Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:36:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 13.03.16 0:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 23:21:45 +0000, "
wrote:

On 12.03.16 23:00, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 10.03.16 10:29, Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:45, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:11:54 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 09/03/2016 19:39, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:01:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:

[snip]

What about self-driving trains? Will these developments bring this
prospect closer?


They've been here since the 60s, first the Victoria line, then the DLR
and various VAL systems in France.

Indeed, but not on the national rail network. Will the technology
ever allow high speed express trains to run without drivers?


Could do it tomorrow[1] if the political will and funding were there.

The plan is for the trains on the Thameslink core (roughly London Bridge
to Kentish Town I think) to be run automatically, albeit with a driver
sitting at the front not doing much, when the Thameslink-2000 project is
complete in a few years time. The argument seems to be that computers
can run trains just a bit faster than the average driver (though I
suppose it is the reaction time of the slowest driver which will
influence the overall flow rate through the core).

The name of the project gives away the fact that it is over-running just
a tad, but as far as I know the automation bit hasn't caused this.

It's not been called Thameslink 2000 for many years now. And the delays
have nothing to do with the automation. Politicians and the Olympics played
the biggest part in the delays.

There were a number of big sub-projects that should have been run in
parallel, but were run serially, such as the rebuilding of four stations
(SPILL, Farringdon, Blackfriars and London Bridge) and the new Borough
viaduct. And the DfT was late in ordering the trains, using a PPP approach,
which is both inflexible and expensive, and which probably contributed to
the trains being built in Germany rather than the UK. The Olympics meant
that all work had to be suspended for the best part of a year.

The Elizabeth line trains will also be driven automatically in the core
section, as are several of the Tube lines.

Will the doors on Lizzie trains automatically open when properly berthed
in stations? That happens now on the Northern and Jubilee lines, does it
not?


And on the Central and Victoria lines, surely?

Can't speak for the Victoria Line, but I thought that drivers on the
Central Line still opened the doors.

AFAIAA they all still require driver action to prevent doors being
opened when undesirable to do so (e.g. station full of smoke,
passengers needing to be detained etc.).


Yes, I imagine that there would be an override of some sort.

I actually meant e.g. "still require driver action to allow the doors
to open to prevent...". A distinct delay between stopping and the
doors opening seems much more common than the doors opening almost as
soon as a train stops.


I'm pretty sure the doors open automatically when an automatically-driven
LU train stops.

The operator's job is only to close the doors, after which the train
departs automatically, runs automatically, stops automatically, and opens
the doors automatically.

Clearly, the onerous job of closing the doors could also be automated, as
it is with lifts or airport shuttles, or it could be delegated to a manned
central control room with a view of the platform using multiple CCTV
screens. One such central door closer could substitute for at least five if
not ten 'drivers', who are no more than mobile door closers. Not only do
you save the cost of the almost-redundant drivers, but you also get space
for at least 4-5 extra paying passengers at each end of the train.

On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:36:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 13.03.16 0:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 23:21:45 +0000, "
wrote:

On 12.03.16 23:00, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 10.03.16 10:29, Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:45, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:11:54 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 09/03/2016 19:39, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:01:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:

[snip]

What about self-driving trains? Will these developments bring this
prospect closer?


They've been here since the 60s, first the Victoria line, then the DLR
and various VAL systems in France.

Indeed, but not on the national rail network. Will the technology
ever allow high speed express trains to run without drivers?


Could do it tomorrow[1] if the political will and funding were there.

The plan is for the trains on the Thameslink core (roughly London Bridge
to Kentish Town I think) to be run automatically, albeit with a driver
sitting at the front not doing much, when the Thameslink-2000 project is
complete in a few years time. The argument seems to be that computers
can run trains just a bit faster than the average driver (though I
suppose it is the reaction time of the slowest driver which will
influence the overall flow rate through the core).

The name of the project gives away the fact that it is over-running just
a tad, but as far as I know the automation bit hasn't caused this.

It's not been called Thameslink 2000 for many years now. And the delays
have nothing to do with the automation. Politicians and the Olympics played
the biggest part in the delays.

