class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743 
|
Post by class411 on Sept 1, 2021 12:35:46 GMT
The dispatch aid system, where it determines which doors are definitely clear (actually a trivial computational task) would increase safety, because it would mean that the operator would only be presented with situations that were potentially hazardous, rather than spending the majority of their time looking at situations that were not. A large part of the way that you know something is not right is because you have spent so long looking at situations where it is. I would very surprised if there is any experienced train operator who has never held off closing the doors because for some reason it just felt wrong before it became clear why. Obviously its impossible to prove that this did prevent an incident but it clearly will have done on at least some occasions. I'd certainly agree with that. So, answer me this question: Which system would you think would perform better for (a) Time and (b) Safety? 1) A system where there is someone on the platform who has to monitor 12+ sets of doors, some of which are a long way away and may have many people in his or her line of sight, determine where there is a potential problem, and then get into position to see when it has cleared, then possibly go on to another. 2) A system where someone is sitting in front of a high resolution monitor displaying any doors where there might be a problem, from a few feet away, possibly with multiple camera angles. 3) A system where someone is sitting in front of a high resolution monitor displaying 12+ doors where, for the most part there won't be a problem, from a few feet away. (Although there would not be room for multiple camera angles because of the number of doors they need to display). Remember if LU are going to move to fully automatic operation (or pretend to, to keep meddling politicians quiet), they must either have someone on every physical platform, or have some means of remote monitoring, before they even start testing with passengers. |
|
|
|
Post by philthetube on Sept 1, 2021 19:58:02 GMT
For time I don't think there would be much difference, for safety I would say number 3, unless number 2 is 100% reliable, and no system is, however I would not consider 2 or 3 to be safe if operated by a remote person sat in a room doing this full time, concentrating on the same nothing for periods of time is virtually impossible.
|
|
|
|
Post by jimbo on Sept 1, 2021 20:05:39 GMT
From my time as a train guard (!) I recall that on arrival at a busy platform there was a clear gap between train and crowd along the length of the train. Open the doors and there was complete confusion as both sides battled it out to get on or off at the same time. Then suddenly there was a clear gap between train and crowd along the length of the train again, so doors closed and off we would go. Curved platforms were different, and one waited for guidance from platform staff, or in their absence just waited a reasonable time and closed up. One then paused to listen for shouting and screaming from out of sight platform to reopen and try again, else signal driver to start whilst still monitoring platform as train departed, prepared to pull the emergency handle. The difficult stations are ones where latecomers constantly appear and insist on using the same doorway to board, never leaving a clear gap between train and crowd along the length of the train, so procedure as for curved platforms.
|
|
|
|
Post by nig on Sept 2, 2021 0:00:34 GMT
So, answer me this question: Which system would you think would perform better for (a) Time and (b) Safety? 1) A system where there is someone on the platform who has to monitor 12+ sets of doors, some of which are a long way away and may have many people in his or her line of sight, determine where there is a potential problem, and then get into position to see when it has cleared, then possibly go on to another. 2) A system where someone is sitting in front of a high resolution monitor displaying any doors where there might be a problem, from a few feet away, possibly with multiple camera angles. 3) A system where someone is sitting in front of a high resolution monitor displaying 12+ doors where, for the most part there won't be a problem, from a few feet away. (Although there would not be room for multiple camera angles because of the number of doors they need to display). Remember if LU are going to move to fully automatic operation (or pretend to, to keep meddling politicians quiet), they must either have someone on every physical platform, or have some means of remote monitoring, before they even start testing with passengers. Isn't full automation trains closing doors by themselves and self dispatching all those ideas just move the drivers job to someone else and employ loads more staff |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Sept 2, 2021 6:59:22 GMT
Remember if LU are going to move to fully automatic operation (or pretend to, to keep meddling politicians quiet), they must either have someone on every physical platform, or have some means of remote monitoring, before they even start testing with passengers. Am I the only one unnerved by the idea that there might NOT be someone on every physical platform? |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 2, 2021 7:59:26 GMT
