SPADs

I agree that trains shouldn't approach stations and stop in platforms too slowly, but breaking too hard will cause unnecessary wear on breaks etc and will be very unpopular with customers. Driving style is fast becoming irrelevant though with 4 lines already running ATO and with the SSR now being upgraded running 8 in total. The Victoria achieves this extremely well with hard but smooth consistent breaking - the benefit of being all underground, the Central okay apart from in the rain. The big issue for me is the minimal breaking rate of the Jubilee and Northern to prevent SPADs and to ensure correct stopping marks.

This may be an issue with the system its self but LU should increase the breaking rate and if there is an issue - particularly in wet whether then rely upon the highly qualified drivers in the cab to manually intervene - particularly as ATO goes hand in hand with ATP. In certain locations it may be necessary to adjust breaking rates but on the whole rates should be increased. At times the 1995/6 ts breaking still reminds me of conventual signalling even with the ability to approach platforms at around 40mph. On longer lines with the most trains i.e. Northern with 96 trains in service in the peaks that could mean at least 1/2 tph increase as well as quicker journey times if trains approached platforms faster and braked harder.   

Nice to see this thread, because I wanted to ask a question about S'sPAD in another but it would have taken it off topic (again).

With respect to the impact on drivers, do LU treat a SPAD where the train passes the limit by a foot or two in the same way as one where the train overshoots from some significant distance?

If so, is this actually sensible?

Regarding Superteacher's comment above, there do seem to be some drivers who appear to be absurdly cautious entering (non terminal) stations; surely there is no need for a S-Stock running on dry rails to enter a platform at 10 mph. (Obviously I can't tell the exact speed but if I can run faster than the speed they are doing they certainly aren't going very fast!)

A SPAD is a SPAD even if the train only went past by an inch.

Regarding the treatment of them, it must be remembered that SPADs have killed people in the past, more on the mainline but on LU too. The high-profile incidents of the late 90s gave salience to the issue, and rightly or wrongly this also included LU. In the event of a serious accident management would be in serious hot water were they unable to demonstrate that there was an effective management process in place.

Ideally there should be some leeway involved to cater for misjudgements, but this is easier said than done as where do you draw the line? It’s perhaps worth adding that most SPADs don’t tend to be misjudgements, but in nearly all cases the result of something else. It perhaps doesn’t help that it’s not always easy to get to the bottom of why an incident has happened as it often relies on the driver being honest - for example personally I find it hard to believe that people read newspapers while driving, yet messroom gossip suggests this happens.

One final point, from a cynical perspective SPADs are a way of getting rid of people, often people who the company would dearly like to get rid but can’t quite touch by any other means. I can think of a fair few people who have been shifted thanks to SPADs, either moved from a depot (shifts the problem elsewhere, but resolves the issue as far as the immediate local management are concerned!) or off the handle altogether, temporarily or permanently. I’m not going to offer an opinion on the rights or wrongs of this, just suffice to say it happens.

Simple - it's a safety critical error.


A red signal is also know as a danger signal. Taking a train past one without authority is to take a train into danger.


As an instructor I absolutely disagree with you 100%

Whilst I do fully understand the principle of signalling systems dictating a given line's capacity, and that signalling system designers expect drivers to drive like a bat out of hell, we also run a passenger railway where their safety and comfort comes into play.

Bottom line though is a balance has to be struck between the expectations of signalling designers and the TOC/LU discipline system.


Most likely that drivers are simply being trained to drive defensively. As above, I know that signalling bod's don't like it, but that is how we train new and transferring drivers.


As stated above, 1mm or 1,000 metre's; it makes no difference.


Why would it not be? Fact remains that the train passed a danger signal without prior authority.


Exactly! Passing a danger signal without prior authority is already a safety critical error. If we didn't treat it with the respect it deserves it may lead to what happened at Stratford.....not once but twice!

Defensive driving doesn’t necessarily mean driving slowly, but in many cases leans more towards anticipation of hazards. There remains an expectation for trains to be driven at line speed *where appropriate*, which in reality is much of the time. Unfortunately individuals have their own interpretations of all this, with nowadays little management focus to pull together. In essence there’s little to pick up poor driving, and even less to pick up poor training.

Slow drivers might be picked up in two ways. Firstly during routine assessments by managers, but how much knowledge of line speeds and the like do managers actually have nowadays? Secondly if an individual keeps generating “lost time” items then they might be put on an action plan, but again what use if they’re put with the same instructor who taught them to drive badly in the first place?!

The general standard of driving on the Picc Line has certainly become very poor in my observation. However this doesn’t really seem to have spread to the other manual lines. Not really sure why this has happened on the Picc, I have a few thoughts but it’s probably more appropriate to keep these to myself.

