

[A-driver]

Surprisingly, sometimes jobs change. Lots of people with office jobs found that they were suddenly in open-plan offices and/or in plain view of the public. That's life.



To quote you; why? Why does there have to be a "benefit"? There doesn't seem to be any disbenefit, only that you don't want it.

But the change will never happen without a benefit being found.

And just because other jobs change and people have their working conditions eroded why should the rest of us have to follow on and accept it?

 

[transmanche]

But the change will never happen without a benefit being found.

It's simply a design choice. Nothing more and nothing less.

And just because other jobs change and people have their working conditions eroded why should the rest of us have to follow on and accept it?

Becasue life moves on. Stuff happens. If not we'd still have Gresley N2 0-6-2s puffing out of King's Cross, rather than the 700s which are on their way.

 

[A-driver]

It's simply a design choice. Nothing more and nothing less.



Becasue life moves on. Stuff happens. If not we'd still have Gresley N2 0-6-2s puffing out of King's Cross, rather than the 700s which are on their way.

It's not a design choice though as drivers would get more of a say in design than the public when it comes to the cabs.

Windows in cabs is not a case of moving on. 700s are on the way as they have an obvious benefit over steam trains. Windows to cabs do not have any benefit so that is a weak to non existent comparison! Things move on when benefits are found from moving on.

As for the future of driving cabs, an awful lot of work has gone into the soundproofing of 700s for various reasons which kind of points that drivers cabs are becoming more private, so the complete opposite direction of putting windows in.

I'm still very confused why people are so against the idea of drivers cabs remaining private. Saying things move on is a non argument as no reasons are given for it to 'move on'.

 

[transmanche]

As for the future of driving cabs, an awful lot of work has gone into the soundproofing of 700s for various reasons which kind of points that drivers cabs are becoming more private, so the complete opposite direction of putting windows in.

There's no connection between the two. In fact you could even argue the opposite, with good soundproofing there's no reason not to have a glass window...

In any event, as I have demonstrated upthread, it's perfectly possible to give passengers a forward view without compromising the driver's 'privacy'.

(BTW, I think you assume that I actually care either way. I'm just bemused by the irrational opposition to a piece of glass, when so many other train drivers manage to cope with it without issue.)

 

[A-driver]

There's no connection between the two. In fact you could even argue the opposite, with good soundproofing there's no reason not to have a glass window...



In any event, as I have demonstrated upthread, it's perfectly possible to give passengers a forward view without compromising the driver's 'privacy'.



(BTW, I think you assume that I actually care either way. I'm just bemused by the irrational opposition to a piece of glass, when so many other train drivers manage to cope with it without issue.)

I'm sure people would cope with the window but I don't understand why it would ever be seriously considered in the first place. It bemuses me equally why anyone would ever build one into a train.

And it's not really possible to give the driver and other people who need to travel in the cab privacy whilst giving a forward view.

 

[transmanche]

And it's not really possible to give the driver and other people who need to travel in the cab privacy whilst giving a forward view.

Despite being shown evidence of this happening in practice?

 

[A-driver]

Despite being shown evidence of this happening in practice?

Where? The Newcastle metro dosnt offer privacy considering mainline trains are double manned far more than a metro. A trainee can spend 6momths with a DI-they don't get much privacy from the T&W example.

A light rail like Newcastle metro can't be compared with the mainline.

And you still fail to suggest why a window would ever be considered considering it brings no benifit and so no reason to consider it.

 

[455driver]

Just think of all the youtube videos we could be in when people film us using the GSMR and assume we are on the phone!

 

[transmanche]

A light rail like Newcastle metro can't be compared with the mainline.

Of course not. The fact these trains use Network Rail tracks is apparently of no importance.

And you still fail to suggest why a window would ever be considered considering it brings no benifit and so no reason to consider it.

I haven't "failed" to do anything. As I have already told you; a) I really don't care and b) there's no reason to have to show a "benefit" for a design aesthetic.

I do, however, feel that challenging nonsense is a good thing - and when I see someone making up spurious reasons to object to something, that's definitely worth challenging. And after challenging it seems to have no more substance to it than a toddler's cry of "I don't want to". So we can probably leave it at that.

 

[bb21]

To quote you; why? Why does there have to be a "benefit"? There doesn't seem to be any disbenefit, only that you don't want it.

Distraction from the passengers due to an "open cab" could be a potential drawback. It's not a big deal on a 30mph, mostly uni-directional, light rail system, but at mainline speeds and operational complexity, probably not a good idea.

Then once you have this for high-speed trains, why would you want to spend money having separate standards for lower-speed operations? There is nothing to gain from it.

 

[A-driver]

Of course not. The fact these trains use Network Rail tracks is apparently of no importance.



I haven't "failed" to do anything. As I have already told you; a) I really don't care and b) there's no reason to have to show a "benefit" for a design aesthetic.



I do, however, feel that challenging nonsense is a good thing - and when I see someone making up spurious reasons to object to something, that's definitely worth challenging. And after challenging it seems to have no more substance to it than a toddler's cry of "I don't want to". So we can probably leave it at that.

