David Bradley wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 10 Nov 2004:

Go to the bottom of page:
http://www.trolleybus.net/tramlink.htm
and have fun "turning" the blind.

At least yours doesn't have "Short journey; ask driver!" on it. What
surprised us was that it was a printed destination, not scrawled!
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 6 November 2004 with new photos

Tim Scott wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 10 Nov 2004:

I recall there were a couple of T's (Titan's) as you mention trialed on the
35 and 45??

Yes, I think that's what they were - it was so long ago I can't
remember. But why did they decide not to keep electronic signs in
London, when they seem to be successful in the rest of the country?
--
"Mrs Redboots"
http://www.amsmyth.demon.co.uk/
Website updated 6 November 2004 with new photos

On Wed, 10 Nov 2004 13:14:40 +0000, Mrs Redboots
wrote:
We pondered this for awhile and assumed it would mean that the bus in
question was stopping somewhere its destination blind didn't say, which
is fair enough. But this sparked a discussion as to why modern buses
don't have electronic destination blinds. I know the system was tried -
I used to see the odd 35 with them - but presumably it was too prone to
failure? [...]

I believe that TfL still specify the old-style displays. I think that
they are still more readable, anyway, until a higher resolution can be
achieved on the electronic ones. Elsewhere in the country where
there's no one to care about such things apart from the operators
themselves, standards are really variable with many unreadable dot
matrix displays. New LED displays are very readable and presumably
very reliable. Perhaps we'll see a change in policy, at least for
side and rear displays.

Unless I've just made it up, the buses on the 35 were used as spares
to replace any broken night buses, so had to have more destinations
than would fit on a blind. I can't find any evidence for that at the
moment...

Richard.

Richard J. wrote:

I have yet to see an electronic destination indicator on the front of a
bus or train with the same legibility as London bus blinds (Johnston Bus
or Underground typeface, yellow on black).

I personally find the very new high-intensity amber LED displays to be far
more readable from a distance - but only those, not any other kind of
electronic display, and certainly not any of the front-illuminated kind of
mechanical dot matrix displays which are awful.

Neil
--
Neil Williams in Milton Keynes, UK
To reply use neil at the above domain.

In the message ...
"Mrs Redboots" wrote:

Marc Brett wrote to uk.transport.london on Wed, 10 Nov 2004:

As for inside displays, since GPS/AVL is to be fitted to buses, it'd be
relatively easy to add a bunch of features inside:

For passengers, a display with:
- Bus number & destination.
- Clock with exact time
- Next stop display/voice announcement.
- Messages from TfL / bus company
- Messages from advertisers, or other entertainment

I have seen buses with accurate clocks in them, and ones with
advertising screens on the upper deck (usually used to show what the
CCTV is seeing, but occasionally used for advertisers). As for
messages, the only ones the buses seem capable of saying is "Bus
stopping at next bus stop; please stand well clear of doors", as though
we were all pillocks!

Indeed, I recently travelled on (London) route 390 in a bus with such a
screen in the centre of the upper-deck windscreen, and was similarly
disappointed to see that none of the above-mentioned information (apart from
generic TfL messages and advertising) was displayed. But AFAIK this is par
for the course in today's narrowly commercially-oriented world; even the
idea that the advertising would be more effective if it alternated with
information of real value to passengers (the more specific the better, eg
real-time details of alterations to the services...) has obviously not
crossed the minds of those concerned.

BTW here in Brussels, buses with electronic destination blinds automatically
display the number of minutes before the scheduled departure (bilingually,
of course) while waiting at termini.

Regards,

- Alan (in Brussels)

"Alan (in Brussels)" wrote in message
...
In the message ...

Indeed, I recently travelled on (London) route 390 in a bus with such a
screen in the centre of the upper-deck windscreen, and was similarly
disappointed to see that none of the above-mentioned information (apart
from
generic TfL messages and advertising) was displayed. But AFAIK this is par
for the course in today's narrowly commercially-oriented world; even the
idea that the advertising would be more effective if it alternated with
information of real value to passengers (the more specific the better, eg
real-time details of alterations to the services...) has obviously not
crossed the minds of those concerned.

To do so would require a realtime link to pick up this information whereas
the present system can be updated at depots. I'm sure your idea has crossed
the minds of those concerned but perhaps their investigations showed that
the present control-to-bus link was not up to the job and upgrading it just
for this not cost effective.

Dave

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:03:24 -0000, "Dave Liney"
wrote:


"Alan (in Brussels)" wrote in message
...
In the message ...

Indeed, I recently travelled on (London) route 390 in a bus with such a
screen in the centre of the upper-deck windscreen, and was similarly
disappointed to see that none of the above-mentioned information (apart
from
generic TfL messages and advertising) was displayed. But AFAIK this is par
for the course in today's narrowly commercially-oriented world; even the
idea that the advertising would be more effective if it alternated with
information of real value to passengers (the more specific the better, eg
real-time details of alterations to the services...) has obviously not
crossed the minds of those concerned.

To do so would require a realtime link to pick up this information whereas
the present system can be updated at depots. I'm sure your idea has crossed
the minds of those concerned but perhaps their investigations showed that
the present control-to-bus link was not up to the job and upgrading it just
for this not cost effective.

Dave


I friend of mine writes on this subject:

------------------------------------------------------------
The problem in the UK has been that whilst it is all theoretically
possible, the environment on a bus going over the UK's somewhat
indifferently maintained roads has proved much more challenging to the
equipment than when it was being tested sitting on a desk or bench
top. There have therefore been a very large number of reliability
problems resulting in partial or complete failures of the systems
(hence different displays externally on front and sides).

