Policy Exchange propose to mostly remove route learning

[bahnause]

German drivers absolutely can drive without route knowledge ("Streckenkenntnis"), as long as they stay below 60mph and local regulations don't prohibit it.

As an exception and if no guide with route knowledge is available (rules for DB Fernverkehr). Ver similar rules in switzerland. There is a lot of "ifs", nothing for the daily business.

 

[The exile]

Also, the expression "Spanish practices" is racist. Spain is a modern, dynamic economy very similar to the UK, France, Germany and so on. Picking on them without evidence is the definition of being racist. You wouldn't say something is "Irish" if it's broken or low quality, so don't say something is "Spanish" because you perceive it to be outdated.

Xenophobic - not racist. There’s a difference.

 

[DesiroOperator]

and here in lays the problem we have certain people in the UK maintaining that 'we've always done this ' is the only viable way of doing things, despite

1. practise on other , arguably 'better' railways in the Developed world
2. the fact that many other life and safety critical jobs have changed things dramatically - whether that's Commercial aviation through CRM or healthcare through a variety of things ( including cribbing bits of CRM)
3.a whole variety of other settings where traditional job demarcation and associated spanish practises have long been consigned to the bin

German drivers absolutely can drive without route knowledge ("Streckenkenntnis"), as long as they stay below 60mph and local regulations don't prohibit it.

Forgive me, I don’t have enough knowledge of German Railways to account for this, but if you were to drive some of my routes at 60mph you would potentially derail several times, finding your 500tonne train off a viaduct and into a large residential or commercial area. If you maintained the minimum speed for points on that route it would take you 4 hours to cover the ground usually covered in less than an hour.

As has been said before our signalling system doesn’t yet provide these opportunities. ETCS May change that somewhat, but having used it I wouldn’t want to be in SR mode on a route I don’t know. Frankly there are spots where I wouldn’t be comfortable in fully supervised mode without route knowledge unless I was given some alleviation from passing an MA where I wasn’t completely aware of a virtual block position.

The misconception that the railway’s operation is stagnant is somewhat irksome. The rule book is a living document that changes frequently. Like others I’ve driven under several signalling systems and the only barrier to progress tends to be money in that regard. Electronic notice cases, driver phones and tablets, they all exist. Granted as an ex-pilot I’d love to see the back of paper notices and books as it just brings back miserable memories of carrying around several tonnes worth of Jeppesen manuals when I started out. Technology progressed at ponderous pace in that industry too, future air navigation systems (gps) was future for as long as I flew and GPS approaches are still as rare as hens teeth. What we did learn from change in the industry around training is a lack of thorough grounding cost lives. I won’t stray from the topic too far as we all have memory of events attributed to the most fundamental rules of flight being forgotten by pilots who undertook modern quicker training that involved less manual handling.

I would fear those mistakes (now being reversed), being the thing we did learn from that industry as opposed to learning to embrace the iPad and less bloody notice cases.

Having done both jobs my general take from both is that how training hours are spent tends to be the issue not the number of them. The technical said of flying is far harder and so much time is spent on that. But equal weight is given to Non Techs which is still somewhat given lip service by the railway. Both industries spend a lot of time teaching the technical aspects of their machines, when the reality is identifying a failed instrument, how to reset it if possible, bypass it if not and reporting it is probably all you need. Train drivers don’t fix things without being in contact with control anymore and getting out at 37000’ to fix a hydraulic pump isn’t possible. I need to know how to deal with a problem not the intricacies of its engineering.

My first time flying down a rural mainline in the rain in he dark I was glad of every trip during route learning.

Cuts where they can be made. Not where they cause danger.

 

[En]

Thanks for that.

so when the TOCs use three years as an excuse for their driver shortage as they did to the “think tank” they are telling porkies

I suspect the 'three years' thing is the entire 'zero to hero' cycle from the TOC putting out the job advert to staff being passed out as fully competent drivers who have completed all their probationary and development outcomes and can work interchangably with any other driver at their base...
much the same as in other jobs when you take the time from 'filled in the application' to ' is out on the road / shop floor fully competent and not under any kind of trainee restrictions' as being rather longer than the actual training school and any 'puppy walking' stage as even once signed off from that there will still be restrictions until development standards etc are complete ( again as seen in other life / safety critical roles)

 

[Starmill]

Xenophobic - not racist. There’s a difference.

Can I ask what motivates you to make posts like this...? It seems like an incredibly odd thing to say.

 

[TreacleMiller]

Thanks for that.

so when the TOCs use three years as an excuse for their driver shortage as they did to the “think tank” they are telling porkies

The total of 3 years is from start to post PQA.

PQA lasts for 2 years from the day you are passed out for duty.

So yes, THREE years to be fully out and about is actually correct.

