Policy Exchange propose to mostly remove route learning

[Starmill]

The attached PDF is the latest piece of bizarre output from this think tank.

This paper has sought to demonstrate that much of the disruption and
poor passenger experience common across Britain’s railways is a product
of a serious shortage of qualified train drivers. Other countries with far
more qualified drivers than Britain have already declared a shortage and
taken rapid action to train more drivers in response.
The shortage of drivers is a product of an unnecessarily long and overly
regulated course. Drivers are still learning, by rote, routes which can be
fully digitised and traction information which is dealt with by a mechanic.
By compressing the training into an intensive six-month course, we can
train drivers in one year less for a far smaller cost.
Every year thousands of people apply to become train drivers. They are
not taken on because Train Operating Companies cannot afford to train
them for eighteen months before they begin to drive solo. There will be
huge demand for a government subsidised course.
Until we increase the number of train drivers we will continue to see
poor performance on the railways. It is likely overtime bans will become
even more common as a negotiation tactic by the unions, and it is therefore
vital that TOCs are not reliant on driver overtime to deliver a standard
service.

It's surprisingly awkward to navigate the document too because for some reason they use two columns, but the one with the main body of text switches sides throughout.

 

[Towers]

“About the Author

Lara Brown is a Senior Research Fellow at Policy Exchange. She joined the organisation in September 2023. Previously, she worked for as a Parliamentary Researcher. She has a bachelor’s degree in English Literature from the University of Cambridge where she also served as President of the Cambridge Union.”

In short, the author is highly qualified but not in the field of how railways work. As illustrated by such suggestions as:

“Competency on a route currently expires after just six months to a year of not driving it. This should be increased to two years.”

And:

“Where a driver receives detailed information about a route from the control panel on a train, they should not be required to memorise this.”

Those who do understand railways will dismiss those suggestions accordingly, for a multitude of obvious reasons. File and forget etc; moving on…

 

[TreacleMiller]

Comparing main line drivers to S-Line Drivers in Denmark or Bus drivers is rather unfair.

It's an interesting read and raises valid points. There's certainly logic in consolidation of traction.

The suggestion on route knowledge though - Well. Lara is very clearly a bright girl but this is an academic exercise based in an assumed reality.

 

[Towers]

Comparing main line drivers to S-Line Drivers in Denmark or Bus drivers is rather unfair.

It's an interesting read and raises valid points. There's certainly logic in consolidation of traction.

The suggestion on route knowledge though - Well. Lara is very clearly a bright girl but this is an academic exercise based in an assumed reality.

This is someone writing about a topic they have zero understanding of, which is a road that leads ideally nowhere, but at worst to somewhere dangerous.

 

[Rail Quest]

This is an extract of the first paragraph regarding route learning:

As is noted in the RSSB’s own document on the Management of Route
Knowledge, ‘many members of staff are provided with company phones
or tablets which can be used to provide information. For example, guards
may have access to an app showing the train’s live location on a map. It
can show if the train is stopped at a red signal and sometimes why’.67 Such
technological advancement should gradually reduce the volume of route
knowledge driver’s need. While it is ideal for them to have experience
of routes they drive over, lengthy memorisation of landmarks, signal
information, and gradients is becoming obsolete.

I was so puzzled when this went straight from talking about guards tracking a delay using a mobile app to that being an example of perhaps how easy it might be to replace route knowledge with new technologies. I feel like barely any actual analytical thought was given to this paper at all.

Shame really as I'd agree that a shortage of drivers is definitely causing a headache and rest day working reliance is not a healthy strategy for either the employers or operators. However, instead of taking a sensible look at that problem to try and find genuine solutions, this paper just went straight to a "modern politics" solution of burying real-world issues in buzz words and fairy-tale ideas.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Mainline drivers in Germany use the Buchfahrplan (now electronic, but was a paper book where you turned over the pages as you drove) as a substitute for part of route learning. While not UK practice, it does prove the concept to be workable, particularly when coupled with the likes of ETCS.

 

[TreacleMiller]

This is someone writing about a topic they have zero understanding of, which is a road that leads ideally nowhere, but at worst to somewhere dangerous.

It's a literature review. That's rather typical university course work and whilst it's good learning, it is rather typical of the sort of think tank environment that hires brighter graduates and parachutes them into various projects - such as this one.

The idea of all TOCs sending drivers to academies is a good one to standardise driver theory. That would be a good thing. However, it would mean every new driver course starting for every TOC at the same time - or large gaps between theory (rules) and then traction knowledge.

The idea that a bus driver does more with less training which is a point raised repeatedly is madness.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The idea of all TOCs sending drivers to academies is a good one to standardise driver theory. That would be a good thing. However, it would mean every new driver course starting for every TOC at the same time - or large gaps between theory (rules) and then traction knowledge.

Post GBR there won't be TOCs aside from the devolved nations.

The idea that a bus driver does more with less training which is a point raised repeatedly is madness.

It rather disregards that you start from a higher base with buses - most adults know how to drive, and just need a "conversion course" to the bigger vehicle and customer service aspects.

