Tube driver filming himself whilst driving

[Intermodal]

I haven't seen any discussion of this yet. There is a bloke on YouTube who has recently started posting videos of himself whilst driving trains on the Piccadilly line - both filming the view forward and talking to himself and also filming himself talking to the camera whilst driving.

Presumably someone at LUL has authorised this, but it seems a bit bonkers to me. I think the arguments against it are incredibly obvious and I'm surprised any manager has ever agreed to it. I can't see this being allowed to carry on for long? All it takes is one Daily Mail headline saying that a tube driver is focusing on talking to his YouTube fans instead of actually driving the train.

Dale Charman Travels

A travel Vlog for all to enjoy. Drivers POV of the Piccadilly Line. A mixture of plane and train reviews as well as some of my trips to the likes of Disney and Universal theme parks.

www.youtube.com

A travel Vlog for all to enjoy.
Drivers POV of the Piccadilly Line.
A mixture of plane and train reviews as well as some of my trips to the likes of Disney and Universal theme parks.

 

[Crithylum]

Having watched most of these videos it is very apparent that driving the train is his first priority and talking to the camera is his second. He will often talk about driving the train, which could possibly be a benefit as it stops him from switching into autopilot. Additionally he will stop talking when significant attention is required. I am far more concerned about the millions (yes, millions) of car drivers who seem to be addicted to using their mobile phones behind the wheel.

 

[renegademaster]

He dubs over doing the voiceover at home i reckon

 

[ainsworth74]

Yes I've seen his videos and thought similarly that it was quite remarkable he was being allowed to film in the manner it appears that he is. It does make for interesting videos and I presume he knows what he's doing (I have no reason to think otherwise!) but I'm just surprised it's been signed off on!

 

[Intermodal]

He dubs over doing the voiceover at home i reckon

This is most definitely not the case. There are many examples of him moving the camera, adjusting it, and he has even done videos directly filming himself whilst driving.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2024 ==

I'm just surprised it's been signed off on!

My thoughts exactly

 

[bramling]

This is most definitely not the case. There are many examples of him moving the camera, adjusting it, and he has even done videos directly filming himself whilst driving.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2024 ==


My thoughts exactly

I tend to agree that management must know about it, and it is surprising. But the flip side of the coin is that he remains well focussed on the work-related task. What’s perhaps more surprising is that from a security point of view it is quite clearly showing people how to drive a train, not sure how wise that is nowadays - though I don’t think he has shown stuff like where to put keys or how to open up the cab.

 

[Intermodal]

Having watched most of these videos it is very apparent that driving the train is his first priority and talking to the camera is his second.

I don’t really think there should be any second priority of any kind. No matter how you look at it, it just introduces unnecessary risk. He has a video where he received an emergency stop instruction and yet he is still talking to the camera whilst responding to it.

On this occasion it appears that it didn’t impact anything, however in my view it can only be detrimental to the attention of the driver.

He spends most of his videos answering questions from viewers. I’m not sure whether he remembers these or writes them down, but either way a significant portion of his attention is being devoted to this, which isn’t just standard commentary driving, and seems to suggest non-insignificant additional risk. There is a huge optics problem here - as soon as the papers get hold of it there will be murder.

I wonder what risk assessments have been carried out by TfL for his filming activities?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2024 ==

By the way, I just want to add that the bloke concerned seems to be a thoroughly nice chap. Looks like he’s done everything right in terms of getting permission to film. As previously stated, my amazement is that this was granted.

 

[bramling]

I don’t really think there should be any second priority of any kind. No matter how you look at it, it just introduces unnecessary risk. He has a video where he received an emergency stop instruction and yet he is still talking to the camera whilst responding to it.

On this occasion it appears that it didn’t impact anything, however in my view it can only be detrimental to the attention of the driver.

He spends most of his videos answering questions from viewers. I’m not sure whether he remembers these or writes them down, but either way a significant portion of his attention is being devoted to this, which isn’t just standard commentary driving, and seems to suggest non-insignificant additional risk. There is a huge optics problem here - as soon as the papers get hold of it there will be murder.

I wonder what risk assessments have been carried out by TfL for his filming activities?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2024 ==

By the way, I just want to add that the bloke concerned seems to be a thoroughly nice chap. Looks like he’s done everything right in terms of getting permission to film. As previously stated, my amazement is that this was granted.

Worth noting that this isn’t the first time we’ve seen this. There were a couple of similar videos made relating to the transition from A to S stock, though I’m not sure exactly how these were filmed (I suspect they may have had someone else authorised to be in the cab doing the filming).

