Thameslink core ATO into use

[pt_mad]

One can only assume that the whole thing will be introduced on Thameslink without massive attention providing no serious incidents occur.
If any did and the train was driving in auto mode then no amount of faith in the system could save it from a potential PR disaster.


It does seem a bit sad that so many people seem to be so excited about a computer program being able to drive a train far better than a human ever could or has. Just because the DFT or a TOC says its good for us doesnt mean we all have to agree. Most of us here are surely railway lovers and replacing half of a job which has always been done by a person since the start, with a computer system for rhe first time on the mainline is not exactly the railway's greatest achievement imo.

It seems a bit sad that we demand a service level which is so high that we deem it impossible for a person to drive a train at the level needed and have to comission a computer to drive the train instead.

Seems another case of person can't do it fast enough for what we want so we'll automate it instead. Instead of being satisfied with the best ability of driving a person can possibly achieve we are still demanding an even higher level of performance than that a person is capable of no matter what their ability.

Will any rollout of the current form of ATO upskill our train drivers or reduce the skill of the job from where it is now?

 

[hooverboy]

One can only assume that the whole thing will be introduced on Thameslink without massive attention providing no serious incidents occur.
If any did and the train was driving in auto mode then no amount of faith in the system could save it from a potential PR disaster.


It does seem a bit sad that so many people seem to be so excited about a computer program being able to drive a train far better than a human ever could or has. Just because the DFT or a TOC says its good for us doesnt mean we all have to agree. Most of us here are surely railway lovers and replacing half of a job which has always been done by a person since the start, with a computer system for rhe first time on the mainline is not exactly the railway's greatest achievement imo.

It seems a bit sad that we demand a service level which is so high that we deem it impossible for a person to drive a train at the level needed and have to comission a computer to drive the train instead.

Seems another case of person can't do it fast enough for what we want so we'll automate it instead. Instead of being satisfied with the best ability of driving a person can possibly achieve we are still demanding an even higher level of performance than that a person is capable of no matter what their ability.

Will any rollout of the current form of ATO upskill our train drivers or reduce the skill of the job from where it is now?

it's a change of skill, not an upskill or a downskill.
Munich s-bahn has had ATO for years and works incredibly well, given that the frequency of their trains is nearly one per minute through their "core".
...and they still have drivers on board doing the rest of their respective routes...so it's certainly not meant to be a replacement for a driver, just a better marshalling system.

 

[whhistle]

You would surely think ASLEF would be against this as it could threaten their whole membership over the next 50 years at a guess?

It might do, but they also have to be very careful.

The public are well aware that strikes are generally organised by the RMT and thus the public opinion (or public backing) won't be very forthcomng in this.

Couple that with the idea that many people think train drivers just "sit around and push buttons" anyway... Train Driving as a career will be dumbed down significantly over the next 30 years I think.

 

[AM9]

One can only assume that the whole thing will be introduced on Thameslink without massive attention providing no serious incidents occur.
If any did and the train was driving in auto mode then no amount of faith in the system could save it from a potential PR disaster.


It does seem a bit sad that so many people seem to be so excited about a computer program being able to drive a train far better than a human ever could or has. Just because the DFT or a TOC says its good for us doesnt mean we all have to agree. Most of us here are surely railway lovers and replacing half of a job which has always been done by a person since the start, with a computer system for rhe first time on the mainline is not exactly the railway's greatest achievement imo.

It seems a bit sad that we demand a service level which is so high that we deem it impossible for a person to drive a train at the level needed and have to comission a computer to drive the train instead.

Seems another case of person can't do it fast enough for what we want so we'll automate it instead. Instead of being satisfied with the best ability of driving a person can possibly achieve we are still demanding an even higher level of performance than that a person is capable of no matter what their ability.

Will any rollout of the current form of ATO upskill our train drivers or reduce the skill of the job from where it is now?

Luddites still cropping-up everywhere. Just pretend that the Victoria Line, The Central Line, The DLR and countless other rail systems around the world are figments of our imaginations.

 

[Malcolmffc]

It seems a bit sad that we demand a service level which is so high that we deem it impossible for a person to drive a train at the level needed and have to comission a computer to drive the train instead.

Seems another case of person can't do it fast enough for what we want so we'll automate it instead. Instead of being satisfied with the best ability of driving a person can possibly achieve we are still demanding an even higher level of performance than that a person is capable of no matter what their ability.