Remember if LU are going to move to fully automatic operation (or pretend to, to keep meddling politicians quiet), they must either have someone on every physical platform, or have some means of remote monitoring, before they even start testing with passengers. Am I the only one unnerved by the idea that there might NOT be someone on every physical platform? Given the current level of staffing on stations I think it highly unlikely there would be someone on every platform but that's not really an issue. The current proposal is for Grade of Automation 3, Driverless Train Operation (DTO) with a member of staff onboard at all times as per the DLR. Unless anyone has heard otherwise there is no suggestion that TfL is considering Grade of Automation 4, Unattended Train Operation (UTO), its as relevant as discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin TfL is studying "platform edge protection systems that could be implemented at lower cost than PEDs", basically repeating the feasibility study of 2014 with the hope that technology has advanced to the point that there is a system that can now tell the difference between a person on the track, a pigeon on the track and a copy of the Metro on the track. I suspect the result will be that technology still has a long way to go so PEDs will be needed, meaning that DTO would be possible on the Waterloo & City but not on the Piccadilly due to cost, time, disruption and the problem of sharing track with the Metropolitan Line |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by class411 on Sept 2, 2021 8:01:40 GMT
... however I would not consider 2 or 3 to be safe if operated by a remote person sat in a room doing this full time, concentrating on the same nothing for periods of time is virtually impossible. I absolutely agree. This is a major problem. Isn't full automation trains closing doors by themselves and self dispatching all those ideas just move the drivers job to someone else and employ loads more staff I'm sure that is what TFL would prefer - whether it's practical or not is an entirely different matter. But it would not involve more staff since each monitor would be handling multiple trains. Am I the only one unnerved by the idea that there might NOT be someone on every physical platform? I'm not sure what you mean; there are vast numbers of unmanned platforms on the system. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by class411 on Sept 2, 2021 8:06:36 GMT
The current proposal is for Grade of Automation 3, Driverless Train Operation (DTO) with a member of staff onboard at all times as per the DLR. Unless anyone has heard otherwise there is no suggestion that TfL is considering Grade of Automation 4, Unattended Train Operation (UTO), its as relevant as discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin So why are (some) politicians getting their panties in a bunch trying to get TFL to do this? You just replace one expensive staff member with another (slightly less) expensive member of staff. Both can join unions and both can strike. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 2, 2021 8:15:01 GMT
Am I the only one unnerved by the idea that there might NOT be someone on every physical platform? I'm not sure what you mean; there are vast numbers of unmanned platforms on the system. At present, there is always a member of staff present whenever a train is in the platform - the driver of the train. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 2, 2021 8:18:49 GMT
The difficult stations are ones where latecomers constantly appear and insist on using the same doorway to board, . Well, if the train's ready to depart they would go for the door nearest the point they arrive on the platform, wouldn't they? (Same reason the rear carriage of trains leaving London termini are always the most crowded) |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 2, 2021 8:21:33 GMT
So why are (some) politicians getting their panties in a bunch trying to get TFL to do this? Politics, in particular those who think Trade Unions are a Bad Thing (and haven't thought it through). |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 2, 2021 9:54:26 GMT
The current proposal is for Grade of Automation 3, Driverless Train Operation (DTO) with a member of staff onboard at all times as per the DLR. Unless anyone has heard otherwise there is no suggestion that TfL is considering Grade of Automation 4, Unattended Train Operation (UTO), its as relevant as discussing how many angels can dance on the head of a pin So why are (some) politicians getting their panties in a bunch trying to get TFL to do this? You just replace one expensive staff member with another (slightly less) expensive member of staff. Both can join unions and both can strike. Because they don't know the difference between Automatic Train Operation, Driverless Train Operation and Unattended Train Operation. Back in 2011 when Boris declared that the Circle, District, Metropolitan and Hammersmith & City Lines would be "automatic" by 2018 the Tories on the GLA were cock-a-hoop. If you can find footage of the GLA Transport Committee meeting where Mike Brown explains that ATO still required a driver in the cab the look on their faces is priceless. Note. Obviously that was before Bombardier threw in the towel and Thales took up the job |
|
|
|
Post by spsmiler on Sept 3, 2021 21:35:41 GMT
btw, Fully automated and unstaffed trains (and unstaffed stations) have existed in Lille, France for something like 40 years. The stations have platform doors.
By way of contrast, two systems which feature the same degree of automation but without platform doors are the Vancouver Skytrain which has been running since circa 1986 and Lyon metro line D which has been running since circa 1991.
I do not know what either system does to detect intruders (on the tracks) and to ensure safety when trains close their doors and depart from stations.
|
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Sept 4, 2021 7:55:32 GMT
The same situation existed when unmanned level crossings were first mooted on the public highway.
The safety issue was simply transferred from the railway to the public: "...A train is approaching. It cannot stop. You MUST".
(I read this as: "There's a train coming, and if you get killed that's YOUR fault...".)