Normally for this sort of thing the standard practice is for there to be a manager present to supervise, and normally it would be an instructor rather than a regular driver. Though I seem to remember when the Video 125 cab ride for the Piccadilly Line was filmed, the first one of the drivers knew about it was when her train turned up with the film crew already all setup in the cab!

 

[Intermodal]

Worth noting that this isn’t the first time we’ve seen this. There were a couple of similar videos made relating to the transition from A to S stock, though I’m not sure exactly how these were filmed (I suspect they may have had someone else authorised to be in the cab doing the filming).

Actually, I think that’s the point: it is the first time we’ve seen the driver both being a cameraman, narrator, and a train driver. Understandably, sometimes for operational or promotional reasons, it is desirable to film in the driving cab, and extra staff are allocated to do this.

Are drivers required to stay focused on driving or not? If one can film and talk to camera, why can’t another listen to a podcast or music? Seems less distracting to me.

 

[bramling]

Actually, I think that’s the point: it is the first time we’ve seen the driver both being a cameraman, narrator, and a train driver. Understandably, sometimes for operational or promotional reasons, it is desirable to film in the driving cab, and extra staff are allocated to do this.

Are drivers required to stay focused on driving or not? If one can film and talk to camera, why can’t another listen to a podcast or music? Seems less distracting to me.

Yeah I tend to agree, it’s probably to be regarded as a difficult-to-justify distraction. Not sure if the driver is an instructor, as being in that role would make him more adept at remaining focussed whilst dealing with something else going on - I’d say talking to the camera would be less of a distraction than explaining something to a trainee whilst driving.

 

[Intermodal]

I think that it doesn’t matter how adept any particular person is at driving with an additional distraction, or not. The position of the UK railway industry has always been to absolutely minimise all unnecessary risks. It seems very odd to allow this with that context in mind.

Someone filming for YouTube has no justifiable operational or commercial need - so any extra safety risk (should) be untenable.

Another discussion that could be had is that the employee profits from the YouTube videos in terms of advertisements, which doesn’t seem entirely proper/correct.

 

[Silent]

Well it’s fine to watch the guys videos sometimes and he always seems well focused on the job. I haven’t seen him miss signals or anything whilst recording himself driving.

 

[Deepgreen]

I have seen this and I find it virtually impossible to believe it is being done with LU's permission/blessing - it certainly would not have been in my time there. I imagine his run of videos will be quite short!

 

[Highview]

There is another recent Youtube channel called "It's just an idea" where a Jubilee Line driver on his last day before retirement filmed real time in his cab - with cameras facing forwards and towards him with minimal but live conversation. Well worth a view though.

 

[mullinsj08]

I have seen this and I find it virtually impossible to believe it is being done with LU's permission/blessing - it certainly would not have been in my time there. I imagine his run of videos will be quite short!

He mentions in his latest video that he has had a meeting and TFL are happy with what he is recording and clarified what he is not to film (Which he isn't filming anyway).

He's just talking away as you would if someone else were in the cab with you. Or do tube drivers who give their colleagues a lift just sit there in silence not talking to each other in case it creates unnecessary risk?

 

[Intermodal]

He's just talking away as you would if someone else were in the cab with you. Or do tube drivers who give their colleagues a lift just sit there in silence not talking to each other in case it creates unnecessary risk?

When I was driving, you’d get disciplined if you had someone in the cab for a non-operational reason, even if it were another driver.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Well it’s fine to watch the guys videos sometimes and he always seems well focused on the job. I haven’t seen him miss signals or anything whilst recording himself driving.

I think it's safe to assume that if he had such an incident while filming, he wouldn't upload that footage to his YouTube!

 

[Mawkie]

What’s perhaps more surprising is that from a security point of view it is quite clearly showing people how to drive a train

That would be my concern too.

Are drivers required to stay focused on driving or not?

Of course they are, however this could also be viewed as a risk based commentary, which is one of the methods utilised to regain focus should one lose focus.

Not sure if the driver is an instructor,

He isn't.

When I was driving, you’d get disciplined if you had someone in the cab for a non-operational reason

Not sure how long ago that was. Officially nobody should be in the cab with you when driving, but I have never heard of it ever being questioned in the last decade at least. I frequently have staff travelling with me - probably 3/4 times a week. (My managers are happy to sign off on a cab permit for non staff members too eg friends and family.)

 

[Vespa]

I found the video very educational regarding driving it, braking , the signals and trackworks

 

[Intermodal]

That would be my concern too.

Of course they are, however this could also be viewed as a risk based commentary, which is one of the methods utilised to regain focus should one lose focus.

He isn't.

Not sure how long ago that was. Officially nobody should be in the cab with you when driving, but I have never heard of it ever being questioned in the last decade at least. I frequently have staff travelling with me - probably 3/4 times a week. (My managers are happy to sign off on a cab permit for non staff members too eg friends and family.)

