Northern Line train being manually driven

I just took a Northern Line train from Kings + to London Bridge and formed the distinct impression it was being manually driven.

The braking rate wasn't as consistent as ATO feels and the acceleration seemed much reduced (it felt more like it used to when trains operated under reduced power, before the line switched over to ATO).

Do Train Operators have the option to drive manually at weekends in order to "keep their hand in"?

Yes, they do.

Bromley boy said:

I just took a Northern Line train from Kings + to London Bridge and formed the distinct impression it was being manually driven.

The braking rate wasn't as consistent as ATO feels and the acceleration seemed much reduced (it felt more like it used to when trains operated under reduced power, before the line switched over to ATO).

Do Train Operators have the option to drive manually at weekends in order to "keep their hand in"?

Click to expand...

There's a hardcore of about 5 people who drive manually on a regular basis, including during the peaks, and having had practice can easily meet or even beat ATO timings. No one minds providing the train doesn't lose time or start having issues which wouldn't have occurred in ATO. Instructor Operators are officially allowed to drive manually at any time, with or without a trainee.

At one point there was a driver who had never used ATO since initial ATO training, but he has moved lines now. Needless to say he was very good and apart from being smoother you wouldn't notice any difference.

A few others do choose to drive manually occasionally, although generally such individuals are likely to be less proficient. Drivers have to drive manually for their routine driver manager assessments too, although this may only be for a couple of stops if the person demonstrates competence quickly.

bramling said:

There's a hardcore of about 5 people who drive manually on a regular basis, including during the peaks, and having had practice can easily meet or even beat ATO timings. No one minds providing the train doesn't lose time or start having issues which wouldn't have occurred in ATO. Instructor Operators are officially allowed to drive manually at any time, with or without a trainee.

At one point there was a driver who had never used ATO since initial ATO training, but he has moved lines now. Needless to say he was very good and apart from being smoother you wouldn't notice any difference.

A few others do choose to drive manually occasionally, although generally such individuals are likely to be less proficient. Drivers have to drive manually for their routine driver manager assessments too, although this may only be for a couple of stops if the person demonstrates competence quickly.

Click to expand...

Does the driver have to inform the control room when this is happening, or can this be seen from the data coming through?

Busaholic said:

Does the driver have to inform the control room when this is happening, or can this be seen from the data coming through?

Click to expand...

It can be seen as soon as they select that mode. Most people ask before they drive in PM; it does attract attention if a train suddenly goes into manual when approaching a platform as it may be in reaction to something happening. As mentioned by the poster above there are some regular drivers who just drive in manual anyway, but if they don't loose time it doesn't bother anyone.

Do the Northern Line trains use the exact same ATO system ad both the Jubilee and Central lines?

SpacePhoenix said:

Do the Northern Line trains use the exact same ATO system ad both the Jubilee and Central lines?

Click to expand...

Short answer no.

Long answer:
*Central line - an early, bespoke version generally known as 'Central line ATP/ATO'. Very similar to normal train operation with lineside signals and fixed overlaps

*Jubilee line - Transmission Based Train Control, or TBTC, a true moving block system with overlaps etc. being constantly updated and adjusted. A variant of Thales Seltrac system

*Northern line - TBTC, nominally the same as the Jubilee but there are a few differences where lessons were learnt from the Jubilee's installation

For completeness:

*Victoria line - Westinghouse (now Invensys/Siemens) Distance-to-go (radio), or DTG-R. Not a million miles from the Central line's system, but more modern. Also uses linesidesignals I look and fixed blocks, but multiple trains can be in section if running with ATP (as per Central)

*Sub-surface lines - Although not yet ATO, these will use Communications Based Train Control (CBTC), another variant on Seltrac and a more modern version of TBTC, with further refijements and a radio-based transmission rather than fixed induction loops. The first section to switch over should be the Hammersmith early next year, before rolling out to the rest between then and the early 2020s.

And finally - the Victoria line opened as an automatic railway in 1968 and used a different version again. Very primitive, very bespoke, and also used on a small part of the Central line near Hainault to test the trains and system.

bluegoblin7 said:

Short answer no.

Long answer:
*Central line - an early, bespoke version generally known as 'Central line ATP/ATO'. Very similar to normal train operation with lineside signals and fixed overlaps

*Jubilee line - Transmission Based Train Control, or TBTC, a true moving block system with overlaps etc. being constantly updated and adjusted. A variant of Thales Seltrac system

*Northern line - TBTC, nominally the same as the Jubilee but there are a few differences where lessons were learnt from the Jubilee's installation

For completeness:

*Victoria line - Westinghouse (now Invensys/Siemens) Distance-to-go (radio), or DTG-R. Not a million miles from the Central line's system, but more modern. Also uses linesidesignals I look and fixed blocks, but multiple trains can be in section if running with ATP (as per Central)

*Sub-surface lines - Although not yet ATO, these will use Communications Based Train Control (CBTC), another variant on Seltrac and a more modern version of TBTC, with further refijements and a radio-based transmission rather than fixed induction loops. The first section to switch over should be the Hammersmith early next year, before rolling out to the rest between then and the early 2020s.

