Use of Tablets by Drivers

[jon0844]

Most tablets are infinitely easier to use than coffee machines, washing machines and some microwaves!

 

[muz379]

Most tablets are infinitely easier to use than coffee machines, washing machines and some microwaves!

My grandparents have only recently in the past few years taken to having a microwave in the kitchen , It was a struggle getting them to use it and they still dont understand how something that used to take half an hour maybe more to heat in a conventional oven can be heated in a few minutes in a microwave . I also dread when it breaks and has to be replaced by one with a whole new set of buttons controlling it .

 

[Taunton]

Such technology is already in widespread use by aircraft pilots, the transfer of documentation for each flight etc has moved over to this format. I can't quite see how it's not distracting for them but is seen to be for drivers - many of whom, doubtless, have SatNavs in their cars, aftermarket ones not integrated with the vehicle, a far greater distraction.

I don't remember anyone saying it was distraction to have to leaf through a 300-page WTT, across several volumes, with a format which seemed not to have changed in 100 years.

What would be necessary is for the IT team at the TOC to design an app properly which minimises the keystrokes and time taken to absorb the detail, rather than just buying something off the shelf from the lowest bidder. It's mentioned above that some are issuing detailed material on a little phone screen instead of a tablet, which is ridiculous.

 

[E&W Lucas]

We don't have ours yet but the above posters with theirs seem happy and haven't (as yet) posted any negatives.

Please bear in mind that most of us will be subject to a Company Social Media policy, asking us not to identify ourselves as employees of whatever TOC, and not to discuss our employers in cyberspace.

Tablets are a significant investment, and as such are a "good news" story.

 

[ComUtoR]

Such technology is already in widespread use by aircraft pilots, the transfer of documentation for each flight etc has moved over to this format. I can't quite see how it's not distracting for them but is seen to be for drivers

Autopilot ?

Also, what is the likely-hood of an incident whilst flying compared to the constant stop start that happens on a train. Do aircraft pass signals, read jn indicators, deal with a plethora of speed changes, AWS, TPWS, passcoms, Fires, leaffall, snow, ice, damp, trespassers, suicides etc.

Distractions are a human factor. The railway is littered with things that will distract you and Drivers see every little addition as a potential for a new distraction. The PIS on the 465 is a perfect example of how badly technology is implemented and the Distraction is can cause. Hopefully professionalism and training will mitigate any incident.

I fully support technology and anything that reduces fatigue, and removes tasks from the Driver is a good thing (in my book) A Drivers job is to drive the train.

 

[Llama]

Considering there are TOCs out there whose policies prohibit using GSMR except when stationary, even in emergencies, having a tablet even just switched on in a live driving cab is not going to happen any time soon at the majority of TOCs. The GSMR DCP was designed by a panel of railway standards specialists to allow use of basic functions on the move by not requiring an excessive number of key presses.

There is nothing that can be displayed on a tabler that a driver needs to look at so urgently when a train is moving, except in some instances perhaps their diagram, which in any case should have all.the info from the WTT that a driver needs to perform their duties.

The issues are not so much that drivers are to be issued tablets, but that some seem to think that having them switched on in the cab, when in practice not necessary, and to replace the mark 1 piece of paper, is the way forward.

 

[ComUtoR]

@Llama

I would like to hear your views on Mitrac and Timetable/Driver Advisory Systems.

 

[Clip]

The issues are not so much that drivers are to be issued tablets, but that some seem to think that having them switched on in the cab, when in practice not necessary, and to replace the mark 1 piece of paper, is the way forward.

It is the way forward and it will happen once its been trialled successfully elsewhere.

I cant see no decent argument against having them I'm afraid.

 

[KA4C]

Such technology is already in widespread use by aircraft pilots,

There are two pilots and most aircraft virtually fly themselves these days

I don't remember anyone saying it was distraction to have to leaf through a 300-page WTT, across several volumes, with a format which seemed not to have changed in 100 years.

You didn't leaf through the WTT when driving, you referred to it before going to the train and made notes

 

[Llama]

DAS appears to be detested by the majority of those who use it. The software on DMIs should be kept as simple as possible and the use of screens in cabs reduced to the absolute minimum necessary.

Perhaps someone can tell us what the aim of this TAS on East Coast is?
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

It is the way forward and it will happen once its been trialled successfully elsewhere.

I cant see no decent argument against having them I'm afraid.

I put it to you that the first incident where a driver is involved in a near miss or a fatality when the use of a tablet in the cab is considered causal will put that to bed. Are you a driver?