It was less than a year ago - admittedly they very recently started cracking down on it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 5 Oct 2024 ==

I found the video very educational regarding driving it, braking , the signals and trackworks

I’m not disputing that the videos are interesting and well made. I’m suggesting that it is significantly against the tide of the industry to allow them and may pose some safety risks.

 

[Vespa]

I’m not disputing that the videos are interesting and well made. I’m suggesting that it is significantly against the tide of the industry to allow them and may pose some safety risks.

From what I'm seeing he's is not distracted and is operating it safely.

I've driven several diesels on experience days you would have 4 people in the cab, me, instructor, second man and another participant who could be talking to each other, the instructor talking to me and I'm focused on the driving while listening.

That's the main thing as long as you're focused there's no safety issues.

How else would a train or tube driver learn to drive if there's no one in the cab, it would be a similar set up, the camera is static and not interfering with the driver.

 

[Silent]

I think it's safe to assume that if he had such an incident while filming, he wouldn't upload that footage to his YouTube!

Sure but the fact he can upload many videos driving the train without messing up makes me trust that he is safe as to what he is doing.

 

[43066]

I’m not disputing that the videos are interesting and well made. I’m suggesting that it is significantly against the tide of the industry to allow them and may pose some safety risks.

I’m not sure I see the safety risk here. Train drivers will regularly have other staff members in the cab with them, and that’s surely more distracting than just commentating into a GoPro. Obviously it’s down to the driver to be aware of when they’re becoming distracted and act accordingly.

It’s also not unknown elsewhere in the industry. Don Coffey and Ben Elias both make similar videos on the mainline which AIUI are made with the full blessing of management.

 

[whoosh]

There's giving an insight to what his job involves, and teaching us to nick a train. Those are two very different things.

From a Public Relations point of view, they are a good thing for London Underground. He actually demonstrates what at my company are called 'Personal Protection Strategies' - things you do to remember things, or stay focused. If I were a layman I'd find that reassuring, and as a train driver i find it an example of good practice.

 

[Intermodal]

I've driven several diesels on experience days you would have 4 people in the cab, me, instructor, second man and another participant who could be talking to each other, the instructor talking to me and I'm focused on the driving while listening.

I don’t want to be dismissive, but a diesel on an experience day isn’t even slightly comparable to an experienced driver on a public line that has all sorts of extra risks.

Sure but the fact he can upload many videos driving the train without messing up makes me trust that he is safe as to what he is doing.

He hasn’t uploaded very many videos. The default standard for train drivers is to make no errors. Obviously some people make errors. This is dealt with within the industry in a reasonable way. If/when he does make an error, which isn’t a statistically unlikely event, how can TfL justify the cost, inconvenience, and breach of safety if the YouTube videos somehow contributed to this error? I can imagine the scathing language in the RAIB report already.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Oct 2024 ==

From a Public Relations point of view, they are a good thing for London Underground. He actually demonstrates what at my company are called 'Personal Protection Strategies' - things you do to remember things, or stay focused. If I were a layman I'd find that reassuring, and as a train driver i find it an example of good practice.

We will have to agree to disagree here - I showed these videos to some of my friends who are external to the industry and they were not at all reassured by it.

One friend sent me this video completely unprompted and expressed his concern about it.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Oct 2024 ==

It’s also not unknown elsewhere in the industry. Don Coffey and Ben Elias both make similar videos on the mainline which AIUI are made with the full blessing of management

Making videos where the camera is mounted statically, as these two do, without a voiceover, is materially different to what this tube driver is doing. He talks to the camera constantly, occasionally moves the camera, films himself whilst walking around infrastructure such as depots and sidings. It’s not the same thing. Having a static camera placed in the cab essentially poses zero risk whatsoever. It’s interacting with the camera that introduces risk.

 

[InkyScrolls]

I don’t want to be dismissive, but a diesel on an experience day isn’t even slightly comparable to an experienced driver on a public line that has all sorts of extra risks.

Making videos where the camera is mounted statically, as these two do, without a voiceover, is materially different to what this tube driver is doing. He talks to the camera constantly, occasionally moves the camera, films himself whilst walking around infrastructure such as depots and sidings. It’s not the same thing. Having a static camera placed in the cab essentially poses zero risk whatsoever. It’s interacting with the camera that introduces risk.

I very much agree with all your points - I find it astounding that this has been allowed.

 

[Deepgreen]

I think it's safe to assume that if he had such an incident while filming, he wouldn't upload that footage to his YouTube!

