TfW Request Stop Trial

[Belperpete]

Will it have separate buttons for up and down directions? Otherwise, with those halts close to a passing loop, I could see some confusion.

The idea of a member of the project team telling the guard, who in turn will tell the driver, seems a bit comical, not to mention long-winded. Presumably this person is going to have to shadow the guard as he/she passes up and down the train checking and issuing tickets?

How long before the train arrives will the button have to be pressed, to ensure the message finally gets to the driver? And what if someone presses the button just as the train is approaching? Does the driver ignore them, or slam the brakes on?

 

[edwin_m]

I believe it’s 58. Hopefully the map I’ve added is of decent quality.

As for how it will work, it will use the GSMR system and there will be (I believe) an additional small display to inform the driver of whether someone at the stop has pressed the button to request the train to stop. This part hasn’t been implemented yet so there will be staff that are part of the project with a mobile phone linked to the platform system, on the trains in question to tell the guard if there is someone waiting who can inform the driver in the appropriate manner.

I’m not certain how it will tie in with guards either, whether it will be linked to their work phones, whether only the driver will know and they still use the old system of buzzing the driver to say they don’t have anyone onboard to get off. It’s early days so I wouldn’t be overly surprised if that part of the method of working hasn’t been decided yet.

As for fuel, at Mach, every train that comes on to depot of a night time gets fuelled to max. So if the train uses less fuel for the same mileage since it was last fuelled then that is a cost saving.
I’m not totally sure on the brake changes but I’ll have to ask now out of curiosity.
197’s work differently though, as they have a dynamic brake which gets used exclusively above a certain speed so brake wear will be less. But perhaps there are other benefits in terms of mechanical sympathy if the dynamic brake isn’t having to work as hard all the time.



As a Cambrian coast driver with our 15 request stops, I’m supportive of it but can see it having its own issues / not being as effective as hoped.

So there is someone sitting somewhere with a phone, who can see somehow that a button has been pressed and then has to work out which train it applies to before calling the guard? Plenty to go wrong there, especially as mobile coverage may be sketchy in the places where request stops are.

I worked out recently that it costs around £2 in diesel to accelerate a DMU to a reasonable cruising speed. So unless brake pads are very expensive and changed on condition, the saving probably won't pay for the equipment and certainly won't pay the wages of the person with the phone.

 

[louis97]

I believe it’s 58. Hopefully the map I’ve added is of decent quality.

61 served by TfW, 55 of which are in Wales. The map is slightly out of date - stations between Llandudno Junction and Bangor, plus Deganwy, Ferryside and Kidwelly are no longer request stops.

 

[zwk500]

The idea of a member of the project team telling the guard, who in turn will tell the driver, seems a bit comical, not to mention long-winded. Presumably this person is going to have to shadow the guard as he/she passes up and down the train checking and issuing tickets?

So there is someone sitting somewhere with a phone, who can see somehow that a button has been pressed and then has to work out which train it applies to before calling the guard? Plenty to go wrong there, especially as mobile coverage may be sketchy in the places where request stops are.

I worked out recently that it costs around £2 in diesel to accelerate a DMU to a reasonable cruising speed. So unless brake pads are very expensive and changed on condition, the saving probably won't pay for the equipment and certainly won't pay the wages of the person with the phone.

My reading of it is that the request 'message' will be sent to the Guard's work phone, therefore no additional staff would be required to work the system (although an additional maintenance cost will of course be there).

As a Cambrian coast driver with our 15 request stops, I’m supportive of it but can see it having its own issues / not being as effective as hoped.

Out of interest as a driver do you have a strong feeling about whether Request stops should all just become mandatory calls?

 

[Jez]

I believe it’s 58. Hopefully the map I’ve added is of decent quality.



As a Cambrian coast driver with our 15 request stops, I’m supportive of it but can see it having its own issues / not being as effective as hoped.

That's excellent. Thank you so much for attaching that. Wow 22 request stops on the Heart of Wales!

 

[Sheridan]

If the trial is using the regular mobile phone data network but the final design is to use the GSM-R system then I’m not sure there is much point in the trial at all!

 

[Lurcheroo]

Will it have separate buttons for up and down directions? Otherwise, with those halts close to a passing loop, I could see some confusion.

The idea of a member of the project team telling the guard, who in turn will tell the driver, seems a bit comical, not to mention long-winded. Presumably this person is going to have to shadow the guard as he/she passes up and down the train checking and issuing tickets?

