Train Driving vs Bus Driving

[Teflon Lettuce]

Mod Note: Posts #1 - #30 were originally in this thread.

As I see it, all the problems are down to not enough drivers being type/ route trained. Which leads me to what may seem a stupid question... but why do train drivers need to have so much training? As a bus driver, if a new vehicle type comes into my depot, then I will, IF I am lucky, be given a small manual showing where all the controls are... if I'm REALLY lucky I might be given a 15 min "spin" to find out how the new type handles. As to route changes... well once or twice along the line oos followed if lucky with a run in service with a pilot will be deemed sufficient... in fact if I were to ask for much more training than that I would probably be deemed as incompetent as a driver and would be "asked to leave".

Now.. without wishing to open old arguments... there isn't much difference between propelling a train down a "track" stopping at stops and signals or doing the same with a bus... yes a road can be considered the "track" of a bus... and a train driver doesn't have to worry about complete idiots sharing their track...

Is there a LEGAL requirement for train drivers to have so much training? or is it a product of years of TOC's caving into unreasonable union demands?

 

[Antman]

As I see it, all the problems are down to not enough drivers being type/ route trained. Which leads me to what may seem a stupid question... but why do train drivers need to have so much training? As a bus driver, if a new vehicle type comes into my depot, then I will, IF I am lucky, be given a small manual showing where all the controls are... if I'm REALLY lucky I might be given a 15 min "spin" to find out how the new type handles. As to route changes... well once or twice along the line oos followed if lucky with a run in service with a pilot will be deemed sufficient... in fact if I were to ask for much more training than that I would probably be deemed as incompetent as a driver and would be "asked to leave".

Now.. without wishing to open old arguments... there isn't much difference between propelling a train down a "track" stopping at stops and signals or doing the same with a bus... yes a road can be considered the "track" of a bus... and a train driver doesn't have to worry about complete idiots sharing their track...

Is there a LEGAL requirement for train drivers to have so much training? or is it a product of years of TOC's caving into unreasonable union demands?

I've often wondered the same thing and wouldn't drivers watching a DVD of any new route in a classroom environment be sufficient with an instructor pointing out any potential problems? Obviously having to learn it from the cab is going to be problematic when you there's not room for many drivers in the cab.

 

[Fred26]

As I see it, all the problems are down to not enough drivers being type/ route trained. Which leads me to what may seem a stupid question... but why do train drivers need to have so much training? As a bus driver, if a new vehicle type comes into my depot, then I will, IF I am lucky, be given a small manual showing where all the controls are... if I'm REALLY lucky I might be given a 15 min "spin" to find out how the new type handles. As to route changes... well once or twice along the line oos followed if lucky with a run in service with a pilot will be deemed sufficient... in fact if I were to ask for much more training than that I would probably be deemed as incompetent as a driver and would be "asked to leave".

Now.. without wishing to open old arguments... there isn't much difference between propelling a train down a "track" stopping at stops and signals or doing the same with a bus... yes a road can be considered the "track" of a bus... and a train driver doesn't have to worry about complete idiots sharing their track...

Is there a LEGAL requirement for train drivers to have so much training? or is it a product of years of TOC's caving into unreasonable union demands?

You have got to be joking. Driving a bus is nothing like as complicated as driving a train. Your entire post reeks of ignorance and is very insulting. It's got nothing to do with the union. Do you really think that the union would get away with holding back driver training, across the whole country, constantly, from the year dot?! You've got no idea what you're talking about.

 

[bionic]

You drive a bus by sight. You see someone stick their hand out or hear them ring the bell and you pull over and stop the bus.

If you drove a train like that, say (to keep it Thameslink related) approaching Hendon on the down slow at 90mph, and put the brake in when you saw the platform you'd still be doing about 70 as you shot straight through. Hendon on the up would give you a similar result (although at lower speed), as would the bulk of stations and PSRs on the UK network.

