In-Cab driver assist

[matacaster]

Lorry,Van and car drivers pass a test and are then able to drive anywhere without a retest.

Clearly the rail system of having traction knowledge and route knowledge which also expires places rail at at a significant disadvantage.

How about what is effectively a satnav with video and audio for each section of route and traction type. This would advise the driver of route and traction peculiarities such as when to brake, speed limit, effects of greasy rail etc. The driver would be able to ignore the advice if he / she was aware of some issue not covered (say a cow on line he could see).
The plus side would be that best driving practice would be available without the need for drivers to study, pass test, repass test and remember the route. The driver's would thus be able to take any train on any route.
Opinions?

 

[6Gman]

Lorry,Van and car drivers pass a test and are then able to drive anywhere without a retest.

Clearly the rail system of having traction knowledge and route knowledge which also expires places rail at at a significant disadvantage.

How about what is effectively a satnav with video and audio for each section of route and traction type. This would advise the driver of route and traction peculiarities such as when to brake, speed limit, effects of greasy rail etc. The driver would be able to ignore the advice if he / she was aware of some issue not covered (say a cow on line he could see).
The plus side would be that best driving practice would be available without the need for drivers to study, pass test, repass test and remember the route. The driver's would thus be able to take any train on any route.
Opinions?

I fear the distraction of video and audio could make it more dangerous than the status quo.

 

[Indigo Soup]

Clearly the rail system of having traction knowledge and route knowledge which also expires places rail at at a significant disadvantage.

Devil's advocate - why should road users not have to be trained on each type of vehicle and route they are to use?

 

[coppercapped]

Devil's advocate - why should road users not have to be trained on each type of vehicle and route they are to use?

There are a range of driving licence licence types available from your local DVLA store depending on what you want to drive and have been trained on.

What, exactly, would route training achieve? Apart from doubling the traffic on the road to, say, Newquay because I have to drive it several times to get it added to my route card before I am allowed to drive there on my own with my wife and children for a day out?

 

[PeterC]

I fear the distraction of video and audio could make it more dangerous than the status quo.

If satnav's are deemed safe for car and lorry drivers why shouldn't a similar system be safe on the railway?

Devil's advocate - why should road users not have to be trained on each type of vehicle and route they are to use?

Having seen an Eddie Stobart artic only just manage negotiate a village street a few days ago there is some value in that.

Overall I am sure that there is scope use technology to reduce the overhead in route and traction training even if not as far as to have "go anywhere" drivers.

What, exactly, would route training achieve? Apart from doubling the traffic on the road to, say, Newquay because I have to drive it several times to get it added to my route card before I am allowed to drive there on my own with my wife and children for a day out?

I would "train" myself on a new route by identifying landmarks for key junctions on StreetView before travelling although I think that the previous poster had commercial vehicles in mind.

 

[coppercapped]

I fear the distraction of video and audio could make it more dangerous than the status quo.

Look at the flight aids available in the aeronautical world. Flight management and navigation systems have become mainstream even for single engined aircraft. All, and I mean all, route knowledge is available on demand - including airfield maps, taxiways, radio frequencies, weather, the flight plan, one's exact location. You can be informed when you have reached the Top of Descent, that is the point on the flight when the plane can start descending on a 3% glide slope for the approach and landing - in railway terms think braking distance to a speed restriction or a stop.

It is the future.

 

[bramling]

Devil's advocate - why should road users not have to be trained on each type of vehicle and route they are to use?

I can’t see a case for “route knowledge” for most road users (other than for special cases like vehicles likely to encounter height restrictions or difficulty turning) as unlike trains road vehicles are - or should be - driven on sight.

There’s definitely a case for training on vehicles though. How many people read the manual before taking charge of an unfamiliar vehicle? With modern cars being increasingly stuffed full of gadgets and electronic aids, I’d say if anything this is possibly *more* of an issue now than in the past. My new BMW took me a long time to get used to, and it’s refreshing to get in the old (2000) one where everything is simple and self-explanatory, despite still having a fair few “features”.

I must admit when going on holiday I tend to do quite a bit of route planning beforehand, although we tend to visit quite obscure locations (for example disused railway features), and it helps a lot to have things like parking places worked out in advance and knowing which roads are going to be a pain to drive down - especially having a larger car.

