Who drives?

[R4_GRN]

Maybe a driver can answer my question, if a train is moved to a new area who drives the train? A driver might not have route knowledge but a driver who has route knowledge might not be certified for driving that unit. Sorry if the terminology is incorrect I am not in the industry, just curious

 

[swt_passenger]

Maybe a driver can answer my question, if a train is moved to a new area who drives the train? A driver might not have route knowledge but a driver who has route knowledge might not be certified for driving that unit. Sorry if the terminology is incorrect I am not in the industry, just curious

Often 'in service' units are driven by freight drivers on cross country moves. They tend to know the longer distance routes. How do they know the traction? They may be specially trained if it is a recurring requirement.

Many new unit moves are hauled behind freight locos and between translator vehicles (to deal with the couplings). Especially if they can't be powered up on the route between the builder and the eventual area they are to be used in.

Another scenario is that a driver with traction knowledge is accompanied by a second driver with route knowledge.

 

[GRALISTAIR]

Another scenario is that a driver with traction knowledge is accompanied by a second driver with route knowledge.

Is this what used to happen with Railtours when unusual locos went over rare bits of track etc?

 

[A-driver]

Is this what used to happen with Railtours when unusual locos went over rare bits of track etc?

Rail tours often use 'moonlighting' drivers with relevant route knowledge or retired drivers who will have or get the required knowledge.

Failing that rail tour drivers just add bits to their route card and claim they know the route. It's only once they have had a near fatal SPAD that they admit they actually don't know the road...

 

[ComUtoR]

A driver might not have route knowledge but a driver who has route knowledge might not be certified for driving that unit.

In simple terms you need a pilotman. That is, A person who does have the required route knowledge who guides you. It is not much difference from Trainee and Instructor.

 

[A-driver]

In simple terms you need a pilotman. That is, A person who does have the required route knowledge who guides you. It is not much difference from Trainee and Instructor.

I'd actually argue it's completely different to a trainee. The route conductor won't know the traction and the driver won't know the road. Therefore the conductor won't just say 'start braking for he 30mph at the bridge ahead' as they don't know how the brakes respond. They will give a guide of what's ahead, how far, rough speeds to be doing at various points to ensure the braking curve is correct etc.

 

[ComUtoR]

I'd actually argue it's completely different to a trainee.

"in simple terms"

I do agree with everything you say. The skill is in the pilot. I've piloted many times and it is exactly as you describe. The pilot needs to pick up on the capabilities of the units. I always ask the Driver about their unit and driving style and on the first stop I try to get a personal feel for the units capabilities.

My piloting style is more one of describing the route rather than giving out braking point.

 

[R4_GRN]

Ah, thanks for replies, makes sense to do the above.

 

[Jamesb1974]

Deleted

 

[scott118]

My piloting style is more one of describing the route rather than giving out braking point.

more akin to 'commentary driving' ?

 

[Jamesb1974]

Deleted

 

[ComUtoR]

more akin to 'commentary driving' ?

Similar to what A-Driver said. In simple terms yes but I'd also argue it is distinct.

Commentary Driving is what the Driver does and you call what you see and say what you do. When you are being piloted, you would commentary Drive.

You mean a conductor? That is certainly what they are referred to on the freight side. I was conducted last week, as I don't sign between Abbey Foregate and Crewe, via the Oxley chord and Stafford.

Pilot/Conductor and I think there is another term too. "Route Conductor ?" You get "conducted by the pilot" Maybe its because we have Guards/Conductors that we use the term "Pilot"

I must admit I'd have to refer to my rule glossary to find the specific term. "Pilotman" is altogether something different.......


A-Drivers description is accurate. Instructors are more specific in that they will say to brake step x, at point y, the station is at z. Although when the trainee is more confident they just say "Wake me up at the Cross..."

Conducting is two people working together with a combined wealth of experience. When you get told that "just past the bridge, on the left cure, the station is just in front of you." As an experienced Driver you know how much brake you need.

When I go route learning with an instructor its more like being piloted than instructed.

It's all about communication. Driving is not just about pulling levers and pushing pretty buttons.

 

[driver9000]

You are not being piloted, you are being conducted. A Pilotman and a Route/traction conductor are completely different roles. It's important not to get them confused as a Pilotman cannot conduct a Driver over a route, they are there to look after trains running through an area of single line working.

TW1 uses the term 'conductor driver'.

 

[ComUtoR]

It's important not to get them confused as a Pilotman cannot conduct a Driver over a route, they are there to look after trains running through an area of single line working.

TW1 uses the term 'conductor driver'.

The Pilotman does conduct you over a route. That's what they do. Just because you may know the road their job is to conduct you over that portion of line and instruct you as necessary as to any specific train movements, speeds etc. Especially as it may be obstructed.

"Pilotman" is altogether something different.......

When I am booked to "Pilot" it will specifically say that on my schedule.

PILOT 2D56 Sevenoaks XX.XX
Chislehurst XX.XX

 

[driver9000]

When I am booked to "Pilot" it will specifically say that on my schedule.