 

[ComUtoR]

DAS appears to be detested by the majority of those who use it. The software on DMIs should be kept as simple as possible and the use of screens in cabs reduced to the absolute minimum necessary.

Perhaps someone can tell us what the aim of this TAS on East Coast is?

DMI ? (Driver Monitor Interface ?)

I have heard nothing positive about DAS but I do understand the reasons for its implementation. The only positive I've heard has come from this thread and that was a reminder alarm when your approaching a booked station.

Is it safe to assume your against them in general or do you support their implementation IF done right ?

 

[Clip]

I put it to you that the first incident where a driver is involved in a near miss or a fatality when the use of a tablet in the cab is considered causal will put that to bed. Are you a driver?

But the same could happen whilst looking at their paper notes could it not? And no, no I'm not.

 

[Llama]

The only 'note' possibly required to be checked by a driver during the journey is the diagram, and the basic information from that can often be digested and retained prior to the journey.

A key point is that bits of paper do not produce distracting sources of light in the cab while the train is proceeding in dark conditions. Track workers are often very difficult to see at night, they rely on us warning them to be safe.

If East Coast are genuinely trialling a non-safety critical system that sees them introduce a piece of what would be otherwise strictly prohibited equipment into the cab to be used while the train is being driven, purely for performance benefits at the risk of distraction, then their health and safety representatives and Operations Standards departments should be ashamed, and if I was a track worker on the ECML I would feel a little more unsafe when 'on or near the line' from now on.

 

[Clip]

And a key point about light is dismissed by having a function that it only lights up when it is required which cancels that one out. And I am pretty sure that that will be covered in the risk assessment by EC.

And I am also happy to point out that GB confirms that freight have been using them for a while now and have we had one incident down to having the tablet in the cab with them?

We (GBRf) have been using ipads for the last couple of years. Initially just for rosters and rule books but can also now use it for wagon defect and loco prep reports that can be sent in realtime (there by having better fleet management), TAS, and soon to be able to produce TOPs lists with them. I don't know what benefit TOCs would have but for us they have made life much easier.

As for potential distraction nonsense, I'd like to think we are treated like adults with highly safety critical and respectful positions. I don't know anyone that has (or would) play games, watch videos or browse the net while either driving or performing other safety critical duties.

Personally I think you are over reacting and thinking of worst case scenario for the only reason for them not to be in there. If a proper RA has been carried out on them being used safely then you cant complain.

and as I said you haven't come up with a solid reason for not having them.

 

[Llama]

And nobody has yet come up with a valid practical reason for tablets being used by a driver while a train is in motion.

Perhaps the mobile phone policies of the majority of TOCs are also based on 'worst case scenario' and should perhaps be equally easily dismissed too, no?

 

[Clip]

And nobody has yet come up with a valid practical reason for tablets being used by a driver while a train is in motion.

Perhaps the mobile phone policies of the majority of TOCs are also based on 'worst case scenario' and should perhaps be equally easily dismissed too, no?

I don't think I've seen anyone say they are to be used whilst the train is in motion - have you?

No but I would assume that tablets would be under the same restrictions of use - don't you?

 

[Llama]

Post #53 clearly says the tablets issued by East Coast are for use on the move, for benefits related to performance.

 

[ian959]

The times they are a changing...

I am not a driver but given how much tablets have pervaded a lot of things I have to deal with everyday, it is inevitable that tablet technology of some sort will make it into the cab of all trains. Cost factors alone will dictate that. I think those who are vehemently opposed to it without even seeing what is proposed and what is possible are exhibiting exactly the sort of backward thinking attitudes that keep so much of the British railway system firmly rooted in the 19th century IMHO.

I can easily foresee over the course of the next decade such technology becoming an inherent part of the driving task. It makes sense to me to have train diagrams for instance loaded onto tablets and visible in the cab. Drivers can even use their stylus to make notes on the diagram, cross out stops or whatever, well within the capacity of current technology. Incident reports, fault reports and whatever else can be completed in real time and sent to the appropriate place. Sure there will be challenges but it makes so much sense and as some have already indicated, they are already in use by some operators in the freight area.

I really don't see why people are so against the idea.

 

[Clip]

Post #53 clearly says the tablets issued by East Coast are for use on the move, for benefits related to performance.

I missed that but it is easily possible to make adjustments to ensure that the risk raised in that Ciras report are mitigated correctly. That's what risk management is all about and is why you have such things as a risk assessment.

Again, it is already in use with freight so why different for passenger usage?