|
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 4, 2021 8:18:17 GMT
btw, Fully automated and unstaffed trains (and unstaffed stations) have existed in Lille, France for something like 40 years. The stations have platform doors. By way of contrast, two systems which feature the same degree of automation but without platform doors are the Vancouver Skytrain which has been running since circa 1986 and Lyon metro line D which has been running since circa 1991. I do not know what either system does to detect intruders (on the tracks) and to ensure safety when trains close their doors and depart from stations. I read somewhere that if the DLR were built today it wouldn't get an operating licence without PEDs and the DLR has been fined at least twice for failing to stop trains when someone has fallen on the track Also DLR stations are unstaffed like Lille Metro unless they are subject to the Fire Precautions (Sub-surface Railway Stations) Regs |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 4, 2021 8:22:00 GMT
The same situation existed when unmanned level crossings were first mooted on the public highway. The safety issue was simply transferred from the railway to the public: "...A train is approaching. It cannot stop. You MUST". (I read this as: "There's a train coming, and if you get killed that's YOUR fault...".) Regardless of how you read it the service will be severely disrupted while they remove the body or get the person to a hospital and then clean up the mess |
|
Chris M
Global Moderator
Forum Quizmaster
Always happy to receive quiz ideas and pictures by email or PM
Posts: 19,761
|
Post by Chris M on Sept 4, 2021 13:58:30 GMT
The same situation existed when unmanned level crossings were first mooted on the public highway. The safety issue was simply transferred from the railway to the public: "...A train is approaching. It cannot stop. You MUST". (I read this as: "There's a train coming, and if you get killed that's YOUR fault...".) Regardless of how you read it the service will be severely disrupted while they remove the body or get the person to a hospital and then clean up the mess And that's about the best case scenario. Ufton Nervett shows what a worse case scenario looks like. |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 4, 2021 15:59:18 GMT
Ufton Nervett shows what a worse case scenario looks like. Hixon was even worse, although the relative weights of the rail and road vehicles would have been a factor, as would the lesser strength of the Mark 1 rolling stock. |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 4, 2021 17:34:11 GMT
To the best of my recollection there aren't any level crossings on the Piccadilly or Waterloo & City Lines so i don't think that's going to be an issue
|
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 4, 2021 17:40:17 GMT
To the best of my recollection there aren't any level crossings on the Piccadilly or Waterloo & City Lines so i don't think that's going to be an issue Quite so. Even the risk of another M7 0-4-4T being dropped in front of an approaching W&C train has been eliminated by removing the lift shaft |
|
|
|
Post by aslefshrugged on Sept 28, 2021 12:05:17 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 28, 2021 13:24:33 GMT
So when you have already got a report which says your brilliant idea is actually totally stupid - DAFT decide to just get another report... THIS is public money - Stop wasting it! Listen to transport experts and rather than wasting more on the latest politicians vanity project - only spend money on stuff we really need - like replacing clapped out rolling stock and signals and delivering a frequent and credible public transport offer which is the only way to finally get people out of their fossil fuel burning cars.. |
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Sept 28, 2021 17:57:30 GMT
It was interesting to see the location of Initiate Consultancy's offices and who their people are - at least one of the addresses given I have seen before on Companies House (a very useful website for those interested in such things) and I would be surprised if it's any more than just a mailbox. (I'm naturally cynical when I see a consultancy is involved and it often pays to check out who is behind the firm. This one has a former losing candidate for Mayor of London as one of their people.) |
|
North End
Beneath Newington Causeway
Posts: 1,769
|
Post by North End on Sept 28, 2021 18:17:57 GMT
So when you have already got a report which says your brilliant idea is actually totally stupid - DAFT decide to just get another report... THIS is public money - Stop wasting it! Listen to transport experts and rather than wasting more on the latest politicians vanity project - only spend money on stuff we really need - like replacing clapped out rolling stock and signals and delivering a frequent and credible public transport offer which is the only way to finally get people out of their fossil fuel burning cars.. It’s absolutely maddening as a taxpayer to see our government wasting time and money in this way. If nothing else it’s likely to cause IR issues, which isn’t really to the benefit of anyone. This isn’t the only nonsense going on at the moment. Look at the situation with chronic stock shortages on the mainline network as a result of failure to meet the accessibility deadline, whilst meanwhile 20-years-in-service Networkers are reported to be going for scrap this week as there’s no work for them. Where’s the brick wall to bang the head against?... |
|
|
|
Post by norbitonflyer on Sept 28, 2021 18:33:09 GMT
£130,000 for a two-month contract? They're not going to get much original thinking for that money and timescale.
|
|
castlebar
Planners use hindsight, not foresight
Posts: 1,316
|
Post by castlebar on Sept 28, 2021 18:47:00 GMT
I'm not so worried about driverless trains
I'm more worried about driverless cars.....
......, and the thought of driverless motorbikes scares me rigid.
|
|
Tom
Administrator
Signalfel?
Posts: 4,196
|
Post by Tom on Sept 28, 2021 18:51:08 GMT
£130,000 for a two-month contract? They're not going to get much original thinking for that money and timescale. Depends on how much research and effort goes into the study. |
|
|
|
Post by brigham on Sept 29, 2021 7:29:58 GMT
The research has already been done. The 'effort' involves finding it in the library.
You must be able to get a couple of days 'shelf-bashing' for £130,000!
|
|
|
|
Post by alpinejohn on Sept 29, 2021 8:35:16 GMT
The research has already been done. The 'effort' involves finding it in the library. You must be able to get a couple of days 'shelf-bashing' for £130,000! Given the project is to produce "a report somehow demonstrating the idea could be viable" I am not sure this will go well. 50/50 their findings get marked secret and never see the light of day - although by then, the report may be cheaper than loo paper. Most of that money will be taken up trying to selectively exclude or discount all the earlier evidence which demonstrated the idea was bonkers and then with whatever is left somehow try and construct a remotely credible case that an automated tube line will be cheaper - ever. |
|
class411
Operations: Normal
Posts: 2,743
|
Post by class411 on Sept 29, 2021 9:48:49 GMT
There are two possible outcomes to this report:
1) No, not feasible - nothing has changed.
2) Yes, it's feasible - so when they have a few billion spare they can go ahead - still, effectively, nothing changes.
|
|