PILOT 2D56 Sevenoaks XX.XX
Chislehurst XX.XX

Regardless of what they write on your docket you are not a Pilotman nor are you piloting. You are conducting. We have used these terms for over a century as it clearly defines roles and prevents miscommunication, maybe I'm just grumpy or a pedant but it irks me when companies attempt to muddy the waters altering terminology from what is the accepted norm in the industry. If a Driver got in my cab and told me they were my Pilotman I'd be asking where his armband was and I didn't know SLW was in place!

 

[scott118]

Regardless of what they write on your docket you are not a Pilotman nor are you piloting. You are conducting. We have used these terms for over a century as it clearly defines roles and prevents miscommunication, maybe I'm just grumpy or a pedant but it irks me when companies attempt to muddy the waters altering terminology from what is the accepted norm in the industry. If a Driver got in my cab and told me they were my Pilotman I'd be asking where his armband was and I didn't know SLW was in place!

^^ I have to agree with the above.

I'm often asked to conduct a unit over a route, as i don't sign the traction. It's always 'route conduct', never pilot..To the point where, a two man crew, will consist of, a unit driver, and a conductor, to see you both, end to end.

 

[A-driver]

Regardless of what they write on your docket you are not a Pilotman nor are you piloting. You are conducting. We have used these terms for over a century as it clearly defines roles and prevents miscommunication, maybe I'm just grumpy or a pedant but it irks me when companies attempt to muddy the waters altering terminology from what is the accepted norm in the industry. If a Driver got in my cab and told me they were my Pilotman I'd be asking where his armband was and I didn't know SLW was in place!

This is the railway. One region will use one term and it means a completely different thing in another region. Very likely that the southern region used the term pilot officially and your region uses a different term.

He did say pilot, not pilotman.

 

[ComUtoR]

maybe I'm just grumpy or a pedant but it irks me when companies attempt to muddy the waters altering terminology from what is the accepted norm in the industry.

I don't disagree but it doesn't change what is said on the ground and how people do understand and communicate with each other. Part of "clear understanding" is that people are on the same page. "Dalek's" are still referred to as such and "feathers/Lunars" have various names too. Same with the new term "SPAR" which doesn't exist but is widely used and understood.

If a Driver got in my cab and told me they were my Pilotman I'd be asking where his armband was and I didn't know SLW was in place!

If a Driver got into my cab I should first ask him for his cab pass, reason for being here, if they were route/traction competent, how to stop the train in an emergency and how to contact the signaller if they didn't know the traction.

IF I was stopped at a red and some dude come up to the cab with an armband I would KNOW he was the pilotman. IF someone came up to my cab and told me they were going to pilot me between X and Y I would also 100% understand what was going to happen. I would say that pretty much because I was expecting a pilot as I was being sent somewhere I didn't know.

We can be pedantic all day but I am confident that when a Pilotman is required then the Driver is 100% professional.

The thing with "terminology" is that over time different terminology has been introduced. Or TOC uses the term Pilot and that is what I and all the other drivers understand it as.

When I first started we were specifically told about the North/South divide and how local terminology is used. The rulebook has been changing over time too and again, when I first started the Crystal Mark was only just being introduced.

The Pilotman will conduct you over a route but isn't a conductor.
The Conductor issues tickets and Guards the train.
The Route Conductor will "Pilot" you over the route or "Conduct" you.

The railway has suffered with this problem for years.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

I'm often asked to conduct a unit over a route, as i don't sign the traction. It's always 'route conduct', never pilot..

We can get both. Sometimes I have to drive as, has already been mentioned, the person who knows both traction and route must drive. When I'm driving it I'm not "conducting anyone" I'm driving the unit. I believe that is partly why we use the term to "Pilot" because either is expected. Drive it or Conduct the Driver.

Not forgetting that the Conductor is also someone different altogether.

 

[scott118]

Not forgetting that the Conductor is also someone different altogether.

along with the realms of a station 'pilot'....

you say potato, i say... we could go on for hours I'm sure..

 

[168lover]

An example of this would be a few years ago at the Chinnor and Princes Risborough Railway we had 165001 visit for the day. During this day a chiltern driver drove and a chinnor driver was present in the cab and pointed out every speed change, crossing etc

 

[Juniper Driver]

I had to pilot a Guildford driver from Ascot to Reading when I was on the 458 training course (with him) in 2007...I knew the road quite well but the instructor didn't and obviously I drove bits the instructor didn't know either.

The piloting bit really came together quite well and I was amazed with what I remembered as under the circumstances we were being assessed.There were four of us on the course.

 

[GB]

Surely by its very nature to pilot a vehicle of some description you have to be at its controls, which as a route conductor technically you are not?