 

[ComUtoR]

A key point is that bits of paper do not produce distracting sources of light in the cab while the train is proceeding in dark conditions.

It will have a dark screen option. (Just like Mitrac)

If East Coast are genuinely trialling a non-safety critical system that sees them introduce a piece of what would be otherwise strictly prohibited equipment into the cab to be used while the train is being driven, purely for performance benefits at the risk of distraction, then their health and safety representatives and Operations Standards departments should be ashamed,

It has been approved by the RSSB. DAS is also supported by ASLEF

And nobody has yet come up with a valid practical reason for tablets being used by a driver while a train is in motion.

Because IF it can do anything like the Mitrac then its a positive step. As an example. If your trundling along and your unit feels sluggish or a little underpowered you can hit the traction status screen and check which motors are working. That is a good thing. I have serious doubts that it will be anything like a Mitrac but potentially its possible.

TAS is a performance thing but in a time where every penny counts TAS potentially will be self funding. Reduced costs are a positive thing.

When docked it's important to remember that it will be restricted to whatever function it is supposed to do. I drive with a display screen in the cab and its never been an issue.

 

[HSTfan!!!]

And a key point about light is dismissed by having a function that it only lights up when it is required which cancels that one out. And I am pretty sure that that will be covered in the risk assessment by EC.

And I am also happy to point out that GB confirms that freight have been using them for a while now and have we had one incident down to having the tablet in the cab with them?




Personally I think you are over reacting and thinking of worst case scenario for the only reason for them not to be in there. If a proper RA has been carried out on them being used safely then you cant complain.

and as I said you haven't come up with a solid reason for not having them.

Thing with TAS (I use it as a driver) is you have absolutely no need to touch it whilst driving, in fact it saves me getting my schedule and working out whether I'm running early/late etc as I can quickly glance at the TAS screen and the information is there for me. The screen brightness can be adjusted and I've not found it distracting in the slightest. Also keystrokes etc are monitored and they can tell if you've used the system whilst in motion which would no doubt lead to a telling off, but then you don't need to touch the thing whilst you're moving.

 

[Llama]

Strange really, I already seem to be using a 'timetable advisory system', although mine is made of a piece of paper and known as a diagram...

 

[cjmillsnun]

Such technology is already in widespread use by aircraft pilots, the transfer of documentation for each flight etc has moved over to this format. I can't quite see how it's not distracting for them but is seen to be for drivers

Airline pilots don't do much actual stick and rudder flying nowadays.

They generally take off and land manually, and then let the plane's systems do the work.

They then monitor the systems and fuel usage, and enter instructions into the plane's systems when received from ATC.

If for whatever reason there is hand flying, in normal conditions one pilot is flying, whilst the other operates the radios and reads the checklist.

In an emergency situation, the flying pilot flies the plane, and operates the radios, and the pilot not flying deals with the systems and the checklists.

When another plane gets too close, a system alerts them by shouting "Traffic, Traffic". There are also two pilots on the flight deck 99% of the time (bog breaks are the exception), so one will always be looking out.

Pilots also generally have a hell of a lot more paperwork with them. They will have a full checklist set for the aircraft (normal checklists , MEL and QRH), a full set of maps for their starting airport, every airport en route, the destination airport and every conceivable alternate. Both pilots carry this. Also on board is another full checklist set, the aircraft tech log, and the load sheet.

Now, if this could be cut to an iPad per pilot (replaces all maps and checklists), plus a backup iPad in the cockpit.

The paperwork is then reduced to the tech log and the load sheet.

No consider the train driver.

They're on their own (unless there is a DM or someone route learning with them), having to be vigilant for signals (a handful of which don't have TPWS - are there any left that don't have AWS?). They don't carry maps (they have their route knowledge in their head).

They directly control the train at all times (even trains with ATP are fully driver controlled) Personally I think any more than a scan of the instruments is too much. They need to keep their eyes on the road ahead.

 

[Muzer]

Airline pilots don't do much actual stick and rudder flying nowadays.

They generally take off and land manually, and then let the plane's systems do the work.

They then monitor the systems and fuel usage, and enter instructions into the plane's systems when received from ATC.

If for whatever reason there is hand flying, in normal conditions one pilot is flying, whilst the other operates the radios and reads the checklist.

In an emergency situation, the flying pilot flies the plane, and operates the radios, and the pilot not flying deals with the systems and the checklists.

When another plane gets too close, a system alerts them by shouting "Traffic, Traffic". There are also two pilots on the flight deck 99% of the time (bog breaks are the exception), so one will always be looking out.