It's a similar thing with traction. Do you really want a train hurtling along at 100mph (bearing in mind the driver doesn't know the road because you've given him a dvd instead of training him properly) now taking a "what does this button do?" approach with hundreds of passengers in board?

I'd say comparing bus driving to train driving shows a distinct lack of understanding about how trains and railways operate, and I'd also suggest that just because some bus drivers are getting shoddy "training" doesn't mean everyone else should too. That's the whole race-to-the-bottom attitude promoted by much of the media that holds people back in this country. Many people would rather nick the last tenner from their neighbour rather than they both be given a fiver.

 

[farleigh]

You have got to be joking. Driving a bus is nothing like as complicated as driving a train. Your entire post reeks of ignorance and is very insulting. It's got nothing to do with the union. Do you really think that the union would get away with holding back driver training, across the whole country, constantly, from the year dot?! You've got no idea what you're talking about.

I am obviously ignorant but do not mean to be insulting. However, could you explain a little how it is complicated. I genuinely would like to know as I think there is a general perception that to drive a train you just pull a lever to make it go.

I take Bionic's point that you need to know which button to push to stop and you kneed to know when to press the button to stop the train. That seems to require some knowledge but does not seem complicated. Thanks

 

[AM9]

I am obviously ignorant but do not mean to be insulting. However, could you explain a little how it is complicated. I genuinely would like to know as I think there is a general perception that to drive a train you just pull a lever to make it go.

I take Bionic's point that you need to know which button to push to stop and you kneed to know when to press the button to stop the train. That seems to require some knowledge but does not seem complicated. Thanks

As a non-rail employee who has never been taught anything about driving trains, I can easily see these significant differences:

trains cannot avoid anything in front of them other than by slowing down/stopping
the braking distance of trains at line speed is rarely less than what can be clearly seen ahead
train braking distances are dependent of adhesion conditions in weather that would be of no concern to a road vehicle driver
trains must be driven within a very close band of speed - either for safety or timekeeping/line capacity reasons
train braking is performed completely independent of the passengers' activities whereas most bus occupants are seated and aware of possible road 'events'​

I'm sure that I could think of many more issues given time but to apply normal road experience principles to rail is not very useful.

 

[Antman]

You have got to be joking. Driving a bus is nothing like as complicated as driving a train. Your entire post reeks of ignorance and is very insulting. It's got nothing to do with the union. Do you really think that the union would get away with holding back driver training, across the whole country, constantly, from the year dot?! You've got no idea what you're talking about.

Presumably that applies to me as well?

It would be nice if you could explain things in a more polite way, surely the whole point of a forum like this is those who don't work in the industry can ask such questions?

 

[bramling]

I am obviously ignorant but do not mean to be insulting. However, could you explain a little how it is complicated. I genuinely would like to know as I think there is a general perception that to drive a train you just pull a lever to make it go.

I take Bionic's point that you need to know which button to push to stop and you kneed to know when to press the button to stop the train. That seems to require some knowledge but does not seem complicated. Thanks

The point about route knowledge has been answered. As regards traction knowledge, there can be quite significant differences between different types of train. It’s not just the immediate driving controls, but also locations of equipment - not just in the cab but there’s also equipment through the train which the driver may need to access. In the event of a problem a bus probably won’t be blocking too much, but a broken down train will likely be blocking a major running line with likely no diversionary route, so it’s important the driver has a good prospect of getting the train moving again. Many defects require potential isolation of safety equipment (including brakes) so there are potentially quite serious consequences if someone doesn’t know what they’re doing.

 

[Dunnyrail]

As I see it, all the problems are down to not enough drivers being type/ route trained. Which leads me to what may seem a stupid question... but why do train drivers need to have so much training? As a bus driver, if a new vehicle type comes into my depot, then I will, IF I am lucky, be given a small manual showing where all the controls are... if I'm REALLY lucky I might be given a 15 min "spin" to find out how the new type handles. As to route changes... well once or twice along the line oos followed if lucky with a run in service with a pilot will be deemed sufficient... in fact if I were to ask for much more training than that I would probably be deemed as incompetent as a driver and would be "asked to leave".