 

[TreacleMiller]

Mainline drivers in Germany use the Buchfahrplan (now electronic, but was a paper book where you turned over the pages as you drove) as a substitute for part of route learning. While not UK practice, it does prove the concept to be workable, particularly when coupled with the likes of ETCS.

If we had ETCS on every line - I would happily drive any route in the country with minimal training. We don't.

The risk to drivers from being caught out on routes (Spads and TPWS being the big ones) is massive and we can be out the door relatively quickly after incidents. You'd need to take that element away to allow for faster route learning and that would potentially put us back to 1980s levels of safety.

 

[Towers]

It's a literature review. That's rather typical university course work and whilst it's good learning, it is rather typical of the sort of think tank environment that hires brighter graduates and parachutes them into various projects - such as this one.

As I said above then, someone writing on a topic of which they have precious little grasp.

 

[Nicholas Lewis]

Probably not all her work i would imagine but this is her experience

She has a bachelor’s degree in English Literature from the University of Cambridge where she also served as President of the Cambridge Union

That said be interesting to see whether this results in any challenge to the current system which has more merit than lowering the age to 18.

 

[Re 4/4]

Those who do understand railways will dismiss those suggestions accordingly, for a multitude of obvious reasons.

There are railways on the continent, including high-speed ones, where there is less route learning (Germany was already mentioned), and drivers can sometimes take a train down a non-learned route at reduced speed during disruption.

It would take a good deal of understanding UK railways specifically to see the problem, things like route vs speed signalling, ETCS or lack thereof, different loading gauges and electrification systems etc. Something easy to miss in a literature review if you compare with other countries!

That said, in Germany the special train to celebrate electrification of a key route was routed onto a non-wired track at Hergatz not too long ago, cue one pantograph worse for wear and a lot of red faces all around. But the driver took no blame for taking a wrong road, because that's not how their system works.

 

[Wilts Wanderer]

Is it easier to drive routes without detailed learning in countries with signalling based on speed-principle (most of Europe) as compared to route-principle (U.K.)?

 

[Re 4/4]

My understanding (not a driver) is that in the UK there are situations like if you're supposed to take the slower speed diverging route at a junction ahead, and you get a green, that means stop and moan at the signaller - if you carry on thinking "green means go" you share the blame for taking the wrong route. So that has to go into your route learning among other things.

I don't think there's the same responsibility on the driver in speed-signalled countries.

 

[43066]

The attached PDF is the latest piece of bizarre output from this think tank.


It's surprisingly awkward to navigate the document too because for some reason they use two columns, but the one with the main body of text switches sides throughout.

This seems to be a document by an English graduate who obviously has little clue about the railway, and the train driver role in particular, and who places rather too strong an emphasis on union bashing for my liking (no great surprise given the Policy Exchange is a right wing think tank).

There’s a long list of howlers, but she’s even wrong about the status of Sunday working at my operator. If she can’t get something as basic as that right, there’s little point reading further!

 

[CapabilityB]

This is someone writing about a topic they have zero understanding of, which is a road that leads ideally nowhere, but at worst to somewhere dangerous.

We should always be open to outside challenge though.

 

[TreacleMiller]

Is it easier to drive routes without detailed learning in countries with signalling based on speed-principle (most of Europe) as compared to route-principle (U.K.)?

Yes. The speed and route is dictated and you drive to literal instruction.

In the UK effectively drive from experience -.a combination of route knowledge and traction knowledge. Wrong routing is a major, major risk and it's hammered into route learning. It does still happen.

Complex stations with lots of routes going into and out of them have lots of different route combinations. You then have to know where you do and do not fit, what platforms are suitable for your traction and follow up destination etc etc.

 

[brad465]

Policy Exchange is a very shady think tank, as its funding sources are not disclosed. Anyone with authority should not be taking its publications into consideration, or that of any other think tank that has little or no transparency.

 

[class ep-09]

Policy Exchange is a very shady think tank, as its funding sources are not disclosed. Anyone with authority should not be taking its publications into consideration, or that of any other think tank that has little or no transparency.

No doubt think tank based on Tufton Street …

 

[ainsworth74]

Is it easier to drive routes without detailed learning in countries with signalling based on speed-principle (most of Europe) as compared to route-principle (U.K.)?

Exactly what I was thinking. Where the railway operates on speed signalling (i.e. where the signals tell you what speed it is safe to drive at) then you can reduce the level of density of a drivers route knowledge. Certainly outside complex junctions or stations approaches at any rate. Couple that with something like the Buchfahrplan (which basically gives you the detail that our drivers would tend to memorise) used in Germany and you can get away with having much reduced depth of route knowledge across quite a wide area. The same would seem to apply where ETCS is widely deployed.

However, I imagine that Policy Exchange will not be keen to spend the money required to completely upend the basic signalling principle that British railways have operated under for over a century or to roll out ETCS at a faster rate than we are currently managing. Which rather makes it difficult to institute the changes that they're suggesting.

 

[geoffk]

This paper has sought to demonstrate that much of the disruption and poor passenger experience common across Britain’s railways is a product of a serious shortage of qualified train drivers. Other countries with far
more qualified drivers than Britain have already declared a shortage and taken rapid action to train more drivers in response.

