Driving a train vs flying a plane

[drivin_me_nuts]

A while back I was speaking to an old train driver - not the diesel/electric drivers, but the 'proper steam engine drivers' (his words) about the skills required. As he was talking about the skill and concentration levels he became dismissive of people like modern pilots with all their electronic aides etc.

Not withstanding the nostalgia effect, the skills required and the levels of responsibility needed to drive a mainline steam engine were pretty substantial, but more so than a modern pilot of a large commercial plane?

[anonymous-user]

I drove a train and then a plane in MS train/flight simulator and the plane was much harder. fact.

[mrmaggit]

Problem with driving a steam engine is that not only do you have to control the loco; but you also have to know the "road" intimately, as in every gradient, signal, point, bridge, bend, crossing; and also allow for the weight of the train, its type (goods/mixed/passenger) etc. And you have to do that in your own head, day or night, wet, dry foggy, snow, ice or sun. In the olden days, that could mean well over a thousand miles of route knowledge. That takes years to learn.

I'm not going to criticise either, but I'd say there is precious little to chose between them, given the skill levels required. Also there is no such thing as an autopilot on a steam train. The brakes may have external control, but only on/off, and there is the deadmans pedal, but again, only on/off, and they're not on many steamers.

[eharding]

I'd say the train driver has the more complex task....because the range of noises he has to make compared to those required of a commercial pilot.

Steam Train Driver said:

Psssshhht-kooof, pssshhhhhht-kooof, pssshhhhhht-kooof, pssshhhhhht-kooof, pssshhhhhht-kooof, pssshhhhhht-kooof (bit of a gradient now) pshht-koof, pshht-koof, pshht-koof, pshht-koof (here comes a tunnel) Woooooo-Woooooo

Compare this with the noises required of the airline pilot.

Airbus Driver said:

Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoooooooooooooooooooowm

A lot more going on for the train driver, I'm sure you'll agree.

Obviously, for a military pilot in a combat role the task is a bit more complex.

Eurofighter Typhoon Driver said:

Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoooooooooooooooooooowm. Dakakakakakakakakaka.

[mrmaggit]

[anonymous-user]

eharding said:

Compare this with the noises required of the airline pilot.

Airbus Driver said:

Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoooooooooooooooooooowm What's it doing now? . . . Should it be doing that?. . . . I think it does that sometimes.

[hidetheelephants]

eharding said:

Compare this with the noises required of the airline pilot.

Airbus Driver said:

Neeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeoooooooooooooooooooowm. Oooh, pretty flashing light and hooting noise; what's that mean?{consults 10,000 page SOP manual, but falls asleep while scanning index}

EFA

Edited by hidetheelephants on Thursday 11th August 00:32

[davepoth]

The thing about flying a plane is that it's all written down. Essentially their job is to make sure that the procedures they have are followed to the letter.

With a steam train, it was completely different. My grandad worked the S&D and would one day be driving an express train, and the next day would be shunting in a yard. All the engines were completely different in operation, and some would be harder than others to drive. It's always said that a steam train is not really like a machine, more like an animal, because they are so reactive to conditions, maintenance, coal, and driver.

[anonymous-user]

davepoth said:

The thing about flying a plane is that it's all written down. Essentially their job is to make sure that the procedures they have are followed to the letter.

For pilots there are differences in aircraft themselves, aircraft weights, weather, technical problems, passenger problems, airfields and their associated procedures, terrain, loading issues, ATC/slot problems Flight time limitations etc etc etc

Do you think we have some kind of book up there with all the answers to all these problems in it that can be quickly consulted whenever we need?

I amazed there's all that learning and training and exams and medicals and sim checks and line checks and type ratings etc. All we need is that book where it's all written down. Easy peasy.

[hidetheelephants]

el stovey said:

davepoth said:

The thing about flying a plane is that it's all written down. Essentially their job is to make sure that the procedures they have are followed to the letter.

For pilots there are differences in aircraft themselves, aircraft weights, weather, technical problems, passenger problems, airfields and their associated procedures, terrain, loading issues, ATC/slot problems Flight time limitations etc etc etc

Do you think we have some kind of book up there with all the answers to all these problems in it that can be quickly consulted whenever we need?

I amazed there's all that learning and training and exams and medicals and sim checks and line checks and type ratings etc. All we need is that book where it's all written down. Easy peasy.