Returning to the original post, the railway has dipped its toe in the water with this in the form of DAS systems. Open to correction however it seems the general consensus from staff who work with such systems is that they’re a bit of a waste of space.

Some of the modern in-cab signalling systems certainly reduce the amount of knowledge required for routine driving (with the TBTC system used on parts of LU someone could quite easily drive from one end of the line to the other never having seen it before and with the sunblind down), however this only takes you so far as things will come unstuck when something goes wrong, not to mention things like moves where with complex layouts there’s no substitute for having a proper “feel” for things. Remember the mess up with the speed restrictions on the Cambrian? This shows the pitfalls associated with full reliance on technology.

 

[alxndr]

What happens when your train sat nav fails and the driver is left with no "assistance" and no route knowledge?

In a road vehicle if something goes wrong then it's not the end of the world. One road is much like another and you can keep driving until you get to somewhere safe to pull over, which is not an option available to a train. A car's satnav also does not advise on how to drive your car (braking etc) only where you should drive it.

Automatic Train Protection (ATP) does something of this where fitted in advising the driver of speeds and using braking curves to issue warnings/applications where it deems necessary, but it doesn't mean that someone can drive without route knowledge or just sit there and rely upon it.

 

[Indigo Soup]

There are a range of driving licence licence types available from your local DVLA store depending on what you want to drive and have been trained on.

There certainly are. But there can be considerable differences between vehicles within the same driving licence category. Controls, handling etc can be very different between vehicles.

Train drivers and pilots are required to be specifically trained on every individual class of vehicle they operate unless the licencing authority has been satisfied by the manufacturer that two or more classes can be treated as identical.

An analogy with aviation would suggest that you might have a common 'type rating' for all passenger cars, unless fitted with unusual features, but finer subdivision by design/manufacturer for larger vehicles.

What, exactly, would route training achieve? Apart from doubling the traffic on the road to, say, Newquay because I have to drive it several times to get it added to my route card before I am allowed to drive there on my own with my wife and children for a day out?

For private motorists, probably close to nothing, although it would make claiming ignorance of speed limits/blind bends impossible. For commercial drivers - the frequency with which bridges are hit, walls clipped, and so forth, would suggest that there probably is a fair bit of benefit.

 

[bramling]

What happens when your train sat nav fails and the driver is left with no "assistance" and no route knowledge?

In a road vehicle if something goes wrong then it's not the end of the world. One road is much like another and you can keep driving until you get to somewhere safe to pull over, which is not an option available to a train. A car's satnav also does not advise on how to drive your car (braking etc) only where you should drive it.

I must say I’ve never been a fan of sat navs. There’s simply no substitute for Landranger maps. About the only place I find a sat nav useful is in featureless modern housing estates where it’s hard to get bearings. I bought a sat nav about ten years ago and it fell into disuse, either being too much faff to set up, or just being pointless. My new car has a built-in one, and I’ve been running it as a novelty - so far it’s been complete rubbish, using it locally I don’t think it’s thusfar once taken me on what local knowledge would tell me is the most logical route. What *is* more useful is being able to see one’s precise location on a map, but that’s a function of GPS not satnav technology.

Perhaps I’m the wrong generation. Someone I know who’s only about 8 years younger than me swears by his sat nav and thinks I’m well eccentric for using paper maps!

 

[alxndr]

I must say I’ve never been a fan of sat navs. There’s simply no substitute for Landranger maps. About the only place I find a sat nav useful is in featureless modern housing estates where it’s hard to get bearings. I bought a sat nav about ten years ago and it fell into disuse, either being too much faff to set up, or just being pointless. My new car has a built-in one, and I’ve been running it as a novelty - so far it’s been complete rubbish, using it locally I don’t think it’s thusfar once taken me on what local knowledge would tell me is the most logical route. What *is* more useful is being able to see one’s precise location on a map, but that’s a function of GPS not satnav technology.

Perhaps I’m the wrong generation. Someone I know who’s only about 8 years younger than me swears by his sat nav and thinks I’m well eccentric for using paper maps!

I do generally use my phone as a satnav as it's more convenient than trying to memorise a whole route when driving alone, especially when being spontaneous, but I insist on having a paper map in the car just in case, and people think I'm strange enough for that. I will always check the route a satnav is demanding first though, to know if there's any oddities that I need to ignore (e.g. going down tiny lanes to shave a fraction off the mileage before rejoining the main road).