Now.. without wishing to open old arguments... there isn't much difference between propelling a train down a "track" stopping at stops and signals or doing the same with a bus... yes a road can be considered the "track" of a bus... and a train driver doesn't have to worry about complete idiots sharing their track...

Is there a LEGAL requirement for train drivers to have so much training? or is it a product of years of TOC's caving into unreasonable union demands?

Having already seen some replies to your points, some by at least Train Drivers I think an objective reply might be worthwhile.

Trains are not the same as busses, though there may indeed be many driver assistance systems it does take a lot of training to understand/know them all and be able to fault find on route rather than just shrug ones sholders and wait for a man in a van to fix that fault. Yes that does happen with trains but many services get back moving again (when the man in a van could well be over 2 hours away) due to the drivers ability to fix a problem when he can.

As has been said trains do not stop on a sixpence, intimate route knowledge is required to know on gradients where to be powering off and powering back up again in a way that gives passengers a smooth ride. It is not just all about pulling or pushing a lever.

Drivers are expected to be able to drive trains in the most economic way possible and coasting is a way if doing this, impossible to achieve without extensive knowledge of the route/s that are signed for.

Rules and Regulations plus daily changes to route conditions need to be learnt, understood and signed for. The Rule book has a regular check by someone that will have intimate perfect picture knowledge of that book.

Sadly Transport Ministers and the daft/dot do not or do not wish to understand any of this and the many other things that I have not mentioned that a Driver needs to know intimately.

 

[Agent_Squash]

Has the use of Virtual Reality technology been considered in terms of route learning? That would allow a significant enhancement by allowing a 360 view without needing all the trips.

 

[Dunnyrail]

Has the use of Virtual Reality technology been considered in terms of route learning? That would allow a significant enhancement by allowing a 360 view without needing all the trips.

Driver training rooms do have some of this, but it is not the same as doing a real drive on the road as anyone who has tried learning to drive a train by such systems could tell you.

 

[jon0844]

Has the use of Virtual Reality technology been considered in terms of route learning? That would allow a significant enhancement by allowing a 360 view without needing all the trips.

I was just going to post the same!

If Network Rail fitted a 360 degree camera to one of its monitoring trains, it could easily build up footage for multiple routes (and lines) that TOCs could then use for route learning away from a train. With a VR headset, they could repeat any section they wanted as much as they wanted, and had the ability to look left/right/up/down for landmarks. The industry could require that film is never more than nn months old, so as to be as accurate as possible.

I have no doubt that every driver would still need to actually be out in the cab for SOME of the training, but this could reduce a lot of the time spent in a train to do the bulk of the work.

The software used to play the routes would also be able to track and record how long the headset was used, how much of the route was viewed and other metrics. The same software could also highlight important parts of any film to look for specific things, or talk about issues and things to note.

Driver training rooms do have some of this, but it is not the same as doing a real drive on the road as anyone who has tried learning to drive a train by such systems could tell you.

I assume not VR though. That's the key difference as simple videos are probably nowhere near sufficient as an alternative to being there.

I've spent years wondering exactly how VR is ever going to take off in a big way, but this is actually a perfect usage scenario that brings genuine benefits. A decent high-definition 360 degree (or let's say 180 degree) video is going to be virtually as good as being inside a train cab.

 

[Howard70]

as a layman I would have thought the VR (or in the past DVD etc) approach would be a given as a starting point for route training? I understand that a train is different to a bus, but in a slightly different analogy it's not unheard of for an F1 driver to go straight into a race weekend at an unfamilar track with nothing but simulator experience. Again I'm not saying that's the same thing but it does indicate that there would be some value to reduce the real world learning curve

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

You have got to be joking. Driving a bus is nothing like as complicated as driving a train. Your entire post reeks of ignorance and is very insulting. It's got nothing to do with the union. Do you really think that the union would get away with holding back driver training, across the whole country, constantly, from the year dot?! You've got no idea what you're talking about.