There were a number of big sub-projects that should have been run in
parallel, but were run serially, such as the rebuilding of four stations
(SPILL, Farringdon, Blackfriars and London Bridge) and the new Borough
viaduct. And the DfT was late in ordering the trains, using a PPP approach,
which is both inflexible and expensive, and which probably contributed to
the trains being built in Germany rather than the UK. The Olympics meant
that all work had to be suspended for the best part of a year.

The Elizabeth line trains will also be driven automatically in the core
section, as are several of the Tube lines.

Will the doors on Lizzie trains automatically open when properly berthed
in stations? That happens now on the Northern and Jubilee lines, does it
not?


And on the Central and Victoria lines, surely?

Can't speak for the Victoria Line, but I thought that drivers on the
Central Line still opened the doors.

AFAIAA they all still require driver action to prevent doors being
opened when undesirable to do so (e.g. station full of smoke,
passengers needing to be detained etc.).


Yes, I imagine that there would be an override of some sort.

I actually meant e.g. "still require driver action to allow the doors
to open to prevent...". A distinct delay between stopping and the
doors opening seems much more common than the doors opening almost as
soon as a train stops.


I'm pretty sure the doors open automatically when an automatically-driven
LU train stops.

The operator's job is only to close the doors, after which the train
departs automatically, runs automatically, stops automatically, and opens
the doors automatically.

When did that change ? The drivers seemed to be still opening the
doors back in 2012 :-
http://districtdavesforum.co.uk/thre...s?page=4&page=

Clearly, the onerous job of closing the doors could also be automated,

A machine can't e.g. request that the BTP constables in coach five
make themselves useful by giving an offending door a kick.

as
it is with lifts or airport shuttles, or it could be delegated to a manned
central control room with a view of the platform using multiple CCTV
screens. One such central door closer could substitute for at least five if
not ten 'drivers', who are no more than mobile door closers. Not only do
you save the cost of the almost-redundant drivers, but you also get space
for at least 4-5 extra paying passengers at each end of the train.

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:36:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 13.03.16 0:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 23:21:45 +0000, "
wrote:

On 12.03.16 23:00, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 10.03.16 10:29, Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:45, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:11:54 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 09/03/2016 19:39, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:01:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:

[snip]

What about self-driving trains? Will these developments bring this
prospect closer?


They've been here since the 60s, first the Victoria line, then the DLR
and various VAL systems in France.

Indeed, but not on the national rail network. Will the technology
ever allow high speed express trains to run without drivers?


Could do it tomorrow[1] if the political will and funding were there.

The plan is for the trains on the Thameslink core (roughly London Bridge
to Kentish Town I think) to be run automatically, albeit with a driver
sitting at the front not doing much, when the Thameslink-2000 project is
complete in a few years time. The argument seems to be that computers
can run trains just a bit faster than the average driver (though I
suppose it is the reaction time of the slowest driver which will
influence the overall flow rate through the core).

The name of the project gives away the fact that it is over-running just
a tad, but as far as I know the automation bit hasn't caused this.

It's not been called Thameslink 2000 for many years now. And the delays
have nothing to do with the automation. Politicians and the Olympics played
the biggest part in the delays.

There were a number of big sub-projects that should have been run in
parallel, but were run serially, such as the rebuilding of four stations
(SPILL, Farringdon, Blackfriars and London Bridge) and the new Borough
viaduct. And the DfT was late in ordering the trains, using a PPP approach,
which is both inflexible and expensive, and which probably contributed to
the trains being built in Germany rather than the UK. The Olympics meant
that all work had to be suspended for the best part of a year.

The Elizabeth line trains will also be driven automatically in the core
section, as are several of the Tube lines.

Will the doors on Lizzie trains automatically open when properly berthed
in stations? That happens now on the Northern and Jubilee lines, does it
not?


And on the Central and Victoria lines, surely?

Can't speak for the Victoria Line, but I thought that drivers on the
Central Line still opened the doors.

AFAIAA they all still require driver action to prevent doors being
opened when undesirable to do so (e.g. station full of smoke,
passengers needing to be detained etc.).


