Is route knowledge an outmoded concept?

[Bromley boy]

News to me that in instrument flying you rely on visual clues.

Better go check that analogy Phil.

I think he meant when flying visually without reference to instruments or radio nav aids (which are not "computer aids"), when visual references are used.

 

[dk1]

From the drivers I spoke to, the company hope all route learning will be done on dvd, so they will technically have the same knowledge standard but wont have actually driven it. Its a different argument to the thread but still relevant

Only as long as their palms are generously crossed with silver as an incentive, otherwise forget it

 

[FordFocus]

Some of the suggestions made makes me think it's much cheaper to actually send drivers out on a weeks road learning of these diversionary routes and for them to take a day off driving and refresh the route once every 6 months.

 

[najaB]

Some of the suggestions made makes me think it's much cheaper to actually send drivers out on a weeks road learning of these diversionary routes and for them to take a day off driving and refresh the route once every 6 months.

It may very well be - depending on how many routes you want drivers to sign. As the number of routes increases, so do the costs.

 

[coppercapped]

Yes and from the db drivers I've had in my cab route learning recently they are neither happy nor confident in this arrangement hence why they are in my cab physically going over the route in the flesh and refusing the dvd alone.

Its suppose to be a money saving tactic to avoid paying the man hours of that driver route learning but he'd still need to be payed to watch the dvd 1000 times

Why do I find this response depressing?

Rail freight has had a torrid time recently. One of the knock-on effects of the closure of coal-fired power stations has been the dramatic loss in traffic and jobs - as I understand it DB Cargo is having to to (because there is no work for them) reduce its staff by some 850.

Under these circumstances it is essential that operating costs be reduced as much as possible. It is already said - and has been said by many informed people - that railway costs are too high. Not only do high costs reduce the number of potential customers for rail freight but any marginal traffic could easily be lost to road transport if the balance shifts even a little bit towards road.

Under these circumstances DB Cargo has to make it workforce more flexible and it has to reduce the costs of operation. There is no alternative. The proposal outlined may not be ideal - it probably is not - but it is a start in a never-ending process. It, or something like it, will happen.

In case people still wonder how tablets or other devices can be integrated into existing operations I recommend this video showing an Air Berlin flight approaching Madeira. The Jeppesen maps shown on the tablets are not connected to the flight management systems, they act purely as an aide-memoire for the pilots who have to be specially qualified to land at Madeira. This is also 'route knowledge' but it enhances safety by assisting the pilots.

 

[ComUtoR]

they act purely as an aide-memoire for the pilots who have to be specially qualified to land at Madeira. This is also 'route knowledge' but it enhances safety by assisting the pilots.

Even those of us who are on the side of route knowledge being indispensable still support any and all complimentary tech. It still returns to the original question 'is route knowledge outmoded' Well clearly not. The system you linked (albeit another airplane analogy) is still just complimentary not a replacement.

The DB system linked (which is already old) is still complimentary tech. This doesn't reduce costs. It increases it !! TOC's pay the company to do the maps and videos and then pay each Driver the time off track to be briefed.

 

[Bromley boy]

Why do I find this response depressing?

Rail freight has had a torrid time recently. One of the knock-on effects of the closure of coal-fired power stations has been the dramatic loss in traffic and jobs - as I understand it DB Cargo is having to to (because there is no work for them) reduce its staff by some 850.

Under these circumstances it is essential that operating costs be reduced as much as possible. It is already said - and has been said by many informed people - that railway costs are too high. Not only do high costs reduce the number of potential customers for rail freight but any marginal traffic could easily be lost to road transport if the balance shifts even a little bit towards road.

Under these circumstances DB Cargo has to make it workforce more flexible and it has to reduce the costs of operation. There is no alternative. The proposal outlined may not be ideal - it probably is not - but it is a start in a never-ending process. It, or something like it, will happen.

In case people still wonder how tablets or other devices can be integrated into existing operations I recommend this video showing an Air Berlin flight approaching Madeira. The Jeppesen maps shown on the tablets are not connected to the flight management systems, they act purely as an aide-memoire for the pilots who have to be specially qualified to land at Madeira. This is also 'route knowledge' but it enhances safety by assisting the pilots.

