• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

Southern DOO: ASLEF members vote 79.1% for revised deal

Status
Not open for further replies.

Edinburgh2000

Member
Joined
28 Apr 2017
Messages
38
Train drivers need to do route knowledge because they do not drive on line of sight.

The actual process of driving a train and getting it to stop and start might be simple but, as ever, that's not the difficult part. The skill comes in stopping it in the right place time and time again irrespective of the conditions.

Careful where you are going with that argument. You are making the case for automated driving of all fast trains. Tram drivers, for example, need to use their judgement based on what they see from their windscreen. You are saying that high speed train drivers are automotons and simply perform pre-programmed actions based on their route knowledge, their knowledge of the weather, and the state of the lineside signals, something a machine could do much more reliably. If drivers cannot stop in the distance they can see, they are adding no more safety than a machine can.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

otomous

Member
Joined
5 Oct 2011
Messages
444
Careful where you are going with that argument. You are making the case for automated driving of all fast trains. Tram drivers, for example, need to use their judgement based on what they see from their windscreen. You are saying that high speed train drivers are automotons and simply perform pre-programmed actions based on their route knowledge, their knowledge of the weather, and the state of the lineside signals, something a machine could do much more reliably. If drivers cannot stop in the distance they can see, they are adding no more safety than a machine can.

No, he is saying that route knowledge is required for drivers to adapt to changing conditions and that is harder to do with a heavy fast moving vehicle that cannot stop in the distance the driver can see.
 

Dave1987

On Moderation
Joined
20 Oct 2012
Messages
4,563
Agree absolutely. ASLEF are forcing the government & rail industry to go down the driverless path. If only Aslef could agree to train drivers being as flexible & productive as bus & lorry drivers then there would be no need for driverless trains except on metro lines & reserved freight routes. There are many in ASLEF who are sensible & pragmatic, I wish they could persuade the few ASLEF dinasaurs that their obduracy will do their children & them out of train driving jobs. Look what is happening in Sydney australia. A new quite long distance commuter line is coming into service very soon without any staff aboard, because Sydney's ASLEF equivalent refused to allow DOO. Take heed! There are very close links between Australian & UK rail management.

I would not normally respond to posts like this but feel I need to respond to the inaccuracies in your post again. Wow you really do have something against drivers don't you! Drivers are not forcing the Government into going driverless at all. As much as I'm sure some Tory right wing politicians would love to see drivers on the dole queue for daring to stand up for themselves it isn't going to happen any time soon. David Waboso (the head of Digital Railway) has said driverless trains present some serious problems that would need to be overcome. If the Government aims to put everyone that hates them out of a job then the economy will collapse. For a supporter of Government that is supposed to be about "jobs jobs jobs" you and your fellow right wingers seem very keen to put people on the dole.
 

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
4,181
To be fair it's the first post by XDM that hasn't trashed guards (probably not worth their effort). It would seem the general gist of the conversation is 'do as we say or we'll find a way to get rid of you'
 

313103

Established Member
Joined
13 May 2006
Messages
1,595
I would not normally respond to posts like this but feel I need to respond to the inaccuracies in your post again. Wow you really do have something against drivers don't you! Drivers are not forcing the Government into going driverless at all. As much as I'm sure some Tory right wing politicians would love to see drivers on the dole queue for daring to stand up for themselves it isn't going to happen any time soon. David Waboso (the head of Digital Railway) has said driverless trains present some serious problems that would need to be overcome. If the Government aims to put everyone that hates them out of a job then the economy will collapse. For a supporter of Government that is supposed to be about "jobs jobs jobs" you and your fellow right wingers seem very keen to put people on the dole.

Guards are hated more by this poster then drivers, so i think you are alright for the time being. He/she will like drivers more if the pesky so and so's didn't have the temerity to support the guards and oppose DOO in its current form.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,124
I don't know what can be done. But can I repeat. We have an overall transport system which is dangerous and polluting because the railway may be safe, but is too expensive for most purposes.
I'm afraid that's largely true , I know a couple of DBS drivers due for voluntarily severance shortly, so clearly the industry has failed miserably to replace its lost coal traffic with any type of new business
 
Last edited:

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
4,181
I'm afraid that's largely true , I know a couple of DBS drivers due for voluntarily severance shortly, so clearly the industry has failed miserably to replace its lost coal traffic with any type of new business

Out of interest, how is the cost to transport a rake of intermodal containers broken down?

