DART+ (DART Expansion)

gjim

If my boss told me he needs to put a camera above my desk to monitor me all day long for the job I’ve safely been doing for 20 years, I’d object to it.

Depends on what my job was. If momentary negligence on my part had the potential to cause serious injury or death to large number of people, then I'd be less likely to object.

EarWig

The technology around supervising a driver's attention must be getting better in leaps and bounds if cars are anything to go by.

A1ACo

With all the high winds, travel alerts and DART line problems since yesterday evening, it has brought to mind a previous thought; that with most of the rail services in/ around Dublin even more reliant on EMUs and not Diesel traction (DMUs and locos) in the future, with the almost exclusively overground Metro-like service of the DART - services will seemingly become increasingly vulnerable to fallen lines and related due to winds and theft etc.

So I wonder in terms of 'resilience' will more BEMUs be purchased long-term for skeleton services to help cover incidences?

Would long-term, it also mean diesel or hybrid stock kept in a reserve of sorts (which i doubt), or additional diesel/ hybrid services, or longer train consists kept on lesser lines, to have some fat in the system, to fall back on for busier lines in case of problems?

GerardKeating

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122930190#Comment_122930190

CCTV is good, when it used for major infractions, Phone use while driving would be one. But not when for every single rule infraction, wearing the wrong colour socks for example.

goingnowhere

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122932948#Comment_122932948

if the tree is on the track nothing is moving

An effort to remove likely trees would help two fold, less trees fallen, fewer leaves

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122932948#Comment_122932948

You would have to weigh the increased costs of having BEMUs as a standby against the savings. The savings are likely to be small (fallen trees are not all that common) and BEMUs require significant support infrastructure as well as being more expensive to purchase, more complicated and therefore quite possibly less reliable.

I don't think that the extensive OHLE networks in Europe have big problems with storms.

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122932948#Comment_122932948

I pointed this out recently in response to a similar post,it doesn't matter what reserve options you have if the tracks are littered with stationary EMUs who can't move.

20silkcut

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122882511#Comment_122882511

A conductor told me exactly where to stand in Thurles railway station one day after checking my ticket and he was spot on. The door of my carriage stopped right in front of me. So the railway workers have this knowledge already. Surely not a massive leap to have this information on platforms.

Economics101

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122937450#Comment_122937450

The guy in Thurles knew what type of train was coming. However different trains may use the platform daily: 3, 4, 5 and 6+ car ICRs, Mark IVs. Difficult to have somple markings to cover all eventualities.

CatInABox

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122938677#Comment_122938677

Ah, it's actually the same in Japan, they had different colour markings for each type of train on the platform, with the colour up on the board along with the time and length. Quite intuitive, once you saw it.

I think, at least from my experience anyway, that drivers here have a much wider area in where they are to stop here, which would definitely throw off any markings.

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122938983#Comment_122938983

Just expand the lines a short bit either side, and you should be covered. 22000 stop exactly where the driver wants. 29000 and loco hauled carriages can be a little harder to predict.

DrivingSouth

In Germany, they don't have paint on the floor but the platform is broken into platform 1A, 1B,etc. Then the digital display has an image of the train with numbers inside the carriages, and then letters below, so you know carriage 5 will be stopping between E and F

riddlinrussell

Technically IE already support a system similar to the above at a very limited number of stations (e.g. Heuston) so there's scope to support expanding it across the network but section all platforms 'per carriage' (with a little wiggle room for varying sizes between the new DART, ICR/Mark IV, 22000s on their respective routes etc)

KrisW1001

Such a system is only worth the effort for high-frequency services like DART, as it can speed up boarding. Boarding on Inter City services is always much slower as more passengers have luggage, so there's little benefit for making passengers crowd around the doors.

Pete_Cavan

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122940218#Comment_122940218

I'd say the opposite. It is only relevant when you have short trains also using the platform (so you don't have people waiting a distance from where the train will actually stop) or you have various class of carriages (so if you want first class/restaurant/whatever, you know where to wait).

I know there are shorter DARTs now but with the new fleet, won't the length be standardised to full platform? Regular users will know where to stand to be near the door at stations they are familiar with. If the train is full length, you wouldn't be that far from a door that it would effect boarding.