Will any rollout of the current form of ATO upskill our train drivers or reduce the skill of the job from where it is now?

With attitudes like that we would still be living in caves and riding horses to get around. Embrace change and progress.

 

[AlexNL]

So the system 'offers' to run under ATO, and the driver then has to explicitly accept this and is aware they take full responsibility for this And yet in reality they have no choice but to accept if the train is booked ATO and when the full timetable is rolled out are they really being given a choice on that day whether to accept? It'd be a case of decline at your peril.

Exactly as said above by someone else. The computer is designed to drive closer to the wind than a person capably could. Yet the person has to second guess if the computer is going to make a wrong judgement and stop it in time, when it was close to the wind even before they realised?

Once again, ATO is a supportive system. It is capable of doing what a driver can do, but it doesn't "suffer" from cautious human instincts.

If a driver feels it is necessary to intervene with ATO operation, all they will have to do is operate the power/brake handle and ATO will disengage. (When driving in ATO mode, the power/brake handle is set to neutral.)

ERTMS/ETCS over a good part of the network is likely in 20 years - certainly the busier bits - but how much of the total network?

As someone who clearly knows what they’re taking about... I’d be interested to know, in support of Bletchlyite’s previous comment, how much of the current mainline network do you believe will be technologically capable of being fully (DLR style) driverless within 20 years?

Knowing our unions, I’m afraid it’ll probably be a choice between an autonomous car/bus and a manually driven train.

The busiest sections of the network will see ATO, I am positive of that. It provides opportunity for capacity increase beyond what four-aspect signaling is capable of, it can be delivered with less disruption to passengers, it's quicker to deliver, and it can be built without requiring new infrastructure (which is impossible in many places due to built-up areas).

I don't expect ATO on rural branch lines, as the business case won't be there.

Regarding unions: I am sure they will have their concerns, but I don't see them opposing to a wider roll-out of Thameslink-style ATO. A person will still be required on the pointy end, who will at all times be in full control.

Third, This is my personal view. I don’t have visibility of the details of the digital rail programme. However I know that the ATO on Thameslink is going to be a game changer, and I predict that the pull for the product from the wider industry will be significant, and very soon.

Agreed.

I wonder if HS2 will have any elements of ATO? I mean, it should absolutely have the capability for it to be useable for the entire route, but whether or not that happens is another matter...

The signalling will be ETCS and the trains are still to be built. It would surprise me if there isn't some sort of ATO.

This was true on the underground with the old Victoria line system but this is not the case with the newer systems, I don't know what the situation is through the core but I would be surprised if the driver is expected to intervene

If a train has a sped due to equipment failure the rule is the same as not, it is a spad but not attributed to the driver.

The thing I want to know is what actions are available to the driver if as he a approaches the platform there is something happening which they would normally slow down for, eg drunk on the platform. Do they have the ability to enter a platform slowly or is it full speed or stop?

The driver can always 'pull the brakes'.

It does seem a bit sad that so many people seem to be so excited about a computer program being able to drive a train far better than a human ever could or has. Just because the DFT or a TOC says its good for us doesnt mean we all have to agree. Most of us here are surely railway lovers and replacing half of a job which has always been done by a person since the start, with a computer system for rhe first time on the mainline is not exactly the railway's greatest achievement imo.

Nobody is being replaced.

It seems a bit sad that we demand a service level which is so high that we deem it impossible for a person to drive a train at the level needed and have to comission a computer to drive the train instead.

Seems another case of person can't do it fast enough for what we want so we'll automate it instead. Instead of being satisfied with the best ability of driving a person can possibly achieve we are still demanding an even higher level of performance than that a person is capable of no matter what their ability.

Thameslink's capacity needs are such that it's deemed impossible for a driver alone to drive according to the timetable through the busy Core. This is why ATO was chosen.

The alternative for getting 24tph through the TL Core is doubling the tunnel. This is eye-wateringly expensive, if it is possible at all. It's not like underground London is unexplored territory.

Will any rollout of the current form of ATO upskill our train drivers or reduce the skill of the job from where it is now?[/QUOTE]

it's a change of skill, not an upskill or a downskill.
Munich s-bahn has had ATO for years and works incredibly well, given that the frequency of their trains is nearly one per minute through their "core".
...and they still have drivers on board doing the rest of their respective routes...so it's certainly not meant to be a replacement for a driver, just a better marshalling system.