And finally - the Victoria line opened as an automatic railway in 1968 and used a different version again. Very primitive, very bespoke, and also used on a small part of the Central line near Hainault to test the trains and system.

Click to expand...

From a manual driving perspective, the Central Line system is vastly superior to the Jubilee and Northern. The Jubilee has ironed out a lot of the software bugs but the Northern hasn't bothered to invest much effort for various reasons. Manual driving on the Northern is a bit of a challenge, which is why few people bother, but those who have made the effort and do it regularly have become very good, such that they can marginally beat ATO performance. No idea what it's like to drive manually on the Vic, I suspect it would be hard for a human to keep up with let alone beat their excellent ATO.

bramling said:

From a manual driving perspective, the Central Line system is vastly superior to the Jubilee and Northern. The Jubilee has ironed out a lot of the software bugs but the Northern hasn't bothered to invest much effort for various reasons. Manual driving on the Northern is a bit of a challenge, which is why few people bother, but those who have made the effort and do it regularly have become very good, such that they can marginally beat ATO performance. No idea what it's like to drive manually on the Vic, I suspect it would be hard for a human to keep up with let alone beat their excellent ATO.

Click to expand...

The down side to manual driving on the Central is that many of the block marker boards are appallingly sited and the design itself camouflages nicely with the surroundings in many places in the open sections. Route knowledge compensates for this though, obviously.

When driving in protected manual on the Vic, the system enforces a munch gentler braking curve, so it is impossible to mimic ATO performance. That said, the end-to-end run times can be (or at least used to be) matched by minimising dwell times. The actual experience of manual driving is similar to TBTC, except that there's a block marker or signal to aim for when required to stop between stations.

bramling said:

There's a hardcore of about 5 people who drive manually on a regular basis, including during the peaks, and having had practice can easily meet or even beat ATO timings. No one minds providing the train doesn't lose time or start having issues which wouldn't have occurred in ATO. Instructor Operators are officially allowed to drive manually at any time, with or without a trainee.

At one point there was a driver who had never used ATO since initial ATO training, but he has moved lines now. Needless to say he was very good and apart from being smoother you wouldn't notice any difference.

A few others do choose to drive manually occasionally, although generally such individuals are likely to be less proficient. Drivers have to drive manually for their routine driver manager assessments too, although this may only be for a couple of stops if the person demonstrates competence quickly.

Click to expand...

Interesting, thanks. That explains it.

I take it the power is derated for manual driving?

So it is not mandatory so to a manual run once in a while?

A few years back I went to Paris to go on a "behind the scenes" tour at Métro operator RATP. During the tour it was stated each driver has to do at least one manual run along the line in each shift to keep up the skills.

Bromley boy said:

Interesting, thanks. That explains it.

I take it the power is derated for manual driving?

Click to expand...

Nope - the driver has access to the same speed profile as ATO. In fact, he can hold the speed up in places where the ATO slows down too much.

When the system came in a myth was circulated that manual driving only allows 90% of the speed profile allowed in ATO, however this is complete rubbish and has been proven to be so.

k-c-p said:

So it is not mandatory so to a manual run once in a while?

Click to expand...

A section of each northern branch is designated for manual driving on Sundays and bank holidays. Unfortunately this causes a lot of problems, because many drivers aren't particularly good and thus lose time (or have incidents), plus the difference in brake rates between open-air and tunnel mean this doesn't equip drivers well for when they have to drive in the tunnel, where reactions have to be a lot faster and much more heavy braking is required to avoid a speed violation.

Will all the lines with ATO installed (or planned to be installed) eventually go over to the same ATO system?

bramling said:

From a manual driving perspective, the Central Line system is vastly superior to the Jubilee and Northern. The Jubilee has ironed out a lot of the software bugs but the Northern hasn't bothered to invest much effort for various reasons. Manual driving on the Northern is a bit of a challenge, which is why few people bother, but those who have made the effort and do it regularly have become very good, such that they can marginally beat ATO performance. No idea what it's like to drive manually on the Vic, I suspect it would be hard for a human to keep up with let alone beat their excellent ATO.

Click to expand...

What makes it a challenge on the Northern line?

gsnedders said:

What makes it a challenge on the Northern line?

Click to expand...