I would contend that it is YOUR post that "reeks of ignorance" and is "insulting" I asked a question that I do not know the answer to so that I can fill a gap in my knowledge.... how is that ignorant? As to your contention that driving a bus is not as complicated as driving a train... really? do train drivers have to share their "track" with complete morons in other vehicles? do train drivers have to worry whether their vehicle will fit through gaps? do they have to grapple with all that whilst collecting fares/ changing gear/ dealing with customers? No of course not... I didn't disparage in any way what train drivers have to do... so don't disparage the role of Bus Driver!

 

[Fred26]

I would contend that it is YOUR post that "reeks of ignorance" and is "insulting" I asked a question that I do not know the answer to so that I can fill a gap in my knowledge.... how is that ignorant? As to your contention that driving a bus is not as complicated as driving a train... really? do train drivers have to share their "track" with complete morons in other vehicles? do train drivers have to worry whether their vehicle will fit through gaps? do they have to grapple with all that whilst collecting fares/ changing gear/ dealing with customers? No of course not... I didn't disparage in any way what train drivers have to do... so don't disparage the role of Bus Driver!

I didn't disparge anyone.

You asked why train drivers need this training, when you, as a bus driver, get bugger all. The two are not equal. Train drivers have to deal with trespassers, animals, signal failures, faults, fires, fatalities... Much heavier than morons on the road. If the bus breaks down everyone can just get off and a repair vehicle will be sent out. If a train breaks down its passengers are stuck and remain there until the train is fixed (usually by the driver), or it is evacuated. Train drivers are required to know every inch of the route they drive, which includes things like names of points, junctions and signals, speed restrictions, breaking distances... Does any of that apply to bus drivers?

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

I didn't disparge anyone.

You asked why train drivers need this training, when you, as a bus driver, get bugger all. The two are not equal. Train drivers have to deal with trespassers, animals, signal failures, faults, fires, fatalities... Much heavier than morons on the road. If the bus breaks down everyone can just get off and a repair vehicle will be sent out. If a train breaks down its passengers are stuck and remain there until the train is fixed (usually by the driver), or it is evacuated.

All you are doing is showing your complete ignorance of bus driving.... all the things you mention train drivers as having to deal with are things that bus drivers also have to deal with.... and I contend that bus drivers have to deal with many more trespassers and animals on their "track" in a day than a train driver will have to cope with in a year.

Train drivers are required to know every inch of the route they drive, which includes things like names of points, junctions and signals, speed restrictions, breaking distances... Does any of that apply to bus drivers?

a bus driver needs to know all these things as well.... and any driver that doesn't know/ apply their knowledge of those things I have highlighted in bold would not stay a bus driver for very long... in fact they would soon lose the right to drive ANYTHING!

And you still haven't answered my original question... is the amount of training required a legal requirement or is it by union agreement?

 

[bramling]

All you are doing is showing your complete ignorance of bus driving.... all the things you mention train drivers as having to deal with are things that bus drivers also have to deal with.... and I contend that bus drivers have to deal with many more trespassers and animals on their "track" in a day than a train driver will have to cope with in a year.



a bus driver needs to know all these things as well.... and any driver that doesn't know/ apply their knowledge of those things I have highlighted in bold would not stay a bus driver for very long... in fact they would soon lose the right to drive ANYTHING!

And you still haven't answered my original question... is the amount of training required a legal requirement or is it by union agreement?

The big difference between the two is that a bus is (or should be) always driven on sight - so should always be able to stop short of any obstruction. A train simply isn’t driven on sight, that’s what the signalling system is there for. So the driver has to know the route intimately - including the speed on every section of track, where the signals are, what they mean, et cetera. Likewise because of not being driven on sight, with trains there is less or no forgiveness in the event of an error.

As to whether it’s a legal requirement, yes there is legislation which requires the railway to have a safe method of working. Naturally the unions have their input on behalf of drivers, however ultimately yes it is a legal requirement.