Yes, I imagine that there would be an override of some sort.

I actually meant e.g. "still require driver action to allow the doors
to open to prevent...". A distinct delay between stopping and the
doors opening seems much more common than the doors opening almost as
soon as a train stops.


I'm pretty sure the doors open automatically when an automatically-driven
LU train stops.

The operator's job is only to close the doors, after which the train
departs automatically, runs automatically, stops automatically, and opens
the doors automatically.

When did that change ? The drivers seemed to be still opening the
doors back in 2012 :-
http://districtdavesforum.co.uk/thre...s?page=4&page=


It confirms what I said:
"With regard to automatic opening of the doors on the jubilee, what is the
actual point of taking away another safety critical responsibility from the
drivers while they are still here? Dwell times apparently but all your
(sic) going to do is save about a nano second that it would take for the
driver to just press open."


Clearly, the onerous job of closing the doors could also be automated,

A machine can't e.g. request that the BTP constables in coach five
make themselves useful by giving an offending door a kick.

And how often does that happen? Would the �driver" (button pusher) know
any BTP constables were on board? And would that be any better than asking
the pax in coach five to stop leaning on the door, as they actually do now?

In any case, why does the person who makes such a decision have to be
travelling around, mostly doing nothing, on the front of a train? The
remote operator would be much better placed in a central control room,
where they have direct access to the BTP and the line controller.

On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:44:55 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:36:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 13.03.16 0:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 23:21:45 +0000, "
wrote:

On 12.03.16 23:00, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 10.03.16 10:29, Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:45, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:11:54 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 09/03/2016 19:39, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:01:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:

[snip]

What about self-driving trains? Will these developments bring this
prospect closer?


They've been here since the 60s, first the Victoria line, then the DLR
and various VAL systems in France.

Indeed, but not on the national rail network. Will the technology
ever allow high speed express trains to run without drivers?


Could do it tomorrow[1] if the political will and funding were there.

The plan is for the trains on the Thameslink core (roughly London Bridge
to Kentish Town I think) to be run automatically, albeit with a driver
sitting at the front not doing much, when the Thameslink-2000 project is
complete in a few years time. The argument seems to be that computers
can run trains just a bit faster than the average driver (though I
suppose it is the reaction time of the slowest driver which will
influence the overall flow rate through the core).

The name of the project gives away the fact that it is over-running just
a tad, but as far as I know the automation bit hasn't caused this.

It's not been called Thameslink 2000 for many years now. And the delays
have nothing to do with the automation. Politicians and the Olympics played
the biggest part in the delays.

There were a number of big sub-projects that should have been run in
parallel, but were run serially, such as the rebuilding of four stations
(SPILL, Farringdon, Blackfriars and London Bridge) and the new Borough
viaduct. And the DfT was late in ordering the trains, using a PPP approach,
which is both inflexible and expensive, and which probably contributed to
the trains being built in Germany rather than the UK. The Olympics meant
that all work had to be suspended for the best part of a year.

The Elizabeth line trains will also be driven automatically in the core
section, as are several of the Tube lines.

Will the doors on Lizzie trains automatically open when properly berthed
in stations? That happens now on the Northern and Jubilee lines, does it
not?


And on the Central and Victoria lines, surely?

Can't speak for the Victoria Line, but I thought that drivers on the
Central Line still opened the doors.

AFAIAA they all still require driver action to prevent doors being
opened when undesirable to do so (e.g. station full of smoke,
passengers needing to be detained etc.).


Yes, I imagine that there would be an override of some sort.

I actually meant e.g. "still require driver action to allow the doors
to open to prevent...". A distinct delay between stopping and the
doors opening seems much more common than the doors opening almost as
soon as a train stops.


I'm pretty sure the doors open automatically when an automatically-driven
LU train stops.

The operator's job is only to close the doors, after which the train
departs automatically, runs automatically, stops automatically, and opens
the doors automatically.

