Just came across this on BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15422882

Can't help thinking that Tfl are being a bit optimistic if they think
that only 20% of trains will be manually operated by 2017 and all
lines will have fully remote train operations by 2020. Would that not
require completely new trains track and signalling on the affected
lines?

The only "fully remote" metro I have used is the VAL system in Lille,
and the trains there are far too small to be able to cope with the
crowds in London. "Fully remote" operation would require platform
edge doors at every station, and I would be very surprised if that
could be achieved in 9 years, given current budget constraints.

Ticket office closures, reductions in hours and job losses are more
likely though (I would have thought) However given TfL's recent
experience with the unions, this is more likely to happen gradually
over a number of years rather than in one fell swoop.

"Paul" wrote in message

Just came across this on BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15422882

Can't help thinking that Tfl are being a bit optimistic if they think
that only 20% of trains will be manually operated by 2017 and all
lines will have fully remote train operations by 2020. Would that not
require completely new trains track and signalling on the affected
lines?

The only "fully remote" metro I have used is the VAL system in Lille,
and the trains there are far too small to be able to cope with the
crowds in London. "Fully remote" operation would require platform
edge doors at every station, and I would be very surprised if that
could be achieved in 9 years, given current budget constraints.

Ticket office closures, reductions in hours and job losses are more
likely though (I would have thought) However given TfL's recent
experience with the unions, this is more likely to happen gradually
over a number of years rather than in one fell swoop.

I don't think it suggests unmanned trains, just that DLR-style operation
would spread across other lines as new automated trains are introduced.
All existing LU trains from the 1992 stock onwards are capable of being
driven automatically, and the driver's role is already reduced to that
of the door close button operator, something that could be done just as
well from control stations anywhere along the train, and not just from a
closed cab. Once the 1972 and 73 stocks have been replaced, there won't
be any remaining pure manual LU trains.

Automatically driven trains have been in use in other places for decades
(eg, Vancouver's Skytrain,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_%28Vancouver%29)

See the longer version of this story in the Telegraph:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...1500-jobs.html

Obviously you need to filter out Bob Crow's remarks, which directly
contradict the proposals (eg, they are *not* suggesting unstaffed
stations, unmanned service trains or closing every ticket office).

On Oct 24, 12:05*pm, "Recliner" wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message







Just came across this on BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15422882

Can't help thinking that Tfl are being a bit optimistic if they think
that only 20% of trains will be manually operated by 2017 and all
lines will have fully remote train operations by 2020. *Would that not
require completely new trains track and signalling on the affected
lines?

The only "fully remote" metro I have used is the VAL system in Lille,
and the trains there are far too small to be able to cope with the
crowds in London. *"Fully remote" operation would require platform
edge doors at every station, and I would be very surprised if that
could be achieved in 9 years, given current budget constraints.

Ticket office closures, reductions in hours and job losses are more
likely though (I would have thought) However given TfL's recent
experience with the unions, this is more likely to happen gradually
over a number of years rather than in one fell swoop.

I don't think it suggests unmanned trains, just that DLR-style operation
would spread across other lines as new automated trains are introduced.
All existing LU trains from the 1992 stock onwards are capable of being
driven automatically, and the driver's role is already reduced to that
of the door close button operator, something that could be done just as
well from control stations anywhere along the train, and not just from a
closed cab. Once the 1972 and 73 stocks have been replaced, there won't
be any remaining pure manual LU trains.

Automatically driven trains have been in use in other places for decades
(eg, Vancouver's Skytrain,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_%28Vancouver%29)

See the longer version of this story in the Telegraph:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ansport/884524...

Obviously you need to filter out Bob Crow's remarks, which directly
contradict the proposals (eg, they are *not* suggesting unstaffed
stations, unmanned service trains or closing every ticket office).- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I take your point about automated trains - and indeed trains on the
Victoria Line have always been automated. However, the rolling stock
has been built on the assumption that there will be someone in the cab
to press the start button etc. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't
think it is a simple matter to adapt these trains so that this
operation can be performed remotely from a control centre.

