RSSB - 'New in cab display shows route ahead'

[Robertj21a]

i know with absolute certainty where i am, it's called route knowledge, i don't need to think ; "hang on is there a 30 prs near here, hold on, scroll to page 50, yes there is at 30m 40c, oh ballox i'm at 31 m 10c, !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! "

Do you not feel it would give added confidence to new drivers ?

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Do you not feel it would give added confidence to new drivers ?

If they are not confident, capable and qualified, they should not be driving, there is no difference between and "old" driver and a "new" driver, each does the same job and takes teh same risks, all should be assessed, qualified, treated and payed equally

 

[TheKnightWho]

If they are not confident, capable and qualified, they should not be driving, there is no difference between and "old" driver and a "new" driver, each does the same job and takes teh same risks, all should be assessed, qualified, treated and payed equally

You don't think it could assist in training drivers more quickly at all?

This really does smack of resistance to speedometers: "If they can't feel what speed the train is going, they should not be driving."

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Some of you people make me laugh, you really, really, really do.

Heard these 4 adages ?

1) If it isn't broke, don't fix it

2) Never implement a million pound solution to fix a fifty pence problem

3) Never try to do anyone else's job

4) Every solution leads to another problem

Sat Nav for trains, HUD's for trains ! Jeepers, we run this network on frames installed in 1890, on lumps of wood carved in 1930 and bits of metal cast in 1940. Our traction is like a heritage railway in half the country !

We have simple faults in fault books that haven't been fixed for six months in many cases. Do you really think a high tech, HUD is going to be robust enough and maintained enough over a bumpy branch line ?

I can just see a system installed in a 143 that costs more than the 143 ever did and is worth and is out of service within a week at a cost of zillions !

Some of us work in the REAL railway world. Ideas like this are risible. We are NOT anti technology but simple improvements, to things that need improving, which are required and effective are the way forward.

Not expensive ego projects pushed for ego's sake.

GSMR isn't perfect, but it's a damn sight better than the Not Reliable Network, spend money to tweaking GSMR

Traction, signals, infrastructure are all ancient and creaking in so many areas, spend money on those, reduce the costs of tickets for the poor, long suffering punters

Give me more than ten minutes booking on time from picking up the phone to actually leaving in my train ! That may prevent a fail to call far more than some device to tell me what I already know.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

You don't think it could assist in training drivers more quickly at all?

This really does smack of resistance to speedometers: "If they can't feel what speed the train is going, they should not be driving."

Why the hell would you want to train a driver faster than he should be trained ? Do you actually KNOW what's involved in training to be a train driver ?

You have no idea whatsoever about the specific subject you are talking about ! When you do, please feel free to produce a valid point

 

[najaB]

Do you really think a high tech, HUD is going to be robust enough and maintained enough over a bumpy branch line ?

They manage to get them to work reliably in combat aircraft that experience accelerations several orders of magnitude higher than those seen in a 142, so I'd go with 'yes' for that one.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

They manage to get them to work reliably in combat aircraft that experience accelerations several orders of magnitude higher than those seen in a 142, so I'd go with 'yes' for that one.

The RAF has 6 planes ! each costs more than the annual budget of many African Countries

We have 142s, 143s, 150's 158s etc etc etc,

get real for flip's sake !

get your HUD out of your backside

Tell you what, let's install it under the second man's seat that's had no cushion for the last 3 months, next to the cab heater that's had a noisy fan for 5 weeks and put the control panel next to the old NRN that hasn't been and probably never will be removed and angle the HUD towards the windscreen and the wiper which works after 15 twiddles of the knob and stick the new system in the fault book next to all the other faults when it packs in in a week !

 

[whoosh]

Doing a shunt move you haven't done before?


How about a route guide? A printed one, or one on an iPad in PDF form?

Oh we already have those! And how much do they cost? Not much.



This system about to be trailled is either an expensive waste of money, or a sinister plot to have all trains crewed by those nice competent and fully proffessional people at spot hire, zero hours contract, companies.

 

[cjmillsnun]

Yeah, because I'm sure they'd implement it like that.

And your comment about lorries driving into ponds is ridiculous: that sort of thing doesn't happen anymore now that the technology has matured.

Actually similar things do happen.

Maybe not lorries driving into ponds but for example lorries on roads that specifically cannot take them easily
https://www.fixmystreet.com/report/815244
http://www.edp24.co.uk/motoring/it_..._norwich_building_bashed_by_lorries_1_4032915
http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/13632821.Lorry_crashes_into_York_gallery/

A lot of the time this is down to drivers following their sat navs. Before they would gain knowledge from their piers and avoid these kind of roads.

