Control rooms

Well if Robert Dell had not been the Signal Engineer things would have been much better in that the Underground signalling would have been upgraded a lot quicker and we would not have stuck with programe machines which use old electronics which can only be got off ebay ;D

Secretaries ? Thats old hat they are called Support Managers ;D

All in one building?
What would happen if there was a fire?

As someone who has worked in both signalling and line control rooms, and has visited the other rooms on our combine, I have to say the better rooms are those where the controller and signaller are separate.

There are numerous conversations needed to take place each shift between the 2 grades, and having them in the same room generally means the quickest way to pass a message is to talk. Well, shout really. Noise levels soon creep up - especially during disruption.

Compare this to places such as Baker Street where, especially in the SCC, the noise level is such you could almost hear a pin drop at times.

This would be very unwise especially in todays climate, there must be an alternative control but to be separate from each line is much better.

All service controllers have secondary locations (with admittedly very basic facilities) should there be a need to evacuate their usual location.

The current train of thought (no pun intended) is that controllers and signallers become a shared role within a single room (ie, on Monday you might be on a signalling desk, Tuesday & Wednesday a controller then back to signaller on Thursday & Friday), though I suspect that may be getting quietly dropped judging by the stalling of current controller training. This is the way in which the Central line control room operates.

The Bakerloo's controllers are also their signallers (on the LU section), though they're different to the Central line as they do both roles at the same time so they're perhaps more like Network Rail signallers.

The District is now the same as the Met (quite literally as there's only a corridor between them) whereby the controllers are remote from signallers in control rooms & cabins.

Northern has separate signaller & controller roles but they're all in the same room. The Victoria line used to be the same, and in the very same room too, but they've now moved out.

The Picc is similar to the Northern, though their controllers do get involved in the signalling at the east end of the line in a separate room. They also have one cabin to deal with.

What does that leave? Oh yeah, Jubilee... I haven't actually been to their control room, but I believe it to be similar to the Northern set up; the exception being that signalling Stanmore to Charing Cross is worked in a remote location.

The upshot is that different lines do it different ways. Maybe it works better like that and the uniform approach isn't the right one

EDIT: Line managers on site? They are!! Service Managers (DOM or Duty Operations Manager in old money) are located in the same building as their controllers and will be in the control room during large incidents.

Switching between the two (old & new) has been going on for some months.

I am aware that they've had teething troubles with the new, but I had assumed they'd now sorted them out and had actually moved over fully. Presumably that's not the case then....

Do you find being in separate rooms increases workload noticeably? For example I can think of many occasions when I've witnessed the Northern Line controller shout commands or questions across to a Signal Operator, which are then immediately acted upon. Or is this balanced by the better reliability of communications being by telephone?

It's been on and off the table throughout the Hammersmith developments, and is currently "off" the table. I've always been opposed to multi-function. Better to have a handful of good signallers and controllers than 2 handfuls of people who are only good at one role but have no choice but to do both. DMTs (desk and incident) are classic examples of this. Very rarely do you find one who excels at both roles.



The Bakerloo has always been slightly different since its move to Baker Street. At one time they also used to run their own Engineering Controllers (TAC nowadays). The way in which the computer system runs the railway (identical to the Met SCC area) and the staffing needed to do that job, it always seemed to make sense to have 2 people on the desk - 1 controller, 1 signaller - who can make the decisions between them. For larger lines, and those not controlled from one location, this sort of set up doesn't fit as well.



The District will never be the same as the Met and that corridor is not just a mere corridor. It is like the boundary of 2 opposing nations ;D But I agree with the rest of the paragraph.



The Jubilee started off trying to emulate the Bakerloo set-up, with Controllers and Signallers all being able to do each others job. However, what the Jubilee management also did was refuse entry to the many experienced controllers and signallers on LU, and employed lots of inexperienced "off the street" people. It took years to get everyone trained up and able to cover (with a certain amount of confidence) each and every position.

When it comes to talking of the future, the Jubilee Line room is always mentioned as one of the cautionary tales when it comes to employing staff and when talking of setting up roles within a new room. Which is why at present Hammersmith will be taking existing staff to do the roles they currently do.



Some control rooms (the District is of note) appear to have their SMs sat on the controllers lap for much of the shift. Other control rooms (such as the Met) generally only see the SM when something is occuring, or if he is making the tea. It varies depending on the particular SM on duty.