Show Posts
|
Pages: 1 ... 26 27 [28]
|
406
|
All across the Great Western territory / Your rights and redress / Re: Leaving Early
|
on: March 27, 2009, 00:40:59
|
Some thoughts on dispatching trains from staffed stations:
The old NSE▸ clocks are fine when they work, but are becoming increasingly problematic, which is why some have been painted over. They are very difficult and expensive to fix, so why bother when the CIS▸ is shows the correct time.
The systems that control these and the CIS clocks are both linked to the "atomic" clock, so should show the same time. However, when one system goes wrong, confusion sets in. The worse possible situation is to have two clocks showing different times. If it does happen, then platform staff usually go by the clock showing the later time, providing of course that this is not obviously completely wrong. I know from experience that platform staff are acutely aware of clocks showing different times, if only by a few seconds. The logical solution is to only have one time source.
Platform staff need digital clocks. They work to the "doors will be locked 30 seconds before" rule and will start the dispatch as the clock ticks over.
Early dispatches from staffed stations are very rare. Sometimes by accident - for example on Platforms 4 and 5 at Reading where trains are streaming through, and usually they have to be dispatched as quickly as possible, so an early arrival can catch you out. Usually though an early dispatch is the result of an instruction from Control. It happens when an on time train is being immediately followed by a late runner, so dispatch the on time train early and get the late runner in and out quickly. Most of the time its not a problem for customers, although there are situations where customers journeys are clearly disrupted. There are situations where a regulation error by a signaller might cause trains to arrive in the wrong order, so an early dispatch might be ordered to minimise the overall impact.
There are of course two timetables: the PTT▸ (Public) and the WTT▸ (Working). They usually differ by at most a couple of minutes. TOCs▸ like the PTT to show clockface departures, but the WTT reflects what is actually possible. Platform staff and guards attempt to dispatch trains in accordance with the PTT, which should concur with the times showing on the CIS system.
Very occasionally there is a cock up (often at times when services are altered for engineering work), and the WTT and the PTT can be significantly different. Usual practice then is to adhere to the PTT, although this is not always possible.
My experience at unstaffed stations is that most guards (or drivers if DOO▸ ) try to stick to the PTT, although clearly this is not universally achieved.
|
|
|
408
|
All across the Great Western territory / Fare's Fair / Re: Ticket Machines - machines missing or broken, and penalty fare implications (merged topics)
|
on: March 17, 2009, 22:43:42
|
Pertis machines serve no purpose when a TVM▸ is available. The rules are you must pay before you travel if the means exist to pay. So, if the TVM is working, using Pertis won't count and you could still be liable for a penalty fare. Hence, it is easier to turn off the Pertis machines and avoid any misunderstanding.
The status of TVMs is remotely monitored. If someone claims a TVM is not working, this can easily be verified.
Interesting stuff earlier in this thread about who uses TVMs and who prefers ticket offices. Tickets on Departure were made available (on the S&B machines) about a year ago and now account for a significant proportion of the business they do. Watch for increasing availability of season tickets through them. Usage of the TVMs continues on an upwards trend - so they are certainly popular with regular users. TVMs at large stations have a different customer profile from those at unstaffed stations, of course.
The other significant trend, of course, is use of the internet to purchase tickets in advance (and collected from the TVMs). Its a lot cheaper to have customers do the research and booking onilne, than to provide ticket office staff to do the work for them. There is not much margin in having a sales adviser spend 15 minutes researching the cheapest way of getting from A to B and back, just to sell ^15 of advance tickets. Hence the closures of travel centres and incentives to book online.
|
|
|
409
|
Journey by Journey / London to the Cotswolds / Re: Cotswold Line redoubling: 2008 - 2011
|
on: March 15, 2009, 00:08:55
|
I understand that NR» is evaluating the option of complete replacement of the signalling along the route as part of the redoubling. This would see closure of the 'boxes at Evesham, Moreton and Ascott, with modern signalling controlled from the new Didcot centre. Intermediate signals on the single line stretches would allow flighting of services at much reduced headways.
|
|
|
410
|
All across the Great Western territory / Across the West / Re: Slack
|
on: March 13, 2009, 01:05:18
|
Another interesting example:
Up local stoppers from Oxford in the previous timetable where scheduled to leave at xx.21, six minutes after the AXC» xx.15 service to Bournemouth. This was quite often late by a few minutes - the AXC service was allowed up to 8 mins lateness and it would still precede the stopper.
The stopper provided a six minute connection at Didcot for Bristol and the West. Whenever the AXC train was a few minutes late, the connection at Didcot was missed. Particularly a problem in the evening peak, when 60+ passengers would change at Didcot for Swindon, Bath etc.
In the current timetable, the stoppers leave at xx.07, with the AXC service following at xx.16. Its now very rare for connections at Didcot to be missed. The stopper sits at Didcot for 10 mins to allow the AXC service to pass, then resumes its journey, more or less in the old path.
There is a similar arrangement in the down direction.
The result is that passengers changing at Didcot are very happy. The connections work very well, you just have to be at Oxford a bit earlier. The downside is that connections out of the AXC service are worse - you have to wait 22 mins at Oxford for a connection to Didcot, rather than than 6 minutes as in the previous timetable.
For passengers travelling on the stopper from Oxford beyond Didcot, there appears to be 10 mins of slack at Didcot - the same applies in the down direction.
So, one group of passengers are see an improved service, and another (smaller) group see a worsening. However, punctuality has improved enormously, so both groups see some improvement, albeit at the expense of increased journey times.
The message seems to be that introducing slack can benefit passengers. Reliability is often more highly valued than speed.
|
|
|
411
|
Journey by Journey / London to Didcot, Oxford and Banbury / Re: Oxford CIS screens
|
on: March 13, 2009, 00:20:56
|
Still some problems on platform 3 - trains disappearing etc. Probably down to the interaction between signaller and CIS▸ .
Most of the additional screens now running (eg. in the waiting room on platform 2)
Train proximity sensors (which turn up the volume of PA▸ announcements when a train is at the platform) appears to be working.
Hearing induction loops still to be commissioned.
|
|
|
412
|
Journey by Journey / London to Didcot, Oxford and Banbury / Re: Oxford CIS screens
|
on: March 11, 2009, 19:32:37
|
Late arrival of an inbound train does not always mean a late departure for the next working - it depends just how late the inbound is. The practice at Oxford is often to bring a late running terminator from London into platform 1 and turn it round in the platform to form the next up service, so cutting out the time taken going down to the sidings and back. No computer system could predict this - it needs human intervention to keep the CIS▸ updated.
|
|
|
|