 

[gimmea50anyday]

get your HUD out of your backside!

LMFAO!!!

 

[najaB]

The RAF has 6 planes ! each costs more than the annual budget of many African Countries

Hyperbole much?

You do realise that basic HUDs are already commercially available for road vehicles?. They aren't the expensive, delicate, high-precision devices you make them out to be.
[youtube]Wkf_WEek8bc[/youtube]

 

[gimmea50anyday]

your comment about lorries driving into ponds is ridiculous: that sort of thing doesn't happen anymore now that the technology has matured.

Does it not?

 

[ComUtoR]

So the most important part is in the original post: it allows drivers to retain a greater quantity of route knowledge than they otherwise would do, which would improve operational flexibility. That's from even the quickest skim of the details.

Its a sales pitch.

As a learning tool I can accept that this will be helpful. I'm not sure if you are aware but you are NOT allowed to drive a route you are not competent on.

Operational Flexibility sounds to me like it will allow a Driver to take a route they do not sign. I'm sure anyone can see the safety issues with that. If the person up the front does not know were they are going then I'm not sure I'd want them driving.

Its all well and good reciting the sales pitch but it still doesn't answer any questions about its real time application and it still doesn't answer any suggestions where it can reduce the incidents which you mentioned.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Hyperbole much?

You do realise that basic HUDs are already commercially available for road vehicles?. They aren't the expensive, delicate, high-precision devices you make them out to be.
[youtube]Wkf_WEek8bc[/youtube]

And you SERIOUSLY, think that any system that the railway installs isn't going to cost more than the whole GDP of South America and have even more Manana !
!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[gimmea50anyday]

Don't think it is quite what Eddie Stobart had in mind when he planned less co2 rail....

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Does it not?

Fair play that man has put more freight on rail than many UK Governments have achieved

 

[Dave1987]

You don't think it could assist in training drivers more quickly at all?

Kinda reminds me of the German in 'Magnificent men and their Flying machines' that thinking TBH.

 

[GB]

So the most important part is in the original post: it allows drivers to retain a greater quantity of route knowledge than they otherwise would do, which would improve operational flexibility. That's from even the quickest skim of the details.

Knowledge is in your head, if it's on a tablet it is not knowledge.

Used for training fine, used to brush up fine, but to rely on it it is not.

 

[G136GREYHOUND]

Kinda reminds me of the German in 'Magnificent men and their Flying machines' that thinking TBH.

More like that dodgy 70's book with that bearded bloke and his girl on the cover
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Knowledge is in your head, if it's on a tablet it is not knowledge.

Used for training fine, used to brush up fine, but to rely on it it is not.

exactly

 

[Bromley boy]

If they are not confident, capable and qualified, they should not be driving, there is no difference between and "old" driver and a "new" driver, each does the same job and takes teh same risks, all should be assessed, qualified, treated and payed equally

100% this.

As a trainee driver myself, getting to grips with route knowledge is the hardest part of the training. It can only be gained by driving the route over and over and over again with an instructor, at a variety of times of day and night and in different weather conditions. You either know the route or you don't and you should not be driving it on your own until you know it like the back of your hand!

Anything that gives "confidence", in place of learning the route properly would really only be giving false confidence.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

The point is that relying *solely* on dead reckoning and knowledge has killed people. It's caused accidents on the railway as well, though - as you point out - less frequently due to the relatively static nature of the infrastructure.

Maybe this system is an improvement, maybe it's not - I don't do the job so can't really comment.

What interests me is that so many drivers seem to have the attitude that the current operating model is perfect and there's no way that technology can make your jobs easier or safer.

But dead reckoning in aviation is far more error prone than route learning when driving a train on a specific stretch of track. When you're driving a train you are always somewhere on that specific stretch of track. Your job is to know where, in dense fog, driving rain or pitch black night.

When flying a plane in three dimensions you could be anywhere and may be not where you think you are due to inaccurate wind forecasts etc. This is why it is sensible to use VORs for position fixes, or carry a GPS as a backup. This is an example of technology being effectively used for a specific purpose and totally different to the frivolous technology we are discussing here.

Even this has its drawbacks as unfortunately lots of private pilots these days fly around staring at their GPS rather than looking outside of the cockpit for other aircraft! That is a discussion for another forum!

