SBB mobile phone dispatch

[Bletchleyite]

Guards on SBB despatch with a mobile app? How on earth does that work? Is the mobile app connected via bluetooth or wifi or 2G/3G/4G/5G signal?

Don't know, sorry.

How does it know which is the local door?

If you put a UIC key in at a door and turn it, that door stays open until you press the passenger close button. Those dastardly Europeans have thought of everything!

So does the app have door control buttons and a bell button?

No, just a "go" button. The doors are done the normal way.

Also i thought SBB trains were DOO so which ones still have Guards on them?

All locomotive hauled trains. (Those formed of DOO modified EW I/II didn't, but I think those are all gone now).

 

[railwaytrack]

Don't know, sorry.



If you put a UIC key in at a door and turn it, that door stays open until you press the passenger close button. Those dastardly Europeans have thought of everything!



No, just a "go" button. The doors are done the normal way.



All locomotive hauled trains. (Those formed of DOO modified EW I/II didn't, but I think those are all gone now).

Thank you for the information. What an interesting system to use. I hope there is a backup system in place though for when the mobile app does not work. Otherwise i can see it causing a lot of problems and delays when it does not work.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Thank you for the information. What an interesting system to use. I hope there is a backup system in place though for when the mobile app does not work. Otherwise i can see it causing a lot of problems and delays when it does not work.

I don't know if the old station boxes are still there, but if not just walking to the front and saying "Abfahren, bitte" appears to be acceptable. I have certainly witnessed that in Germany, and unlike what I saw on a Pacer in the North West years ago of the guard opening the cab door and shouting "buzz buzz" is an official option.

 

[dm1]

The phones send text messages over GSM-R, so are extremely reliable.

I'm not sure what the fallback procedures are, but failures are fairly rare. On newer trains running with guards the procedure would probably be to go back to driver door operation, with the guard performing only passenger facing duties.

The whole DOO/guard discussion appears to be far less of a hot topic in Switzerland. On the Zürich S-Bahn network 300m long DOO trains are not uncommon, whereas longer distance passenger trains (IR and up) will generally be staffed by a conductor/guard anyway, independent of whether they perform any safety critical duties or not.

Then there interesting situations, where depending on which company is driving and conducting a train, different procedures can be used. For example the new SOB Traverso trains have doors always controlled by SOB drivers since SOB conductors are not safety critical. Whereas if SBB drivers and conductors are involved, then other dispatch procedures can be used if required. If SBB drivers are working with SOB conductors or vice versa, then there are also other procedures.

In general the focus is on technology and procedures to make dispatch safe, rather than endless arguments about which member of staff presses which button. Newer trains are almost universally equipped with level boarding and gap fillers, as well as doors equipped with lots of sensors to detect obstacles or people caught in or between them. Bodyside cameras are rare. The doors also close automatically after a certain period if nobody is detected passing through them, meaning at dispatch most doors are closed already. The rest comes down to the general Swiss concept of "Eigenverantwortung" (personal responsibility) - as a passenger you are also responsible for your own safety and the consequences of your actions.


On the older EW IV trains there were several incidents of guards getting caught in the doors during dispatch, having given the right away. This led to the procedures being changed and SMS dispatch becoming mandatory, meaning RA can only be given once the local door is closed, increasing dwell times slightly.

 

[TheEdge]

In general the focus is on technology and procedures to make dispatch safe, rather than endless arguments about which member of staff presses which button.

I'd imagine that's because SBB is run as a public service and it isn't essential to make sure your job has a definable impact on the service running to keep the axe wielded by the DfT beancounters at bay.

 

[bahnause]

The phones send text messages over GSM-R, so are extremely reliable.


I'm not sure what the fallback procedures are, but failures are fairly rare. On newer trains running with guards the procedure would probably be to go back to driver door operation, with the guard performing only passenger facing duties.

The system is more complex then it looks. The app on the conductors phone only allows to send the message, after it recieves the "signal shows a proceed aspect" from the Rail Control System RCS. There are more safety features implemented:

The text message dispatching is oriented to the train number update of the rail control system. The train number telegrams are forwarded to the GSM-R system (GEMS application server). This triggers a short message (text message) to the functionally registered mobile phone of the train driver on the basis of corresponding train routing. This SMS can be forwarded by the train driver to the cab radio and to the functionally registered mobile phone of the locomotive driver by simply pressing a button via GSM-R.

The whole DOO/guard discussion appears to be far less of a hot topic in Switzerland. On the Zürich S-Bahn network 300m long DOO trains are not uncommon, whereas longer distance passenger trains (IR and up) will generally be staffed by a conductor/guard anyway, independent of whether they perform any safety critical duties or not.

The train platform interface is very different in Switzerland and often gap free. Accidents do occur, I don't know if it would be acceptable in GB.

 

[Bletchleyite]

The mind boggles as to why SBB persisted with such a dangerous dispatch procedure as they did. The "European standard" (as done for years in France, Germany, Belgium, Austria...) with the exact same equipment is more like the UK - blow whistle, close passenger doors with UIC key, confirm closed, operate right away box/signal right away to driver with "bat" or lamp, return to train, wait in open door, close local door once satisfied things are safe. There's no reason they couldn't just have switched to that without the technological faff.

I was absolutely astonished when I found that the procedure was to give RA then close passenger doors, as it allowed no scope to deal with a trap-and-drag at all, bar the guard running into the saloon to pull an emergency brake handle. Utterly bizarre.

As for mechanically verifying door closure and non-obstruction, it does (largely) work, but behaviour is better than the UK. In the UK people would just hold doors open for people (or block them by standing there*) and the trains would never depart.

* I got told off on an overcrowded German FLIRT once for blocking the beam which prevented the doors closing. Had no idea I was - "don't stand here" areas are normally marked on German trains, trams and buses.

 

[rvdborgt]

The mind boggles as to why SBB persisted with such a dangerous dispatch procedure as they did. The "European standard" (as done for years in France, Germany, Belgium, Austria...) with the exact same equipment is more like the UK - blow whistle, close passenger doors with UIC key, confirm closed, operate right away box/signal right away to driver with "bat" or lamp, return to train, wait in open door, close local door once satisfied things are safe. There's no reason they couldn't just have switched to that without the technological faff.

In the Netherlands, the procedure has been for the past 15 years or so not to wait in the last open door but to close that one too and only then give the permission to depart. In Belgium, this has also changed in this way. In both countries, accidents with late passengers drove these changes.

 

[Bletchleyite]

In the Netherlands, the procedure has been for the past 15 years or so not to wait in the last open door but to close that one too and only then give the permission to depart. In Belgium, this has also changed in this way. In both countries, accidents with late passengers drove these changes.

Which is the UK procedure (as almost all UK trains now have interlock on all doors, so you can't depart with one open even if you wanted to - on multiple units the buzzer/bell won't even work with a door open).

What got me about the Swiss procedure was that they were giving right away with all doors still open on the assumption that they would be closed in time (I saw a few cases where they were not) and that nobody would get trapped. I do get that CH likes personal responsibility, but it's just so obviously dangerous that it's astonishing they didn't fix it sooner by following what other countries did with the same kit.