When did that change ? The drivers seemed to be still opening the
doors back in 2012 :-
http://districtdavesforum.co.uk/thre...s?page=4&page=


It confirms what I said:
"With regard to automatic opening of the doors on the jubilee, what is the
actual point of taking away another safety critical responsibility from the
drivers while they are still here? Dwell times apparently but all your
(sic) going to do is save about a nano second that it would take for the
driver to just press open."

I'm reading that as the function still being performed by the driver
but management wanting to change it. There can be various reasons for
opening the doors requiring permission from the driver, especially
where there are no platform staff present.


Clearly, the onerous job of closing the doors could also be automated,

A machine can't e.g. request that the BTP constables in coach five
make themselves useful by giving an offending door a kick.

And how often does that happen?

Doors not shutting first time ? At least once a week IME.

Would the ”driver" (button pusher) know any BTP constables were on board?

That one did.

And would that be any better than asking
the pax in coach five to stop leaning on the door, as they actually do now?

They don't always get that right.

In any case, why does the person who makes such a decision have to be
travelling around, mostly doing nothing, on the front of a train?

It's better than waiting for him/her to arrive from Neasden in a taxi
when something goes wrong.

The
remote operator would be much better placed in a central control room,
where they have direct access to the BTP and the line controller.

On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 02:44:55 -0000 (UTC)
Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
It confirms what I said:
"With regard to automatic opening of the doors on the jubilee, what is the
actual point of taking away another safety critical responsibility from the
drivers while they are still here? Dwell times apparently but all your
(sic) going to do is save about a nano second that it would take for the
driver to just press open."

In theory. In reality the odd driver can sometimes be quite tardy opening the
doors. Obviously busy doing some other vitally important task to justify his
50K salary.

In any case, why does the person who makes such a decision have to be
travelling around, mostly doing nothing, on the front of a train? The
remote operator would be much better placed in a central control room,
where they have direct access to the BTP and the line controller.

To be fair, you need boots on the ground if there's an incident on the tube
and pax have to be evacuated. Its perhaps not as important on brand new metros
where the doors can be opened in the tunnel onto a nice wide walkway where
everyone can easily walk to the nearest station without assistance. In the
deep tube where you have to evac from the front of the train its another
matter.

--
Spud

On 14.03.16 1:52, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:36:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 13.03.16 0:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 23:21:45 +0000, "
wrote:

On 12.03.16 23:00, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 10.03.16 10:29, Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:45, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:11:54 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 09/03/2016 19:39, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:01:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:

[snip]

What about self-driving trains? Will these developments bring this
prospect closer?


They've been here since the 60s, first the Victoria line, then the DLR
and various VAL systems in France.

Indeed, but not on the national rail network. Will the technology
ever allow high speed express trains to run without drivers?


Could do it tomorrow[1] if the political will and funding were there.

The plan is for the trains on the Thameslink core (roughly London Bridge
to Kentish Town I think) to be run automatically, albeit with a driver
sitting at the front not doing much, when the Thameslink-2000 project is
complete in a few years time. The argument seems to be that computers
can run trains just a bit faster than the average driver (though I
suppose it is the reaction time of the slowest driver which will
influence the overall flow rate through the core).

The name of the project gives away the fact that it is over-running just
a tad, but as far as I know the automation bit hasn't caused this.

It's not been called Thameslink 2000 for many years now. And the delays
have nothing to do with the automation. Politicians and the Olympics played
the biggest part in the delays.

There were a number of big sub-projects that should have been run in
parallel, but were run serially, such as the rebuilding of four stations
(SPILL, Farringdon, Blackfriars and London Bridge) and the new Borough
viaduct. And the DfT was late in ordering the trains, using a PPP approach,
which is both inflexible and expensive, and which probably contributed to
the trains being built in Germany rather than the UK. The Olympics meant
that all work had to be suspended for the best part of a year.

The Elizabeth line trains will also be driven automatically in the core
section, as are several of the Tube lines.

Will the doors on Lizzie trains automatically open when properly berthed
in stations? That happens now on the Northern and Jubilee lines, does it
not?


And on the Central and Victoria lines, surely?

Can't speak for the Victoria Line, but I thought that drivers on the
Central Line still opened the doors.