.

The difference is that those pilots will have physically flown into that airfield under training before being signed off to fly it (or at least "flown" into it on a sim), and be drilled on the relevant procedures*. The Jepp tablets, as you say, function as an aide memoir.

Route learning from DVDs isn't great from a driver's perspective as it amounts to passively watching something on television. Not an effective way of learning the physical realities of a route. Cost cutting may be necessary but I don't believe it should take place in this area.

*the aviation/railway comparison crops up time and again on this forum. It's a very poor one. There aren't really any similarities between the railway and aviation environments.

 

[ComUtoR]

Route learning from DVDs isn't great from a driver's perspective as it amounts to passively watching something on television. Not an effective way of learning the physical realities of a route. Cost cutting may be necessary but I don't believe it should take place in this area.

From something we never had to something we now have is an increase in costs.

The issue I have with the route DVDs at my TOC is that they were issued to the depots after filming and producing them etc. and by that time they were out of date. The first one I watched had incorrect information within the first few minutes.

DVD's are physical media and cannot be updated on the fly. The whole route filming was a totally worthless exercise.

The Trackaccess stuff is better but still suffers from an inability to be updated. Thanks for the 16GB USB drive though

 

[Bromley boy]

The issue I have with the route DVDs at my TOC is that they were issued to the depots after filming and producing them etc. and by that time they were out of date. The first one I watched had incorrect information within the first few minutes.

That's very worrying - if a DVD gives the wrong information it is worse than useless!

Although somehow that approach doesn't surprise me.

Refreshing routes by passing in a cab isn't great either, it's no substitute for actually driving it, but hey, at least we know the railway prioritises safety first. Until £££s are involved!

 

[ComUtoR]

That's very worrying - if a DVD gives the wrong information it is worse than useless!

Exactly why some of us are so apprehensive about the introduction of technology to the railway.

I know what can be done and how but the application of it just doesn't work with the restrictions of the railway environment. Those in support of technology just say it can be done and ....

The problem is that where it all goes to pot. You have tech experts saying do this and that but it just never works.

Our Route DVD's fall directly into that category of thought. They were all filmed (at an expense) and it was considered to be a step forward. By the time there were released some are out of date. How do you then reissue a DVD ? You need to refilm the route and reproduce the DVD. TO maintain an accurate catalog of routes you will need to consistently do this on a permanent film/refilm cycle. It becomes impractical. Allegedly there are new ones being produced.....

The track access one I recently sat through is valid for about 4 months then will be superseded by the next brief. That another day off track and another free USB for me. I can't imagine how much my TOC is paying the company to produce each brief.

All you have to do is read a WON to see how many Sexypendix updates there are each week.

Digital maps are awesome but they need to be maintained an issued on a fluid basis. It still relies on the end user actually opening it too.

Not forgetting a single error can have drastic consequences. Consider this : The Sectional Appendix is missing a speed when departing a station onto a deep curvature through a tunnel. The speed is visible(ish) on the track and not all of my route maps show it either. Which is therefore correct and how should the Driver be driving his unit through the PSR ?

The Sectional Appendix is also missing a level crossing on one of my routes.... Yep Digital maps are awesome :/

Refreshing routes by passing in a cab isn't great either, it's no substitute for actually driving it,

I couldn't agree more. The knowledge from the maps etc are great but actually driving it gives you a real feel for the route characteristics. Front ending also leads to errors where some information given is not always accurate !

We ARE in a new age of route learning but its all complimentary not replacement. It is all very much to support a Drivers route knowledge and to enhance it. Nothing I have seen has been to replace it.

 

[najaB]

It still returns to the original question 'is route knowledge outmoded' Well clearly not. The system you linked (albeit another airplane analogy) is still just complimentary not a replacement.

To be clear, the question was if route knowledge as we know it is outmoded - meaning the way it is learned, the way it is refreshed and the way it is implemented as the first line of safety. There will always be some level of knowledge required.