No, but the converse of that is; would he perhaps not have had an incident if he wasn't filming/narrating (i.e. a distraction incident)? Maybe not. I imagine that if he was involved in one while filming, then; 1) the filming might be considered useful evidence (not necessarily against him), 2) his filming might thereafter be prohibited, all dependent on the nature of the incident.

However, the mention upthread that TfL has agreed to it is surprising (to me anyway, based on my LU career experience), but fair enough - it makes my viewing of the videos less guilt-ridden!

 

[43066]

Making videos where the camera is mounted statically, as these two do, without a voiceover, is materially different to what this tube driver is doing. He talks to the camera constantly, occasionally moves the camera, films himself whilst walking around infrastructure such as depots and sidings. It’s not the same thing. Having a static camera placed in the cab essentially poses zero risk whatsoever. It’s interacting with the camera that introduces risk.

The camera is generally static, with him driving and commentating. Take the point he walks around the infrastructure but, at least in what I’ve watched, I haven’t seen him actually moving the camera while driving.

No, but the converse of that is; would he perhaps not have had an incident if he wasn't filming/narrating (i.e. a distraction incident)? Maybe not. I imagine that if he was involved in one while filming, then; 1) the filming might be considered useful evidence (not necessarily against him), 2) his filming might thereafter be prohibited, all dependent on the nature of the incident.

I’m not sure if it’s the same on the Tube, but a mainline driver involved in an incident could generally expect to be placed on a development plan. Typically a feature of these plans is that drivers aren’t allowed route learners, colleagues etc. in the cab with them, and if they had permission to film that would likely also be suspended.

 

[61653 HTAFC]

Sure but the fact he can upload many videos driving the train without messing up makes me trust that he is safe as to what he is doing.

Yeah, but my point was that saying "I haven't seen him make a mistake on any of his videos" is pretty much meaningless unless he's streaming the recordings live. Same as how when you watch the highlights of the football on Match of the Day, they won't show the bits where Manchester City were passing the ball aimlessly between their back four for five minutes... but it doesn't mean it can't have happened.

No, but the converse of that is; would he perhaps not have had an incident if he wasn't filming/narrating (i.e. a distraction incident)? Maybe not. I imagine that if he was involved in one while filming, then; 1) the filming might be considered useful evidence (not necessarily against him), 2) his filming might thereafter be prohibited, all dependent on the nature of the incident.

However, the mention upthread that TfL has agreed to it is surprising (to me anyway, based on my LU career experience), but fair enough - it makes my viewing of the videos less guilt-ridden!

This is true, but irrelevant to the point I was making, which is that he chooses which footage to upload and which sections to discard.
Like others, I'm a little bit surprised that the management are fine with his videos in the state they're uploaded in. If the commentary was dubbed in afterwards as someone suggested near the beginning of the thread, I'd be less concerned... though as others have also suggested, doing the commentary may actually aid concentration in the same way that "talking yourself through a task" can ensure you don't miss anything.

 

[Intermodal]

The camera is generally static, with him driving and commentating. Take the point he walks around the infrastructure but, at least in what I’ve watched, I haven’t seen him actually moving the camera while driving.



I’m not sure if it’s the same on the Tube, but a mainline driver involved in an incident could generally expect to be placed on a development plan. Typically a feature of these plans is that drivers aren’t allowed route learners, colleagues etc. in the cab with them, and if they had permission to film that would likely also be suspended.

He's definitely moved the camera around at stations a number of times. There is also a video where he is dealing with a minor emergency and is still talking to the camera and at some point turns the camera off - so his focus is at least partially on filming rather than entirely on what he is dealing with. Is it significant? I don't know - we'd have to see the risk assessments (that surely exist?) to know. My view would be that any level of unnecessary additional risk is unacceptable unless it has an operational need.

As stated earlier, another angle is that the guy is making money off these videos, through YouTube advertisements and memberships. Is it right that he should be allowed to make additional income from his job which ultimately the taxpayer facilitates? Surely any income gained whilst filming as an employee of TfL should be fed back into TfL. What happens when other drivers realise they can make a bit of extra money by making YouTube videos and then everyone wants to do it?

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 6 Oct 2024 ==

No, but the converse of that is; would he perhaps not have had an incident if he wasn't filming/narrating (i.e. a distraction incident)? Maybe not. I imagine that if he was involved in one while filming, then; 1) the filming might be considered useful evidence (not necessarily against him), 2) his filming might thereafter be prohibited, all dependent on the nature of the incident.

However, the mention upthread that TfL has agreed to it is surprising (to me anyway, based on my LU career experience), but fair enough - it makes my viewing of the videos less guilt-ridden!

I think we should take the chance on the status quo with decades of research and experience behind it rather than making (questionable) hypothesis about making YouTube videos enhancing someone's ability to drive trains.