 

[coppercapped]

I have thought long and hard before committing this to writing. Much as I admire the skill of train drivers - it never failed to amaze me that a train could arrive at Reading at speed and the driver could stop a 10 coach train with vacuum brakes so the water crane on the platform lined up exactly with the filler on the tender on the nose, every time! - it seems to me that many of those posting in this thread don’t appreciate how rapidly technology is changing and how cheap and reliable many of the devices are becoming. This will, in my opinion, dramatically affect the way that drivers do their job in the future. What I write is an attempt to look at the issues dispassionately and explain what technology is capable of doing. I am not trying to market it or sell it - I am retired from the fray - and my description is not limited to tablet computers but describes any driver-centric information system which could also be built-in to a train.

Now, as In the past, five main areas of expertise have maintained the safety of operation of the railways. Obviously there are others, such as systems and processes, but for the sake of my argument these five are, in no particular order:

• signalling - interlocking, indications, warning systems and so on
• civil engineering - track and infrastructure condition
• mechanical engineering - train design and maintenance
• route knowledge
• operating procedures, i.e., the Rule Book.

I concentrate on the last two items. I know I will upset many people by writing this but Route Knowledge is essentially a combination of a feat of memory and an ability to know where one is at all times. It is not a black art but it is essential and not everybody is capable of doing it - some might be able to photographically remember a route but still be clueless if dropped onto part of it and then be asked “Where are you?” I know i couldn't do it.

However, what has to be realised is that computers are very, very, very good at remembering things. One could easily store all the data concerning a route - possibly the whole network - in a memory chip; it probably has already been done. For a particular line of rails this information could be the description of gradients; curvatures; positions of signals - and the signal’s number and all the indications it can give; positions and ID of AWS magnets, TPWS loops, balises, turnouts and crossings. It will also hold the start and end of speed limits; the start and end of platforms and on which side of the track they are to be found; where cuttings, embankments, tunnels, bridges and culverts are to be found; areas of reduced adhesion; the exact position of signal post telephones and walkways; places where vision is restricted and so on and so forth. Braking points for different speeds, loads, braking steps and adhesion levels can also be stored.

If a farmer can buy GPS kit for his tractor which enables him to ensure that the spray booms for the fertiliser or weed killers do not either overlap or miss part of the crop when the tractor changes direction in a field then the issues of working out a train’s position are trivial - for a start it is laterally constrained by the track! The train ‘knows’, or will be able to ‘know’, exactly where it is - this is anyway a requirement for ETCS Levels 2 and 3. This works by the train continuously calculating the distance past each balise and reporting this back to the control centre.

The Rule Book is essentially a set of procedures - these can also be codified and stored in the computer in the same way that aircraft have computer controlled check-lists which the pilots have to work through at different stages of the flight. These three things, route knowledge, position and what do do in case of a problem, simply have to be combined in a computer and one has what is called a ‘disruptive technology’. Think what Uber is doing to the taxi business.

Don’t get sidetracked by the way things are now and extrapolate this to the future. If things haven’t been fixed in a train for months, that has no bearing on what this technology could do in the future or the changes in management priorities that will come with it.

Before anyone takes umbrage - I am not denigrating or attacking train crew or their knowledge and experience. I am simply trying to point out what - as sure as night follows day - is coming.

And the reason it will be adopted is clear. It takes a long time to train a train driver - such a technology will reduce the time the needed to remember so much ‘stuff’. One can argue, in my opinion successfully, that a good driver knows how to quickly and correctly interpret the information he or she receives, rather than simply remembering stuff. It’s the difference between learning by rote and being able to solve problems. It won’t reduce the need for traction knowledge - though it will help with fault finding which will become even more important as the railway gets busier.

History shows that guilds, set up originally to protect their members’ businesses by restricting entry to the guilds, in the long term have collapsed due to the pressures of technological and social change. I am afraid to say that I see this trio of route knowledge, knowing one’s exact position and procedures is exactly one of these ‘guild-like’ activities which is endangered by technological change. The job will change - but I hope and trust that, sitting at the front of my train, is a professional, skilled and competent driver supported by the best technology can offer.

A couple of other things. It won’t come overnight - any new technology needs time to mature. It will probably be installed in new rolling stock rather than being a retro-fit in older stuff. It is also supremely oblivious to whether the signal box has a lever frame dating from 1890 or is a state of the art control centre - the thing that is important is the position of the signal and the type of indication it gives. In other words it will work anywhere - as long as the route is modelled digitally.

And don’t shoot the messenger! Please!