Munich's S-Bahn has LZB signalling (which is equivalent to ETCS L2) but does not have ATO (AFB in German). As far as I am aware, the Munich S-Bahn frequency through the Core isn't on Thameslink-like levels yet and thus don't need ATO.

 

[LNW-GW Joint]

It does seem a bit sad that so many people seem to be so excited about a computer program being able to drive a train far better than a human ever could or has. Just because the DFT or a TOC says its good for us doesnt mean we all have to agree. Most of us here are surely railway lovers and replacing half of a job which has always been done by a person since the start, with a computer system for rhe first time on the mainline is not exactly the railway's greatest achievement imo.
It seems a bit sad that we demand a service level which is so high that we deem it impossible for a person to drive a train at the level needed and have to comission a computer to drive the train instead.

I take it you would never fly on a plane in autopilot mode? ie most of them.
The concept is very similar to ATO.
That certainly hasn't deskilled the work of the pilot, just changed it for the better.

 

[philthetube]

The thing I want to know is what actions are available to the driver if as he a approaches the platform there is something happening which they would normally slow down for, eg drunk on the platform. Do they have the ability to enter a platform slowly or is it full speed or stop?

The driver can always 'pull the brakes'.

What I am asking is is the driver able to slow down or are full speed or stop the only options?

 

[Bletchleyite]

The systems are designed in such a way that if a failure does happen, the system will choose a safe mode of failure: signals will turn red, level crossing will remain closed, traffic lights will go into hazard mode (flashing yellow aspects).

As a minor point, the UK doesn't have that mode, so a failed traffic light shows a blank aspect. This is arguably safer, as a blank traffic light simply means to act as if it were not there.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I don't expect ATO on rural branch lines, as the business case won't be there.

Maybe not ETCS ATO, but once automated cars are more perfected I can see some simpler branch lines going to "guard only operation" on a different technical model. It would save a packet.

For instance, the Stourbridge Shuttle would be an easy place to do this - no level crossings, no interaction with anything else. All you'd need is some sensors on the front to say "stop if something is in the way" and the guard to do the doors and press go.

 

[AlexNL]

What I am asking is is the driver able to slow down or are full speed or stop the only options?

As far as my understanding goes, the driver can take back control at any time by just operating the power/brake handle and then driving manually.

As a minor point, the UK doesn't have that mode, so a failed traffic light shows a blank aspect. This is arguably safer, as a blank traffic light simply means to act as if it were not there.

Ah, thanks. I didn't know that

Here in the Netherlands, failed or deactivated traffic lights show flashing yellows.

Maybe not ETCS ATO, but once automated cars are more perfected I can see some simpler branch lines going to "guard only operation" on a different technical model. It would save a packet.

For instance, the Stourbridge Shuttle would be an easy place to do this - no level crossings, no interaction with anything else. All you'd need is some sensors on the front to say "stop if something is in the way" and the guard to do the doors and press go.

I suppose a DLR-like way of operation is possible on those lines, if you can manage to isolate the infrastructure (through fencing and tree maintenance)... but that's a wholly different mode of operation than ATO.

 

[Dave1987]

With attitudes like that we would still be living in caves and riding horses to get around. Embrace change and progress.

Whilst I think pt_mad post is a little overboard I think your rhetoric is very blaise. For people to embrace change you need to sell change. Knowing what things are like in the real world I am not even slightly worried about my job or career future. The apparent joy some take in trying to make out that others will be out of a job or “deskilled” is very sad to see.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I suppose a DLR-like way of operation is possible on those lines, if you can manage to isolate the infrastructure (through fencing and tree maintenance)... but that's a wholly different mode of operation than ATO.

I'm actually thinking more of a style of operation whereby the train has most of the intelligence rather than the infrastructure, i.e. an adaptation of the self-driving car concept (which would be a whole lot easier to do than the car because you don't have to steer, you just have to accelerate and brake, and things like speed limits could be done[1] using balises rather than it having to read signs). But yes I suppose it's not ATO per-se, it's something else.

[1] For maximum safety positively, i.e. the train can only exceed, say, 5mph, if it has received a positive balise signal saying it can and how long for.