Every year thousands of people apply to become train drivers. They are not taken on because Train Operating Companies cannot afford to train them for eighteen months before they begin to drive solo. There will be
huge demand for a government subsidised course. Until we increase the number of train drivers we will continue to see poor performance on the railways. It is likely overtime bans will become even more common as a
negotiation tactic by the unions, and it is therefore vital that TOCs are not reliant on driver overtime to deliver a standard service.

I've removed the paragraph about the "unnecessarily long and overly regulated course." Does everyone agree in principle with the rest of it? One solution is of course to reduce the timetable to a level which can be operated
without overtime. Has anyone done an exercise to see what this would look like? Among other things, it would mean no Sunday trains in some areas.

 

[Re 4/4]

Other countries with far more qualified drivers than Britain

Do they give an example or a source for this? Especially as it's our drivers doing all that route learning.

Every year thousands of people apply to become train drivers. They are not taken on ...

I'm guessing part of that is the strict medical requirements. Which would be one of the last places to skimp.

no Sunday trains in some areas

Or "Sundays Inside", which the unions are ok with as long as the pay is adequate.

 

[Broucek]

I was once in a policy forum with people like Lara and various industry experts. We were taking it in turns to explain to the very bright but inexperienced generalists why their plausible-sounding ideas would fail in the real world. (That said, outsiders can sometimes be useful, in challenging the status quo when this is done the right way: "is there a reason why/why not.....?)

 

[Lewisham2221]

I was once in a policy forum with people like Lara and various industry experts. We were taking it in turns to explain to the very bright but inexperienced generalists why their plausible-sounding ideas would fail in the real world. (That said, outsiders can sometimes be useful, in challenging the status quo when this is done the right way: "is there a reason why/why not.....?)

Sounds a bit like this forum!

 

[greatkingrat]

I'm guessing part of that is the strict medical requirements. Which would be one of the last places to skimp.

Don't think medicals are the problem, the number of people who pass all the assessments and then fail the medical is tiny.

 

[185]

Some clarity on "Policy Exchange" Limited, Company 04297905.

Director: Dean Godson, Baron Godson (Conservative) born 1962​

Founders:
Nick Boles (conservative)
Lord Maude (conservative)
and
Archie Norman (labour)*

*only joking. Conservative.

Page 1, section 1 of Wikipedia states...

"Policy Exchange is a British right-wing conservative think tank based in London. In 2007 it was described in The Daily Telegraph as "the largest, but also the most influential think tank on the right"."

In a similar fashion, in 1939 it was proposed by another right wing think tank(s) (lots of them) to invade Poland, but that too wasn't the best idea.

Tories cutting corners = More Clapham Junction disasters.

 

[JamesT]

Do they give an example or a source for this? Especially as it's our drivers doing all that route learning.

The side note on page 7 says 19,400 train drivers in the UK, versus 37,000 in Germany.

 

[LYradial]

would it not be possible to have a two or three stage training, with link 1 and link 2 drivers.
after say three months a grade 2 diver could for example learn Newport to Shrewsbury, hand over to a grade one and pick up a return working to Newport
then after six months, say, add Newport to Swansea to his route.

there must be other areas where there are long simple stretches with just a main station at either end, Oxford to Worcester springs to mind

 

[TreacleMiller]

Do they give an example or a source for this? Especially as it's our drivers doing all that route learning.


I'm guessing part of that is the strict medical requirements. Which would be one of the last places to skimp.

Or "Sundays Inside", which the unions are ok with as long as the pay is adequate.

It's a statement based on entry requirements education wise.

The amount of unfair comparisons in the document is astounding now I've read it in detail.

For example, she makes the argument that one can fly a plane at 18. That's partially true.

The youngest Captain, I'm told by their colleague, (IE the one responsible for 3/400 lives) is currently 25 and started flying when they were 14 as a cadet.

I'm responsible for 1500 lives on a regular basis.

Age isn't the issue. Maturity and ability to be proven in a process driven or safety critical role (ideally both) before having hundreds and yes somtimes thousands of lives is sort of paramount.

 

[43066]

I've removed the paragraph about the "unnecessarily long and overly regulated course." Does everyone agree in principle with the rest of it? One solution is of course to reduce the timetable to a level which can be operated
without overtime. Has anyone done an exercise to see what this would look like? Among other things, it would mean no Sunday trains in some areas.

Nope, almost the entire document is nonsense.

There’s no problem in principle with relying on overtime to some degree, indeed it’s more efficient to do so and in line with many other industries. Cutting Sunday services just to avoid paying drivers overtime will cost far more in terms of lost revenue than any potential saving in overtime! That’s before the wider economic costs are considered. It’s an ideological position adopted by those who are more interested in depriving ASLEF of a bargaining chip than they are in seeing a reliable service for passengers.

The solution to unreliability is simply for operators to a. Employ enough drivers to cover the service without too much reliance on overtime, and b. Manage industrial relations better.

The less of a they’re prepared to do, the more of b will be required!