Not sure if this is an off-topic digression though, or proof that an algorithm can't yet beat a human with local knowledge.

 

[Peter Kelford]

I would say that, especially on our multitude of secondary lines, SatNav-assisted rail is far safer than a car on a nearby country road.

 

[Ken H]

When the class 91's were new Roger ford got a footplate ride. He described the speed system. the driver dialled in the speed with a rotating knob, and pulled the handle full back. The train then accelerated to that speed then kept at that speed. until the driver dialled in a new speed.
My car has a speed limiter - I can set a speed and it wont accelerate above that speed. Great on managed motorways.

They have car mounted cameras that can 'read' speed restriction signs as set the speed limiter accordingly.

So how hard would it be to have a system like this for trains? maybe transmit the speed limit to the train via some track mounted kit rather than reading signs because of reading the right speed limit on multi track lines.

it would remove a lot of the route knowledge requirement.
If the system could also transmit to the driver locations that would help
as would a distance to a station.

The amount of data in each 'telegram' would be actually quite small. A lot less than this post!!!

 

[JamesT]

When the class 91's were new Roger ford got a footplate ride. He described the speed system. the driver dialled in the speed with a rotating knob, and pulled the handle full back. The train then accelerated to that speed then kept at that speed. until the driver dialled in a new speed.
My car has a speed limiter - I can set a speed and it wont accelerate above that speed. Great on managed motorways.

They have car mounted cameras that can 'read' speed restriction signs as set the speed limiter accordingly.

So how hard would it be to have a system like this for trains? maybe transmit the speed limit to the train via some track mounted kit rather than reading signs because of reading the right speed limit on multi track lines.

it would remove a lot of the route knowledge requirement.
If the system could also transmit to the driver locations that would help
as would a distance to a station.

The amount of data in each 'telegram' would be actually quite small. A lot less than this post!!!

Isn’t that essentially a description of ETCS?

 

[randyrippley]

Lorry,Van and car drivers pass a test and are then able to drive anywhere without a retest.

Clearly the rail system of having traction knowledge and route knowledge which also expires places rail at at a significant disadvantage.

How about what is effectively a satnav with video and audio for each section of route and traction type. This would advise the driver of route and traction peculiarities such as when to brake, speed limit, effects of greasy rail etc. The driver would be able to ignore the advice if he / she was aware of some issue not covered (say a cow on line he could see).
The plus side would be that best driving practice would be available without the need for drivers to study, pass test, repass test and remember the route. The driver's would thus be able to take any train on any route.f t
Opinions?

If the system was that good then you may as well eliminate the driver

 

[Peter Kelford]

Why not just use internationally compatible ETCS2/3 technology? You could go to Europe and China on the same system.

In some places, especially regional networks, drivers do the routes with a familiar driver once or twice then are left to get on with it.

If one wanted to save on ETCS, lines under 75mph could just get signs indicating where to brake and so on

 

[notadriver]

There’s no substitute for a drivers route knowledge. Driving a car is nothing like driving a train even in terms of speed limit signs. A train has a long braking distance. It could be braking for a speed restriction miles before the actual speed limit board comes into view. Yes there are reduction of speed warning signs but these are set for the slowest braking train. If all drivers were to apply full service brakes at every speed warning board the service would run very late. This is what a computer reading the signs would do.

 

[JamesT]

There’s no substitute for a drivers route knowledge. Driving a car is nothing like driving a train even in terms of speed limit signs. A train has a long braking distance. It could be braking for a speed restriction miles before the actual speed limit board comes into view. Yes there are reduction of speed warning signs but these are set for the slowest braking train. If all drivers were to apply full service brakes at every speed warning board the service would run very late. This is what a computer reading the signs would do.

Thankfully ETCS appears to be a bit smarter than reading the signs. From a quick skim-read of things like https://www.rssb.co.uk/rgs/standards/GEGN8605 Iss 1.pdf the onboard computer knows how far it has to go till it has to drop speed, and it knows the braking performance of the train. So it wouldn't be applying full service brake at every sign.

