Slashdot is powered by your submissions, so send in your scoop

 


Forgot your password?
Close
typodupeerror
×
United Kingdom Transportation Technology

London Unveils New Driverless Subway Trains 127

Posted by samzenpus from the running-on-time dept.
MikeChino writes London just unveiled its next-generation subway trains — and they're sleek, 100% automated, and WiFi-equipped. UK-based design studio Priestmangoode teamed up with Transport for London to develop the trains over a period of 3 years, and they feature open and airy interiors inspired by aviation design.
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

London Unveils New Driverless Subway Trains More

London Unveils New Driverless Subway Trains

Comments Filter:

  • Well... (Score:3, Interesting)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 10, 2014 @05:37AM (#48109693)

    We had those (except wifi) in our city (Torino, little more than 800k people in northen Italy) for the last 8 years. Where is the news?

    • The news is that London is getting them. Did you RTF title?

      • Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)

        by __Reason__ ( 181288 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @06:14AM (#48109777)

        The news is that London is getting them. Did you RTF title?

        Driverless trains have existed in London for many years, too. For example on the DLR: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... [wikipedia.org]

        Several lines of the London Underground already use Automatic Train Operation (ATO), where the train is fully controlled by software under normal conditions. There is still a "Driver", but all they do is operate the doors, make passenger announcements, and are ready to take over in the case of an emergency or a system failure.

        In fact, the Victoria line has used ATO since it opened in the 1960s, and was the world's first major metro/subway line to do so.

        • Driverless trains have existed in London for many years, too. For example on the DLR: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/D... [wikipedia.org]

          There is still a "Driver", but all they do is operate the doors, make passenger announcements, and are ready to take over in the case of an emergency or a system failure.

          Doesn’t he have to feed the monkey as well?

      • Re:Well... (Score:5, Informative)

        by operator_error ( 1363139 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @06:24AM (#48109801)

        I RTFA, and London isn't getting them until 2020. And that does *not* include the Northern (i.e. Misery) Line. Progressive? More like, its about %$#@! time.

        • The Northern line has been driverless since 2012. The person who sits in the front just opens & closes the doors (when they are not on strike).
          • Well, they're only paid £50K/year. That's not a lot for having to press a button not once, but twice every few minutes...
    • Meanwhile in the Boston area we have positively antiquated vehicles on the Red, Green and Orange lines. It's time to move toward the future.

  • I've been wondering why this took so long (Score:5, Informative)

    by Vlado ( 817879 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @05:39AM (#48109697) Homepage
    Driverless subways exits in other cities for a while now. And this is definitely one of those things, where you can automate a lot out of a system.

    • Comment removed (Score:5, Insightful)

      by account_deleted ( 4530225 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @05:44AM (#48109709)
      Comment removed based on user account deletion

      • Re:I've been wondering why this took so long (Score:5, Interesting)

        by pr0nbot ( 313417 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @06:02AM (#48109759)

        The Economist this week has a special report about how automation is going to make a lot of us unemployed, possibly in more permanent ways than previous industrial revolutions:

        http://www.economist.com/news/... [economist.com]

      • Unions. The DLR has been automated for decades.

        Indeed. The wifi thing is a very smart move by Transport for London. The unions in the UK normally only get their way by getting the public behind them, and the public are understandably a bit jumpy about getting in driverless trains. But if the Transport Workers' Union objects to the new trains on grounds of being driverless, TfL and the Mayor's office will push the idea that TWU is keeping wifi off the tube, and if there's one thing that's more important to the modern public than a perception of safety, i

        • Oh shugar. TWU? It's RMT over here isn't it. Sorry... still got Oz on the brain.

        • Re:I've been wondering why this took so long (Score:5, Insightful)

          by oneandoneis2 ( 777721 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @06:56AM (#48109895) Homepage

          You think so?

          As a Londoner, I've yet to encounter anyone who supported the Tube strikes: Everyone I know considers it near-criminal extortion and loves the notion of trains that aren't subject to strikes by drivers who are insanely over-paid already. The DLR has had them for years and nobody bats an eye.

          What makes you think people need to be bribed with Wifi to get driverless trains into use?

          • You think so?

            As a Londoner, I've yet to encounter anyone who supported the Tube strikes:

            I'm one. So now you have. Glad I could help.

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Dr. Evil ( 3501 )

            It's kind of insane that the unions are such a burden to transit, that it's easier to accept the safety risks and enormous costs of driverless trains than to accept a non-union driver.