Pilots also generally have a hell of a lot more paperwork with them. They will have a full checklist set for the aircraft (normal checklists , MEL and QRH), a full set of maps for their starting airport, every airport en route, the destination airport and every conceivable alternate. Both pilots carry this. Also on board is another full checklist set, the aircraft tech log, and the load sheet.

Now, if this could be cut to an iPad per pilot (replaces all maps and checklists), plus a backup iPad in the cockpit.

The paperwork is then reduced to the tech log and the load sheet.

No consider the train driver.

They're on their own (unless there is a DM or someone route learning with them), having to be vigilant for signals (a handful of which don't have TPWS - are there any left that don't have AWS?). They don't carry maps (they have their route knowledge in their head).

They directly control the train at all times (even trains with ATP are fully driver controlled) Personally I think any more than a scan of the instruments is too much. They need to keep their eyes on the road ahead.

SIMBIDs don't have AWS, there might be a handful more examples. Most signals don't have TPWS - ones that only protect against rear-end collisions don't have them, as this is presumably a lower risk (or if not, likely to have fewer negative consequences) than a collision on a junction.

 

[Railsigns]

They're on their own (unless there is a DM or someone route learning with them), having to be vigilant for signals (a handful of which don't have TPWS - are there any left that don't have AWS?).

Signals at the exits from terminal platform lines, and other signals without any routes approaching them don't have AWS.

Some signals in loops don't have AWS.

Semaphore stop signals don't have AWS, unless they're combined with a distant signal.

Signals on some goods lines don't have AWS.

Shunting signals don't have AWS.

Signals inside "AWS gaps" (on certain complex station layouts) don't have AWS.

 

[cool110]

Also signals in the underground sections of the Merseyrail network don't have AWS as they are fitted with trainstops

 

[rdeez]

Don't some cabs already have electronic screens in the form of the TMS? I don't really see how an iPad or similar for work related purposes presents any greater risk of distraction than these, with the proper risk assessments and sensible precautions in place (and no doubt their safety will be thoroughly examined prior to widespread deployment).

I think its important to remember that train drivers are a group of people who have, through the selection process for their job, demonstrated that they are able to concentrate and perform safely under various circumstances and I'm sure they would be the first to speak up if they felt there was any risk prior to or after the introduction of tablets. I think we can also trust them to exercise proper judgement into when they can safely use such devices.

Personally I think this is nothing more than the natural evolution of the presentation and storage of information for drivers. As some have already pointed out, their burden of physical paperwork is already substantial and isn't likely to get anything but bigger - and the cost and administration involved in keeping all of this printed material up to date can't be insignificant either.

 

[bramling]

The times they are a changing...

I am not a driver but given how much tablets have pervaded a lot of things I have to deal with everyday, it is inevitable that tablet technology of some sort will make it into the cab of all trains. Cost factors alone will dictate that. I think those who are vehemently opposed to it without even seeing what is proposed and what is possible are exhibiting exactly the sort of backward thinking attitudes that keep so much of the British railway system firmly rooted in the 19th century IMHO.

I can easily foresee over the course of the next decade such technology becoming an inherent part of the driving task. It makes sense to me to have train diagrams for instance loaded onto tablets and visible in the cab. Drivers can even use their stylus to make notes on the diagram, cross out stops or whatever, well within the capacity of current technology. Incident reports, fault reports and whatever else can be completed in real time and sent to the appropriate place. Sure there will be challenges but it makes so much sense and as some have already indicated, they are already in use by some operators in the freight area.

I really don't see why people are so against the idea.

I have to say I prefer to receive and carry publications in paper format. At least when attending an incident I can almost *guarantee* I will have the relevant document, for example a track diagram, available. I wouldn't feel confident relying on an electronic device.

There is more merit in the idea of being able to transmit real-time reports however, and I don't really subscribe to the idea that an electronic device is necessarily a distraction, as railway staff are generally very aware of their responsibilities in this respect.

Fortunately I don't work with any form of advisory system, but in my view there's no substitute for a well-trained driver's judgement.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

The Train Simulator game has displayed distance to signals and stations, junction names, gradients, etc, will the display of that sort of info become standard, if not on a tablet, some fixed display?

 

[js47604]

The problem here is that as long as drivers are being disciplined for incorrect use of technology etc why should something be placed in the cab that could tempt them down this very road. Our TOC wanted to issue tablets a couple of years ago but as a union we turned them down.