Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Is the driver allowed to have a conversation (potentially a whole string of conversations with passengers in different coaches) while driving at speed?
My company instructions are to use the passcom talkback only to find out what the problem is. You wouldn't get into a conversation about it. Most of the time the person using it either doesn't speak or you can't hear them clearly anyway.
On the trains I drive the passenger information is really basic and only lets you skip one station at a time. If you were missing out four in a row - A B C D - you'd need to press the button four times to skip A, then B, then C, then D but while you're doing it the system would show and announce "The next stop is B" then "The next stop is C" then "The next stop is D" then "The next stop is E". It would be much less confusing just to turn it off and let the guard make manual announcements.
On the trains I drive the passenger information is really basic and only lets you skip one station at a time. If you were missing out four in a row - A B C D - you'd need to press the button four times to skip A, then B, then C, then D but while you're doing it the system would show and announce "The next stop is B" then "The next stop is C" then "The next stop is D" then "The next stop is E". It would be much less confusing just to turn it off and let the guard make manual announcements.
But surely 4 announcements on both public address and display for 4 stations skipped, is better than one announcement and continuing to display the skipped stations.
What I think this thread is demonstrating is that some train crews don't seem to comprehend that announcements are only good if they are heard, and people are listening at right moment, whereas a display can be checked anytime.
Think of it in reverse, control calls driver whilst station announcement is playing or they are concentrating on something, message not received instantly or part is missed, control then puts phone down and ends message with no follow up (same way a PA message ends with no follow up) That is what drivers only using PA are doing, no follow up and no visual confirmation to indicate the important message. Actually worse because the visual follow up (screens) now giving misinformation.
you will be creating more a safety risk distracting a driver than the infinitesimal chance it's a delirious driver rather than a communication error or something wrong with the PIS.
The average customer might not know that and I don't think you should fine anyone, but you should know better
I'm sorry but that's not only nonsense, it's dangerous nonsense. Nobody should EVER be discouraged from bringing a perceived safety issue to staff attention (and on a DOO train there is only one way to do that). In so many cases in history, many deaths have resulted from things not being reported.
I know it's mostly about crime, but if you see something that doesn't look right...
But surely 4 announcements on both public address and display for 4 stations skipped, is better than one announcement and continuing to display the skipped stations.
It's not much good the system showing B as the next stop if the train isn't going to stop there. Especially if it comes as part of a run of four or five conflicting announcements all saying different mutually exclusive things.
What I think this thread is demonstrating is that some train crews don't seem to comprehend that announcements are only good if they are heard, and people are listening at right moment, whereas a display can be checked anytime.
In that case why after one or two stations missed did no one think to press the call button which communicates with the driver (not the stop train button).
If that was me on train and I realised it was not stopping where it should id be wanting to speak to driver.
Seems very strange that all these people over carried just sat there all the way to St Albans.
Not a dig at you, or anyone specific, more the silliness of system that allows the continuous information (visual screens) that can be checked anytime to be seen as lower priority than one off (audio) messages as a way to convey amendments
I'm sorry but that's not only nonsense, it's dangerous nonsense. Nobody should EVER be discouraged from bringing a perceived safety issue to staff attention (and on a DOO train there is only one way to do that). In so many cases in history, many deaths have resulted from things not being reported.
I know it's mostly about crime, but if you see something that doesn't look right...
There were multiple Sutton to St Albans trains yesterday running fast from St Pancras to St Albans, so I would imagine this was a PIS error.
Something was causing major disruption though I am unable to pinpoint exactly what it was. In true TL fashion, the entire network was affected for most of the day.
If I were a driver I'd personally make a manual announcement about this though...
I thought that, in the normal course of things, missing a station accidentally was treated as seriously as a SPAD - and is therefore in the same category as a safety issue?
I thought that, in the normal course of things, missing a station accidentally was treated as seriously as a SPAD - and is therefore in the same category as a safety issue?
Most times stations are missed it's because they've been told to do so and haven't told the public or didn't update PIS, accidental skips must be very rare or you'd see them more on RTT
This has to be control or train crew laziness, not bothering to update the calling pattern (I am not familiar with Thameslink fleet so not sure if updates are sent remotely by controller, or manually entered on a panel in cab), either way someone didn't bother to do their job properly, with consequences for (lots per Op) people.
If an announcement is made, then the PIS should be changed, because evidently they know. Many crew seem to find it a faff and/or extremely difficult to actually manage correctly.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Looking at that, it could be a technicality but a diversion is normally different from skipping stops, certainly in operational language.
Skipping stops is going A-B-C-D and then going A-D but still via B.
A diversion might be going A-E-F-D. To use a common example, A Southeastern service now going via Sidcup instead of via Bexleyheath to get to Dartford.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I recently joined a late-running Thameslink to St Albans at Wimbledon that was run fast from Tooting to Blackfriars. All very well handled from the platform at Wimbledon to the on-train screen and announcements. Completely competent (and had the desired effect of making up the time). So it can be done. Nobody caught out as far as could see.