Newcastle metro may use NR tracks but is still a different set up with different operating procedures and training requirements. Plus reducing the drivers cab to a cupboard would be a huge reduction in working conditions and environment which would not be approved unless any kind of benefit could be found.

My argument is not 'I don't want to' but simply that I can't see any reason for it. If there was a reason to be found them I'd take the proposal seriously.

What If I suggested that all office workers had to wear leotards from now on? I can't see any reason for them not to. After all, things move on and change happens. Yet it's a pointless thing to suggest and would be resisted by most office workers. But why? It works perfectly well in other work places. On fancy dress days some office workers wear similar things and still manage to get through the day. They would just have to accept that from now on they need to wear this. It's up to them to come up with reasons why it wouldn't work, not for me to suggest why on earth it should ever be considered...

 

[transmanche]

What If I suggested that all office workers had to wear leotards from now on?

Go for it, if that floats your boat. But it's not a comparable suggestion to giving passengers a forward view.

The fact is, I don't believe there is any reason not to have a forward view. As far as I'm concerned it's a simple design decision - no different to what type of seats are used - and all the objections that have been given to it have (IMHO) no substance. You feel otherwise. We're not going to change each other's mind, so time to move on.

 

[A-driver]

Go for it, if that floats your boat. But it's not a comparable suggestion to giving passengers a forward view.



The fact is, I don't believe there is any reason not to have a forward view. As far as I'm concerned it's a simple design decision - no different to what type of seats are used - and all the objections that have been given to it have (IMHO) no substance. You feel otherwise. We're not going to change each other's mind, so time to move on.

Why is it not a comparable suggestion? I don't see any difference. It may float my boat as much as a forward train view floats others boats...but both are pointless ideas with no gain to be had and the huge downside of winding up the work force.

To use your argument, I don't see any reason for office staff NOT to wear leotards. It's a simple uniform choice no different to asking them to wear suits and no different to the seats provided in the office.

And I fail to see how you believe that the workforce objecting is of no substance-surely peeing off all your drivers is of huge importance and any decision likely to do this with no gain to anyone is a pointless idea that no one with an ounce of common sense would ever take even semi seriously?! An open plan or public viewed office would be done to bring benefit to the business, weather a cost benefit or productivity benefit. No benefit has yet been suggested for windows into cabs so I still don't see what the basis of your argument it.

 

[transmanche]

Why is it not a comparable suggestion?

Ah you want to keep the argument going. Fair enough. Perhaps you can do that in the privacy of your cab? I'm just enjoying the view.

 

[A-driver]

Ah you want to keep the argument going. Fair enough. Perhaps you can do that in the privacy of your cab? I'm just enjoying the view.

No, you began the argument and have continued it on. I just keep answering your points which I am perfectly entitled to do. There are flaws in your argument which I'm pointing out and you seem to be ignoring and not answering.

Plus I believe this is a discussion, not an argument...it's a discussion forum so I think it's fair enough to answer your posts. I have asked questions which you have not answered, that is all.

 

[mbonwick]

Has anyone considered that cab bulkheads serve a structural purpose in the event of a crash?

Glass for all it's wonderful attributes isn't too great at absorbing energy or providing bulk reinforcement in situations like this....

 

[A-driver]

Has anyone considered that cab bulkheads serve a structural purpose in the event of a crash?

Glass for all it's wonderful attributes isn't too great at absorbing energy or providing bulk reinforcement in situations like this....

Unfortunately you are just going to get the stock answer..."they do it in Germany/Newcastle/dlr..."

 

[transmanche]

No, you began the argument and have continued it on. I just keep answering your points which I am perfectly entitled to do. There are flaws in your argument which I'm pointing out and you seem to be ignoring and not answering./

You haven't 'answered' any of my points. You've repeatedly given a few reasons why you think having a forward view is a bad idea. I don't agree with your reasons and feel that they are spurious. And I've explained clearly why I think they are spurious. End of.

Plus I believe this is a discussion, not an argument...it's a discussion forum so I think it's fair enough to answer your posts.

You're thinking of the word argument solely as a dispute. Remember its primary meanings. "A fact or statement used to support a proposition; a reason. A process of reasoning."

So when I say you "want to keep the argument going", it's a polite way of saying you "want to keep banging on making the same point repeatedly to try and prove you're 'right' and I'm 'wrong', even though I've made it clear that we're never going to agree and we should just leave it there".

 

[notadriver]

You're not a driver so you won't have the insight and experience that drivers have about this issue so you are the one who is wrong transmanche.

 

[transmanche]

You're not a driver so you won't have the insight and experience that drivers have about this issue so you are the one who is wrong transmanche.

Ah the old "you're not in the industry so you know nothing" argument. Sorry, that's just utter hogwash.

If you really, truly believe that only industry "experts" can comment on the design of a vehicle, I do hope that you're going to inform anyone who isn't a car designer that they are "wrong" if they ever hold an opinion about the aesthetics of a car design.