 

[Peter Kelford]

If we literally were going to redraw the map for a SatNav and plonk it onto a train, I would the first person to complain about it. In rail, NR, ROSCOs and TOCs are happy to pay £1000s for such a system, unlike the average driver. That means that, if just DB Schenker were to fit their 300-strong fleet with a system that cost about £2000 apiece, it would be no more than £600 000, something which they would be happy to pay, most probably. At that price, I see no reason why more detail and sophistication could be added, perhaps even with AI. Complex games now have adaptive AIs and an advisory system would not really be much of a stretch. Of course, drivers need to know how to handle their train and, of course, route knowledge is a plus but it wouldn't be as necessary. Perhaps drivers could just hitch a ride with a checklist once or twice in the cab with the company of a more experienced driver, with online videos of the route and key places for them to watch. Not the cancellation of route testing, but making something achievable in a limited amount of time. Perhaps the self-motivated could watch the videos off duty while booking a cab ride during their day(s) off.

 

[Mintona]

There’s so much more to driving a train than most people realise, that a satnav wouldn’t be a suitable replacement for route knowledge. You don’t realise until you actually do it.

 

[Peter Kelford]

I don't think 'replace' is the right term. But rather than going through the bureaucracy of a long and difficult to arrange route learning course, I am simply advocating the concept that route knowledge can be gained while on the job rather than on the route learning course. I am certainly not saying anything about type ratings, although aviation now has a push towards similar types and so less training.

 

[PeterC]

I don't think 'replace' is the right term. But rather than going through the bureaucracy of a long and difficult to arrange route learning course, I am simply advocating the concept that route knowledge can be gained while on the job rather than on the route learning course. I am certainly not saying anything about type ratings, although aviation now has a push towards similar types and so less training.

Once upon a time it was said that having enclosed cabs would make drivers inattentive. There seems to be a similar attitude towards anything that changes the classic system for gaining route knowledge.

 

[notadriver]

Once upon a time it was said that having enclosed cabs would make drivers inattentive. There seems to be a similar attitude towards anything that changes the classic system for gaining route knowledge.

We have one of the safest railway systems in the world. A lot of that is down to professional highly trained drivers.

 

[HSTEd]

Well cab signalling will provide a lot of this information once it arrives.

All speed restrictions will be displayed as required in the cab etc etc etc.

This significantly reduces the number of things the driver absolutely must remember to enable the train to be driven safely.... does ETCS data include gradients as well?

And whilst highly trained drivers have played a part in our rail system's safety, so have increasingly sophisticated driver aids like AWS, ATP, TPWS and now ETCS.
I don't see any reason why this should not be taken to it's logical conclusion.

 

[Mintona]

Once upon a time it was said that having enclosed cabs would make drivers inattentive. There seems to be a similar attitude towards anything that changes the classic system for gaining route knowledge.

I have no problem with technology that actually helps. But there are too many variables on a route you don’t know to be able to drive it. ETCS will provide much of the same information, and is slowly being brought into more areas. A satnav feels like technology for technology’s sake.

It’s also not particularly arduous going route learning for a few days and then being assessed. It’s not ‘long and difficult to arrange’ at all.

 

[HSTEd]

You would probably get better results from trying to produce an entirely standard cab to reduce the need for traction training.

 

[coppercapped]

I would suggest that the 'satnav' model of driver's assistance is not the right way to look at the way technology can assist. Looking at what is currently used in aircraft is more useful in trying to foresee how technology can assist the driver.

One of the data sets which pilots can call up are the Jeppesen charts of airfields and airways - these include the positions of parking stands, fuel points, taxiways, radio frequencies, runway lengths, widths and gradients, navigation beacons and so on. Imagine such details of each route being available to a train driver on demand - for example access points from roads to the railway so in the case of emergency he/she could try to stop the train near a suitable one. Gradients, track layouts and signal positions, or later ETCS marker boards, could be called up if needed to jog the memory; the position of the train could be shown in real time. Think of it as the Sectional Appendix on steroids!

If anyone needs it all of the Rule Book would be instantly accessible without sacrificing trees or getting a bad back carrying them!

The possibilities are limitless - but I would suggest that the aim should not be the replacement of the driver by automation but - as in the aeronautical world - lightening the workload of the pilot/driver in the physical parts of flying/driving enabling them to concentrate on monitoring safe progress.