How long before the train arrives will the button have to be pressed, to ensure the message finally gets to the driver? And what if someone presses the button just as the train is approaching? Does the driver ignore them, or slam the brakes on?

No idea quite frankly. We’ve not been give much info on it. Let’s take Tonfannau for example, near to Tywyn where nearly every service crosses. Logically, I would think the screen would tell you which service is next due, worst case they press it when the service to a Machynlleth is approaching, it stops they say “sorry we want the one going the other way” and the train proceeds and they repeat for the one heading to Pwllheli, just as happens now sometimes.

That is only for the trial to prove that the technology is functioning. They could not be in the driving cab with a mobile phone on like that so it’s just how it’ll need to be done for the trial.

The message should be pretty instant with the technology it will be using.
As for how soon before arrival it has to be pressed will depend on the speed the train is travelling and That is one of the things I was thinking of when I said I could think of some possible issues. I assume the system would automatically switch to the next train once you reach the ‘cut off’ point.
An easy way to do it would be to have it linked to something like a treadle set at the service braking distance from the request stop that would then switch it over so the driver would only ever receive a stop message for that station within a stoppable distance without doing any crazy braking.

In many instances, if you come around a corner doing line speed and see someone trying to wave you down, you’ll have no hope of stopping even in the emergency brake setting.

So there is someone sitting somewhere with a phone, who can see somehow that a button has been pressed and then has to work out which train it applies to before calling the guard? Plenty to go wrong there, especially as mobile coverage may be sketchy in the places where request stops are.

I worked out recently that it costs around £2 in diesel to accelerate a DMU to a reasonable cruising speed. So unless brake pads are very expensive and changed on condition, the saving probably won't pay for the equipment and certainly won't pay the wages of the person with the phone.

only for the trial is what I understand
, no idea how it will work long term.

I hope TFW would do the sums with the data of the number of services that don’t stop at each request and figure out if it’s truly worth it or not.
There are of course other benefits such as timetable resilience. If you’re running a bit late and you can fly past a number of request stops at line speed then it will help to make a bit of time back.
You don’t need to pay any phone people wages haha !

That's excellent. Thank you so much for attaching that. Wow 22 request stops on the Heart of Wales!

my pleasure. Someone else has said that the map is a bit out of date, on RTT I can only count 16 crews and at most 10 requests for any one journey for a given crew as they only work half of it and swap over and go back. Perhaps someone can correct me if that’s wrong.

If the trial is using the regular mobile phone data network but the final design is to use the GSM-R system then I’m not sure there is much point in the trial at all!

The whole point of the trial is this:
Expected outcomes:

1. Gather data on passenger usage, engagement & feedback, plus data on improvements in train performance and fuel usage.
2. Determine if the equipment provides customer experience improvements.
3. Promotion of the activities and customer engagement.
4. Create a trial report detailing the findings.

Out of interest as a driver do you have a strong feeling about whether Request stops should all just become mandatory calls?

Not really. It’s a tough one. When you’re on time, stopping everywhere would be easier, if you’re not stopping and you’re powering flat out everywhere then you’ll get way ahead of time and be going through request stops way too early so you have to moderate your speed at lot. You get 6 minutes to go from Harlech to Llandanwg and it takes about 2-3 minutes if your flat out so your literally trundling along at less than half the line speed to kill time.
When you’re late it’s super handy as you can make back quite a lot of time.

 

[zwk500]

@Lurcheroo many thanks for all of that very informative post.

 

[WAB]

When you’re late it’s super handy as you can make back quite a lot of time.

Especially on the Cambrian, you need that capability with the single-line working and the need to hold for connections etc.

 

[Meerkat]

Any news on how this works?
My best guess is that the platform unit sends the message to a central base, which knows which train is next and then sends the station name to the display unit on that train (in order if necessary) ( I am assuming GSM-R can already link a head code to a ‘phone number’ for a particular train so that signallers can contact it).
For the trial I’m guessing the trial bod has their own GSM-R handset to replicate the train, or trial HQ just reads the station’s message and calls the trial bod on the train (though what’s mobile coverage like out there in the hills?).

 

[Belperpete]

As the ETCS signalling system relies on GSM-R, I would hope that the coverage is adequate. Some of the axle counter sections used by the signalling system are very long, so trains are also tracked by GSM-R, which is what I think updates the departure indicators at the outlying halts (every station and halt on the Cambrian has a real-time departure indicator).

GSM-R does include a method for linking the train description with the driver's GSM unit. But it sounds like for the trial at least, the messages will be received on a different handset. I doubt that GSM-R will also include that handset in the link.