            • Re: (Score:3)

              by Vlado ( 817879 )
              What kind of safety risks are there supposed to be in driverless trains, as opposed to the ones with drivers? I'm asking especially, since driverless trains are not a new concept. And I've yet to see (I may have missed them) headlines for accidents that happened due to the fact that the train didn't have a driver.

          • What makes you think people need to be bribed with Wifi to get driverless trains into use?

            Well that would be the sizable public reaction Every Single Time driverless trains have been mooted, even after the successful implementation of the DLR. TfL could convince people to accept driverless trains by an expensive publicity campaign, or they could just tie the issue to something everyone already likes and that they would realistically have to implement eventually.

      • I agree. They have removed the worst part of the underground. Over paid train drivers and their unions!

    • Re:I've been wondering why this took so long (Score:5, Informative)

      by RogueyWon ( 735973 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @05:44AM (#48109715) Journal

      London also has driverless trains on its (more recent) Docklands Light Railway.

      The reason it's news when driverless trains head to the Tube is nothing to do with technology and everything to do with industrial relations. London's Tube Drivers are extremely militant - it's normal to have a couple of strikes per year (sometimes over "normal" industrial disputes like pay, sometimes because, I suspect, they just want to remind people they can do it).

      The current Mayor, who has been in post for around 6 years now and who is, to put it mildly, no friend of the unions, has been making threats about automation on and off ever since he was first elected. It's a dangerous game to play, because even the mention of automation is sometimes enough to trigger strikes - you can get rid of the drivers eventually (though probably keeping - lower paid - train attendants), but they can cause you a hell of a lot of pain during the transition.

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by AGMW ( 594303 )
        I'd start with the Jubilee Line, as the JL Extension has trackside barriers already (the trains pull in and the train doors line up with doors in the tracksdie barriers). If they could roll those barriers out along the rest of the Jubilee Line it'd be one less 'safety' thing for the union to get their panties bunched about.

        Piccadilly Line next as it services Heathrow and that seems like a useful target for (approaching) a 24hr service.

        Line by line will take some time and hopefully natural wastage (ie pe

        • If you read the TfL page about this that's exactly what they say their plan is - more track barriers, and allowing "current drivers to work for the rest of their careers". Of course I doubt the RMT will be willing to see itself slowly fade into the sunset via natural ageing, but they don't want to push it too far. London Underground engineering is incredibly efficient, they pack a lot of maintenances into the 3-4 hour engineering hours they get each night (the Tube never really shuts down per se). A lot of

        • Start with the Victoria Line. The trains there could be converted to driver-less operation within a week. Trackside barriers are a red herring. If someone jumps onto the track, there is nothing the driver can do about it anyway.

          • Start with the Victoria Line. The trains there could be converted to driver-less operation within a week. Trackside barriers are a red herring. If someone jumps onto the track, there is nothing the driver can do about it anyway.

            The biggest reason for keeping drivers on the train for the forseeable future is to cope with when things go wrong. When the DLR goes wrong someone just drives to the nearest station then walk a few yards (all the stations are really close together) and then sorts it out. With the underground that is not possible due to the way the tunnels and the way the two electrifies rails make walking down them impossible, when something goes wrong you get stuck under ground unless the driver can get you to the nearest

      • Re: (Score:3)

        by N1AK ( 864906 )

        London's Tube Drivers are extremely militant - it's normal to have a couple of strikes per year (sometimes over "normal" industrial disputes like pay, sometimes because, I suspect, they just want to remind people they can do it).

        And it's worked for them so far sadly. They have an incredible deal compared to equivalent workers on other networks, regularly shake down the government for more by threatening not to do their job during major events, and continue to whine incessently. I'd pay more for my travel if

    • Re:I've been wondering why this took so long (Score:4, Informative)

      by cardpuncher ( 713057 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @06:02AM (#48109757)

      The Victoria Line has had automated train operation since it opened in 1968. All the driver does is push a button at each station to close the doors.

      It's not really a matter of technology.

      There is a safety issue in that there are no escape routes other than the unilluminated and electrified track meaning you'd need some on-board staff member to ensure that people could be safely evacuated in the event of an emergency.