 

[AM9]

I'm actually thinking more of a style of operation whereby the train has most of the intelligence rather than the infrastructure, i.e. an adaptation of the self-driving car concept (which would be a whole lot easier to do than the car because you don't have to steer, you just have to accelerate and brake, and things like speed limits could be done[1] using balises rather than it having to read signs). But yes I suppose it's not ATO per-se, it's something else.

[1] For maximum safety positively, i.e. the train can only exceed, say, 5mph, if it has received a positive balise signal saying it can and how long for.

Out of interest, can anybody say how a failed, (i.e. dead with no signal emitted) balise is dealt with. If the on-board equipment doesn't sense it, does it expect there to be one at that position and consequently drop into some safety mode, or would it continue operating according to the last authorisation which may have a time or distance validity, (not a particularly safe situation if a string of them are inoperative owing to a signalling power failure)?

 

[Jan]

Munich's S-Bahn has LZB signalling (which is equivalent to ETCS L2) but does not have ATO (AFB in German). As far as I am aware, the Munich S-Bahn frequency through the Core isn't on Thameslink-like levels yet and thus don't need ATO.

In theory I seem to remember figures of 30 tph being mentioned and looking at the departure board for today's evening peak I see around 28 tph being scheduled in practice.
Also note that the current AFB in Germany is more of a fancy cruise control than a real ATO system - on LZB/ETCS-equipped routes it'll drive according to the minimum of driver-selected target speed and LZB/ETCS-governed maximum speed which works as a sort of crude ATO, but e.g. most importantly it cannot execute scheduled station stops on its own.

 

[rebmcr]

Out of interest, can anybody say how a failed, (i.e. dead with no signal emitted) balise is dealt with. If the on-board equipment doesn't sense it, does it expect there to be one at that position and consequently drop into some safety mode, or would it continue operating according to the last authorisation which may have a time or distance validity, (not a particularly safe situation if a string of them are inoperative owing to a signalling power failure)?

Balises are passive, like an Oyster card. The power is provided by the train itself doing the reading.

 

[SPADTrap]

It will be very interesting to see how ATO stacks up. The same 24tph through the ATO section have to run normally either side of it too. I wonder how ATO will assist on service recovery if trains start arriving late into the core.

 

[Domh245]

It will be very interesting to see how ATO stacks up. The same 24tph through the ATO section have to run normally either side of it too. I wonder how ATO will assist on service recovery if trains start arriving late into the core.

The transition points into ATO occur just after the core separates into 2 routes at both ends (between St Pancras and Kentish Town/Finsbury Park respectively at the north end, and between Blackfriars and London Bridge/Elephant & Castle at the south end) so it is less than 24tph once outside of the ATO area (but not evenly split 12/12 I don't think)

 

[SPADTrap]

The transition points into ATO occur just after the core separates into 2 routes at both ends (between St Pancras and Kentish Town/Finsbury Park respectively at the north end, and between Blackfriars and London Bridge/Elephant & Castle at the south end) so it is less than 24tph once outside of the ATO area (but not evenly split 12/12 I don't think)

Thank you for that. I think I can forsee being held everywhere for Thameslinks

 

[Bletchleyite]

Out of interest, can anybody say how a failed, (i.e. dead with no signal emitted) balise is dealt with. If the on-board equipment doesn't sense it, does it expect there to be one at that position and consequently drop into some safety mode, or would it continue operating according to the last authorisation which may have a time or distance validity, (not a particularly safe situation if a string of them are inoperative owing to a signalling power failure)?

Logic would be that it comes to a controlled stop and the guard takes over and drives manually.

 

[SPADTrap]

Also noticed while disposing of a set in Cricklewood there looked to be some CL700 recovering training taking place using a FL66 with a adaptor coupler and all the staff who would be present during a rescue.

 

[pt_mad]

With attitudes like that we would still be living in caves and riding horses to get around. Embrace change and progress.

Living in caves and riding horses is hardly the same as appreciating the train driving arrangements we have now where a driver has full manual control without a computer being required to drive to be able to reach desired frequency.

Yes the Underground has been mentioned but as has been said this is the first use on the mainline which is a new kettle of fish for the first time. Not everyone can agree on everything can they? and not everyone will welcome it with opens arms the way many have.