CrabRevolution

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122925852#Comment_122925852

That's exactly what the unions are at. Over in the UK, some of the train operators are bound by CBAs which state that rosters and rostering changes can only be communicated to drivers by fax. The unions admit it's ridiculous but insist that any modernisation will have to be accompanied by pay rises.

goingnowhere

The union deal in Irish Rail has a new technology no escalation clause so no claim will be sustained for a new train type or technology. So no claim for new trains, ETCS, GSM-R etc…

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122943844#Comment_122943844

Yet the company have already agreed to disconnect the equipment……..

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122944617#Comment_122944617

"disconnect the equipment" - care to explain what this is, why they agreed to disconnect it and who exactly did they make this agreement with?

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122944617#Comment_122944617

That is a very dangerous approach from the company. If new safety equipment is installed and the company disconnect it at the behest of drivers, and there is a subsequent serious accident, the company could be facing a negligence charge, possibly of a criminal nature if there are injuries and fatalities.

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122945202#Comment_122945202

Yeah, totally agree with that. If it's true and if the media were aware of it so that it became common knowledge, I'm pretty sure the public would not be too happy to learn that safety devices on trains that they travel in have been disabled, because the drivers are afraid that they'll be seen doing things that they shouldn't be doing in the first place! Lets face it, if a driver is doing his/her job correctly, then having cameras/safety equipment that monitors you doing your job in your workplace should be of little or no concern to said drivers as there would be no negative repercussions as a result. There's a security camera in the room I'm in right now and I'm within frame of it however I'm not doing anything against company rules so I've no no issue with it.

This is rather shocking and disturbing news if it is true and accurate. I'd be tempted to contact a reputable news outlet to see if it's a news story that they'd be interested in following up with as it's certainly something that needs to be known by the public. If anyone has any more info on this, please do share here or PM me as this is certainly something that can't be permitted if it's true.

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122946319#Comment_122946319

The public aren't travelling on these trains. Are the public going to stop travelling on all the trains that are currently in service?

We have one of the safest railways in the world FFS!

highdef

The public are not travelling on the trains currently but we know that as they won't be in public service for some time however taxpayers money contributes to Irish Rail so naturally the tax payers of the country would have a vested interest into knowing if any safety systems which have been designed, specified, paid for and installed have been manually disabled or compromised - not just because of the potential decrease in safety as a result but also that tax payers money will have been wasted - all because some employees have some unfounded and yet to be rationally explained aversion to the safety systems installed. Again, if the drivers are doing their jobs as per the rules set out by The Company, there can be no negative outcomes for said drivers. The fact that the Unions are in agreement with the disabling of the safety systems is not exactly inspiring confidence either.

@Citizen Six , you say "We have one of the safest railways in the world FFS!" - What's wrong with having it even safer again?

Also, I ask again - "disconnect the equipment" - care to explain what this is, why the Unions agreed to disconnect it and who exactly did they make this agreement with? Additionally, is it likely that drivers will suddenly allow the disabled safety systems to be re-enabled should they be bribed to do so?

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122946650#Comment_122946650

No safety systems are being interfered with.

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122946710#Comment_122946710

I'm a little bit confused with your responses, with you firstly stating that the safety systems in question were being disconnected as agreed with The Union but now you are stating that those same safety systems will not be "interfered with" as you have now decided to describe it.

Are you playing with words as you stated that the Unions have agreed to disconnect the safety systems in question? Using the term "interfered with" may well have a different meaning to "disconnecting".

Or are you perhaps trying to argue that the safety systems being discussed are not actually safety systems, from your own personal opinion?

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122946797#Comment_122946797

I never said safety systems were being disconnected. You inferred that, and I've already corrected you.
You've demonstrated a bias against workers getting paid for extra responsibility. Falsely correlating workload with responsibility for safety.

DrivingSouth

I presume it's just the cctv that is being disconnected.

Cookiemunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122947147#Comment_122947147

Well maybe you could state what systems are being disconnected then instead of being snarky?

And what extra responsibility is involved in driving newer trains?

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122947147#Comment_122947147

There is no extra responsibility in having a safety camera on.