      • Re:I've been wondering why this took so long (Score:4, Informative)

        by _Shad0w_ ( 127912 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @06:16AM (#48109779)

        The Victoria, Central, Jubilee, and Northern lines all use semi-automation. It wasn't uncommon to see the driver stood up in the middle of the cab when it pulled in to a station, when I used the central line regularly; the train stops itself. I've been on a couple where it's overshot the end of the platform and they've had to skip the station and continue to the next (reversing a tube train means the driver has to get out and go to the other end - it delays the service too much, so they just won't do it).

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by AGMW ( 594303 )
      Funniest thing of all, after how many years of driverless trains on the DLR (also in London) is the Tube Driver's Union saying it won't be safe!
      [rubs chin thoughtfully] Hmmmm. I wonder if they've got an ulterior motive?

      Stand by for the Tube Driver's Union holding London to ransom again ... [sigh]

      • Re: (Score:2)

        by dave420 ( 699308 )
        I think you're forgetting something rather important: the DLR was constructed with driverless trains in mind, specifically things like track/train visibility/access from the platform, escape routes, and communication between the platforms and the control centre, and so on. Some of the old lines on the underground were designed for steam trains, and most of the newer ones were designed for trains with drivers. Automated trains are wonderful, but in the event of an emergency, the software can't lead passeng
        • The number 1 line of Paris subway was converted to full automation (no driver pushing button even to open doors) while never designed to be and it works perfectly well.
        • Ideally the tunnels should be designed so that he passengers can find their own way to the back of the train and to the nearest exit with or without a driver. If the train has become incapacitated, there's no guarantee that the driver would be able to help anyway. As far as people falling on the tracks, I would think that the computer system would be much more likely to be paying attention 100% of the time to check for people on the tracks, and it would be able to apply the brakes. The computer could even

  • Unions upset (Score:4, Insightful)

    by Richard_at_work ( 517087 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @05:43AM (#48109703)

    And on the day of unveiling, the immediate comment from the National Union of Rail, Maritime and Transport Workers Union was "we don't like driverless trains". Why? Because the drivers are members of that union. Nuff said really.

    Driverless trains have worked fine on the Docklands Light Railway for years, about time we switched the tube over.

    • Re: (Score:2)

      by ihtoit ( 3393327 )

      some of the underground lines run driverless (as in no cabs, the locomotive control is by computer and is dependent on a crewman running the doors), I wonder if the GP actually means "completely crewless" as in DLR, Heathrow, Gatwick?

      • some of the underground lines run driverless (as in no cabs, the locomotive control is by computer and is dependent on a crewman running the doors), I wonder if the GP actually means "completely crewless" as in DLR, Heathrow, Gatwick?

        1. No London Underground trains are "Driverless". All current London Underground rolling stock have driving cabs, and there is a driver in that cab at all times (even if they aren't doing any actual driving!).

        2. The DLR is not crew-less. All DLR trains have a member of staff on board at all times.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by ihtoit ( 3393327 )

          1. Victoria Line are cabless/driverless, there are train captains who have the ability to take over manual control for whatever reason but that's more to bring the train to a safe stop than anything else. Control panels for such eventualities are kept behind locked panels at the end of all cars since they are all interchangeable by design and the train captain occupies the "front" end car with passengers. I should know this being as I use Victoria every single time I go to London (several times a year) and

  • Seems like there are few seats, but I guess most people will stand.

    • they feature open and airy interiors inspired by aviation design.

      Aviation design doesn't exactly spell open and airy interiors to me. It spells cramped seats and stale peanuts.

      • Aviation design doesn't exactly spell open and airy interiors to me. It spells cramped seats and stale peanuts.

        Um, you know that would be an improvement at rush hour, right? At the moment the current design is more like being wedged under some massive sweaty unwashed guy's armpit in 35 degree heat.

        Cramped seats and stale peanuts would be a welcome break from that.

    • That's how London Underground, as well as other highly congested services in London (Overground, DLR and, increasingly, some of the short-distance "heavy rail" commuter trains) are configured. Crowding levels during the morning peak are intense and removing seats is a way to cram more people on.

      By and large, the way it works is that if you are commuting from one of the outer zones (5 or 6) into the center, your train won't be as busy when you get on it and you should be able to get one of those seats, which

      • Subway trains, at least the ones I've been on, never been to London, tend to be pretty brutal towards those with disabilities anyway. It's usually stairs or escalators. There's usually only a few stops that have elevators. I'm not sure what a good solution is though. On one hand I think that people with disabilities should be afforded the same opportunities and services as every other citizen. On the other hand, sometimes putting in the needed infrastructure for those with disabilities makes the system m

    • Re:Looks good (Score:5, Funny)

      by Rik Sweeney ( 471717 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @06:41AM (#48109851) Homepage

      Clearly you don't live in Britain, otherwise you'd understand how polite and accommodating we are.