 

[Fred26]

All you are doing is showing your complete ignorance of bus driving.... all the things you mention train drivers as having to deal with are things that bus drivers also have to deal with.... and I contend that bus drivers have to deal with many more trespassers and animals on their "track" in a day than a train driver will have to cope with in a year.



a bus driver needs to know all these things as well.... and any driver that doesn't know/ apply their knowledge of those things I have highlighted in bold would not stay a bus driver for very long... in fact they would soon lose the right to drive ANYTHING!

And you still haven't answered my original question... is the amount of training required a legal requirement or is it by union agreement?

Bus drivers don't deal with trespassers. Pedestrians are not banned from walking across roads. This is not America, jaywalking does not exist here. There are exceptions, but the only roads that can't be walked on are motorways.
Bus drivers do not need to know what awaits them on the road. They don't go anywhere near as fast as trains and can react to road signs and other disruptions as and when. Train drivers have to know everything about the route before they drive it, there should be no surprises.

 

[johnnychips]

Bus drivers don't deal ...

Do you think you could create a separate thread of bus v train driver if you feel it is necessary? It’s distracting from the topic purpose.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

Bus drivers don't deal with trespassers. Pedestrians are not banned from walking across roads. This is not America, jaywalking does not exist here. There are exceptions, but the only roads that can't be walked on are motorways.
Bus drivers do not need to know what awaits them on the road. They don't go anywhere near as fast as trains and can react to road signs and other disruptions as and when. Train drivers have to know everything about the route before they drive it, there should be no surprises.

sorry to be so blunt but you're talking rubbish.... if a pedestrian walks out into the road without looking right in front of the bus that is no diffferent to trespass on the line...and I would suggest that it happens to bus drivers more times in one day than a train driver has to deal with trespassers in a year! Train drivers can be pretty sure that the route they drove yesterday will be exactly the same as today... and no surprises. Bus drivers can't. Furthermore, train drivers don't have to worry about awkwardly placed street furniture, poorly positioned trees etc. I suggest you go out and learn to drive a bus before pontificating about how much easier it is than driving a train. I don't profess to know everything there is to know about train driving... hence my enquiries.. if you can't be bothered to give a considered, polite and un-condescending answer then please keep your opinions to yourself!

 

[Bromley boy]

I would contend that it is YOUR post that "reeks of ignorance" and is "insulting" I asked a question that I do not know the answer to so that I can fill a gap in my knowledge.... how is that ignorant? As to your contention that driving a bus is not as complicated as driving a train... really? do train drivers have to share their "track" with complete morons in other vehicles? do train drivers have to worry whether their vehicle will fit through gaps? do they have to grapple with all that whilst collecting fares/ changing gear/ dealing with customers? No of course not... I didn't disparage in any way what train drivers have to do... so don't disparage the role of Bus Driver!

And you still haven't answered my original question... is the amount of training required a legal requirement or is it by union agreement?

As someone with a car license, I could learn to drive a bus within 4-6 weeks. I could then drive that bus anywhere in the uk (with a decent route map). Train drivers take 1 year - 18 months to train and on completion of training can only drive the specific traction and routes they sign.

Not to denigrate bus drivers in any way, but the jobs are not in any way comparable. The only thing a train has is common with a bus is that the speedometer is in miles per hour.

The length of the training is nothing to do with the unions.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

As someone with a car license, I could learn to drive a bus within 4-6 weeks. I could then drive that bus anywhere in the uk (with a decent route map). Train drivers take 1 year - 18 months to train and on completion of training can only drive the specific traction and routes they sign.

Not to denigrate bus drivers in any way, but the jobs are not in any way comparable. The only thing a train has is common with a bus is that the speedometer is in miles per hour.