 

[InkyScrolls]

3 years?? If it takes that long, there is something wrong. We have seen above experienced drivers saying that training can be completed in 9 months, and even if we allow 12, it is ridiculous to suggest that recruitment alone can take 2 years.

A friend of mine did the whole course in just over seven months!

 

[Magdalia]

Xenophobic - not racist. There’s a difference.

Yes, there is a difference, and it is evident that you don't know what it is.

Xenophobia is a fear of foreigners.

 

[12LDA28C]

The total of 3 years is from start to post PQA.

PQA lasts for 2 years from the day you are passed out for duty.

So yes, THREE years to be fully out and about is actually correct.

That depends entirely on the link structure at each TOC and depot. It's entirely feasible at a smaller TOC / depot that a newly-qualified driver may sign all the routes and traction that are required by the link they are placed in at qualification, so in that case they would be classed as 'fully out and about' i.e. fully productive at the end of their training period and no further routes or traction would need to be signed at the end of their PQA period.

 

[TreacleMiller]

That depends entirely on the link structure at each TOC and depot. It's entirely feasible at a smaller TOC / depot that a newly-qualified driver may sign all the routes and traction that are required by the link they are placed in at qualification, so in that case they would be classed as 'fully out and about' i.e. fully productive at the end of their training period and no further routes or traction would need to be signed at the end of their PQA period.

Oh absolutely, but regardless, as you know that two year period post qualification is mandatory and a term of the license.

If someone asked the question a certain way it's certainly valid to say 36 months assuming 12 months of driver training.

 

[Krokodil]

so when the TOCs use three years as an excuse for their driver shortage as they did to the “think tank” they are telling porkies

It's more complicated than that. You train an extra driver, but in that time one of your old hands retires. So you still have a vacancy to fill. Any increase in depot complements will need to involve extra instructors to take on the extra work (compared with the routine replacement of retiring staff). This is why it takes ages to get on top of training backlogs.

I could drive trains without route knowledge on the UK network at (perhaps) 30 or 40mph, and be confident of not derailing or spadding

Worth noting that many SPADs involve shunt moves.

 

[43066]

A friend of mine did the whole course in just over seven months!

They went from walking in the door as a new trainee to passing out as a qualified driver within seven months?

Whereabouts was that, out of interest?

 

[12LDA28C]

Oh absolutely, but regardless, as you know that two year period post qualification is mandatory and a term of the license.

Of course, but it's not really correct to include the two-year PQ cycle as part of a driver's training period. They are fully-qualified in that scenario after 12 months and are no more qualified after the following two years. Claiming a 3-year training period is either 'creative licence' at best or a downright lie at worst, depending on your viewpoint.

 

[eldomtom2]

As an exception and if no guide with route knowledge is available (rules for DB Fernverkehr). Ver similar rules in switzerland. There is a lot of "ifs", nothing for the daily business.

Yes, it's not regular practice. The point is that the nature of German railways is that driving without route knowledge if no guide is available is the default option, which it definitely isn't in the UK!

 

[TreacleMiller]

Of course, but it's not really correct to include the two-year PQ cycle as part of a driver's training period. They are fully-qualified in that scenario after 12 months and are no more qualified after the following two years. Claiming a 3-year training period is either 'creative licence' at best or a downright lie at worst, depending on your viewpoint.

Absolutely, it shouldn't be. I'm trying to think of any other sensible way to get "3 years" from anything.

It's certainly nonsense to suggest drivers aren't productive etc. In that time.

 

[m0ffy]

I think everyone is in agreement that currently recruitment and training takes too long and costs too much, and it's fair to challenge this.

I would look at the following areas:

1. Duplication. Why do we need fourteen employers running separate recruitment campaigns and training schools, when we could have only one? Why do places like Newcastle have or need three driver depots with intercity trains all working over substantially very similar route between Edinburgh and York?

2. Traction. The total absence of any long-term rolling stock strategy means vast millions of pounds are wasted annually on traction training which wouldn't have otherwise been necessary. Also why has there been absolutely no attention whatsoever on commonality of controls and cabs for decades?

3. Workforce life cycles. Why has there been little focus in some parts of the industry to balance the age profile of the workforce? Recruiting only qualified or previously experienced drivers for two decades heavily biases your workforce, at a point in time, to late-career staff. This saves money now at the expense of money later.

Sadly, I don't see a single mention of any of this throughout the document.

Also, the expression "Spanish practices" is racist. Spain is a modern, dynamic economy very similar to the UK, France, Germany and so on. Picking on them without evidence is the definition of being racist. You wouldn't say something is "Irish" if it's broken or low quality, so don't say something is "Spanish" because you perceive it to be outdated.