      If there are no seats, ask a fellow passenger if you can sit on their lap. They'll usually oblige, unless they have a very good reason.

      Try it the next time you visit.

      • If there are no seats, ask a fellow passenger if you can sit on their lap. They'll usually oblige, unless they have a very good reason. Try it the next time you visit.

        However, you first need to greet them correctly. To do this, hold up two fingers (palm towards yourself) and wave your hand up and down vigorously. This is generally taken to be a welcoming and friendly greeting, and the person will likely rise out of their seat, thereby allowig you to sit down.

        • Don't forget the OK sign. Except they make it much smaller over there.

          Do the OK sign, then close the finger/thumb hole up completely.

    • They have trains like this in Toronto. The open-car/few seats part of the design, not the driverless part. I was on vacation there in the summer, and I found they work quite well. At low volume times, there was few passengers so you could mostly find a seat. At high volume times, there was no way you could find a seat no matter how many seats they had on the train. Having less seats left more room for standing and more room for maneuvering to get on and off the train.

      Compared to the buses in my city (

  • Aerodynamic design? (Score:4, Interesting)

    by Jack Malmostoso ( 899729 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @05:44AM (#48109711)

    I'm not an engineer, but I always wondered why trains tend to be designed like a wall. Only high-speed trains are actually wedge shaped to be aerodynamic.

    I would imagine that a subway train, acting like a "piston" would work better if it were more aerodynamic and not have to overcome a lot of pressure within the tunnel.

    Can anyone explain the reasons behind this design?

    • Aerodynamic design? (Score:5, Interesting)

      by Anonymous Coward on Friday October 10, 2014 @05:47AM (#48109723)

      They are piston shaped on purpose, they actually are the main way to cause ventilation of air in/out of the underground.

      • And this was part of the original plan: as well as having occasional open spaces (for lines close enough to the surface of course, see 23/24 Leinster Gardens) for venting until full electrification the engines were steam powered from coal burning. Got to get rid of the smoke somehow.

        • Re: (Score:1)

          by Anonymous Coward

          London Transport tried an aerodynamic cab in the 1930s (just prior to the introduction of the 1938 stock IIRC); but at the relatively-low maximum speeds that deep-level trains reach (even on open-air track sections) there was little point to the modification.

    • Re:Aerodynamic design? (Score:5, Informative)

      by itzly ( 3699663 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @05:52AM (#48109733)
      In a narrow tunnel, the train is going to act like a piston no matter what the front shape is like.

    • Re:Aerodynamic design? (Score:4, Informative)

      by bluegutang ( 2814641 ) on Friday October 10, 2014 @07:50AM (#48110065)

      Because it's a higher priority to maximize the volume of the train car (i.e. more passengers), and to make the cars easily attachable to each other, than it is to slightly increase the aerodynamic efficiency of a relatively low-speed vehicle.

    • I would imagine that a subway train, acting like a "piston" would work better if it were more aerodynamic and not have to overcome a lot of pressure within the tunnel.

      Can anyone explain the reasons behind this design?

      There are various reasons for this. One important one is safety: You need a door at each end of the train to allow it to be evacuated.

  • TFL are still in the middle of total network conversion to cabless - so far it's only taken thirty years!

  • I'm glad they'll now use dynamic electronic screens for ads! The old flat paper displays weren't just too restful for me to truly enjoy my underground trips...

  • Why?

    2 main reasons:

    - On the really old lines there is only about 6 inches between the train and the tunnel wall , there is NO escape walkway. So in an emergency a member of staff WILL be needed to evacuate passengers from the front or rear of the train and walk them along the track.

    - When the tube gets really busy its virtually impossible for anyone to walk the length of the train inside so any staff might as well be in front driving it , or at least monitoring it in a cab.

    • It's extremely rare that an emergency results in a train stopped between stations: if you pull the cord the driver won't stop mid-tunnel. Every carriage on every train on every line has a notice stating this.

      • It's extremely rare that an emergency results in a train stopped between stations

        Actually, it's not that unusual.