 

[ComUtoR]

To be clear, the question was if route knowledge as we know it is outmoded

To be clear. The original question was multifaceted which did have the element of being replaced to run a diversionary. -

meaning the way it is learned, the way it is refreshed

Doesn't this beg the question; what do people understand we actually do, as 'we' know it. I feel that some don't realise that digital maps, briefings, DVDs, etc have been around for years. We have moved on and are continuing to.

and the way it is implemented as the first line of safety.

I still don't see this. We are the last line of defence, not the first.

There will always be some level of knowledge required.

Some... as in how much is required and can that lack of knowledge be replaced by other means. If you could quantify 'some' then I'd be grateful.

 

[najaB]

To be clear. The original question was multifaceted which did have the element of being replaced to run a diversionary.

Indeed, it was.

I still don't see this. We are the last line of defence, not the first.

There are two reasons why I see route knowledge as a primary safety mechanism. The first is that while the rule book has provisions for driving a train with other systems (e.g. ATP, AWS) disabled - admittedly in degraded mode, if a driver doesn't sign the route the train isn't moving. The second reason is because the abovementioned safety systems are there to catch the mistake - you should never have an AWS intervention. If you do then it's a tea and biscuit-less meeting for you. Same with signals - pass a red and there's a good chance you've got some explaining to do. That says to me, at least, that knowledge of the route and the driver's skill in applying that knowledge are the first layer of safety.

Some... as in how much is required and can that lack of knowledge be replaced by other means. If you could quantify 'some' then I'd be grateful.

I'm not able to answer that, and I know that I'm not - I leave that to the experts such as yourself.

 

[ComUtoR]

The first is that while the rule book has provisions for driving a train with other systems (e.g. ATP, AWS) disabled - admittedly in degraded mode, if a driver doesn't sign the route the train isn't moving.

I do see that but if the Driver doesn't sign the route then they wouldn't ever be in a situation where the route is degraded. Even the situation with a diversionary it is still quite rare (at least on my TOC) that you are in that situation because we sign the diversionaries as part of each route. Good rostering mitigates against any situation where a Driver doesn't sign the route. Any route issues are sorted before they turn up that day.

The second reason is because the abovementioned safety systems are there to catch the mistake - you should never have an AWS intervention. If you do then it's a tea and biscuit-less meeting for you.

AWS errors are not route related. They are driving errors.

Same with signals - pass a red and there's a good chance you've got some explaining to do.

It is rare for a signal to be passed at red due to lack of route knowledge. I know a couple but neither could have been resolved with additional route aide memoires in the cab. SPADS are still deeply routed in Driver error.

That says to me, at least, that knowledge of the route and the driver's skill in applying that knowledge are the first layer of safety.

It is all very interwoven but your driving skill trumps any route knowledge.

I'm not able to answer that, and I know that I'm not - I leave that to the experts such as yourself.

Which is where I need clarification from those who don't drive choo choo's. They are pushing for something but cannot provide the bits that are actually important for us to drive a route. The whole 'as we know it' seems to be a grey area for the outsiders as 'we know it' different from 'what you presume to know'

So much of what has been mentioned already happens or has already been implemented. Yet. Route knowledge still exists and considered to be essential.

Outmoded.. Depends on what you see as 'current' It has moved on considerably from some dude letting you drive a train and going back for a cuppa and leaving you to sort it out yourself. (which is how I learned the Hayes)

 

[Bromley boy]

To be clear, the question was if route knowledge as we know it is outmoded - meaning the way it is learned, the way it is refreshed and the way it is implemented as the first line of safety. There will always be some level of knowledge required.

I think the answer to this point, and this thread in general, is that until there is a fundamental sea-change in the way trains are driven there is no substitute for physically driving a route in order to learn it. Ie there's currently no substitute for route knowledge as we know it.

That's as true in 2017 as it was in the 1970s, the 1940s, the 1870s, or any other decade you may care to mention, since the railway began.

I don't doubt that such a change will eventually come. Until it does, it's regrettable that TOCs are taking DVD-style shortcuts to route learning in the name of (very marginal) cost savings.

