Rail Training through Driving Simulators.

Integration of the
Human Factor
a) (b) (c) (d) (e)
Baltasar Gil, Pilar Calvo, Antonio Monrocle, Víctor Irala, Iñaki Aliaga
c) (d)
Renfe Operadora
(a) (b)
ESM Institute of Research into Safety and Human Factors
(e)
Lander Simulation and Training Solutions, S.A.

Article Information Abstract

Keywords: Renfe Operadora, ESM, Institute of Research into Safety and Human Factors, and Lander
K1, Simulation Simulation and Training Solutions, are aware of the new scenario created by railway
K2, Human Error interoperability and the latest ERTMS-ETCS driving systems, as well as safety demands
K2, Assessment coming from European Union Directives, and have detected the need to develop a
K4, Training methodology with simulators capable of identifying and evaluating, in an objective and
automatic way, human errors in train driving through simulation training. Based on that need,
we have created “multipurpose simulators”, which are capable of evaluating human error in
rail safety, while integrating and quantifying Human Factors in the training process.
Corresponding author:
Baltasar Gil de Egea The structure of the teaching methods will be devised to fulfil the training and assessment
Tel.: (34) 985 235934 objectives defined by the instructors of Renfe Operadora. The achievement of these training
Fax.(34) 985 273832 and assessment goals will make it possible to guarantee that drivers are efficiently trained to
e-mail: baltasargil@esm.es perform their task in a professional manner, ensuring that they fulfil the legal requirements in
Address: C/Martínez Cachero, 12 this matter.
bajo33013 Oviedo – Asturias – Spain

in the field of Human Factors evaluation via simulators.