Perhaps what they are talking about is that future new rolling stock
will be built so that it is like the current DLR trains, whereby the
door closing and opening can be done from anywhere along the train.
However, all DLR trains can be driven manually if required so this
feature would have to be incorporated into tube rolling stock.

"Paul" wrote in message

On Oct 24, 12:05 pm, "Recliner" wrote:
"Paul" wrote in message







Just came across this on BBC News

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-15422882

Can't help thinking that Tfl are being a bit optimistic if they
think that only 20% of trains will be manually operated by 2017 and
all lines will have fully remote train operations by 2020. Would
that not require completely new trains track and signalling on the
affected lines?

The only "fully remote" metro I have used is the VAL system in
Lille, and the trains there are far too small to be able to cope
with the crowds in London. "Fully remote" operation would require
platform edge doors at every station, and I would be very surprised
if that could be achieved in 9 years, given current budget
constraints.

Ticket office closures, reductions in hours and job losses are more
likely though (I would have thought) However given TfL's recent
experience with the unions, this is more likely to happen gradually
over a number of years rather than in one fell swoop.

I don't think it suggests unmanned trains, just that DLR-style
operation
would spread across other lines as new automated trains are
introduced.
All existing LU trains from the 1992 stock onwards are capable of
being
driven automatically, and the driver's role is already reduced to
that
of the door close button operator, something that could be done just
as
well from control stations anywhere along the train, and not just
from a
closed cab. Once the 1972 and 73 stocks have been replaced, there
won't
be any remaining pure manual LU trains.

Automatically driven trains have been in use in other places for
decades (eg, Vancouver's
Skytrain,http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SkyTrain_%28Vancouver%29)

See the longer version of this story in the
Telegraph:http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...ansport/884524...

Obviously you need to filter out Bob Crow's remarks, which directly
contradict the proposals (eg, they are *not* suggesting unstaffed
stations, unmanned service trains or closing every ticket office).-
Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

I take your point about automated trains - and indeed trains on the
Victoria Line have always been automated. However, the rolling stock
has been built on the assumption that there will be someone in the cab
to press the start button etc. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don't
think it is a simple matter to adapt these trains so that this
operation can be performed remotely from a control centre.

Perhaps what they are talking about is that future new rolling stock
will be built so that it is like the current DLR trains, whereby the
door closing and opening can be done from anywhere along the train.
However, all DLR trains can be driven manually if required so this
feature would have to be incorporated into tube rolling stock.

Yes, that's pretty much what it says. I think the operator will still
be in charge of closing the doors, but won't normally sit in the cab (in
fact, future trains may not have a cab as such). There would be control
stations along the train, just as in the DLR, so the operator can move
along the train, closing the doors from any of the several/many control
points (obviously a key will be needed). This isn't all that different
to the old guard's positions that used to be located in passenger
saloons.

No doubt, manual driving will still be possible, just as in the DLR, but
this will probably be only used in emergencies, and at restricted speed.

Existing (modern) rolling stock would be modified to work the same way,
with door closing buttons fitted in, say, one or two doors on each side
of each car, so the operator could be stationed in any car of the train
(and in emergencies, this could also be done remotely, say by a
dispatcher on the platform). This work would presumably be carried out
as part of a mid-life heavy overhaul of the 1995/6 stocks (I assume the
1992 stock would probably be replaced by the new Picc/Bakerloo stock
build rather than modified). I assume that the new Victoria line stock
has been built this requirement in mind.

Obviously what Bob Crow doesn't like is that this de-skills the train
drivers, thus reducing their negotiating power. Many more staff could be
provided with the necessary training, so drivers wouldn't achieve much
by striking.

In message
, at
06:10:54 on Mon, 24 Oct 2011, David F remarked:
I don't mean this facetiously, but what skills does a train driver
need? I was always under the impression that they just pressed "go"
and the train went to the next station, where they pressed the door
open/close button a couple of times.

Is there skill to driving a train? Or, is it more a case of being
equipped and qualified to deal with emergencies?