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122948397#Comment_122948397

Yeah, I'm confused. I can't understand how a camera can mean an extra increase in responsibility for a train driver. If anything, I see it as less responsibility as the driver can request that footage from the camera be used in the event that a situation occurs whereby there's an incident and there is some doubt as to whether the driver was doing his/her job in the correct manner. And if it is not blindingly obvious, the expectation is that the driver is always doing his/her job as intended, at all times (the same as more or less any other job) so assuming that is the case, the camera footage will then reveal that the driver was not the cause of the incident or did not have a role to play in it occurring.

The only way I can see a driver having an issue with a camera being fitted is if said driver does things that are prohibited to do whilst in control of a train so that in itself literally proves that the camera is an actual safety camera as it would likely ensure that the driver does actually comply with the rules and regulations that the driver has agreed to abide by, by way of signing his/her contract of employment at the beginning of the employment.

@Citizen Six, does the above sound reasonable? Or am I missing some information that would assist me further in trying to form opinions here?

VonLuck

I think people are confusing being a train driver with working in an office. Someone who is sitting at a desk all day and is seen occasionally browsing youtube or just generally being inefficient may feel that footage of this could result in them being let go. That might seem unfair as the person is (probably) still doing their job. If a train driver was seen doing something they shouldn't be, it's a much bigger issue and is a safety risk.

murphaph

Yeah I mean why don't we get rid of cockpit voice recorders lest a pilot be found responsible for an accident and we learn out of it.

goingnowhere

To be fair none of the CCTV gear on train 1 was working when I was onboard anyway, internal or external.

The basic principal is that ALARP, As low as reasonably practicable, all reasonable and possible steps should be taken to reduce and mitigate risks. A driver alertness monitor is reasonable as is in cab CCTV

See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_Croydon_tram_derailment for an accident where microsleep was called out as a likely factor

highdef

And safety cameras are being rolled out to the Garda force. These are being introduced to protect the Gardai - it also ensures that any Gardai doing things that they should not be doing could well be disciplined as a result of video evidence recorded by the safety cameras. However, as long as a member of AGS is doing his/her job properly, he/she has nothing to worry about.

There are safety cameras on public roads all over the country. These take photos of every car that passes. Those drivers who decide to break the Rules of the Road and commit Road Traffic Offences may well be fined and punished for doing so. However, as long as members of the public drive within the permitted speeds (or only exceed by a small margin, to allow some grace) and are generally observing the rules set out in the Road Traffic Act, those drivers have nothing to worry about.

There are safety cameras installed on the newest fleet of trains in Ireland………..you get the picture!

KrisW1001

Also, CCTV is neutral. It can also protect a driver from accusations of negligence by showing that they were alert and performing their duty at the time of an accident.

I can see some legitimate concerns about monitoring during scheduled break periods, but there shouldn't be a problem with having CCTV active while the train is being driven.

Beta Ray Bill

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122925926#Comment_122925926

Disciplinary action of something not related to safety.

Just to put it in perspective, Ireland has the safest railways in the EU, that's backed up by eurostat

Why are Irish rail doing this? what is broken that they are trying to fix?

It's clearly an attempt to punch down.

Given the existing safety record, the CCTV has NOTHING to do with safety.

More than likely it will be driver conversations that will be scrutinized.

Cookiemunster

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122949156#Comment_122949156

More than likely it will be driver conversations that will be scrutinized.

You know there's a conspiracy forum for that type of shíte right?

Anyways, in reality.

https://www.citizensinformation.ie/en/employment/employment-rights-and-conditions/data-protection-at-work/surveillance-in-the-workplace/#804493

Your employer must have a valid reason and consider whether using CCTV is reasonable. For example, using CCTV to detect intruders, vandals or thieves may be reasonable. However, using CCTV to constantly monitor employees is intrusive and only justifiable in special circumstances.

Or

https://nfg.ie/legal-implications-of-cctv-in-the-workplace/

The use of CCTV in disciplinary matters is inadmissible unless there are exceptional or special circumstances justifying the surveillance. The employee should be notified in advance of the presence of the cameras and that the images may be used in disciplinary proceedings.

blanch152

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122949156#Comment_122949156

It cannot be used for personal driver conversations.