1 Introduction
Throughout the history and development of
simulation technology (and simulators) for the training of
train drivers, the role of safety behaviour training has
become more and more significant. This has been made
possible by reproducing unusual or risk situations so as to
facilitate learning from the simulated experiences, or by
forcing trainees to behave in a manner that we would like
to reinforce or correct. Accordingly, the scientific
community has detected the need to move forward on the
integration of Human Factors in simulation technologies
aimed at achieving safe behaviour and qualifications
capable of guaranteeing the competency of train drivers
in efficiency and safety-related issues. Thus, we cannot
stress strongly enough up to what point it is important to
achieve a competency management system capable of
developing, monitoring and assessing competencies in a
consistent and reliable manner.
2 Aims
Our aim has been to meet such a need through the
incorporation and quantification of Performance
Influencing Factors (PIFs) or Human Factors in the
training process. We have done this by using training
simulators capable of automatically registering the
trainee's behaviour and any active errors, whether they
be operational, cognitive or communication errors.
Besides, we have identified the precursors leading to
incorrect behaviour while directing and personalising the
training process, trying to bridge the gap currently existing
Our goal is two-fold: to improve the safety-related training
process (Human Reliability Training) and to enhance the
knowledge of Human Factors leading to human errors
(Human Factors Research).
2.1 Human Error Management
Human reliability is a range of knowledge and
techniques used to analyse, forecast and reduce the
number of human errors in rail operations. A rail system is
“reliable” in so far as it is able to fit the purpose for which it
has been conceived while minimising the number of
potential failures, whether they be technical or human.
It is a well-known fact that human errors are
extremely complex, hard to detect, record and measure,
possibly much more complex than any other technological
element in the system. Therefore, it is necessary to
analyse this complexity in a systematic way in order to
throw some light on the weaknesses of the “man-
machine-infrastructure-organisation” interface in the rail
sector.
Human errors are risks which create a loophole
in our protection system, compromising safety. Only by
learning from errors and by systematically recalling past
experience can we discover the multicausality of human
and organisational factors, adopt prevention barriers and
guarantee an organisation resistant to human error.
Baltasar Gil et al.
All the international research studies agree on the fact
that human error is involved in 80% of accidents and
incidents, not only in the rail sector, but also in
aeronautics and the marine sector.
ACCIDENT
Underlying errors in
management systems
Driver’s active error
Infrastructure
Rules
Maintenance
Trajectory of and Rolling
Accident Stock
3. The Method
To reach this goal in Renfe Operadora we have relied
on Task Analysis Methodology, based on the analysis of
drivers’ behaviour and on the various contexts they must
face while driving. Consequently, we have taken into
account a series of parameters such as the operating
conditions (standard, degraded, emergency, etc.),
operations and tasks (driving, manoeuvring, problem
solving, technical failure management, communications,
etc.) and the element in the system affected by the
operation/driving.
3.1 The IPSE-Simulator Method
The whole train driving system revolves around
human performance, even the most automated parts of
the system, such as High Speed and ERTMS equipment.
The possibility of human error is a constant risk, the
different types and degree of seriousness of which we
must detect and analyse with the use of training
simulators.
Based on a better understanding of how and why
people act in an efficient way when driving a train, and
how and why they make mistakes on particular occasions
under particular circumstances, we have set the basis for
the appraisal of such events and the implementation of
automatic detection of errors into simulators.
Identifying and assessing human error in train
driving is possible. There are numerous techniques
available to study human reliability and its involvement in
risk. IPSE belongs to a group of techniques which is
able to assess the role of human error in rail safety
management systems. ESM has developed the IPSE
methodology to identify, evaluate and prioritise human
errors. This method lets us operate both with data
collected in real time during the performance of a task or
with recorded data to be analysed at a later stage.
IPSE is based on the application of Generic
Values (GV) and Specific Values (SV) to the errors
detected. Generic Value means the relevance of an error
April 6th – 8th, 2011, Madrid,Spain
Rail Training through Driving Simulators. Integration of the Human Factor
and its contribution to risk and it is independent of the
specific circumstances surrounding the event, whereas
the Specific Values do depend on the specific conditions
leading up to the error in the analysed event.
The application of the IPSE-Simulator to the
railway sector is a software adaptation of the IPSE
method acting as an “Automatic Assessment System” for
errors occurring in train driving simulators. It can identify,
register, classify and weigh errors in an automatic and
objective way. It also enables us to compare different
trainees’ performances in the simulator and to generate
graphic representation of the same.
We must not forget that one of the most critical
problems we face when using rail simulators is the
objectivity of data and the possibility of comparing results.
When using “multipurpose simulators” such as those
developed by Lander to train drivers –initial training,
advanced training, post-accident training, as well as
competence assessment– we require an objective
assessment model, so as to minimise the weight of
personal bias in the instructor’s subjective analysis.
Subjective analysis always implies an extra workload for
the instructor and furthermore, it does not enable him to
compare results with other trainees in the Renfe rail