You'd have to pay for driver, shunter, loading, unloading, fuel, track access? Is there anything else? Which of the above is the biggest cost? I'd put money on it not being staff... how do you reduce those other costs?
 

otomous

Member
Joined
5 Oct 2011
Messages
444
I'm afraid that's largely true , I know a couple of DBS drivers due for voluntarily severance shortly, so clearly the industry has failed miserably to replace its lost coal traffic with any type of new business

Maybe because it is not given the same freedoms as the road lobby. It doesn't have unrestricted access to the rail network. It can't keep increasing the size of its wagons. It's not a level playing field!
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,124
Maybe because it is not given the same freedoms as the road lobby. It doesn't have unrestricted access to the rail network. It can't keep increasing the size of its wagons. It's not a level playing field!
Yes, I'm sure they're all longstanding major contributing factors too, that probably won't change unless a future government decides at some point to vastly increase the charges on lorries
 
Last edited:

BestWestern

Established Member
Joined
6 Feb 2011
Messages
6,736
Agree absolutely. ASLEF are forcing the government & rail industry to go down the driverless path. If only Aslef could agree to train drivers being as flexible & productive as bus & lorry drivers then there would be no need for driverless trains except on metro lines & reserved freight routes. There are many in ASLEF who are sensible & pragmatic, I wish they could persuade the few ASLEF dinasaurs that their obduracy will do their children & them out of train driving jobs. Look what is happening in Sydney australia. A new quite long distance commuter line is coming into service very soon without any staff aboard, because Sydney's ASLEF equivalent refused to allow DOO. Take heed! There are very close links between Australian & UK rail management.

Nobody within ASLEF thinks that Drivers shouldn't have proper route knowledge, and I very much doubt many TOC managers think their Drivers should have no traction knowledge. Sit, do nothing and wait for the RAC is not a clever option when a technical failure is blocking a main line.

As for your staffless trains in Sydney, we are already building lines encompassing ATO which had nothing to do with DOO disputes. There is a world of difference between a brand new, purpose built line and the idea of doing away with competent crew for purely cost reasons on the existing network. Anybody with a more knowledgeable and less tediously political viewpoint than your own will tell you that.
 
Last edited:

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,559
Yes, I'm sure they're all longstanding major contributing factors too, that probably won't change unless a future government decides at some point to vastly increase the charges on lorries

What you mean is stop subsidising HGVs to the tune of 70% of operating costs.

This subsidy is provided by the private motorist who, if asked, I am certain would prefer some of that subsidy to be diverted to railfreight giving the motorist a clearer run on the roads.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,124
What you mean is stop subsidising HGVs to the tune of 70% of operating costs.

This subsidy is provided by the private motorist who, if asked, I am certain would prefer some of that subsidy to be diverted to railfreight giving the motorist a clearer run on the roads.
I'm pretty certain they would too, providing the costs of the goods being carried didn't have to rise significantly in order to achieve it
 

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,559
I'm pretty certain they would too, providing the costs of the goods being carried didn't have to rise significantly in order to achieve it

No reason why the cost should rise. Subsidy could be cost neutral. The total subsidy to rail domestic intermodal, for environmental benefits of rail, is currently gbp15.5m, which in road terms is peanuts.
 

bramling

Veteran Member
Joined
5 Mar 2012
Messages
17,686
Location
Hertfordshire / Teesdale
Careful where you are going with that argument. You are making the case for automated driving of all fast trains. Tram drivers, for example, need to use their judgement based on what they see from their windscreen. You are saying that high speed train drivers are automotons and simply perform pre-programmed actions based on their route knowledge, their knowledge of the weather, and the state of the lineside signals, something a machine could do much more reliably. If drivers cannot stop in the distance they can see, they are adding no more safety than a machine can.

Not necessarily - the driver may have already used his route knowledge to determine a need to drive at a lower speed for whatever reason. One of the good things about a human driving is that this works both ways - in good conditions they can drive the train as fast as possible, and adapt in time to avoid risking an incident occurring when conditions change. ATO systems have a rather more dubious record in this area - either forcing the train to travel slower even in good conditions, or having a greater number of incidents than if a human were driving but tolerated because it's ATO. In Britain today we have examples of both these approaches.
 

StephenHunter

Established Member
Joined
22 Jul 2017
Messages
2,118
Location
London
The actual process of driving a train and getting it to stop and start might be simple but, as ever, thats not the difficult part. The skill comes in stopping it in the right place time and time again irrespective of the conditions.

Why do train drivers have to stop in a specific place on the platform anyway? I can understand if it was a 12-car in a 12-car length platform, but there's plenty of options for a 4-car in a 12-car length...
 

TEW

Established Member
Joined
16 May 2008
Messages
5,841
Why do train drivers have to stop in a specific place on the platform anyway? I can understand if it was a 12-car in a 12-car length platform, but there's plenty of options for a 4-car in a 12-car length...