I think one of the reasons for change in driving attitudes on the Piccadilly line apart from the change in attitude from a safety perspective is just the deteriorating condition of the 73 stock. You're hardly going to push a train right to line speed if you know how knackered the fleet gets every leaf fall season.

We are well and truly past the leaf fall timetable and yet the journey up the Rayners branch is arguably just as slow now. I remember in the early 2000's standing on the Eastbound platform at Hyde Park corner each Saturday with a train sighted just as the last one had left without fail every single time. You just don't get those kinds of speeds with Piccadilly anymore. 

And don't forget on the mainline TPWS isn't fail safe - it just mitigates the effects of a signal being passed.
It is also not installed at all signals - only those at which there is a higher risk.
It does not prevent accidents - there was a collision with the buffer stops a couple of weeks ago at Victoria, was there not?

I agree with my colleagues that SPaD's have to be and are taken seriously. Sometimes on the Picc, we can go almost a week without one but at my depot, we have had 3 in the past 3 days. This then causes big issues with the drivers being stood down from driving duties until they go through the action plan process. This takes up Instructor Operator time and we are busy enough with the amount of trainees coming through (we have 27 in training at the moment).

In terms of defensive driving and/or slow driving, I think in other threads there have been comments about the standard of driving. From my own observations, some of the driving is abysmal from the reckless to the tortoise. It doesn't help that instructors are left to do their own thing in terms of teaching and tend to teach exactly how they drive themselves. There really is no common approach. Driving on the Picc is somewhat interesting with the signalling system throwing us a few curved balls sometimes! Saying that, regardless of anything else, you should have your train under control at all times and be able to stop if you have to.

Now that particular area has nothing to do with the signalling or driving styles.......there's a 25mph permanent speed restriction just before the start of the tunnel


The selection process for an Instructor Operator consists of the application form which has a section requiring supporting evidence from the employing TOM (Train Operations Manager) - this includes attendance, staff errors, etc. If the TOM fails to endorse the application, it cannot proceed.

Next step is a line based written exam which covers rules & procedures, rolling stock and line geography. This is followed by a role play excercise where you take a trainee through their first day, showing them the book on process, picking up a train, demonstrating the controls and then finally putting them in the driving seat and driving the train.

If successful one will get an interview - the interview also includes technical questioning.

Once the position is gained, a new Instructor Operator must complete a coaching training course which is delivered by an outside company before they can take a trainee for the first time.

At no point is driving officially assessed as part of the selection process although in my case my TOM just so happened to be on the platform on a couple of occassions prior to completeing my application form - he wanted to satisfy himself before he gave the nod. In any case though, drivers are continuously monitored as part of the competence management system that monitors all of LU's employee's in operational roles.

So yes, to a great extent there is no consistent "this is how you drive a train". It's very much down to the individual Instructor Operators and can be something of a lottery as to whether a trainee gets a good one or a not so good one - there are good and bad in all grades of staff - but I have to say that on the District line we have a very good team of Instructor Operators who talk to each other and share what they know across the line.

The District seems to have benefited from having an excellent LSM for some years. From observation Id say this is borne out by the standard of driving on the District being amongst the best.

It’s also worth adding that it’s not all down to training, there’s “old hand” drivers who don’t really have a clue. There’s not a lot done about it, as long as they fill a box on that booking-on sheet...

In the days of non-continuous track circuiting there would definitely be a problem if you stopped too far short of a signal, as the train wouldn't be detected.

I noticed when travelling the Marston vale line recently that the stop boards for 1- and 2-car trains are set only a metre or so apart, suggesting that stopping in exactly the right place is very important there. I assume the reason is that the platform is not quite long enough for a 2-car unit, which therefore has to overhang the platform at each end. But if a single car (class 153) were to stop in the same place, the front passenger door (which is nearer the end of the carriage than on a 2-car class 150 (or 230)) would be off the platform.

Tend to find at work that incidents go in waves. So they'll be a peak of things and then everybody will start being more careful - then gradually as time goes by the near miss rate goes up and then something happens.

Slight change in the selection process. After getting through the application stage, you now have to undertake a timed (35 minutes) online rules and procedures test. Multiple choice, can't remember how many questions you had to answer. It was not easy! In fact, out of 20 that took the test, only 3 of us passed.

Once successful at that stage, it was the competency based interview, role play exercise and then a written test on line knowledge and stock.

North End is spot on. I do quite a bit of work on educating drivers (and I/Op's) on signals especially multi SPaD signals (we have a big list of them). There is a lot of confusion regarding the difference between approach controlled, timed occupancy and draw up signals. Having an idea on what is what and the likely behaviour of a signal under varying conditions to my mind is pretty crucial to keeping you out of trouble! I could talk for hours on this subject but I'll leave it at this for now :-)