simulation training systems. A comparison of driver safety
training programmes and their contents could facilitate the
adoption of best practices, thus greatly improving the
training of drivers.
RENFE/ESM/LANDER have been working for a
long time on the development of an Automatic Human
Error Assessment Model for multipurpose simulators in
the field of rail transport.
Train Simulator Lander
Within the European rail sector and given the
awareness of the new scenario created by interoperability
and the new ERTMS-ETCS driving systems, the need for
objective, automatic assessment has become a priority in
the use of simulators. Rail simulators being currently used
are underperforming in terms of objective result analysis,
assessment procedures and human error analysis.
4. The Training Model
In the last few years, we have all seen a number of
changes in the field of training. Up to now, training used to
focus on the imparting of a certain amount of knowledge
Proceedings of the WCRT2011
Baltasar Gil et al.
from a professional to trainees, and the assessment of
how the trainees had assimilated such knowledge.
Nowadays, however, with the use of simulators, trainees
must prove, not only that they have assimilated
theoretical knowledge or that they have a certain number
of driving hours under their belt, but also that they have
attained a certain degree of competence, that is to say
the ability to combine theoretical and practical knowledge
to sort out a given difficult situation –both in highly
automated situations and in degraded operations. This is
why teaching methods, assessment methods and human
reliability improvement methods need to move forward.
In this way, simulation training must bring about
a change in the situation from which the trainees, whether
they are experienced or not, start their training.
Improve training by:
• Continuously assessing, on a personal basis,
the level of competence throughout the
learning process. This personalised method
usually increases personal motivation.
• Identifying inadequate behaviour under certain
driving conditions and learning gaps. This
enables further “a la carte” training, which
suits the individual needs of trainees better,
while at the same time maximising the use of
available resources.
• Identifying reliable behaviour with a view to
positively reinforcing it, as a model for other
trainees.
Acquire new knowledge and abilities or skills by:
• Implementing changes in the exercises. These
changes could contemplate, for example,
infrequent or unusual traffic conditions, with a
view to highlighting active safety-critical errors
and predicting behavioural limits in tasks
prone to the generation of human error.
• Training in situations where the trainee must
demonstrate reliable behaviour, especially
when the task requires him to make a
calculated decision between “safety” and
“production”, involving critical situations under
stress.
• Having the instructor come up with
“customised” exercises. He can do so by
increasing the level of difficulty according to
each individual trainee, by modifying the
exercise settings in order to obtain a wider
range of situations focused on the same skill,
and by aiming at the consistent definition and
memorising of procedures, through a well-
designed and continuously updated teaching
programme.
Change attitudes by:
• Promoting training in preventive attitudes in
usual or unusual operations, so that the
April 6th – 8th, 2011, Madrid,Spain
Rail Training through Driving Simulators. Integration of the Human Factor
trainees are able to anticipate the
consequences even if they have not personally
experienced negative consequences before,
thus encouraging the development of risk
awareness.
• Developing specific exercises aimed at
improving risk perception, with a view to
recycling agents who show a poor
understanding of risk perception or who expect
to see a particular set of signals only because
they have been exposed to an intense
repetition of a particular signal associated with
a particular traffic configuration.
5. Assessment
Assessment of a training session is based both
on the objective data provided by the system and on the
assessment previously issued by a panel of expert
instructors, from which all subjectivity has been removed.
A training tool, such as a simulator, must have a series of
features which are capable of analysing and assessing
the exercises performed in it by the trainees, in a
comprehensive, precise, and specific way, subject to
objective appraisal. Any simulator should, therefore, be
able to simplify the instructor’s assessment tasks. This
includes predicting and monitoring human errors, as well
as increasing drivers’ reliability.
Objective Assessment is based on statistical data
and analysis of the simultaneous occurrence of certain
variables collected within the parameters of the
performance of an exercise in the simulator. In this way,
allowing the system to obtain in real time the readings of
certain indicators in real time, which then become the
criteria on which to assess the trainee’s competences
tested in the simulator.
The capacity to collect and process data is one of
the areas in which this type of simulator outperforms other
more traditional training systems, which show a higher
degree of subjectivity. Consequently, we can say that
simulation training is more objective and complete. We
can then talk about a true Competence Assessment.
However, it is very difficult to assess some
factors in situations where the relevant regulations only
recommend that “we proceed with care” or words to that
effect. In such cases, the instructor must rely on his
experience as an added-value tool, introducing data into
the system in a quantifiable way, so as not to permit
variations even if the data were to be assessed by a
different instructor.
In these cases, the instructor must become
aware of the situation beforehand, in order to input the
quantifiable parameter into the system, in real time or at a
later stage. Nevertheless, to facilitate the instructor’s task
and level off the criteria of the various instructors, there
are a number of categories at their disposal which allow
them to analyse, in a comprehensive way, the above-
mentioned aspects of driving.
Proceedings of the WCRT2011
Baltasar Gil et al. Rail Training through Driving Simulators. Integration of the Human Factor