Various reasons:

Unlike the Central Line, where the system still relies on the driver looking out the window and being able to locate a fixed point (signal or block marker board) where the train has to have changed speed or stopped, with TBTC it's all in cab. This is harder to master.

Secondly, the system calculates a braking curve on the approach to a change in speed or limit of movement authority. This means that the driver will see a hand start moving downwards on the in-cab display, if he exceeds the maximum safe speed as defined by this moving hand then a speed violation will occur, which will bring the train to a stand.

If during the above speed violation emergency brake application the train slides, the train may lose communication with the system and have to go through a lengthy process of re-entry, which will likely cause a delay. As an aside it may also flat the wheels. All this is more of an issue in the open during poor adhesion than in the tunnels however.

The system has different brake rates for open-air and tunnel running, and there's nothing official to tell the driver which brake rate will happen in a given location. Potentially the first he knows what the brake rate will be is when the hand starts coming down, which gives almost no margin for error if it's a harsh brake rate. Unfortunately there's a lot of places in the tunnel where the brake rates have been altered for various silly reasons, so there's a total lack of consistency. Plus the software changes from time to time without warning, so things can change overnight. Meanwhile, try stopping smoothly on a steep uphill gradient with a very gentle brake rate without the train rolling back!

Finally, there are loads of software bugs and glitches where the system simply doesn't behave in the way it should, thus giving the driver situations where spurious things appear on the in-cab display, or the maximum safe speed will start dropping with *no* warning, so in the latter case by the time one reacts even if maximum braking is selected a speed violation is almost inevitable.

This is what happens when someone chooses a bunch of software programmers from Canada (Thales) over experienced railway engineers (Westinghouse)!

SpacePhoenix said:

Will all the lines with ATO installed (or planned to be installed) eventually go over to the same ATO system?

Click to expand...

No. Why should they?

D365 said:

No. Why should they?

Click to expand...

It'd mean that any departmental trains could operate on all lines without a specific car for all of the different signalling equipment in use. Although I suppose that you probably don't want departmental trains pootling around in traffic hours when you could be running a passenger train in it's place.

FWIW, LU do seem to be settling on Seltrac for providing their ATO related signalling, I wouldn't be that surprised to see the contract for the next tranche of lines (Piccadilly, Bakerloo, and W&C I think) go to them with a similar product to what is going in on the SLL (with the usual refinements between installations)

Domh245 said:

It'd mean that any departmental trains could operate on all lines without a specific car for all of the different signalling equipment in use. Although I suppose that you probably don't want departmental trains pootling around in traffic hours when you could be running a passenger train in it's place.

FWIW, LU do seem to be settling on Seltrac for providing their ATO related signalling, I wouldn't be that surprised to see the contract for the next tranche of lines (Piccadilly, Bakerloo, and W&C I think) go to them with a similar product to what is going in on the SLL (with the usual refinements between installations)

Click to expand...

It's not so much LU has settled on Seltrac, but following the total mishandling of the SSR resignalling by LU (changing its mind not once but twice), it's more a case that Thales are the only supplier willing and able to deal with LU.

So for the NTfL lines, we are in the rather unsavoury position that Thales can more or less name their price. One wouldn't mind if the Thales product was superbly good, but it isn't. It does seem LU is starting to see the cracks in the Thales product, for example Northern Line performance had stubbornly not quite been what it should be considering the massive investment, but what alternative now is there?

The whole SSR resignalling is a fiasco. A project running for over a decade that had not delivered a single millimetre of resignalled railway. How many paid man hours have been invested on this project so far? How much work, design and on-the-ground, was done for the two abortive contracts? Sadly it's the PPP legacy, but LU is far from blameless too.

bramling said:

It's not so much LU has settled on Seltrac, but following the total mishandling of the SSR resignalling by LU (changing its mind not once but twice), it's more a case that Thales are the only supplier willing and able to deal with LU.

So for the NTfL lines, we are in the rather unsavoury position that Thales can more or less name their price. One wouldn't mind if the Thales product was superbly good, but it isn't. It does seem LU is starting to see the cracks in the Thales product, for example Northern Line performance had stubbornly not quite been what it should be considering the massive investment, but what alternative now is there?

The whole SSR resignalling is a fiasco. A project running for over a decade that had not delivered a single millimetre of resignalled railway. How many paid man hours have been invested on this project so far? How much work, design and on-the-ground, was done for the two abortive contracts? Sadly it's the PPP legacy, but LU is far from blameless too.

Click to expand...

That's a very interesting post, and I'll bear it in mind when the Battersea extension gets built and open as to whether the various operational options promulgated by TfL a year or two back are still available, or just one, and that a compromised (or weakened) one too.