Metro services pretty much have to run fast or terminate short during most disruptions if any semblence of a normal timetable is to be reinstated within a reasonable time! And such amendments happen daily. So it is not a surprise that it is (mostly) handled well.
Then they should all get better at their job then. We customers have suffered tons of strikes and work to rule protest and ticket rises etc up and down the country and we are sick of being so understanding of incompetence.
Then they should all get better at their job then. We customers have suffered tons of strikes and work to rule protest and ticket rises etc up and down the country and we are sick of being so understanding of incompetence.
If you pressed the passcom button on a train I was driving and when I asked what the emergency is you told me it was a protest against unions/fares/incompetence or whatever, you would be getting off at the next station.
Does "turn it off" also disable the on board displays showing the next stop? If so I agree that may be the best way to mitigate a poorly designed system. If not I would suggest that a confusing mass of messages initially at least isn't showing incorrect messages to everyone on the train. Some people can't hear announcements (or just might happen to miss one) so need to be able to trust that the on train displays are accurate. If they go off completely at least they know that something is wrong and to seek further information.
Does "turn it off" also disable the on board displays showing the next stop? If so I agree that may be the best way to mitigate a poorly designed system. If not I would suggest that a confusing mass of messages initially at least isn't showing incorrect messages to everyone on the train. Some people can't hear announcements (or just might happen to miss one) so need to be able to trust that the on train displays are accurate. If they go off completely at least they know that something is wrong and to seek further information.
On the ones I drive you can make the internal displays show just the current time. I totally agree with you, it's better than confusing automatic announcements and displays.
I would go further and say screens giving incorrect calling patterns is actively harmful. If I see a screen saying my stop I will assume the train is going to stop there, I shouldn't have to worry that maybe I missed a quiet PA announcement 10 minutes ago. If they said nothing I'd at least try to check with other sources.
Indeed. The other day I boarded a train booked non stop from Sheffield to Stockport but the display screen and auto announcements said the next stop was Dore & Totley. As we approached that station at speed the PA announced it as the next stop. At no time were there any manual announcements. If passengers can't rely on the screens/auto annoucement being correct there is no point in having them.
The internal displays should be fed from Darwin. The Northern 195 PIS can do this and make announcements/display messages advising of the altered calling pattern and the reason. It's very quick - I've seen the screens update before the guard has even had a phone call from Control.
The internal displays should be fed from Darwin. The Northern 195 PIS can do this and make announcements/display messages advising of the altered calling pattern and the reason. It's very quick - I've seen the screens update before the guard has even had a phone call from Control.
Or you saying that they "should" as in they "ideally should" or as in "practically should"?
Because I can tell you now the majority of train PIS screens are not fed from Darwin, although this is changing. More complex ones, with timing points and fancier graphics are more likely to be.
Or you saying that they "should" as in they "ideally should" or as in "practically should"?
Because I can tell you now the majority of train PIS screens are not fed from Darwin, although this is changing. More complex ones, with timing points and fancier graphics are more likely to be.
They ideally should - the technology exists and has done for some time. I would have thought this would be especially important on DOO routes where you don't really want the drivers fiddling with PIS systems...
Most times stations are missed it's because they've been told to do so and haven't told the public or didn't update PIS, accidental skips must be very rare or you'd see them more on RTT
RTT doesn’t show missed stops. The “Not Stopping” is added after-the-fact when a train goes through a booked station without stopping. It shows regardless of whether it was Cancelled on other data sources so you can’t tell if there’s an accidental skip by looking at RTT.
The thing is once they've missed the station, 95% if the time because they've been told to skip stops but forgot to tell the customers, or customer was zoned out when it was announced, calling the alarm is essentially pointless since theirs not exactly much they can do, it's not like they just put it reverse and return to the stop. The correct thing to do is get off at the next stop and consult station staff.
If the driver has skipped multiple stops by accident I'm sure control can give them the bollocking and the customers don't need to
They are not that rare. They can happen because a driver momentarily forgets which service they’re driving and the stopping pattern or because the schedule card is wrong and the stopping has been omitted.
They ideally should - the technology exists and has done for some time. I would have thought this would be especially important on DOO routes where you don't really want the drivers fiddling with PIS systems...
Yes I would tend to agree, but even a lot of newer stock doesn’t have this functionality, although I believe it can be reverse engineered in.
If the DMS (driver management system) is easy to use, then even a DOO service all they’d need to do is something like a “tickbox” and deselect all the stops the train is no longer calling it which would update the PIS. Maybe accompanied by a message that does exist already on some trains such as “Please note the stopping pattern of this train has changed. Listen to announcements and check on board screens”. That would take maybe 30 seconds max.
Because I can tell you now the majority of train PIS screens are not fed from Darwin, although this is changing. More complex ones, with timing points and fancier graphics are more likely to be.
Then they should all get better at their job then. We customers have suffered tons of strikes and work to rule protest and ticket rises etc up and down the country and we are sick of being so understanding of incompetence.
We are aware of an issue with emails from the Forum to Microsoft-based email accounts (hotmail/outlook/live.com email addresses). This is being looked into currently, thanks for your patience meanwhile.
