Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2006 20:24:22 GMT
While enjoying the delights of a typically rammed n/b platform at Victoria today, I had a brainwave about an interesting new feature that ought to go into the cabs of the 2009TS.
Basically, it would be a timer that would begin counting upwards from 0:00 after the train doors are opened. Combined with the "target dwell time" posters I have seen lurking on some platform headwalls, it would give the driver a powerful tool to ensure that he doesn't wait overlong at a station and bung up the service.
The best (or worst) thing about this feature is that at 0:30, a chime would start sounding to remind the driver that he really ought to close the doors and start the train. The chime would be stopped either by hitting a Dwell Timer Cancel button, changing the control key position away from Forward, or ignoring it until it counted up past 0:45.
Is this a total pile of s***e or would it be useful?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2006 20:39:29 GMT
Perhaps it could be done automatically by the Auto operation system? obviously safegaurds would need to be put into place in case of an emergency, but sounds like a good idea!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2006 20:59:40 GMT
Indeed.
ISTR reading about devices called "headway clocks" that other Metro systems employ to tell drivers how long it was since the last train called at the station, to give them an idea of how fast they need to perform station duties. This dwell timer would provide a similar feature.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 26, 2006 21:20:36 GMT
I think the original Yerkees lines used these - the Picc definitely did.
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Oct 26, 2006 21:32:53 GMT
TheOneKEA is on the ball as per usual!  The current plan is to have a countdown clock in the cab which is tied in to the signalling system. This would effectively count down the dwell time to a point where the driver should be aiming to depart. It does have some predictive features as the countdown would start while the starter is still at danger and my signalling colleagues do have some refinement to do. Nice idea! ;D |
|
|
|
Post by mandgc on Oct 26, 2006 23:51:36 GMT
Headway Clocks.
There was an Indicator at the Westbound Platform Starter at Mansion House in the 1950s enabling the Signalman to tell the Driver of a through train how many minutes ahead the previous train was. The indicator was not used by then.
|
|
prjb
Advisor
LU move customers from A to B, they used to do it via 'C'.
Posts: 1,840
|
Post by prjb on Oct 26, 2006 23:54:54 GMT
We go full Circle then. No puns please folks!!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2006 0:19:47 GMT
TheOneKEA is on the ball as per usual! Surely not ;D The current plan is to have a countdown clock in the cab which is tied in to the signalling system. This would effectively count down the dwell time to a point where the driver should be aiming to depart. It does have some predictive features as the countdown would start while the starter is still at danger and my signalling colleagues do have some refinement to do. Well, if you want to waste BAET's time be really clever, you could set individual dwell times for each station platform, and have the PAC download it to the train. That way, you could define dwell times that fit the usage pattern for each platform. If you want to really waste BAET's time make it really flexible, you could have the PAC download different dwell times based on the time of day too!  Thanks |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Oct 27, 2006 7:58:44 GMT
I have to say, I think a dwell timer in the cab is a daft idea  ;D If the doors are clear, and the starter's clear, the driver will shut the doors and go. If the platform & train are both heaving, it could take 15-20 seconds for passengers to disembark - then it could take another 15-20 seconds for passengers to board (and that's assuming boarding passengers do actually stand to one side and allow people off). That's potentially 40 seconds with the doors open - dwell time, AFAIA, is meant to be 'wheel stop' to 'wheel start'. On that basis, and using the above example, do we let the punters off then shut the doors and go? At the extreme ends of the day (early morning & late evening), a dwell timer really isn't neccessary. I think this could also be a possible cause of SPADs - the most critical time when driving a train is the PTI (platform-train interface). Virtually all SPADs at station starters are in some way connected with the PTI - let alone with the added pressure of a timer forcing you to rush and commit mistakes. Have the Unions approved this? (I'm no Union man - I'm just curious). |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2006 8:38:32 GMT
I have to say, I think a dwell timer in the cab is a daft idea ;D If the doors are clear, and the starter's clear, the driver will shut the doors and go. If the platform & train are both heaving, it could take 15-20 seconds for passengers to disembark - then it could take another 15-20 seconds for passengers to board (and that's assuming boarding passengers do actually stand to one side and allow people off). That's potentially 40 seconds with the doors open - dwell time, AFAIA, is meant to be 'wheel stop' to 'wheel start'. On that basis, and using the above example, do we let the punters off then shut the doors and go? No - the dwell timer will have been set to a value that allows for people to get on and get off. In this particular case, the timer would count up to 0:40. Besides, the mechanism is only meant to be a guide anyway - it's designed to help the driver perform station duties as fast as possible without leaving people behind. At the extreme ends of the day (early morning & late evening), a dwell timer really isn't neccessary. I think this could also be a possible cause of SPADs - the most critical time when driving a train is the PTI (platform-train interface). Virtually all SPADs at station starters are in some way connected with the PTI - let alone with the added pressure of a timer forcing you to rush and commit mistakes. The only place this would be used is on the Victoria Line, where 99% of the time it would be a little hard to have a SPAD |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2006 9:00:48 GMT
One for Artery - I thought the 1992's had this already - in the form of a 'Countdown to Departure' screen adjacent to the ATO start buttons on the main console. There are three chimes transmitted by the DTS when the train is meant to be leaving the station. Have I got this right?