 

[Bevan Price]

I would agree that route knowledge is essential, but I would ask why route knowledge is considered "lapsed" or "expired" if a driver has not used that route for "x" months - in those cases where the route has not seen altered signalling, track layout or speed limits.

(And likewise, why does traction knowledge "expire" if there have been no modifications to that type of traction ?)

 

[Bromley boy]

I would agree that route knowledge is essential, but I would ask why route knowledge is considered "lapsed" or "expired" if a driver has not used that route for "x" months - in those cases where the route has not seen altered signalling, track layout or speed limits.

(And likewise, why does traction knowledge "expire" if there have been no modifications to that type of traction ?)

Essentially, because route knowledge is highly perishable.

You don't just need to know the signal locations, speeds etc. (that's the absolute minimum, even if speed boards are missing/illegible). You also need to know if you've been wrong routed.

That wrong route may as be as seemingly innocuous as a position 4 rather than 5 junction indicator at a complex junction, which may work perfectly well as a route to your destination, but be out of gauge for the unit you're driving. (as happened to a mate of mine, driving a 319 into Victoria during engineering works).

If you get it wrong, as a driver, it's your fault. End of. The corollary to the extreme blame culture on the railway is the entitlement to be "current" on all the routes you drive over.

 

[ComUtoR]

I would agree that route knowledge is essential, but I would ask why route knowledge is considered "lapsed" or "expired" if a driver has not used that route for "x" months - in those cases where the route has not seen altered signalling, track layout or speed limits.

I think there is a liability issue. Reading enough RAIB reports and various incident reports. Imagine the headlines if something serious happened and then it was reported that the Driver hadn't been that way in X months.

Remove the blame game and the litigious nature of the railway then there wouldn't be an issue.

 

[najaB]

I just want to give public thanks to the drivers who have contributed to this thread. It's made for interesting reading. I hope you don't think I'm trying to tell you how to do your jobs.

 

[Bromley boy]

I just want to give public thanks to the drivers who have contributed to this thread. It's made for interesting reading. I hope you don't think I'm trying to tell you how to do your jobs.

Not at all. On the contrary, as a current driver, I think it's a fascinating topic.

It has served to highligt how the current system works, and will continue to work, until we get something better.

From my perspective, that seems a long way off!

 

[bramling]

That's very worrying - if a DVD gives the wrong information it is worse than useless!

Although somehow that approach doesn't surprise me.

Refreshing routes by passing in a cab isn't great either, it's no substitute for actually driving it, but hey, at least we know the railway prioritises safety first. Until £££s are involved!

Yes there is no substitute for actually driving a route. One could watch a route ten times on a DVD and it not sink in, yet driving it once or twice (especially with a good trainer) could be enough.

DVDs are good for clarifying things like reversing moves and the like, but apart from that their only real use is as a reference tool - and then they are useless if they go out of date. As such, where I am the DVDs don't really get used much especially for running lines. A few office-based staff use them occasionally if they're trying to investigate or swat up on something in order to make up for them not being able to visualise what a particular location or scenario looks like!

 

[ComUtoR]

I just want to give public thanks to the drivers who have contributed to this thread. It's made for interesting reading. I hope you don't think I'm trying to tell you how to do your jobs.

Not in the slightest and I'm happy to contribute.

Tech solutions is rather a niche market on the railway, especially Driver facing. The railway needs experts to come together from both sides to implement the right solutions. Any company who can do that is sitting on a goldmine.

I like Mitrac and feel that it is very underused and has little value in its current form. I'm not keen on the HMI/DMI as the whole UI feels unfriendly and has too much impact on the units and feels overly complex. I think the first step is to create something between the two and standardise the system for all units; difficult that's for sure.

Getting solutions that work industry wide would be the icing on the cake. The reason why 'Old fashioned' route knowledge works so well is that it is universal.

 

[Olaf]

Given where we are in terms of technology and what's just around the corner, I would say yes interns of new systems, but it is sometime off when it comes to the heritage network and the speed at which the old-school rail industry moves at in the UK.