AFAIAA they all still require driver action to prevent doors being
opened when undesirable to do so (e.g. station full of smoke,
passengers needing to be detained etc.).


Yes, I imagine that there would be an override of some sort.

I actually meant e.g. "still require driver action to allow the doors
to open to prevent...". A distinct delay between stopping and the
doors opening seems much more common than the doors opening almost as
soon as a train stops.


I'm pretty sure the doors open automatically when an automatically-driven
LU train stops.

The operator's job is only to close the doors, after which the train
departs automatically, runs automatically, stops automatically, and opens
the doors automatically.

The train does not automatically depart, but rather requires positive
action from the driver, regardless of which line.

On 14.03.16 2:33, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:36:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 13.03.16 0:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 23:21:45 +0000, "
wrote:

On 12.03.16 23:00, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 10.03.16 10:29, Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:45, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:11:54 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 09/03/2016 19:39, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:01:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:

[snip]

What about self-driving trains? Will these developments bring this
prospect closer?


They've been here since the 60s, first the Victoria line, then the DLR
and various VAL systems in France.

Indeed, but not on the national rail network. Will the technology
ever allow high speed express trains to run without drivers?


Could do it tomorrow[1] if the political will and funding were there.

The plan is for the trains on the Thameslink core (roughly London Bridge
to Kentish Town I think) to be run automatically, albeit with a driver
sitting at the front not doing much, when the Thameslink-2000 project is
complete in a few years time. The argument seems to be that computers
can run trains just a bit faster than the average driver (though I
suppose it is the reaction time of the slowest driver which will
influence the overall flow rate through the core).

The name of the project gives away the fact that it is over-running just
a tad, but as far as I know the automation bit hasn't caused this.

It's not been called Thameslink 2000 for many years now. And the delays
have nothing to do with the automation. Politicians and the Olympics played
the biggest part in the delays.

There were a number of big sub-projects that should have been run in
parallel, but were run serially, such as the rebuilding of four stations
(SPILL, Farringdon, Blackfriars and London Bridge) and the new Borough
viaduct. And the DfT was late in ordering the trains, using a PPP approach,
which is both inflexible and expensive, and which probably contributed to
the trains being built in Germany rather than the UK. The Olympics meant
that all work had to be suspended for the best part of a year.

The Elizabeth line trains will also be driven automatically in the core
section, as are several of the Tube lines.

Will the doors on Lizzie trains automatically open when properly berthed
in stations? That happens now on the Northern and Jubilee lines, does it
not?


And on the Central and Victoria lines, surely?

Can't speak for the Victoria Line, but I thought that drivers on the
Central Line still opened the doors.

AFAIAA they all still require driver action to prevent doors being
opened when undesirable to do so (e.g. station full of smoke,
passengers needing to be detained etc.).


Yes, I imagine that there would be an override of some sort.

I actually meant e.g. "still require driver action to allow the doors
to open to prevent...". A distinct delay between stopping and the
doors opening seems much more common than the doors opening almost as
soon as a train stops.


I'm pretty sure the doors open automatically when an automatically-driven
LU train stops.

The operator's job is only to close the doors, after which the train
departs automatically, runs automatically, stops automatically, and opens
the doors automatically.

When did that change ? The drivers seemed to be still opening the
doors back in 2012 :-
http://districtdavesforum.co.uk/thre...s?page=4&page=

AIUI, Northern and Jubilee trains automatically open their doors. Vic
and Central still require positive action.

On 14.03.16 2:44, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:36:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 13.03.16 0:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 23:21:45 +0000, "
wrote:

On 12.03.16 23:00, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 10.03.16 10:29, Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:45, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:11:54 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 09/03/2016 19:39, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:01:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:

[snip]

What about self-driving trains? Will these developments bring this
prospect closer?


They've been here since the 60s, first the Victoria line, then the DLR
and various VAL systems in France.

Indeed, but not on the national rail network. Will the technology
ever allow high speed express trains to run without drivers?


Could do it tomorrow[1] if the political will and funding were there.