 

[PHILIPE]

An incident in the late nineties when XC ran an HST out of Swansea to Leeds.
Things went pear shaped one morning when an HST had to run down ECS from Derby. The Derby driver stayed with it conducted by a Wales and West driver but overshot at Bridgend, one driver knowing the traction only and the other the route only. Following this incident, Wales and West instructed that any route conducting drivers should have knowledge of the traction. This didn't come down to individual classes but generalised in to categories:-

DMU
Diesel Locomotive and
HST

 

[AndyW33]

Surely by its very nature to pilot a vehicle of some description you have to be at its controls, which as a route conductor technically you are not?

If you class a ship as a vehicle, and it is from shipping that the railways took the term, a pilot comes on board as a ship nears a port, or an estuary, when the ship's own captain or officers aren't familiar with the location of rocks, sandbanks, currents and tidal flows. He doesn't steer the ship, he gives instructions to the helmsman. Seems almost identical to the railway usage you're objecting to.

The only other place that the word pilot is used is in aviation, and it is entirely routine for both commercial and private pilots to fly to airports they've never been to before. They don't have anyone added to the cockpit crew to help them with this, the whole system is utterly different from railways or shipping.

 

[Jamesb1974]

Deleted

 

[LowLevel]

All the operational competencies herein described are job roles that may be performed by individuals with different job titles. It's the role that's important, not the job title.

A person undertaking the role of a pilotman replaces unavailable functionality of a signalling system, generally by functioning as the human equivalent of a train staff or issuing a ticket as per staff and ticket. A person whose job title is a mobile operations manager might act as pilotman.

A guard is a job role that is in charge of a train (let's leave it at that for simplicity sake). Someone with the job title train manager, conductor or senior conductor or indeed 'Generic Manager' might undertake that role.

A driver is a job role that operates a train. Someone with the job title 'train manager', driver operator, or just plain 'driver' might undertake that role.

A traction conductor or route conductor is a development of the role of guard or driver showing another person in those roles a route or traction they aren't competent to work themselves. The rulebook only refers to conductors, not pilots, and states that if they sign both route and traction they must drive/guard the train themselves. It doesn't mean they cease to be a conductor though - being employed by a different company might preclude them being the rostered driver due to union agreements etc.

My contract says I'm a 'senior conductor', but when I undertake official communications I refer to myself as 'the guard of 2A01' for example as my job title is irrelevant and serves no purpose to anyone other than HR and payroll, and I suppose to an extent the passengers. My ID card says 'job title: senior conductor:' and 'competencies: 'train guard'.

Apart from an actual pilotman, the only thing I've heard referred to as a pilot on the railway is a small shunting engine.

 

[Juniper Driver]

I think what I meant there is it's different driving a train naturally than instructing someone who's inexperienced with the route and traction.I suppose that's a bit obvious though.

 

[craigybagel]

Here's one to mess up the wording - at my depot we have a semi regular job where I as a conductor (of the rear cab dwelling ticket monkey variety) have to be a conductor (of the piloting variety) for another depots conductor - I'm a conducting conductor! It's probably a good thing my diagram says "Pilot" instead

 

[notadriver]

All the operational competencies herein described are job roles that may be performed by individuals with different job titles. It's the role that's important, not the job title.

A person undertaking the role of a pilotman replaces unavailable functionality of a signalling system, generally by functioning as the human equivalent of a train staff or issuing a ticket as per staff and ticket. A person whose job title is a mobile operations manager might act as pilotman.

A guard is a job role that is in charge of a train (let's leave it at that for simplicity sake). Someone with the job title train manager, conductor or senior conductor or indeed 'Generic Manager' might undertake that role.

A driver is a job role that operates a train. Someone with the job title 'train manager', driver operator, or just plain 'driver' might undertake that role.

A traction conductor or route conductor is a development of the role of guard or driver showing another person in those roles a route or traction they aren't competent to work themselves. The rulebook only refers to conductors, not pilots, and states that if they sign both route and traction they must drive/guard the train themselves. It doesn't mean they cease to be a conductor though - being employed by a different company might preclude them being the rostered driver due to union agreements etc.

My contract says I'm a 'senior conductor', but when I undertake official communications I refer to myself as 'the guard of 2A01' for example as my job title is irrelevant and serves no purpose to anyone other than HR and payroll, and I suppose to an extent the passengers. My ID card says 'job title: senior conductor:' and 'competencies: 'train guard'.

Apart from an actual pilotman, the only thing I've heard referred to as a pilot on the railway is a small shunting engine.

An interesting point arises when trains running ECS can do so with just a driver (TOC/traction specific) so if a train guard didn't sign a section of the route the passengers be detrained until the point where the guard does know the route and the train ran ECS inbetween? What if the next stop was the terminus and the guard didn't sign the diversionary route ?

 

[Moonshot]

An interesting point arises when trains running ECS can do so with just a driver (TOC/traction specific) so if a train guard didn't sign a section of the route the passengers be detrained until the point where the guard does know the route and the train ran ECS inbetween? What if the next stop was the terminus and the guard didn't sign the diversionary route ?

That actually happened to me not so long back, and ended up with the passengers being transfered to another operators service whose staff did sign the route. Peak time as well!!!