The length of the training is nothing to do with the unions.

while you could certainly pass your bus test within 4-6 weeks and would be legal to drive.... and would then maybe be given 1 months route learning to cover the routes you will be operating, I contest that you would still not be a bus driver, just a steering wheel attendant. It really does take a couple of years before you can become a fully competent bus driver with the confidence to deal with anything that is thrown at you. As to signing off routes and/ or traction I would point out that in London where the bus network is still very regulated and the companies are highly unionised a supervisor cannot give a driver a vehicle he hasn't been type trained on... nor can a driver be put on a route that they haven't signed as having knowledge...

so that leads me back to my original question which no-one wants to answer.... is the amount of route/ traction learning required a legal requirement... or is much of it due to over powerful unions and weak management over the years leading to restrictive practise? I'm beginning to think that as I am only getting answers which denigrate the role of bus driving without actually answering the question then there must be a reason why I'm not getting the answer that I seek...

after all it's not that long ago that a certain TOC was having major disruption due to strikes over proposed DOO on the grounds of safety.... a dispute that was resolve by offering a 28% pay rise.... and all of a sudden DOO was safe!

I think that at this point if I don't get a straight answer to my innocent question then I will bow out and leave people to draw their own conclusions.....

 

[tsr]

while you could certainly pass your bus test within 4-6 weeks and would be legal to drive.... and would then maybe be given 1 months route learning to cover the routes you will be operating, I contest that you would still not be a bus driver, just a steering wheel attendant. It really does take a couple of years before you can become a fully competent bus driver with the confidence to deal with anything that is thrown at you. As to signing off routes and/ or traction I would point out that in London where the bus network is still very regulated and the companies are highly unionised a supervisor cannot give a driver a vehicle he hasn't been type trained on... nor can a driver be put on a route that they haven't signed as having knowledge...

so that leads me back to my original question which no-one wants to answer.... is the amount of route/ traction learning required a legal requirement... or is much of it due to over powerful unions and weak management over the years leading to restrictive practise? I'm beginning to think that as I am only getting answers which denigrate the role of bus driving without actually answering the question then there must be a reason why I'm not getting the answer that I seek...

Essentially, when you end up driving a train, you join the role with typically no experience whatsoever in how that type of vehicle functions or how it can be driven. It's akin to learning to drive from scratch - not just learning to drive a bigger vehicle than the bog-standard car test allows. If you think about how long it takes to master control of a car so that you can safely drive with any type of passengers, then throw in the ability to fix it on your own in the middle of nowhere, and the ability to deal with any conceivable emergency on routes which are not operated on line-of-sight driving (ie. a railway), then you probably have something approaching the answer to why it takes so long.

The reason you have route knowledge is then proven by the simple fact that you need to have absolutely instant recall of everywhere you might realistically end up. This includes all likely signals and shunt manoeuvres you'll encounter (you'll never learn about every turning in which you might conceivably need to use to turn around in the road in your car, or bus). You also need to know features about each station - what you can and can't do with the doors or the passengers. Then you need to be able to recognise the route even if you're going at 100mph in thick fog AND the dark AND when leaves make braking unpredictable.

Does that approach an explanation?

 

[Bromley boy]

while you could certainly pass your bus test within 4-6 weeks and would be legal to drive.... and would then maybe be given 1 months route learning to cover the routes you will be operating, I contest that you would still not be a bus driver, just a steering wheel attendant. It really does take a couple of years before you can become a fully competent bus driver with the confidence to deal with anything that is thrown at you. As to signing off routes and/ or traction I would point out that in London where the bus network is still very regulated and the companies are highly unionised a supervisor cannot give a driver a vehicle he hasn't been type trained on... nor can a driver be put on a route that they haven't signed as having knowledge...

so that leads me back to my original question which no-one wants to answer.... is the amount of route/ traction learning required a legal requirement... or is much of it due to over powerful unions and weak management over the years leading to restrictive practise? I'm beginning to think that as I am only getting answers which denigrate the role of bus driving without actually answering the question then there must be a reason why I'm not getting the answer that I seek...

after all it's not that long ago that a certain TOC was having major disruption due to strikes over proposed DOO on the grounds of safety.... a dispute that was resolve by offering a 28% pay rise.... and all of a sudden DOO was safe!