The plan is for the trains on the Thameslink core (roughly London Bridge
to Kentish Town I think) to be run automatically, albeit with a driver
sitting at the front not doing much, when the Thameslink-2000 project is
complete in a few years time. The argument seems to be that computers
can run trains just a bit faster than the average driver (though I
suppose it is the reaction time of the slowest driver which will
influence the overall flow rate through the core).

The name of the project gives away the fact that it is over-running just
a tad, but as far as I know the automation bit hasn't caused this.

It's not been called Thameslink 2000 for many years now. And the delays
have nothing to do with the automation. Politicians and the Olympics played
the biggest part in the delays.

There were a number of big sub-projects that should have been run in
parallel, but were run serially, such as the rebuilding of four stations
(SPILL, Farringdon, Blackfriars and London Bridge) and the new Borough
viaduct. And the DfT was late in ordering the trains, using a PPP approach,
which is both inflexible and expensive, and which probably contributed to
the trains being built in Germany rather than the UK. The Olympics meant
that all work had to be suspended for the best part of a year.

The Elizabeth line trains will also be driven automatically in the core
section, as are several of the Tube lines.

Will the doors on Lizzie trains automatically open when properly berthed
in stations? That happens now on the Northern and Jubilee lines, does it
not?


And on the Central and Victoria lines, surely?

Can't speak for the Victoria Line, but I thought that drivers on the
Central Line still opened the doors.

AFAIAA they all still require driver action to prevent doors being
opened when undesirable to do so (e.g. station full of smoke,
passengers needing to be detained etc.).


Yes, I imagine that there would be an override of some sort.

I actually meant e.g. "still require driver action to allow the doors
to open to prevent...". A distinct delay between stopping and the
doors opening seems much more common than the doors opening almost as
soon as a train stops.


I'm pretty sure the doors open automatically when an automatically-driven
LU train stops.

The operator's job is only to close the doors, after which the train
departs automatically, runs automatically, stops automatically, and opens
the doors automatically.

When did that change ? The drivers seemed to be still opening the
doors back in 2012 :-
http://districtdavesforum.co.uk/thre...s?page=4&page=


It confirms what I said:
"With regard to automatic opening of the doors on the jubilee, what is the
actual point of taking away another safety critical responsibility from the
drivers while they are still here? Dwell times apparently but all your
(sic) going to do is save about a nano second that it would take for the
driver to just press open."


Clearly, the onerous job of closing the doors could also be automated,

A machine can't e.g. request that the BTP constables in coach five
make themselves useful by giving an offending door a kick.

And how often does that happen? Would the �driver" (button pusher) know
any BTP constables were on board? And would that be any better than asking
the pax in coach five to stop leaning on the door, as they actually do now?

I've seen that on the Central and I have heard of that on the Northern.
Why is that, and how would simply leaning on the doors impact the
interlocking?

On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 22:19:58 +0000, "
wrote:

On 14.03.16 2:44, Recliner wrote:
Charles Ellson wrote:
On Mon, 14 Mar 2016 01:52:47 -0000 (UTC), Recliner
wrote:

Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sun, 13 Mar 2016 12:36:43 +0000, "
wrote:

On 13.03.16 0:57, Charles Ellson wrote:
On Sat, 12 Mar 2016 23:21:45 +0000, "
wrote:

On 12.03.16 23:00, Recliner wrote:
wrote:
On 10.03.16 10:29, Recliner wrote:
Clive Page wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:48, Graeme Wall wrote:
On 09/03/2016 20:45, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:11:54 +0000, Graeme Wall
wrote:

On 09/03/2016 19:39, Scott wrote:
On Wed, 9 Mar 2016 08:01:42 -0800 (PST), wrote:

[snip]

What about self-driving trains? Will these developments bring this
prospect closer?


They've been here since the 60s, first the Victoria line, then the DLR
and various VAL systems in France.

Indeed, but not on the national rail network. Will the technology
ever allow high speed express trains to run without drivers?


Could do it tomorrow[1] if the political will and funding were there.