Regards embracing change I agree and it can be hard. Hence all this national opposition to local house building as people don't want drastic scale and change in their communities. Same with the changes politically in the last 15 years if you get my drift leading to a vote to reject changes seen if you get my drift but that's another matter.
Change will be fine so long as it's totally safe, fool proof, and looks after drivers for the long distant future ensuring the future generation drivers can have as successful a career as those who drive today do.

Are drivers themselves all for it the way a lot of forum posters are?

 

[SPADTrap]

Are drivers themselves all for it the way a lot of forum posters are?

I think drivers have a very different understanding of the challenges of automating their jobs than some posters here so are naturally a little more realistic about its implementation and its impact on them.

 

[AlexNL]

I'm actually thinking more of a style of operation whereby the train has most of the intelligence rather than the infrastructure, i.e. an adaptation of the self-driving car concept (which would be a whole lot easier to do than the car because you don't have to steer, you just have to accelerate and brake, and things like speed limits could be done[1] using balises rather than it having to read signs). But yes I suppose it's not ATO per-se, it's something else.

[1] For maximum safety positively, i.e. the train can only exceed, say, 5mph, if it has received a positive balise signal saying it can and how long for.

You mean something like ERTMS Regional?

Out of interest, can anybody say how a failed, (i.e. dead with no signal emitted) balise is dealt with. If the on-board equipment doesn't sense it, does it expect there to be one at that position and consequently drop into some safety mode, or would it continue operating according to the last authorisation which may have a time or distance validity, (not a particularly safe situation if a string of them are inoperative owing to a signalling power failure)?

Balises are passive, like an Oyster card. The power is provided by the train itself doing the reading.

Trains that are dependant on balises know when to expect the next balise, and which balise this should be. If no balise is detected or if the wrong balise is encountered, the train will be "tripped" (brought to a standstill) and the driver (after contacting the signaller) resumes their journey in "post trip mode" until a new movement authority is received.

In theory I seem to remember figures of 30 tph being mentioned and looking at the departure board for today's evening peak I see around 28 tph being scheduled in practice.
Also note that the current AFB in Germany is more of a fancy cruise control than a real ATO system - on LZB/ETCS-equipped routes it'll drive according to the minimum of driver-selected target speed and LZB/ETCS-governed maximum speed which works as a sort of crude ATO, but e.g. most importantly it cannot execute scheduled station stops on its own.

It's possible that German driving policies allow Deutsche Bahn to run 28tph without thinking it's necessary to use ATO, this might be due to their driving policy. In my experience with German drivers they can be quite... aggressive, coming into a station at a high speed and only slowing down at the last moment.

The combination of LZB and AFB indeed allows a train to run on its own, and it will accelerate and slow down according to the information received from the infrastructure. However, as the AFB driving style can be pretty harsh so drivers prefer to brake a bit earlier or accelerate a bit slower than AFB would for comfort reasons.

 

[swt_passenger]

I wonder if HS2 will have any elements of ATO? I mean, it should absolutely have the capability for it to be useable for the entire route, but whether or not that happens is another matter...

Yes it will, ATO over fixed block ETCS level 2. Googling HS2 signalling will find some info, pretty off-topic for this thread though.

 

[falcon]

It might do, but they also have to be very careful.

The public are well aware that strikes are generally organised by the RMT and thus the public opinion (or public backing) won't be very forthcomng in this.

Couple that with the idea that many people think train drivers just "sit around and push buttons" anyway... Train Driving as a career will be dumbed down significantly over the next 30 years I think.

30 yrs try 5-10 yrs I think that's far more likely.

 

[Bromley boy]

It will be very interesting to see how ATO stacks up. The same 24tph through the ATO section have to run normally either side of it too. I wonder how ATO will assist on service recovery if trains start arriving late into the core.

I think this is where the DAS system comes in and is supposed to ensure trains arrive in the right sequence at the entry to the core.

Anyone know what stage of development it has reached?

 

[falcon]

Year 2025-30 train captain sitting in cab as computer drives train. No need for route knowledge or braking points required means £35K a year not £70K.

 

[Bromley boy]

Year 2025-30 train captain sitting in cab as computer drives train. No need for route knowledge or braking points required means £35K a year not £70K.

Jealousy does strange things to people as this post shows.

 

[Clip]

Jealousy does strange things to people as this post shows.

Unsure why you have said it is jealousy - Paranoia runs high on here eh?