An alternative method would be for the station unit to simply send a broadcast message to any train within the vicinity. And perhaps repeat that message at suitable intervals until a train passes. It should be relatively easy for the handset on the train, knowing where it is and the direction it is going, to ignore any messages from a halt it has already passed.

There are some obvious questions about the functionality. Such as, with a 2 - 3 hour service frequency, will someone pressing the button stop the next train even if it is 2 hours later? Or the next day? Or will it only work if you press the button within a set time of the next train's arrival? And if so, what happens if that train is significantly delayed, such that the button press has timed out, could passengers who have pressed the button see the train sail straight through?

 

[Meerkat]

As the ETCS signalling system relies on GSM-R, I would hope that the coverage is adequate.

I meant normal mobile coverage for the bod on the train for the trials, if he was just getting told by HQ to tell the guard. Depends if they are just testing the platform unit, whilst replicating the train at HQ

There are some obvious questions about the functionality. Such as, with a 2 - 3 hour service frequency, will someone pressing the button stop the next train even if it is 2 hours later? Or the next day? Or will it only work if you press the button within a set time of the next train's arrival? And if so, what happens if that train is significantly delayed, such that the button press has timed out, could passengers who have pressed the button see the train sail straight through?

In the photo the platform unit has a display showing the next train. I assume that the button is effectively “do you want this train”.
If that train stops being the next train you would hope the system stops the new next train (though on those lines is anyone going to actually wait rather than wander off and come back?)

 

[Belperpete]

I meant normal mobile coverage for the bod on the train for the trials, if he was just getting told by HQ to tell the guard. Depends if they are just testing the platform unit, whilst replicating the train at HQ

In the photo the platform unit has a display showing the next train. I assume that the button is effectively “do you want this train”.

As I understand it, GSM-R uses reserved spectrum in the standard GSM coverage, so if GSM-R is available, then standard GSM mobile coverage should be available.

The do you want this train functionality makes sense, and would stop the overnight issue. However, if the train order suddenly changes because the passing place has been moved, this could cause issues. For a halt close to a passing loop, it might not give someone waiting for the new next train much opportunity to press the button.

Unusually, the platform displays on the Cambrian display trains over two hours in advance, so I wonder if these units will too? For some of the Cambrian halts, there isn't much in the vicinity to wander off to, particularly if the weather is bad.

At least these days, there are the displays to tell you when the next train is due. I can remember before they were provided, pre RETB, waiting for several hours at places like Minffordd with no clue when my train might eventually turn up. And if a train came the other way, asking the guard of that train if he knew what was going on.

 

[Meerkat]

Watched a video about the Scottish ones - you can’t push the button earlier than 20 mins before the train is due.
Hopefully it doesn’t cancel it if the train is delayed 20 mins!

Another question is whether there is any proving - does the train tell the platform unit that the train has received the message and does the driver get a confirmed “no”? Otherwise a communication failure could result in a failure to stop.

 

[Belperpete]

Watched a video about the Scottish ones - you can’t push the button earlier than 20 mins before the train is due.
Hopefully it doesn’t cancel it if the train is delayed 20 mins!

Another question is whether there is any proving - does the train tell the platform unit that the train has received the message and does the driver get a confirmed “no”? Otherwise a communication failure could result in a failure to stop.

I wonder what the compensation arrangements would be for that? I pressed the button but the train didn't stop, so I was two hours late. Would TfW be able to retrospectively check if the button had been pressed or not, or would they just have to pay up?

I suppose the system could be engineered so that the train stops unless it gets a message to say that the button hasn't been pressed. So the station unit could wait until a set time before the train is due, and then send out the no need to stop message. If there is a power failure or comms failure, or the unit is faulty, then the train stops. As a signal engineer, that seems more fail safe, but significantly more complex to achieve.

 

[Meerkat]

Is the latest ‘push time’ advertised - I didn’t see it in the video of Scottish units/signage?
I assume they won’t bodge the public timetable as that would make the train normally seem late.

 

[geoffk]

The "stations" section of National Rail Enquiries appears to make no mention of request stops. Should this not be part of the "accessibility and support" section? I checked a couple of stations in Devon which I know are request stops.

 

[markymark2000]

The "stations" section of National Rail Enquiries appears to make no mention of request stops. Should this not be part of the "accessibility and support" section? I checked a couple of stations in Devon which I know are request stops.

National Rail Enquiries has shed loads of out of date info as no one can be bothered updating the details. Whenever I've tried to get it updated, it's hit a dead end.