The plan is for the trains on the Thameslink core (roughly London Bridge
to Kentish Town I think) to be run automatically, albeit with a driver
sitting at the front not doing much, when the Thameslink-2000 project is
complete in a few years time. The argument seems to be that computers
can run trains just a bit faster than the average driver (though I
suppose it is the reaction time of the slowest driver which will
influence the overall flow rate through the core).

The name of the project gives away the fact that it is over-running just
a tad, but as far as I know the automation bit hasn't caused this.

It's not been called Thameslink 2000 for many years now. And the delays
have nothing to do with the automation. Politicians and the Olympics played
the biggest part in the delays.

There were a number of big sub-projects that should have been run in
parallel, but were run serially, such as the rebuilding of four stations
(SPILL, Farringdon, Blackfriars and London Bridge) and the new Borough
viaduct. And the DfT was late in ordering the trains, using a PPP approach,
which is both inflexible and expensive, and which probably contributed to
the trains being built in Germany rather than the UK. The Olympics meant
that all work had to be suspended for the best part of a year.

The Elizabeth line trains will also be driven automatically in the core
section, as are several of the Tube lines.

Will the doors on Lizzie trains automatically open when properly berthed
in stations? That happens now on the Northern and Jubilee lines, does it
not?


And on the Central and Victoria lines, surely?

Can't speak for the Victoria Line, but I thought that drivers on the
Central Line still opened the doors.

AFAIAA they all still require driver action to prevent doors being
opened when undesirable to do so (e.g. station full of smoke,
passengers needing to be detained etc.).


Yes, I imagine that there would be an override of some sort.

I actually meant e.g. "still require driver action to allow the doors
to open to prevent...". A distinct delay between stopping and the
doors opening seems much more common than the doors opening almost as
soon as a train stops.


I'm pretty sure the doors open automatically when an automatically-driven
LU train stops.

The operator's job is only to close the doors, after which the train
departs automatically, runs automatically, stops automatically, and opens
the doors automatically.

When did that change ? The drivers seemed to be still opening the
doors back in 2012 :-
http://districtdavesforum.co.uk/thre...s?page=4&page=


It confirms what I said:
"With regard to automatic opening of the doors on the jubilee, what is the
actual point of taking away another safety critical responsibility from the
drivers while they are still here? Dwell times apparently but all your
(sic) going to do is save about a nano second that it would take for the
driver to just press open."


Clearly, the onerous job of closing the doors could also be automated,

A machine can't e.g. request that the BTP constables in coach five
make themselves useful by giving an offending door a kick.

And how often does that happen? Would the ”driver" (button pusher) know
any BTP constables were on board? And would that be any better than asking
the pax in coach five to stop leaning on the door, as they actually do now?

I've seen that on the Central and I have heard of that on the Northern.
Why is that, and how would simply leaning on the doors impact the
interlocking?

Some modern stock seems to be very sensitive WRT edge/obstruction
detection. It might not necessarily be leaning on a door causing the
problem rather than causing sufficient brief impedance to free travel
to be detected as an obstruction which on older stock would merely
have briefly delayed an otherwise normal closure.
A slightly different problem but IME doors on the Central Line seem to
snap shut so fast that carried bags or backpacks are easily trapped;
on other stock with slower doors the same passengers would get in
complete with luggage while those following are still discouraged from
jumping through the closing gap.

On Tue, 15 Mar 2016 00:49:29 +0000
Charles Ellson wrote:
Some modern stock seems to be very sensitive WRT edge/obstruction
detection. It might not necessarily be leaning on a door causing the
problem rather than causing sufficient brief impedance to free travel
to be detected as an obstruction which on older stock would merely
have briefly delayed an otherwise normal closure.

I've noticed this on the victoria line happening quite a lot. Unfortunately
instead of selectively re-opening the offending door - which they can do - the
trained chimp at the front just keeps repeating over the tannoy to mind the
doors. If the person could have "minded the doors" with their bags or whatever
at that point they would have done. Quite often this goes on for over a minute
until the chimps lonely braincell finally clocks that maybe re-opening the door
might sort the problem. Which is almost always does.

--
Spud