By means of “Automatic Assessment”,

simulators incorporating ESM/LANDER technology can
meet the training needs of the most demanding railway
companies in terms of safety requirements.

Apart from detecting the occurrence of drivers’

errors, the system can automatically quantify and classify
them according to a triple matrix: the seriousness of the
error, its cognitive nature and its most likely precursors.
6. The Multipurpose simulators (MPS)
The starting point of this project was the traditional
equipment known as the Full-Mission simulator. Many
examples of these have been in service in many countries
(such as Trenitalia in Italy, or DB in Germany), consisting
of a real cabin (1:1 replica), a 6 DOF motion platform, an
immersive projection system on-board the motion
platform and an Instructor’s Station. Renfe itself used to
have a Full-Mission simulator (without motion platform) for
the high speed train.
The first question that we considered was: what is the
training scope of these simulators? And then: how many
drivers can we reach within the time we actually have for
their training?
The answers are easy to find:
• Training scope: topics like the following are
covered with Full-Mission simulators
o One particular rolling stock model
o Correct utilization of cab controls
o Driving competencies under any
railroad and weather conditions
o Development of safe driving habits and
techniques
o Traction and brake management for
energy saving
o Detection, identification and
management of malfunctions
• Reachable driver population: only one driver can
be trained by an instructor using traditional
simulators.
Figure 1: Simulation cabin with front projection
As for the controls and indicators of the driving desk,
Lander and Renfe decided to look for a solution that may
allow the latter to simulate a wide variety of rolling stock
and technologies:
• Rolling stock: locomotives such as Siemens 292
and EMUs such as CAF CIVIA
• ATPs and Signalling systems: ASFA, Digital
ASFA and the high speed ETCS and LZB
systems
• Communication technologies: GSM-R and
traditional train-ground communication systems.
Such a big configurability was made possible with the
desk design in Figure 2. That desk is equipped with the
following components:
• Desk surface with a set of levers for traction and
different brake systems, and a set of
pushbuttons and commands for several
functions. All of them are common to the different
rolling stock models to be simulated.
• Front surface with a set of three TFT touch
screens to simulate those commands that a
particular rolling stock may have but were not
included as real elements in the desk surface,
and those indicators, lamps, communication
consoles, HMIs, etc. that the simulated rolling
stock may have in that position.

The aim of the project was not to lose the training scope
of traditional simulators, but to improve the cost-
effectiveness and the reachable driver population per
instructor. To achieve that, a specific design of the
Trainee’s Station, Instructor’s Station and Training Centre
Network was developed, manufactured and
commissioned between 2006 and 2008.
Figure 2: Driving desk design
MPS: Trainee’s Station (TS) The level of configurability achieved by this solution of
driving desk fulfilled the requirements of Renfe. Different
One of the biggest issues in the design of a simulation configurations can be seen in Figure 3 and Figure 4,
cab is to maximize the degree of immersion a trainee will demonstrating much greater training possibilities than in
experience inside, so that a great transference to real life a replica cab.
is achieved by means of simulation based training. For
this purpose, a specific cab design was developed, in
combination with a front projection solutions to cover a
wide range of the front field of view of the driver, as
Figure 1 shows.

