Driverless Underground Trains

[Nym]

What have the Tories got to do with it?

The document that was released last year was written by a department within London Underground as a discussion paper to generate ideas based on the need to reduce headcount and save money.

The paper states that a new 'Train Attendant' role could be created, noting that not all trains would have staff on board.

It should also be noted that this is a paper that has been internally circulated as an idea genertor, not a proposal. Just seems like someone is jumping on the bandwagon way too early.

For example, the vic line upgrade supports full driverless operation from a control centre (the old ATO did not, I'll get more into it later) but they chose to go with what was actually a very conservative choice of ATO implementation for the vic compared with the system JNP uses (Tube Lines). But it was not the case, drivers are still in place, and to be honest with the way that TfL operates with a high level of high quality front line staff, I can't personally see any front line staff being removed in a hurry.

My experiences from a passenger point of view:

Well yes it's true that computers don't drive in the same way as humans. My experiences of travelling on the Victoria, Jubilee and DLR are that there only seem to be a few modes:
Brake, Coast, Slow or Fast , and no smooth transitions between them, so to maintain a constant slowish speed, the computer is constantly alternating between slow and coasting, which isn't as smooth as if a human was driving. This is very noticeable on the DLR which can be a jerky ride, but to be honest I don't think many passengers notice or care.

I beleive most of your experience there is with older ATO systems, but the newer systems on the Jubilee and Victoria lines have much more advanced systems with many more 'modes' than the previous vic system and the old DLR systems.

The systems used on each of these are very different...

"1st Gen" Track Coded Circuits, 4 codes (Go quick, go slower, coast, stop)
"2nd Gen" Track Coded Circuits, 14 codes

Then it splits:

Leaky Cable Local Decision Signalling...
Distance To Travel Radio Systems...
Many Code Track Coded Circuits...

All of these work in very different ways, with very different levels of operating modes...

 

[BestWestern]

I beleive most of your experience there is with older ATO systems, but the newer systems on the Jubilee and Victoria lines have much more advanced systems with many more 'modes' than the previous vic system and the old DLR systems.

The systems used on each of these are very different...

"1st Gen" Track Coded Circuits, 4 codes (Go quick, go slower, coast, stop)
"2nd Gen" Track Coded Circuits, 14 codes

Then it splits:

Leaky Cable Local Decision Signalling...
Distance To Travel Radio Systems...
Many Code Track Coded Circuits...

All of these work in very different ways, with very different levels of operating modes...

That's very interesting. I gather from reading industry safety bulletins that one issue that can cause problems with driverless systems is poor railhead adhesion, i.e. leaf fall etc. I presume that the situation has to be constantly monitored and the ATO system adjusted in vulnerable areas (this obviously doesn't affect the Tube deep level stuff), in order to maintain safe control of trains, whilst minimising delays when it isn't necessary? Does this affect the DLR or are the speeds simply too slow for it to be a concern? This would I suppose be one example of where a computer would be outwitted by a human Driver.