|
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Oct 27, 2006 9:34:15 GMT
I don't care if the SPAD issue is 1%, 10% or 100% to be quite honest, it's still an issue - and in my capacity as a driver I don't like it  ;D S stock is being designed with ATO/ATP in mind - which means we could end up with it on the S too....and whilst still driving manually as we won't get ATO/ATP straight away. So potentially it's actually a big issue as far as i'm concerned as I plan to still be a driver when S stock becomes a reality. Drivers on all lines know the score with regard to dwell times - it's an uneccessary added pressure. |
|
|
|
Post by tubeprune on Oct 27, 2006 10:33:50 GMT
Drivers on all lines know the score with regard to dwell times - it's an uneccessary added pressure. I'd have to disagree there, Sir. My experience of the Underground over the last 40-odd years is that dwell times are increasing. Much of this is due to the introduction of OPO plus the increase in traffic. At a practical level it is partly due to T/Os not getting the doors closed quickly enough. It has to be a joint effort of course, station staff and train crew working together but it is often sadly lacking. You have to manage the passengers aggressively at busy times otherwise they will just keep on trying to get on. ANY dwell time (and I mean wheel stop to wheel start) over 40s is too long and you have to take DDA bleeps, door open/close times and traction start time into account as well. This may take 10s out of the time. I think a time-variable reminder is useful. It should be linked to the time of day/WTT requirements. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2006 16:48:17 GMT
I agree with Colin, I could do without something bleeping at me while I'm still waiting for people to get off the train.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 27, 2006 17:52:29 GMT
However, AIUI reading from the posts here it seems as if it's just a "guide" - not something that should be followed from the book. So if the countdown timer buzzes and passengers are still loading, the driver can ignore it and close up as / when nescesarry.
|
|
|
|
Post by william on Oct 27, 2006 21:25:29 GMT
Drivers on all lines know the score with regard to dwell times - it's an uneccessary added pressure. I'd have to disagree there, Sir. My experience of the Underground over the last 40-odd years is that dwell times are increasing. Much of this is due to the introduction of OPO plus the increase in traffic. I would agree very much with tubeprune. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 27, 2006 21:28:19 GMT
but drivers will always aim for the least dwell time possible so a timer would just cause stress for the driver and add pressure on the driver to close doors on passengers even |
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 27, 2006 21:39:10 GMT
so a timer would just add pressure on the driver to close doors on passengers even That is EXACTLY the point. If there is a 2min service with average dwell times of 30 sec, and one t/op keeps taking 50sec, his train will create a bigger gap in front so his train will get fuller and fuller. It also bunches up the trains behind. So at times a good driver WILL have to close the doors on passengers for the sake of the service as a whole. Of course I'm referring to the peak: if there is only an 8 min service or so, any t/op will wait till all have boarded. |
|
Colin
Advisor
My preserved fire engine!