April 6th – 8th, 2011, Madrid,Spain Proceedings of the WCRT2011

Baltasar Gil et al.
Figure 3: Configuration for ETCS, GSM-R and Digital
ASFA
Figure 4: Configuration for LZB, Train-Ground and normal
ASFA
MPS: Instructor’s Station (IS)
Achieving an immersive and configurable Training
Station is a big step forward, but the real user of the
simulator is not the trainee, but the trainer. So, a
successful simulator must include a very powerful
Instructor’s Station from which the real learning can be
designed, planned and delivered. This is all about
functionalities, but ergonomics and design must not be
forgotten. These considerations lead Renfe and Lander to
the solution in Figure 5.
Figure 5: Instructor’s Station
In terms of functionality, the IS (hardware and software)
must allow the instructor to have absolute control over the
simulation sessions, and provide the necessary tools to
cover all the necessities that the instructor might have
during the simulation session. These necessities are of
two types:
• Information necessities: the instructor must, at
any moment, be able to know with all possible
precision, both the state of the simulated
machine and the operations that the student
executes on it, as well as the state of the
surroundings in which the session is developed
(scene, traffic, etc.).
• Necessities of control and intervention: in
addition to the aforementioned, the instructor
also needs tools that allow him to take part in the
simulation sessions, generating simulated
conditions that will put the drivers in critical
situations (or of another type of pedagogical
April 6th – 8th, 2011, Madrid,Spain
Rail Training through Driving Simulators. Integration of the Human Factor
interest) so that they can learn about how to
react in these situations:
o Failures.
o Incidences.
o Adverse environmental conditions (fog,
rain, etc.).
o Etc.
In order to respond to all these necessities, the means
that the IS makes available for the instructor are the
following (distributed through the 5 screens depicted in
Figure 6):
• Replica of the simulator’s visual channels (far
right screen in Figure 6). On it, the instructor will
be able to contemplate the same image that is
being shown by the projection system to the
student.
• Replica of the three TFT touch screens of the TS
(first three screens from the left in Figure 6). The
instructor will be able to see the same images
the student does, and also actuate on the virtual
controls remotely.
• Simulation control screen (the computer
application for simulation management), on
which the instructor will have the following:
o Monitoring service, in real time, of the
state of all the controls and indicators
installed in the driving desk.
o Video image of the cabin’s interior to
allow the instructor to observe the
actions and attitudes of the driver.
o Monitoring service of the position of the
unit within the whole scene.
o Tools to launch incidences, failures,
variations of environmental conditions,
etc.
o Working documents to use by the
student in each exercise of simulation.
• A printer, in order to obtain printed information of
each simulation session, and whichever other
documents are needed by the instructor.
• Wireless Keyboard and mouse for a cable
cleared writing-desk.
• Microphone and loudspeakers to allow
communication with the student while the
simulation takes place.
Figure 6: Screens of the Instructor’s Station
All driving sessions remain recorded within the system
for future playback, in briefing sessions or in further
assessment by the instructor if needed. In such situations,
the screens of the IS show exactly the same images as
they did during real time simulation, since every single
detail is recorded, including communications, that can be
listened to during a playback session.
Proceedings of the WCRT2011
Baltasar Gil et al. Rail Training through Driving Simulators. Integration of the Human Factor
Furthermore, automatic assessment tools are installed
in the simulator so that a wide variety of non-subjective
driving mistakes can be automatically detected by the
system and reported to the IS (to be included in a
complete final report). For instance, as exceeding the
permitted maximum speed of a line is objectively
definable and detectable, the IS will automatically report
the error, but that will not happen with other categories of
more subjective mistakes, such as not stopping the train
in the most adequate location for passengers not to have
to walk too far to the doors, or similar subjective
considerations. For this kind of assessment, the instructor
will have a specific environment in his software for a
complete evaluation (see p.3 above of this paper ESM
methodology).
Finally, it is important to highlight that any simulation
session must be the result of a previous planning and
design effort. This is a very important stage of the training
success process, and the simulator aids the Instructor in
this task by means of the Planning Mode of the IS
software.
The Planning Mode offers the instructor comfortable,
versatile and intuitive tools to design/edit any aspect of
the training plans that he wishes to deliver by means of
the simulator. In this way the instructor has the option of
arranging the following tasks (all of them can be done at
any moment, even when a simulation is running):
• To create, modify and delete exercises.
• To organize the exercises according to its
didactic content (or according to the criterion that
is considered appropriate) in groups of superior
level, like, for example, lessons, training units or
courses.
The more basic edition level is the one that relates to
the exercises. To create an exercise is just to assign
values to a series of configurable parameters that the
Planning Mode will offer to the instructor:
• Select the rolling stock:
o Locomotive / EMU
o Passengers / Freight
o Initial state of the systems
• Determination of the simulation scenario:
o Selection of starting point
o Determination of the route to follow by
the train
o Define traffic flow of the same line in
both directions
o Number of passengers in stations (low,
medium or high)
• Initial weather and visibility conditions:
o Setting the initial time of the session, in
order to adjust aspects like day or night
driving
o Level of snow, rain or fog, with the
corresponding influence on the visibility
and adherence between the wheel and
the track
• Programming of general events, so that they
take place during the simulation, at the moment
that the instructor defines:
o Change in weather and visibility
conditions
April 6th – 8th, 2011, Madrid,Spain
o Malfunctions and failures of rolling stock
o Incidences (unexpected traffic
conditions, signalling failure, obstacle
on the tracks, etc.)
The previous categories of events are also available
during the simulation, so that the instructor may include
some new event on real-time and alter the original