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122948397#Comment_122948397

You need to read some posts that you missed.

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122949750#Comment_122949750

Why not?

tom1ie

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122948880#Comment_122948880

Not sure I’d be bringing the situation with the guards into this argument.

Guards trying to do their job are regularly being put under intense unwarranted scrutiny from GSOC.
But anyway back to trains.

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122948467#Comment_122948467

You do seem pretty confused alright.

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122950695#Comment_122950695

Excellent reply and contribution to my post, the fact that you're giving no worthy or helpful response to my queries says it all.

Citizen Six

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122950775#Comment_122950775

Read you own posts mate.

KrisW1001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122950819#Comment_122950819

I think you're being needlessly aggressive towards someone who was trying to engage politely with you.

if you can share further information, then that would help us all understand l what the actual issue is here. If you can't, then it's okay to say that you can't... but sniping at people who are making an effort to see your point of view is unhelpful.

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122950898#Comment_122950898

Thank you, and I appreciate the support @KrisW1001. And yes, I am trying to engage in a polite manner, gather as many facts as possible and then go from there. I've posted some lengthy posts which I believe are reasonable, in terms of my questions and opinions I've formed based on the information I've received here but yes, full replies to my posts such as "You do seem pretty confused alright." and "Read you own posts mate." from @Citizen Six are not just immature and unhelpful but are also just clogging up this conversation with lint.

Perhaps @Citizen Six has a personal reason to not want the cameras fitted to Irish Rail trains. I've no idea if he/she is an employee but @Citizen Six certainly has negative feelings towards the cameras on the new trains, going by the responses on this thread.

end of the road

lads this is the biggest non-issue ever, a much ado over nothing to be honest.
the cameras are not safety features, they have got nothing to do with safety nor will make any difference to safety so nobody is at any risk here.
they simply came as a part of the train and aren't actually required in daily use hence being turned off.
dead man's peddle and the signalling including the relevant protection systems are your safety features and they are going nowhere so you have nothing to worry about, much better then cameras will ever be.

if any driver is doing anything they shouldn't be they can already be caught and will be dealt with.

Economics101

This graph is virtually meaningless. First it says nothing about the total accident rate in different countries, only about the share of different apparent causes in the various totals: so is a 30% share of an accident rate of 1 per million journeys worse than a 50% share of 1 per 10 million journeys?

Second, the figure for Ireland says that 100% of accidents were related to rolling stock in motion, and therefore zero to level crossing accidents. This is self-evident BS. I suppose that level crossing accidents could be classified as "rolling stock in motion", whixh explain might explain things.

But overall, it's a mess.

KrisW1001

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122951735#Comment_122951735

You’re right that without totals, it proves nothing, but it should be obvious that "Rolling stock in motion" accidents are those that cannot be categorised into the other buckets.

I looked up the site that chart came from, and the full figures are there. The absolute number of fatalities in 2022 here was exactly one person. Here's a more meaningful graph from the same source (Railway safety statistics in the EU - Statistics Explained)

So, Ireland does indeed have the safest railway system in Europe when measured by fatalities. Further, nobody was seriously injured on Irish railways that year. However, there were six deaths on railway property from suicide here that year - suicides are the most common cause of death on railways everywhere across Europe.

highdef

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/122951348#Comment_122951348

"lads this is the biggest non-issue ever, a much ado over nothing to be honest."

Irish Rail management probably said the same thing to drivers but going from what I've read here, the subject of in-cab cameras went all the way to the Unions so it's not just Boards.ie users who have kicked up a bit of a fuss about them.

"the cameras are not safety features, they have got nothing to do with safety nor will make any difference to safety so nobody is at any risk here."

If a driver is using his/her phone whilst driving a train and there is someone/something on the tracks ahead, there is a reasonable possibility that the use of the phone would cause sufficient delay to result in the driver being unable to stop the train in time, something that may not have occurred had the driver being not using a phone. After all, according to @Beta Ray Bill, every single rail accidents that occurred in Ireland in 2022 was to persons (hit) by rolling stock in motion so what I've just mentioned is plausible…….but there are no cameras to prove it so it can be only a theory.