Posts: 11,310
|
Post by Colin on Oct 28, 2006 6:59:08 GMT
I'd have to disagree there, Sir. My experience of the Underground over the last 40-odd years is that dwell times are increasing. Much of this is due to the introduction of OPO plus the increase in traffic. At a practical level it is partly due to T/Os not getting the doors closed quickly enough. It has to be a joint effort of course, station staff and train crew working together but it is often sadly lacking. I agree with what you are saying (apart from your disagreement  ;D ;D), but dwell time is only one factor in the course of a train's journey. Signals and their 'line capacity' also play a large part - especially in controlled areas. You have to manage the passengers aggressively at busy times otherwise they will just keep on trying to get on. ANY dwell time (and I mean wheel stop to wheel start) over 40s is too long and you have to take DDA bleeps, door open/close times and traction start time into account as well. This may take 10s out of the time. Again, we drivers are well aware of the need to sometimes be 'aggresive' with the doors. We do get this drummed into us during job & road training I think a time-variable reminder is useful. It should be linked to the time of day/WTT requirements. I think the signallers need it more than drivers ;D However, AIUI reading from the posts here it seems as if it's just a "guide" - not something that should be followed from the book. So if the countdown timer buzzes and passengers are still loading, the driver can ignore it and close up as / when nescesarry. It kinda makes you wonder what the point is really, dosen't it? If we can ignore it, and do so on a regular basis, then what's the point of having it fitted?  |
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 28, 2006 8:12:30 GMT
Wouldn't it be a guide or reminder - "Now is the rough time you should be leaving" - so it reminds the driver of the need to depart, however he can adjust it depending on individual circumstances. However it would still "jog the memory".
|
|
Phil
In memoriam
RIP 23-Oct-2018
Posts: 9,473
|
Post by Phil on Oct 29, 2006 9:42:09 GMT
Maybe it's just needed for new drivers, say their first 6 months, till they develop the 'instinct' as to when they close the doors at any time.
Oh, and for Circle Drivers all the time (sorry prjb et al! ;D ;D ;D).
|
|
|
|
Post by Tomcakes on Oct 29, 2006 13:30:52 GMT
No doubt an "unofficial" modification would quickly be made to most of them, if they were indeed fitted, involving snipping the wires!
|
|
|
|
Post by frankoids on Oct 29, 2006 15:46:21 GMT
I have to agree with Colin on this one, which, as a Northern Line driver I don't always do!! After closing the doors of a train thousands upon thousands of times in the course of our job you instinctively know when to shut the doors. A reminder is really not necessary. One way of reducing dwell times would be to educate our customers to not try and board the train as the doors are closing and not placing foot, newspaper, briefcase, etc.... in the doors, to cause the doors to have to be re-opened. Not an easy task I grant you!! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2006 19:55:33 GMT
One way of reducing dwell times would be to educate our customers to not try and board the train as the doors are closing and not placing foot, newspaper, briefcase, etc.... in the doors, to cause the doors to have to be re-opened. Not an easy task I grant you!! What about that suggestion by a Central driver of making the door ends sharp and made of metal, then hook it up to the juice? ;D I appreciate that drivers can't control peak-hour dwell times too well due to external factors but I sometimes wish they'd make a move on when it's empty! ;D 10 seconds with the doors open seem enough East end of the District when I know there's more than a 5 minute service gap anyway. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 29, 2006 22:26:50 GMT
I appreciate that drivers can't control peak-hour dwell times too well due to external factors but I sometimes wish they'd make a move on when it's empty! When it's quiet it is all too easy to actually run early, in which case there's no point having short dwell times! |
|
|
|
Post by trainopd78 on Nov 1, 2006 8:33:00 GMT
Any professional train operator would be more agressive at peak times and Saturdays. Any T/op worth his/her salt would instinctively know how long to give.
I must admit, i'd have it turned off in my cab on a manual train as i'm not a five year old and can keep to time all by myself thank you very much!!!
You can always tell who ny trainees are as I train to be quite hot on the dwell times. Its a common sense thing. I can see this new idea spliiting up many a family as I can see any excess dwell time being downloaded and becoming a performance issue even if the dwell time was adjusted at the next 2 stations to get back "on book".
Personally, I use clear use of the PA to Gee the customers along. When they start taking the michael, I make effective use of the PA and that way, along with station staff, I always keep to my correct times.
Whilst in manual, its yet another distraction which will lead to more wind up against SPADS. Maybe its a better idea for ATO trains Only, but for manuals should be given a very wide berth.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2006 9:15:08 GMT
Indeed, trainopd78 - in my OP I specifically stated that it would only be used on the 2009TS, and only because I feel it to be especially valuable on the Victoria Line. On the SSL it wouldn't make much sense to have dwell timers.
|
|
;D
;D
;D ;D), but dwell time is only one factor in the course of a train's journey. Signals and their 'line capacity' also play a large part - especially in controlled areas.