exercise if necessary. The planning mode, however,
allows him not to be forced to do so, as all the events can
be automatically managed by the system, following the
instructions the instructor set in the planning mode.
Some of the malfunctions the system is able to
simulate are the following:
• Overload at the traction circuit
• Shunt at the traction circuit
• Overload at the high voltage circuit
• Shunt at the high voltage circuit
• Compressor failure
• Pneumatic leak in brake system
• Loss of traction (different levels and conditions)
• Pneumatic brake system release failure
• Electric brake failure
• Dead man’s pedal malfunction
• Permanent brake due to failure in ATP system
• Passenger alarm
• False “door open” while running
• Unexpected resistance against traction
• Etc.
Some of the incidences the system is able to simulate
are the following:
• Power loss in catenaries
• Branch hanging from catenaries
• Broken track
• Lateral deformation of the track
• Obstacle on the track
• Very low adherence
• Works in track
• Incorrect switch
• Different malfunctions in level crossing systems
and signalling
• Car on level crossing
• Signal suddenly changing to red
• Red signal without reason
• Fused signal
• Temporary restricted speed
• Temporary telephone interlocking
• Driving in opposite direction on a double-tracked
section
• Approaching a stopped train ahead
• False indication of a beacon
• Loss of signal in a beacon
• Diverse ETCS and LZB infrastructure or
communication failures
• Shunts in a station or depot
These incidences are available in the different type of
lines simulated, up to 800km:
• Madrid – Seville line with LZB signalling
• Madrid – Barcelona line with ETCS level 1
signalling
• Non high speed lines with different interlocking:
permissive and absolute blocks, automatic and
Proceedings of the WCRT2011
Baltasar Gil et al.
non-automatic blocks in single and double-
tracked sections, with and without CTC, etc.
MPS: Training Centre Network
Given the low cost of the simulation cabins (the cost of
the cab is reduced 10 to 1) and the enhanced automatic
assessment module of the IS, a new layout is feasible, in
which we forget the traditional one-to-one training and
come to a new layout of Training Center, in which more
than one cabin can be controlled from a single IS and by
a single Instructor, even with all of them working at the
same time.
The network of Training Centers of Renfe consists of
10 of them, each equipped with a set of Trainee’s
Stations, managed from one Instructor’s Station. The
global layout is as follows:
Training Centres with 3 TS: Madrid (two Centres, see
Figure 7)
Training Centres with 2 TS: Barcelona (two Centres),
Seville, León, Valencia and Bilbao.
Training Centres with 1 TS: Miranda and Santiago
Figure 7: IS and two of the three TSs of one of the
Training Centres in Madrid
The ten Training Centres equipped with multipurpose
simulators by Lander, are connected to each other so that
they can share databases of students, exercises,
assessment reports, training plans, etc.
Cost effective
We say that a 100% of immersion is achieved when
the driver, after some minutes, is not able to say whether
he is performing in a simulator or in a real train. This is a
theoretical consideration very difficult to reach, but the
truth is that a Full Mission Simulator is the best approach
to this. The point now is: is it worth investing such an
amount of money on this? Is it really critical for the
training of driver?
The answer to the previous question may be different
depending on the aims of the user. Renfe’s experience in
recent years clearly backs the idea of multipurpose
simulators and their cutting edge technological
advantages:
• Very high immersion level achievement
• Not only one but many trains in each simulator
April 6th – 8th, 2011, Madrid,Spain
Rail Training through Driving Simulators. Integration of the Human Factor
• Not only one but several simulations can take
place at the same time with just one Instructor.
• Logistic problems reduced by installing several
Training Centres in different locations so that the
organization of training sessions is easier and
MUCH CHEAPER
• The complexity of the system is decreased:
• No special needs in client’s facilities to host the
simulators. Normal offices are enough.
• Lower installation costs.
• Extremely little maintenance.
• More advanced assessment tools, to raise the
level of delivered training from the point of view
of both, Trainer and Trainee.
• The cost of one new train to be simulated on a
MPS is much cheaper than a Full Mission.
• If many trains, ATPs, lines, incidences, etc. are
included, the development cost is increased.
However, the final product will be very cost
effective.
7. Findings and Conclusions
All the errors registered are treated by using a
series of Human Error Analysis tools, allowing the
organization to find out which type or types of errors are
safety-critical for each particular operation and to know
whether the errors are consistent or random. The link
between active errors and their underlying factors or
precursors, together with the statistical analysis of the
results, encourages us to move forward with confidence in
the same direction.
Our simulators are currently operating in the
Renfe Operator geographical zones where driver training
is carried out. The results obtained through the Human
Error assessment system allow them to devise specific
training measures with a view to meeting the needs of
each individual trainee in the field of behaviour reliability,
obtaining a high degree of acquired competency transfer
to the actual work position.
In this way, simulators allow for the integration
of Human Factors in hands-on training and the latest
safety technologies, facilitating risk management in the
absence of real risks. Such integration is our foremost
contribution to the design and development of training and
research simulation.
The train driving simulators developed by the
Spanish manufacturer Lander, are the first in the world
incorporating the IPSE-Simulator (ESM technology) for
the Automatic Assessment of Human Errors.
Renfe Operadora uses a Network of 20
multipurpose simulators distributed across 10 Simulation
Centres around Spain. Those Centres host one, two or
three simulation cabs, depending on the necessities of the
geographical area they must serve. Regardless of the
number of simulators of the Centre, there is always a
single Instructor's Station to control them all and monitor
the training sessions.
The multipurpose simulation cabs have been
designed and manufactured by the Spanish company
LANDER Simulation & Training Solutions. Each cab is
equipped with a set of commands and pushbuttons on the
driver's desk, in combination with virtual representations
Proceedings of the WCRT2011
Baltasar Gil et al. Rail Training through Driving Simulators. Integration of the Human Factor