I think that at this point if I don't get a straight answer to my innocent question then I will bow out and leave people to draw their own conclusions.....

It probably takes a year or two after passing out as a train driver to be fully conversant with every situation you might be presented with. But (for both roles) from the employers’ perspective, once the employee is legally allowed to drive, they are productive however experienced or inexperienced they may be.

The training isn’t down the unions - it breaks down as:
- rules course - circa 3 months:
- traction - circa 4 weeks:
- train handling/route learning combined 9 months - 1 year.

It simply takes that long to get someone from “off the street” to competent to be given a key.

The train handling is done by paring the trainee with a driver instructor who is an active driver - the trainee follows their roster and drives “their” trains.

Drivers are paid less during training so if anything the unions would push for shorter training for that reason. So would TOCs because shorter training would = cheaper training. Training standards are regulated by Network Rail / ORR.

Absolutely no criticism meant of bus driving here, but comparing the two jobs is simply apples and oranges.

 

[Teflon Lettuce]

It probably takes a year or two after passing out as a train driver to be fully conversant with every situation you might be presented with. But (for both roles) from the employers’ perspective, once the employee is legally allowed to drive, they are productive however experienced or inexperienced they may be.

The training isn’t down the unions - it breaks down as:
- rules course - circa 3 months:
- traction - circa 4 weeks:
- train handling/route learning combined 9 months - 1 year.

It simply takes that long to get someone from “off the street” to competent to be given a key.

The train handling is done by paring the trainee with a driver instructor who is an active driver - the trainee follows their roster and drives “their” trains.

Drivers are paid less during training so if anything the unions would push for shorter training for that reason. So would TOCs because shorter training would = cheaper training. Training standards are regulated by Network Rail / ORR.

Absolutely no criticism meant of bus driving here, but comparing the two jobs is simply apples and oranges.

Thanks! at last an objective and informative answer to the question from someone. And whilst I agree that the 2 jobs are like apples and oranges, I would contest that both are as highly skilled as each other and are of equal worth... and out of interest it's estimated that 30% of new entrants to bus driving leave the industry completely within 2 years... and it is known wisdom that a large majority do so due to the stress of feeling unsupported and under trained for the stressful, highly responsible job they do.... oh and of course there's also the point that wages in the bus industry have been driven so low now that most drivers feel that they aren't paid enough for the responsibility!

 

[Bromley boy]

Thanks! at last an objective and informative answer to the question from someone. And whilst I agree that the 2 jobs are like apples and oranges, I would contest that both are as highly skilled as each other and are of equal worth... and out of interest it's estimated that 30% of new entrants to bus driving leave the industry completely within 2 years... and it is known wisdom that a large majority do so due to the stress of feeling unsupported and under trained for the stressful, highly responsible job they do.... oh and of course there's also the point that wages in the bus industry have been driven so low now that most drivers feel that they aren't paid enough for the responsibility!

I can imagine - it does seem like a pretty thankless job, and indeed a very responsible one. From what I’ve heard the wages are very poor indeed, especially for new entrant drivers.

As for commenting on skills required, I’ve done a range of jobs but I’ve never been a bus driver, so I’m going to plead ignorance. I’m fed up enough of my own job being diminished by those who’ve never done it. I’m not going to diminish someone else’s until I’ve walked (or driven) a mile in their shoes.

 

[Fred26]

sorry to be so blunt but you're talking rubbish.... if a pedestrian walks out into the road without looking right in front of the bus that is no diffferent to trespass on the line...and I would suggest that it happens to bus drivers more times in one day than a train driver has to deal with trespassers in a year!

Bus drivers do not deal with trespassers. Trespassing is illegal. Crossing a road whether people have looked or not is not against the law.

 

[Fred26]

Do you think you could create a separate thread of bus v train driver if you feel it is necessary? It’s distracting from the topic purpose.