It depends on the line. Many of them still need drivers who decide what
speed to go, when to pass signals, and where to stop.

Ironically (unless it's been automated now) the "where to stop" seems to
be most crucial at stations like on the Jubilee with PEDs.
--
Roland Perry

"David F" wrote in message

On Oct 24, 1:14 pm, "Recliner" wrote:

Obviously what Bob Crow doesn't like is that this de-skills the
train drivers

I don't mean this facetiously, but what skills does a train driver
need? I was always under the impression that they just pressed "go"
and the train went to the next station, where they pressed the door
open/close button a couple of times.

Actually, I think they only have to close the doors; they open
themselves when the train has arrived at the next platform.


Is there skill to driving a train? Or, is it more a case of being
equipped and qualified to deal with emergencies?

Remember that most LU lines still have manually driven trains, so they
probably do need genuine skills and route knowledge. I gather the
training takes several months, so it's not trivial, but hardly
comparable to the training and experience required by an airline pilot
(who starts on less money than a Tube driver). As they do need to have
line knowledge, you can't just take a driver from one line to another
without additional training; I don't know how much of this would be
needed with fully automatic trains.

"David F" wrote in message

On Oct 24, 2:54 pm, "Recliner" wrote:
"David F" wrote in message

Remember that most LU lines still have manually driven trains, so
they probably do need genuine skills and route knowledge. I gather
the training takes several months, so it's not trivial, but hardly
comparable to the training and experience required by an airline
pilot (who starts on less money than a Tube driver). As they do need
to have line knowledge, you can't just take a driver from one line
to another without additional training; I don't know how much of
this would be needed with fully automatic trains.

I've always thought that a bus driver has a harder job than a train
driver. Learning the 'route' has to be harder.

I agree. They have to manoeuvre through traffic without any sort of
automation, remember the route and which stops apply, take the fares,
watch out for unruly pax, etc -- much more than a Tube driver. And they
earn much less.

"Recliner" wrote in message
...

Yes, that's pretty much what it says. I think the operator will still be
in charge of closing the doors, but won't normally sit in the cab (in
fact, future trains may not have a cab as such).

OTOH all the trains currently being introduced check the doors by using a
bank of CCTV monitors in the cab, with the pictures provided by fixed
cameras all the way down the platform. They aren't likely to replicate that
feature at a number of positions all the way down the train, so even with
full ATO, I expect the proposed DLR style 'door closer' is still going to
sit in the cab.

IIRC the DLR operators often use the front seat and observe the platform
mirrors when the platforms are at their most crowded anyway...

Paul S

"Paul Scott" wrote in message

"Recliner" wrote in message
...

Yes, that's pretty much what it says. I think the operator will
still be in charge of closing the doors, but won't normally sit in
the cab (in fact, future trains may not have a cab as such).

OTOH all the trains currently being introduced check the doors by
using a bank of CCTV monitors in the cab, with the pictures provided
by fixed cameras all the way down the platform. They aren't likely
to replicate that feature at a number of positions all the way down
the train, so even with full ATO, I expect the proposed DLR style
'door closer' is still going to sit in the cab.

Yes, I wondered about that. Of course, from a centre position, the
operator could probably see all the doors anyway on a straight platform.
So perhaps the controls would, at most, be placed at a couple of
positions down the train, as well as at the cab end (where there would
obviously be additional controls locked away in a cabinet).

On Mon, 24 Oct 2011 06:10:54 -0700, David F wrote:

Is there skill to driving a train? Or, is it more a case of being
equipped and qualified to deal with emergencies?

Will these automated trains be able to run non-stop at maximum line
speeds when a failed unbraked rail grinder being recovered wrong-line
breaks away from the towing train on a rising gradient?

Having said that, most of the accidents that have happened on the rail
network in recent years seem to have been down to human error, and I'm
beginning to conclude that removing humans from the loop could, for
example, eliminate spads completely.

The problem is to code the control systems for all eventualities.

Rgds

Denis McMahon