        The Victoria line, for example, has a very dense and frequent service - in fact there are about 45% more trains in operation at peak times than there are platforms on the line. So, if an emergency (like someone jumping on to the track in front of a train) means the line has to be suspended, inevitably there are going to be trains stopped in tunnels.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by ledow ( 319597 )

      And the solution is not one man trying to evacuate people down the line (it's an emergency, right? So if you shut down the line enough for help other than the lone driver we have at the moment to walk down the line, then everyone could walk back to the station safely anyway!)

      And escape walkway or not - what the hell does that matter? It means you can't walk down the SIDE of the train. Only through it and out onto the tracks. If you're out of the train, the danger is the same. In fact, I'd say it's safe

      • The DLR is actually AIRBORNE at some points (no escape at all) and was unmanned. The "must be manned" is the union line to preserve jobs, not anything to do with safety.

        The DLR has never been unmanned. There is always a crew member onboard DLR trains, at all times.

        Also, all sections of DLR track, whether elevated or in tunnels, has walkways (albeit narrow ones) along side for evacuation purposes.

        • Re: (Score:2)

          by ledow ( 319597 )

          "The trains were fully automated, controlled by computer, and had no driver; a Passenger Service Agent (PSA) on each train, originally referred to as a "Train Captain", was responsible for patrolling the train, checking tickets, making announcements and controlling the doors."

          This I have no objection to, but it is essentially the job-preservation demand of a union. They are not a driver. They can be replaced in a day. However, currently drivers are claiming to be irreplaceable and, when they strike, the

          • Re: (Score:2)

            by Viol8 ( 599362 )

            " Especially if there are three carriages full of people - getting them off safely cannot be the domain of one man."

            I would suggest that one man has a better chance of doing than zero men. Unless you think the passengers should be left to fend for themselves until help can reach them?

      • the solution is not to pay several hundred men £30k each to push a lever for 10 years, but to widen the tunnel slightly.

        "Widening the tunnels slightly", in the case of the Tube, would be astronomically expensive. Not least for the economic cost of having to close lines for years while the work was carried out.

    • Even supposing this to be true, it means that a train could be safely and efficiently operated by someone who hasn't expended months or years of their life being taught and practicing how to drive a train.

  • Inspired by aviation... (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    ....or trips on the countless other metro systems that already have a single 'continuous' carriage? Also many cities have articulated buses?

    Looks good though.

    • Re: (Score:3)

      by ledow ( 319597 )

      Actually, the real news is that it's "inspired by Tube driver strikes".

      The London Underground staff go on strike so often, this is basically a (well-deserved) warning shot. If the drivers being paid more than teachers, nurses and doctors to push a lever forward for 8 hours a day (probably only 300 days a year, though, once you take into account strikes, holidays, etc.) want to disrupt the entire London Tube network and bring London to a standstill every time they negotiate their above-inflation pensions an

  • Subway trains? (Score:1)

    by Anonymous Coward

    Why would the London Underground have subway trains?
    Tube trains, sure!
    Underground trains? Why not!
    Subway trains? What do you think we are? Merkins?

    • Why would the London Underground have subway trains?

      Oh, they're talking about the actual Underground? I was assuming that a "subway train" was some more efficient way of getting people along a subterranean walkway. Whenever I've arrived at St Pancras overground station and needed to get to St Pancras Underground I've always thought that they could do with a train of some sort...

    • Or Glaswegians. The underground line in Glasgow is called the Subway.

  • Not driverless...yet (Score:2, Informative)

    by Anonymous Coward

    As I understand it, the new trains are *capable* of being driverless... meaning they can also have drivers, and the plan is for them to retain drivers, initially at least. Anyone who knows anything about the history of LU will know that the spectre of driverless trains is something the unions (the RMT particularly, personified by the late Bob Crow) have been trying to resist for years. This is a smart move by the Mayor of London and the Conservative govermnent, like it or not - I imagine that the trains wil

  • Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada has had driverless trains since 1985

  • Cue strikes in 3,2,1

  • I despise most all of Symantecs products from their craptastic PGP implementation, drive encryption, etc. It's horrendous. It's why I went 100% Unix. Don't need Symantec at all for AV or firewall or PGP or encryption. It's built into Linux.
  • I hope these trains will run on a *nix/Linux system and not Windows. The security and reliability problems would be horrendous if they chose the Microsoft offering...

Slashdot Top Deals

Elliptic paraboloids for sale.

Close