of indicators, lamps, HMIs, etc. represented by means of Wilson, J., Norris, B., Clarke, T., and Mills, A. Rail Human
three touch screens in the front desk. Factors. Supporting the Integrated Railway. Ashgate Ed.
2005.
The simulation includes train units and locomotives
(freight and passengers). Simulation of the signaling is
automatic. Malfunctions, incidents and adverse weather Wittingham, R.B., The Blame Machine: why Human Error
conditions can be simulated. The training includes causes Accidents. Ed. Elsevier. 2003.
ordinary and emergency protocols, communications,
regulations... Automatic mistake detection and playback
mode are also available.

So far, Renfe has delivered training with MPSs to more

than 5,000 drivers including topics such as courses for
beginners (candidates to get a driving licence) driving
licence renewal courses, recycling courses on ETCS, LZB
and other safety and signalling systems, etc.

8. References
Building a Safe, Interoperable Railway: A Methodological
Guide to Integrating Human Factors. UIC. 2004.

Espié, S. Research on Human Factors using Simulators.

International Congress on the Use of Simulators. Leon,
Spain. 1999.

European Organisation for the Safety of Air Navigation.

ESARR Advisory Material/Guidance Document
(EAM2/GUI8): Guidelines on the Systemic Occurrence
Analysis Methodology (SOAM). 2005.

Farmer, E., et alt. Handbook of Simulator-Based Training.

Ed. Ashgate. 1999.

Gil de Egea, B., Simulation and Human Reliability.

International Congress on the Use of Simulators. Leon,
Spain. 1999.

Ian Noy, Y., Ergonomics and Safety of Intelligent Driver

Interfaces. In Human Factors and Transportation. Ed.
Barry H. Kantowitz1997.

Meyer, G., Eligiendo un simulador: mundo virtual versus

realidades económicas y electrónicas: consideraciones
para la evaluación de la formación. International
Congress on the Use of Simulators. Leon, Spain. 1999.

Schmitz, M., Maag, C., Pechoucek, J., et alt. 2Train-

Benchmarking Report on computer-based Railway
Training in Europe: Training of Train Drivers in safety-
relevant Issues with validated and integrated computer-
based Technology. Marcus Schmitz and Christian Laag
Ed. 2008.

Rail Safety and Standard Board. Understanding Human

Factors. A Guide for the Railway Industry. 2006.

Wilson, J., Norris, B., Clarke, T., and Mills, A. People and
Rail Systems. Human Factors in Road and Rail
Transport. 2007.

April 6th – 8th, 2011, Madrid,Spain Proceedings of the WCRT2011