Frankly I don't usually bother with this silly nonsense, but I let myself get wound up.

sorry to be so blunt but you're talking rubbish.... if a pedestrian walks out into the road without looking right in front of the bus that is no diffferent to trespass on the line...and I would suggest that it happens to bus drivers more times in one day than a train driver has to deal with trespassers in a year! Train drivers can be pretty sure that the route they drove yesterday will be exactly the same as today... and no surprises. Bus drivers can't. Furthermore, train drivers don't have to worry about awkwardly placed street furniture, poorly positioned trees etc. I suggest you go out and learn to drive a bus before pontificating about how much easier it is than driving a train. I don't profess to know everything there is to know about train driving... hence my enquiries.. if you can't be bothered to give a considered, polite and un-condescending answer then please keep your opinions to yourself!

Your question has been answered three times by different posters.

As someone with a car license, I could learn to drive a bus within 4-6 weeks. I could then drive that bus anywhere in the uk (with a decent route map). Train drivers take 1 year - 18 months to train and on completion of training can only drive the specific traction and routes they sign.

Not to denigrate bus drivers in any way, but the jobs are not in any way comparable. The only thing a train has is common with a bus is that the speedometer is in miles per hour.

The length of the training is nothing to do with the unions.

Thank you.

while you could certainly pass your bus test within 4-6 weeks and would be legal to drive.... and would then maybe be given 1 months route learning to cover the routes you will be operating, I contest that you would still not be a bus driver, just a steering wheel attendant. It really does take a couple of years before you can become a fully competent bus driver with the confidence to deal with anything that is thrown at you. As to signing off routes and/ or traction I would point out that in London where the bus network is still very regulated and the companies are highly unionised a supervisor cannot give a driver a vehicle he hasn't been type trained on... nor can a driver be put on a route that they haven't signed as having knowledge...

so that leads me back to my original question which no-one wants to answer.... is the amount of route/ traction learning required a legal requirement... or is much of it due to over powerful unions and weak management over the years leading to restrictive practise? I'm beginning to think that as I am only getting answers which denigrate the role of bus driving without actually answering the question then there must be a reason why I'm not getting the answer that I seek...

after all it's not that long ago that a certain TOC was having major disruption due to strikes over proposed DOO on the grounds of safety.... a dispute that was resolve by offering a 28% pay rise.... and all of a sudden DOO was safe!

I think that at this point if I don't get a straight answer to my innocent question then I will bow out and leave people to draw their own conclusions.....

You have been given your answer three times. It's nothing to do with the union. Continuing to ask won't actually get you the answer you want, whatever that may be.

Thanks! at last an objective and informative answer to the question from someone. And whilst I agree that the 2 jobs are like apples and oranges, I would contest that both are as highly skilled as each other and are of equal worth... and out of interest it's estimated that 30% of new entrants to bus driving leave the industry completely within 2 years... and it is known wisdom that a large majority do so due to the stress of feeling unsupported and under trained for the stressful, highly responsible job they do.... oh and of course there's also the point that wages in the bus industry have been driven so low now that most drivers feel that they aren't paid enough for the responsibility!

I'm sure they aren't paid enough , or trained properly. I'm sure they're stressed and leaving. Aren't we all. Train driving is still a harder job, and that doesn't denegrate anything.

 

[Robert Symonds]

Frankly I don't usually bother with this silly nonsense, but I let myself get wound up.



Your question has been answered three times by different posters.



Thank you.



You have been given your answer three times. It's nothing to do with the union. Continuing to ask won't actually get you the answer you want, whatever that may be.



I'm sure they aren't paid enough , or trained properly. I'm sure they're stressed and leaving. Aren't we all. Train driving is still a harder job, and that doesn't denegrate anything.

I think we all know what the posters agenda is here.He clearly wants someone to blame the unions for this fiasco.

 

[700007]

Moderators, please can the bus vs train drivers debate be moved to another thread?

It is off topic and has been clogging the last few pages of this thread. They're both highly respectable roles but this isn't the place to discuss this.