You're both right; to be fair Airline flying does involve wall to wall checklists and manuals, but equally the pilot should be capable of doing 95% of it with his eyes shut and one hand behind his back.

[mrmaggit]

It's a bit like who's the better pilot, Glider or PPL.

I'm biased but I'd say glider, you have to be, you haven't got a big fan up from to pull you out of trouble. Glider pilots only ever get one chance at landing! (unless you're in a powered glider, of course).

Anecdotally, glider pilots transfer to powered much quicker than the other way round.

[Madness60]

Glider vs powered??? The true pilots are in helicopters. Fixed wing aircraft want to fly where as a helicopter wants to kill you all the time!

[mrmaggit]

Yes, you're right. Helicopters just beat the laws of physics into submission.

[hidetheelephants]

mrmaggit said:

Yes, you're right. Helicopters just beat the laws of physics into submission.

They don't fly, they're just so ugly they repel the earth.

[Flintstone]

davepoth said:

The thing about flying a plane is that it's all written down. Essentially their job is to make sure that the procedures they have are followed to the letter.

Yup, that's it. That's how it's done.



Capt: "Morning. You fly there and I'll fly back" <Pushes button 'A'>

First Officer: (Six hours later) <Pushes button 'B'>

Edited by Flintstone on Saturday 9th October 18:47

[Madness60]

hidetheelephants said:

mrmaggit said:

Yes, you're right. Helicopters just beat the laws of physics into submission.

They don't fly, they're just so ugly they repel the earth.

But even by beating laws of physics and being ugly you still need to believe they can fly, doubt for a second and burning death and destruction will follow!

[hidetheelephants]

Flintstone said:

davepoth said:

The thing about flying a plane is that it's all written down. Essentially their job is to make sure that the procedures they have are followed to the letter.

Yup, that's it. That's how it's done.



Capt: "Morning. You fly there and I'll fly back" <Pushes button 'A'>

First Officer: (Six hours later) <Pushes button 'B'>

Damn, you broke the code! [vector all black helicopters to the Flintstone dwelling; we have a security breach]

Edited by hidetheelephants on Saturday 9th October 20:54

[Simpo Two]

drivin_me_nuts said:

Not withstanding the nostalgia effect, the skills required and the levels of responsibility needed to drive a mainline steam engine were pretty substantial, but more so than a modern pilot of a large commercial plane?

I don't believe that controlling a device on a fixed track in two dimensions where the only variable is speed, can be as hard as controlling a device on no tracks that is free to move in all three dimensions, everything is infinitely variable and if you get it wrong you make a smoking hole in the ground.

[FourWheelDrift]

hidetheelephants said:

You're both right; to be fair Airline flying does involve wall to wall checklists and manuals, but equally the pilot should be capable of doing 95% of it with his eyes shut and one hand behind his back.

Have you never seen "Seconds from Disaster"?

[drivin_me_nuts]

Simpo Two said:

drivin_me_nuts said:

Not withstanding the nostalgia effect, the skills required and the levels of responsibility needed to drive a mainline steam engine were pretty substantial, but more so than a modern pilot of a large commercial plane?

I don't believe that controlling a device on a fixed track in two dimensions where the only variable is speed, can be as hard as controlling a device on no tracks that is free to move in all three dimensions, everything is infinitely variable and if you get it wrong you make a smoking hole in the ground.

Not so sure about the two dimensional aspect. Certainly train movement does involve an X, Y and Z axis of movement. Does the fact that everything is infinitely variable make it easier - in so far as witin a set of variable parameters there will be a numner of combinations that will work?

There are certainly a huge number of complexities involved in driving a steam loco, many of which have already been mentioned. Granted there are fewer controls, but the dynamics of human involvement are greater. Take for instance a route out of London to York running an express engine would take a considerable effort in concentration, skill and experience to make it on time - often made in the past to within seconds of the scheduled arrival times. Fewer controls, same (if not greater) risk to life and limb if a mistake is made and fewer, if no failsafe systems (other than lead plugs to drop the fire if the fireman forgets to keep the water topped up). If you get it wrong in a steam loco, indeed quite literally you do make a smoking hole in the ground!

Men in grubby overalls and years of hard earned 'road' experience, vs starched white shirts, polished glasses and years of training and experience. Are they actually that different?