Because passengers don't tend to enjoy a walk 8 coaches along the platform from the end of the train to the exit and the pouring rain and howling wind for a start.
 

kw12

Member
Joined
12 Jan 2017
Messages
180
Out of interest, how is the cost to transport a rake of intermodal containers broken down?

You'd have to pay for driver, shunter, loading, unloading, fuel, track access? Is there anything else? Which of the above is the biggest cost? I'd put money on it not being staff... how do you reduce those other costs?

There are also costs for things such as leasing (or buying) the locomotives and wagons used, plus maintaining those locomotives and wagons.

The latest set of accounts published by Freightliner Limited show that around a third of its operating costs in 2015 were staff costs. Thus, this suggests staff costs were at least the second highest, and potentially the largest, expense Freightliner incurred in running a container train. Presumably similar situation with the container train operations for other companies. May differ for other types of freight train, and for passenger trains.
 

HowardGWR

Established Member
Joined
30 Jan 2013
Messages
4,983
What you mean is stop subsidising HGVs to the tune of 70% of operating costs.

This subsidy is provided by the private motorist who, if asked, I am certain would prefer some of that subsidy to be diverted to railfreight giving the motorist a clearer run on the roads.

What evidence is there that this would be for the good? What has any of this (goods traffic on or off rail) has anything to do with which staff operate doors on trains?
 

otomous

Member
Joined
5 Oct 2011
Messages
444
What evidence is there that this would be for the good? What has any of this (goods traffic on or off rail) has anything to do with which staff operate doors on trains?

The question of the high cost of the railway in the U.K. relative to other forms of transport due to practices in staffing, training and regulation was raised.
 

Carlisle

Established Member
Joined
26 Aug 2012
Messages
4,124
What has any of this (goods traffic on or off rail) has anything to do with which staff operate doors on trains?
For the purpose of discussion about the costs involved in different modes of transport
 
Last edited:

furnessvale

Established Member
Joined
14 Jul 2015
Messages
4,559
Because passengers don't tend to enjoy a walk 8 coaches along the platform from the end of the train to the exit and the pouring rain and howling wind for a start.

It would also play havoc with station dwell times.
 

Deepgreen

Established Member
Joined
12 Jun 2013
Messages
6,340
Location
Betchworth, Surrey
Builds character! :lol:

Happened to me at Redhill the other day when, yet again, the GWR driver stopped his terminating ex-Reading train at the south end of the platform instead of the north. The closely-following Gatwick reverser is booked to use the south end so that was stuck outside the station until we moved along to our proper spot. Torrential rain and a dash back along the platform! The excellent lady guard made sure everyone who boarded knew that we were going to move up to the north end where the train should have stopped in the first place.

To address the OP's question, stopping marks are designed to place each train at the optimum spot on the platform for passenger convenience (proximity to exits, shelters, etc.), signal sighting, CCTV provision and possible accommodation of other trains in the same platform.
 

IKB

Member
Joined
15 Nov 2013
Messages
366
To address the OP's question, stopping marks are designed to place each train at the optimum spot on the platform for passenger convenience (proximity to exits, shelters, etc.), signal sighting, CCTV provision and possible accommodation of other trains in the same platform.

They are also spaced so that when changing ends the AWS receiver is not sat over the magnet, hence at some locations there might only be a couple of meters difference between the 6 and 8 mark, as opposed to two coach lengths (hypothetical example).
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,557
Because passengers don't tend to enjoy a walk 8 coaches along the platform from the end of the train to the exit and the pouring rain and howling wind for a start.
Well until the last year or so, that is just what passengers at Fratton had to do if catching a 10 car 444. The last 5 cars under under the canopy and if it rained people has to go out into the rain to join the front 5.

Once Standard Door Operation's was introduced this of course got consigned to the history and people could board from under the canopy rain or shine.
 

pompeyfan

Established Member
Joined
24 Jan 2012
Messages
4,181
Well until the last year or so, that is just what passengers at Fratton had to do if catching a 10 car 444. The last 5 cars under under the canopy and if it rained people has to go out into the rain to join the front 5.

Once Standard Door Operation's was introduced this of course got consigned to the history and people could board from under the canopy rain or shine.

Assume you mean automatic selective door operation. As an aside Fratton on the up can actually accommodate 8 carriages of 23m stock, but for some reason Asdo is set up for 7.
 

387star

On Moderation
Joined
16 Nov 2009
Messages
6,653
Anyone know new strike days as the rmt news is incorrect and shows previous strike days assume same as the north
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Top