Northern Still Using FAX Machines

[chris.lambert.]

Are they? The data is normally sent unencrypted and both the data and sender are normally unauthenticated. It would seem fairly trivial to compromise a fax based system in any number of ways.

How?

So it's been reported today that Northern are blaming unions on the reason they still use fax machines in 2024....could this be true or just another example of union bashing?!

Do they also have some semaphore signals & block instruments & hand operated level crossings? We should be told

 

[TUC]

When trains are diverted last minute due to disruption they very rarely stop en route, so a simple GSM-R call with the signaller confirming that a train is to be diverted isn't an issue and doesn't really require anything in writing. I was once asked not to stop at Luton because of some issue at the station by the signaller and this was easily passed on to me through a verbal communication without even having to stop - no delay caused. No need for anything in writing.

Is there a protection for the driver in the event of any issue later, for them to be able to point in writing towards the instructions they were given?

 

[12LDA28C]

Where there is disruption and a potential diversion, being able to see those details confirmed in writing, not just a phone message?

Good luck with that when it's the signaller informing you of the disruption and diversion via the GSM-R.

 

[bengley]

Is there a protection for the driver in the event of any issue later, for them to be able to point in writing towards the instructions they were given?

Any such instruction passed on by a signaller will have been authorised via NR Route controllers and TOC controllers so in the unlikely event that someone doesn't know about it through those communications, leading to the driver being questioned about it, a simple download of the GSM-R comms will absolve the driver of any wrongdoing.

 

[12LDA28C]

Can someone please explain why it is undesirable for train drivers to have access to mobile devices in the cab? I can absolutely see why they mustn't be used whilst driving or for casual, non-work purposes, but in terms of both the purposes discussed above, and the added ability to receive other urgent messages, what is the problem as compared to paper?

Because they have the potential to cause distraction and many TOCs expressly forbid the use of mobile electronic devices in the cab. This includes smartwatches and tablets.

Any 'urgent messages' would be relayed by the signaller, or by a member of staff (or the signaller) asking the driver to contact control.

For most drivers it probably wouldn't be a problem, but some become easily distracted and so you have to legislate for those people too.

Some companies do have quite clever DAS (Driver advisory system) which shows stops and timings (@357 ) can vouch for that. Most companies that I am aware of still use paper diagrams, which really isn't an issue - at the end of the day what information do you really need when driving other than station stops and times?

DAS is useful but I believe it's due to be switched off soon as it uses the 3G network which is obsolete. I guess upgrading it to use 4G is either not possible or prohibitively expensive.

 

[Dai Corner]

Paper is better for annotating, noting formation length, highlighting stops etc.

You know you can annotate documents on mobile devices?

 

[66701GBRF]

You know you can annotate documents on mobile devices?

Indeed you can, but is more cumbersome than just pen a paper.

 

[Dai Corner]

Because they have the potential to cause distraction and many TOCs expressly forbid the use of mobile electronic devices in the cab. This includes smartwatches and tablets.

Any 'urgent messages' would be relayed by the signaller, or by a member of staff (or the signaller) asking the driver to contact control.

Doesn't taking a phone call from Control or a signaller, finding a pen and paper to write the message down and reading it back to check you've got it right cause a distraction? A bigger one than hearing an alert on a tablet and reading the message, I'd suggest?

 

[43066]

You know you can annotate documents on mobile devices?

Yes obviously, but not as easily. There is no benefit over and above a paper diagram. A device is something else to carry, and paper doesn’t have a battery that will run out etc.

Again, how is this relevant to the thread title, which is to discuss fax machines being used? If a modern network printer is used you still end up with a paper diagram.

Doesn't taking a phone call from Control or a signaller, finding a pen and paper to write the message down and reading it back to check you've got it right cause a distraction? A bigger one than hearing an alert on a tablet and reading the message, I'd suggest?

No. I’d rather take a call from the signaller and annotate my diagram. You’re now suggesting the same device that displays the diagram needs to be opened up and interrogated for alerts etc. Sounds like lots of complex reinvention of the wheel and scope for additional distraction.

 

[bengley]

You know you can annotate documents on mobile devices?

What benefit to you, as a passenger, does a driver annotating their document on a mobile device have over them doing it on paper?

 

[Llanigraham]

Doesn't taking a phone call from Control or a signaller, finding a pen and paper to write the message down and reading it back to check you've got it right cause a distraction? A bigger one than hearing an alert on a tablet and reading the message, I'd suggest?

Generally complicated messages between signaller and driver will only be given when the train is stopped, and once passed between the two and repeated there is proof of a "clear understanding". The latter is impossible to achieve if the message is only passed in a non-verbal manner.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

I honestly cannot believe that we're seven pages into a discussion about the use of Fax machines. They may be considered to be old technology by some but if the task at hand doesn't require anything more modern, what's the problem?

We still communicate using voice calls - it's not exactly new technology either, but it still has its place. The technology behind voice calls has moved on (Voice over IP etc.), but the end user doesn't usually consider how it all works and nor do they need to.