 

[driver_m]

I think that's where you're wrong. I'd wager that every driver I work with COULD tell you where they are if you plonked them in a random part. I have driven my entire route in fog, I genuinely believe I could drive the same route with the blind fully down and do it correctly. I'm not bragging, it's not bravado, I just have a 100% confidence in my own ability to do it That's all,

This genuinely is a solution looking for a problem. The issue isn't us doing down new technology, it's the fact that it cannot be 100% relied on, and because of that we still have to have the skill the tech is trying to dismiss as old hat.

Ponder this. We still have swathes of Absolute Block signalling. That's because it WORKS. It's ancient and it does the job.

 

[ComUtoR]

It's also introducing more risk.

 

[theageofthetra]

Any screen other than a windscreen is a distraction. As I have said before any driver aids should be verbal unless stationery with a possible exception of HUD to advise if something is really wrong.

 

[Dryce]

Ponder this. We still have swathes of Absolute Block signalling. That's because it WORKS. It's ancient and it does the job.

It doesn't work all by itself.

If it did then train protection systems and backup such as trap points wouldn't be needed.

 

[driver_m]

It doesn't work all by itself.

If it did then train protection systems and backup such as trap points wouldn't be needed.

The line I used to work had none of that. It still managed quite well without it. A HUD going down that line or some iPad based system would be total overkill.

 

[coppercapped]

I think that's where you're wrong. I'd wager that every driver I work with COULD tell you where they are if you plonked them in a random part. I have driven my entire route in fog, I genuinely believe I could drive the same route with the blind fully down and do it correctly. I'm not bragging, it's not bravado, I just have a 100% confidence in my own ability to do it That's all.

I think you have misinterpreted what I wrote. I have already agreed with you - one of the selection criteria for train drivers is exactly what you describe - the ability to remember a route and the ability to know where one is even if plonked down on it anywhere in the dark. What I was saying was that not everyone has the ability to do this and I know that I do not have such an ability. Therefore not everybody can become train drivers.

 

[Llanigraham]

It doesn't work all by itself.

If it did then train protection systems and backup such as trap points wouldn't be needed.

No protection system or "trap" points on my old AB line!
Where are you thinking of?

 

[driver_m]

I think you have misinterpreted what I wrote. I have already agreed with you - one of the selection criteria for train drivers is exactly what you describe - the ability to remember a route and the ability to know where one is even if plonked down on it anywhere in the dark. What I was saying was that not everyone has the ability to do this and I know that I do not have such an ability. Therefore not everybody can become train drivers.

That's all part of the selection process at interview. They get rid of those who can't show an ability to memorise and effectively multitask. I get what you're saying about technology. Most of us like our gadgets and understand how it can help us. The problem we have is that there's usually an ulterior motive when these things get brought as we've seen time and time again. So we are understandably suspicious of why these things get brought in. New tech is at its best when it complements something. Such as the LED signal in both semaphores and colour lights. a modern aid to an old device.

 

[NotATrainspott]

I agree wholeheartedly with coppercapped.

Whether people like it or not, technology will eventually make humans superfluous in almost every area of the economy. It won't happen overnight, but each little baby step will make humans less and less essential, until such time as the driver can simply be removed. Regardless of who owns the railway, there will always be a drive to maximise efficiency and handing over control to computers is a sure-fire way to do that. For example, one of the new innovations on Crossrail is that services terminating at Paddington from the east will run without a driver to and from the sidings at Westbourne Park. Although it should be possible for the human driver to get from one cab to the other before the train starts again, the capability exists for the train to drive itself to minimise turnaround times during disruption, or in future once capacity demands are higher. Previously, to get turnarounds that low it would have been necessary to have a second driver on standby in a stepping back operation, which involves more chance of things going wrong and the need to employ more drivers.

When people discuss automation of the transport sector, including issues like DOO, it is common to forget that technology is more than capable of far exceeding any human ability in repetitive tasks. For instance, while someone might say that a computer wouldn't be able to identify a hazard on the line as quickly or as accurately as a human, it should also be remembered that it is not the train which is being automated but the railway itself. Rather than being limited to only what cameras or pair of eyeballs at the front of the train can see ahead of them, it would be possible to effectively blanket the railway environment with sensors and any hazards could be identified and acted upon well before any train could ever see them. Advances in technology are only going to make it cheaper to fit all these sensors, while their abilities are only going to increase. As more and more intelligence is added to the railway system, the amount of skill a human driver needs will go down and down. Instead of having to watch out for obstacles, a human driver would just be getting a notification on the screen saying that an obstacle had been detected ahead and that it would be necessary to slow down. What about that could a computer not do?

 

[GB]

Given the problems you get with obstacle detectors at level crossings, I'm having a hard time believing sensors all over the railway would do any better.