 

[Llanigraham]

GSM-R uses their own masts and has no link to the public GSM system.
There are several places between Newtown and Machynlleth where there is GSM-R reception but no public mobile signal.

 

[Belperpete]

GSM-R uses their own masts and has no link to the public GSM system.
There are several places between Newtown and Machynlleth where there is GSM-R reception but no public mobile signal.

Is that because the railway-supplied masts don't include any public bandwidth?

 

[Dai Corner]

Is that because the railway-supplied masts don't include any public bandwidth?

They're not allowed to. As I understand it, the railways are allowed to build masts on their land without any of the usual permissions/restrictions as long as they're only used for operational purposes.

 

[Sheridan]

As the trial was only at two stations, presumably the people running it were confident that the approaches to those stations have good 3G coverage, or they would have picked somewhere else?

 

[pint]

Ask a daft question time...
I recently watched a programme on people who live in remote parts of Canada and use a request stop method for getting on and off trains where the train stops at seemingly random points along the track where people and goods get on/off at the trackside - no station no platform just apparently random bits along the railroad tracks.
Could a similar system operate in the UK for request stops? There appear to be certain network rail access points onto the tracks that could be used for such purposes and could add some flexibility at a very low cost to rail access/travel

 

[cool110]

Could a similar system operate in the UK for request stops?

No, there's no way to board a UK train from ground level other than the ladders on cab doors. It can work in the US and Canada since they mostly use low level doors with internal steps.

 

[DelW]

Ask a daft question time...
I recently watched a programme on people who live in remote parts of Canada and use a request stop method for getting on and off trains where the train stops at seemingly random points along the track where people and goods get on/off at the trackside - no station no platform just apparently random bits along the railroad tracks.
Could a similar system operate in the UK for request stops? There appear to be certain network rail access points onto the tracks that could be used for such purposes and could add some flexibility at a very low cost to rail access/travel

PRM accessibility regulations would be the first problem. The need to board via portable steps or a ladder would be the next. I think there might be others ...

 

[Lurcheroo]

Ask a daft question time...
I recently watched a programme on people who live in remote parts of Canada and use a request stop method for getting on and off trains where the train stops at seemingly random points along the track where people and goods get on/off at the trackside - no station no platform just apparently random bits along the railroad tracks.
Could a similar system operate in the UK for request stops? There appear to be certain network rail access points onto the tracks that could be used for such purposes and could add some flexibility at a very low cost to rail access/travel

Fair observation.
My grandfather used to get the train to and from school each day from a farm just outside of a village called Llandinam to a school in Llanidloes. The line is now closed but back in those days, the train would just stop outside the farm house and he would climb on.

As for modern day, almost certainly not. Even if viable with rolling stock (which Cool110 explains why it’s not) then Health and safety would never permit it.

 

[Belperpete]

Of course, it could be possible if you built special rolling stock that met all the necessary requirements. Just how much that would cost to build a small fleet of totally non-standard stock would be another matter. Probably cheaper to build a proper platform.

I can recall watching a similar series (it is probably being regularly repeated). From what I recall, they didn't just stick their hand out to stop the train, but they had somehow warned the train crew in advance. Both driver and conductor were well aware that they were going to be stopping to pick someone up.

Although I do recall an episode where a couple were apparently desperately racing through the snow to meet a train that was dropping off something they urgently needed. Quite how contrived it was, who knows (like the many episodes where the track gang just manage to fix something in the nick of time). I was left wondering what would have happened if they hadn't made it there on time - would the train have still stopped if there were noone there?

 

[williamn]

I don’t really understand what problem is this trying to solve. There surely must be more pressing uses for the budget?!

 

[AlterEgo]

PRM accessibility regulations would be the first problem. The need to board via portable steps or a ladder would be the next. I think there might be others ...

If that’s what is getting in the way of literally stopping in the middle of nowhere to accommodate a (presumably ambulant) customer’s request then that’s a bit mad.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 13 Sep 2024 ==

I don’t really understand what problem is this trying to solve. There surely must be more pressing uses for the budget?!

It means trains can go faster through request stops where nobody is waiting to board or alight, as they won’t have to slow down to a crawl just in case. It’s improving reliability and speed, what’s not to like?

 

[The exile]

If that’s what is getting in the way of literally stopping in the middle of nowhere to accommodate a (presumably ambulant) customer’s request then that’s a bit mad.

If a facility is newly made available to the able-bodied, it has to be accessible for those who are not. There are exceptions, but arguing for them for something that would be an operational and H&S nightmare would be a waste of breath.