It has been a good while since I needed to use a fax machine but when I last needed to do so it was far more efficient to send a hand-written document than it would have been to transcribe the information and email it onwards.

Old tech isn't necessarily bad tech!

But the Secretary General of the Greater Manchester Soviet Socialist Republic wanted to do a bit of sabre-rattling...

 

[Dai Corner]

What benefit to you, as a passenger, does a driver annotating their document on a mobile device have over them doing it on paper?

I was arguing that a driver receiving information or instructions by means of an alert on a mobile device is less likely to be distracted than one taking a phone call and therefore safer. I mentioned as a point of information that it is possible to annotate on a mobile device. A more sophisticated system could send a new, amended, diagram with the changes changes highlighted together with an alert.

Again, how is this relevant to the thread title, which is to discuss fax machines being used? If a modern network printer is used you still end up with a paper diagram.

The thread has developed into one about the railway using everyday technology in general.

 

[Horizon22]

Any such instruction passed on by a signaller will have been authorised via NR Route controllers and TOC controllers

Well that is not the case. Plenty of times I've known it to be the case that the signaller has effectively made service decisions (by making routing decisions) without controllers knowing and then the customer information is out of whack.

 

[vikingdriver]

I was arguing that a driver receiving information or instructions by means of an alert on a mobile device is less likely to be distracted than one taking a phone call and therefore safer. I mentioned as a point of information that it is possible to annotate on a mobile device. A more sophisticated system could send a new, amended, diagram with the changes changes highlighted together with an alert.


The thread has developed into one about the railway using everyday technology in general.

When I take a phone call through the GSM-R, I'm looking where I'm going, so safer for myself, the passengers and any poor individual I don't sound the horn for whilst I'm distracted by a mobile device.

 

[43066]

What benefit to you, as a passenger, does a driver annotating their document on a mobile device have over them doing it on paper?

Bizarre isn’t it. Do the same people get irritated when they see people in any other setting using a pen and paper rather than using a device?

I was arguing that a driver receiving information or instructions by means of an alert on a mobile device is less likely to be distracted than one taking a phone call and therefore safer. I mentioned as a point of information that it is possible to annotate on a mobile device. A more sophisticated system could send a new, amended, diagram with the changes changes highlighted together with an alert.

It isn’t clear it would be less distracting than a GSMR call - personally I don’t think it would. And I don’t see any benefit over and above a paper diagram. It seems several other experienced train drivers also disagree with you.

Well that is not the case. Plenty of times I've known it to be the case that the signaller has effectively made service decisions (by making routing decisions) without controllers knowing and then the customer information is out of whack.

Calls over the GSMR are recorded in the event of any dispute.

The thread has developed into one about the railway using everyday technology in general.

Since when?

 

[Horizon22]

Calls over the GSMR are recorded in the event of any dispute.

Of course. All railway safety-critical calls (phones / GSM-R) should be logged and recorded anyway

 

[InkyScrolls]

Personally I would never want anything other than a paper diagram which I can annotate as necessary.

 

[43066]

Of course. All railway safety-critical calls (phones / GSM-R) should be logged and recorded anyway

Indeed, in which case there’s no issue whether control are “in the loop” with the instructions or not, the driver is protected by just having had the GSMR call with the signaller. Which was the original point @bengley was responding to.

 

[Horizon22]

Indeed, in which case there’s no issue whether control gave the instructions or not, the driver is protected by just having had the GSMR call. Which was the original point @bengley was responding to.

Yes that is not to say there are not contradictory calls however but that's a separate discussion of communications amongst roles.

 

[fishwomp]

But the Secretary General of the Greater Manchester Soviet Socialist Republic wanted to do a bit of sabre-rattling...

A sabre? Sounds old fashioned - shouldn't he use something more modern

 

[bengley]

Yes that is not to say there are not contradictory calls however but that's a separate discussion of communications amongst roles.

I'm happy to take any reasonable instruction from the signaller. At the end of the day they are in charge and know what's best in their little snapshot of the railway. I don't need it in writing

 

[Horizon22]

I'm happy to take any reasonable instruction from the signaller. At the end of the day they are in charge and know what's best in their little snapshot of the railway. I don't need it in writing

No of course you don't need it in writing. Some places insist on not-to-call / special stop orders being physical pieces of paper but again I feel this is an outdated practice.

But I will have to challenge the fact that "the signaller knows best" because they sometimes make decisions without communicating them to other roles within the industry (e.g. information controllers, service controllers, stations) which has a knock-on impact (sometimes considerable) to operations and customer information. But anyway, this is off-topic from the main discussion.

 

[muz379]

I was arguing that a driver receiving information or instructions by means of an alert on a mobile device is less likely to be distracted than one taking a phone call and therefore safer. I mentioned as a point of information that it is possible to annotate on a mobile device. A more sophisticated system could send a new, amended, diagram with the changes changes highlighted together with an alert.