Fully agree with this approach. Strategic workforce planning seems to have evaded the industry.

 

[InkyScrolls]

They went from walking in the door as a new trainee to passing out as a qualified driver within seven months?

Whereabouts was that, out of interest?

I've just spoken to him - I misremembered slightly, it was just over eight months, not seven. Very quick either way, and yes, that was from a non railway background to fully qualified! I won't specify the depot but Northern is the TOC in question.

 

[43066]

I've just spoken to him - I misremembered slightly, it was just over eight months, not seven. Very quick either way, and yes, that was from a non railway background to fully qualified! I won't specify the depot but Northern is the TOC in question.

Interesting - that is going it some! I wondered if it was London Overground as they have one traction type (two at some depots) and a small route network. I’ve heard of nine months being achievable there (a few colleagues used to work there).

Most places seem to be a year or just over.

My operator is taking 9-10 months to pass fully qualified drivers out on the route at the moment.

 

[InkyScrolls]

Interesting - that is going it some! I wondered if it was London Overground as they have one traction type (two at some depots) and a small route network. I’ve heard of nine months being achievable there (a few colleagues used to work there).

Most places seem to be a year or just over.

My operator is taking 9-10 months to pass fully qualified drivers out on the route at the moment.

May I ask which operator you work for? Northern specifies a year, and at the larger depots it does take that long.

 

[43066]

May I ask which operator you work for? Northern specifies a year, and at the larger depots it does take that long.

I’m not going to say which, but needless to say, it’s due to training delays etc. It should only take around twelve weeks!

Edit: and to reiterate this is qualified drivers who have moved across to us from other TOCs. Longer than some street to seat trainees are taking - which is a tad bonkers .

 

[Starmill]

I've just spoken to him - I misremembered slightly, it was just over eight months, not seven. Very quick either way, and yes, that was from a non railway background to fully qualified! I won't specify the depot but Northern is the TOC in question.

There are certainly some Northern depots where nearly all of the work is on a surprisingly short section of route. Harrogate could do an incredible amount of work with just Leeds - Harrogate - York and Buxton with just Buxton - Manchester Piccadilly. In that respect several depots at London Overground and c2c are a little similar too. That can absolutely be a very efficient way to work. Of course it falls apart rapidly if you try to cover service groups at say Avanti West Coast like that, it's totally unworkable.

 

[Harpo]

There are certainly some Northern depots where nearly all of the work is on a surprisingly short section of route. Harrogate could do an incredible amount of work with just Leeds - Harrogate - York and Buxton with just Buxton - Manchester Piccadilly. In that respect several depots at London Overground and c2c are a little similar too. That can absolutely be a very efficient way to work. Of course it falls apart rapidly if you try to cover service groups at say Avanti West Coast like that, it's totally unworkable.

Short range route knowledge is useful for making new drivers productive but either method (short range or long range route knowledge) fails if the plan is to operate it without a full establishment and without goodwill on both sides. Northern, Avanti and many more have repeatedly demonstrated this.

The difference between the two strategies is the impact of an uncovered job and that impact is somewhat proportional to the number of different headcodes on the uncovered job. The lack of a resource to redeploy what's left, and reduce impacts, exacerbates that.

 

[TreacleMiller]

Short range route knowledge is useful for making new drivers productive but either method (short range or long range route knowledge) fails if the plan is to operate it without a full establishment and without goodwill on both sides. Northern, Avanti and many more have repeatedly demonstrated this.

The difference between the two strategies is the impact of an uncovered job and is somewhat proportional to the number of different headcodes on the uncovered job. The lack of a resource to redeploy what's left, and reduce impacts, exacerbates that.

Indeed. The lack of route learning on redundancy routes and diversions early on limits new drivers ability to be flexible through disruption too. There's been several instances of me having my service terminated due to my own route knowledge.

This isn't helped by having such a varied roster, maintaing that knowledge is an absolute pain.

I do think there is some merit in allowing unsigned routes to be used with set rulebook limitations. We have it for various forms of degraded working. That could be a 40/50 mph max with a signaller giving drivers the route set prior to the movement taking place.

Railway being the railway though if won't happen. It takes ages to introduce single line working or special working to the point that the incident is usually cleared before it happens.

 

[Egg Centric]

One of the problems with with our political system is this sort of thing. I'd far rather have a STEM graduate opining uninformed on politics than an English graduate opining uninformed on technology (even archaic technology). Possible counterpoint: Liz Truss.

 

[WAB]

Fully agree with this approach. Strategic workforce planning seems to have evaded the industry.

Some TOCs have dedicated teams working on an intelligence-based approach to replacing retiring traincrew, but you can't predict everything and if the training school is full, there's little to be done.

 

[Mag_seven]

This thread has run its course.