Tbh if you are going to be getting a driver to skip stops or take a different route , you need to speak with them to confirm that they have recieved and understood the change . Sure you could add read receipts to the notifications but really you would be better reaching a clear understanding via conversation .

And who is going to be able to send notifications to the drivers tablet anyway , presumably as they'll be issued via Toc's , it will be their control . So the signaller in the box wont know that the driver has read the notification anyway.

Anyway , issuing drivers with mobile devices , and getting rid of fax machines are two entirely different things .

No of course you don't need it in writing. Some places insist on not-to-call / special stop orders being physical pieces of paper but again I feel this is an outdated practice.

Indeed , the message being passed on a recorded line should be enough .

 

[43066]

I'm happy to take any reasonable instruction from the signaller. At the end of the day they are in charge and know what's best in their little snapshot of the railway. I don't need it in writing

Indeed. And it’s recorded if there’s any dispute later.

No of course you don't need it in writing. Some places insist on not-to-call / special stop orders being physical pieces of paper but again I feel this is an outdated practice.

Not if the instruction is given over the GSMR they don’t - for the same reason mentioned above.

On the other hand, if I was given a instruction not to call/to call additionally by any other means than via the GSMR I would *always* insist on a physical copy (and the guard needs one too), so I can check it’s been issued to the correct train, and in the event of any dispute later. Any awkwardness around that results in “I’ll be sticking to my diagram, then”.

 

[Dai Corner]

Since when?

Since this post #33 on Wednesday I think (my bold)

Yes we still use fax machines.

There is no agreement between Unions and Northern to communicate via e mail.

To get an agreement, a productivity deal needs to be agreed.

Fax machines have zero bearing on delays and cancellations.

 

[12LDA28C]

Doesn't taking a phone call from Control or a signaller, finding a pen and paper to write the message down and reading it back to check you've got it right cause a distraction? A bigger one than hearing an alert on a tablet and reading the message, I'd suggest?

You can take a call from the signaller or Control on the move quite safely, whilst looking forwards and maintaining awareness of signals and so on. Using a tablet to access what would possibly be a different App from the one your diagram/stopping pattern is displayed on to read a message is certainly more of a distraction and an action that can't be taken whilst concentrating on the line ahead. It's frankly amazing how many people on this forum think they know all about what's involved with driving a train without ever having been anywhere near the controls of one.

 

[43066]

Since this post #33 on Wednesday I think (my bold)

But that poster subsequently confirmed that diagrams at Northern are already sent to depots via networked printer. It has already been made clear that “traditional” faxes are used in very few circumstances. That has nothing to do with whether drivers should have devices in the cab, GSMR recordings etc. so perhaps the thread title should be changed, or new threads created to discuss those aspects?

 

[Dai Corner]

You can take a call from the signaller or Control on the move quite safely, whilst looking forwards and maintaining awareness of signals and so on. Using a tablet to access what would possibly be a different App from the one your diagram/stopping pattern is displayed on to read a message is certainly more of a distraction and an action that can't be taken whilst concentrating on the line ahead. It's frankly amazing how many people on this forum think they know all about what's involved with driving a train without ever having been anywhere near the controls of one.

My alerts take one swipe to access (or could just pop up on their own) and short ones like 'call additionally at Tweetown' maybe a second to read. Just writing down the message would take longer than that?

My experience is that taking a phone call when driving a car is more distracting than glancing at a phone notification, written note or sat nav as the person the other end doesn't know when I'm approaching a hazard so carries on expecting my attention.

 

[mikeb42]

How?

This'll quickly get OT, not least as the list of potential exploits is long.

That said, one of the most obvious flaws is pretty much laid out in the statement you're questioning.

There's zero worthwhile authentication of the sender. Bad. If the recipient fax is on the PSTN then potentially anyone can fax stuff to it. Worse. Now add the ease with which those of malign intent can spoof their apparent sending number to give false assurance or get past filters. Worse again. So that's a system which is very obviously open to being compromised.

At the other end of the exotic exploits spectrum, traditional fax is just sending an unencrypted analogue signal formatted according to a public domain standard over some primitive cables. There's all sorts of things you can do to that on its journey from source to sink if you can get proximity to relevant cables somewhere and, crucially, can really be bothered.

However, as we're not talking state secrets or even safety critical train stuff, who's going to do any of that? You'd need a lot of inside knowledge and to go to a lot of effort just to, if you're lucky, send some train drivers on a mildly comical wild goose chase for a bit. If it was a Sunday, the service might be improved if the diagrams/timetable/whatever for the three drivers who've been bribed into working were replaced with a random number generator!

The story doesn't seem to stack up anyway if the debunking by insiders here is sound. Even if it did, it hasn't been jumped on for its own significance. Rather it's because it's emblematic of how the overall institution still makes like it's 1976 in many ways. All the while it continues to hoover up ever vaster amounts of taxpayer wad and simultaneously badly fails to deliver on its promises like... a decent approximation to the timetabled service 7 days a week.