Generally for external displays, the electrically operated roller
blind (as fitted to Croydon Tramlink) has proved to be more cost
effective and more reliable. You can get into quite high costs with
LED's particularly if you want true descenders on the lower case
(requires more lines of LED's for effectively the same size of
lettering). From a DDA perspective (for poorly sighted people of whom
there are many more than wheelchair bound) , I personally think blinds
are much easier to read than LED's on a moving vehicle. Internally I
think that most companies have now managed to get their acts together
and the equipment is now robust enough to be reliable (I saw some very
good location based internal displays on buses in the Harrogate area,
so they do exist in the UK).

One thing that you have to get right and often separates the skilled
'sheep' from the cheapo 'goats' is the issue of buses being diverted
or not completing whole routes. This is of course a matter of
compiling the logical algorithms thoroughly enough to allow for all
likely possibilities. There are unfortunately companies (often the
well known 'big boys') who seem to either lack the skills or
motivation or both to achieve this and hence the problems!
----------------------------------

David Bradley

"Tim Scott" wrote in message ...
I recall there were a couple of T's (Titan's) as you mention trialed on the
35 and 45??

Some of the former London Buses sent off to sister companies such as
Stagecoach etc converted their London style blinds to the electronic style
ones.

Examples:

DMS/NV's from London General/Central going to Go Ahead North East
Various Stagecoach vehicles including the earlier discarded TA's (Tridents)
going to Stagecoach Hull, Cambridge. Southcoast and Manchester, Devon kept
the London style blinds;
VA's from London United/VN's going to First Leeds (though Potteries have not
gone electronic)

As mentioned Oxford, some First buses in Edinburgh/Glasgow have the
electronic displays

And Stageecoach in Cambridge. The blinds tend to alternate
automatically between 'Citi [route no.], then 'City Centre' and '&
[destination]'.

In the message ...
"David Bradley" wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:03:24 -0000, "Dave Liney"
wrote:


"Alan (in Brussels)" wrote in
message
...
In the message ...

Indeed, I recently travelled on (London) route 390 in a bus with such a
screen in the centre of the upper-deck windscreen, and was similarly
disappointed to see that none of the above-mentioned information (apart
from
generic TfL messages and advertising) was displayed. But AFAIK this is
par
for the course in today's narrowly commercially-oriented world; even
the
idea that the advertising would be more effective if it alternated with
information of real value to passengers (the more specific the better,
eg
real-time details of alterations to the services...) has obviously not
crossed the minds of those concerned.

To do so would require a realtime link to pick up this information
whereas
the present system can be updated at depots. I'm sure your idea has
crossed
the minds of those concerned but perhaps their investigations showed that
the present control-to-bus link was not up to the job and upgrading it
just
for this not cost effective.

Dave


I friend of mine writes on this subject:

------------------------------------------------------------
The problem in the UK has been that whilst it is all theoretically
possible, the environment on a bus going over the UK's somewhat
indifferently maintained roads has proved much more challenging to the
equipment than when it was being tested sitting on a desk or bench
top. There have therefore been a very large number of reliability
problems resulting in partial or complete failures of the systems
(hence different displays externally on front and sides).

Generally for external displays, the electrically operated roller
blind (as fitted to Croydon Tramlink) has proved to be more cost
effective and more reliable. You can get into quite high costs with
LED's particularly if you want true descenders on the lower case
(requires more lines of LED's for effectively the same size of
lettering). From a DDA perspective (for poorly sighted people of whom
there are many more than wheelchair bound) , I personally think blinds
are much easier to read than LED's on a moving vehicle. Internally I
think that most companies have now managed to get their acts together
and the equipment is now robust enough to be reliable (I saw some very
good location based internal displays on buses in the Harrogate area,
so they do exist in the UK).

One thing that you have to get right and often separates the skilled
'sheep' from the cheapo 'goats' is the issue of buses being diverted
or not completing whole routes. This is of course a matter of
compiling the logical algorithms thoroughly enough to allow for all
likely possibilities. There are unfortunately companies (often the
well known 'big boys') who seem to either lack the skills or
motivation or both to achieve this and hence the problems!
----------------------------------

Surely the *main advantage of using electronic technology* is the
possibility of changing the displayed information en route, to take account
of unforeseen situations - and there are various ways of compensating for
any potential loss of readability, such as using larger font sizes with
scrolling. So there's little point in making the change unless and until
real-time updating is available as part of the *system*. And don't all TfL
buses already have mobile radio facilities that could easily be adapted for
selective text broadcasting?

Regards,

- Alan (in Brussels)

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 18:41:20 +0100, "Alan \(in Brussels\)"
wrote:

In the message ...
"David Bradley" wrote:

On Thu, 11 Nov 2004 11:03:24 -0000, "Dave Liney"
wrote:


"Alan (in Brussels)" wrote in
message
...
In the message ...

Indeed, I recently travelled on (London) route 390 in a bus with such a
screen in the centre of the upper-deck windscreen, and was similarly
disappointed to see that none of the above-mentioned information (apart
from
generic TfL messages and advertising) was displayed. But AFAIK this is
par
for the course in today's narrowly commercially-oriented world; even
the
idea that the advertising would be more effective if it alternated with
information of real value to passengers (the more specific the better,
eg
real-time details of alterations to the services...) has obviously not
crossed the minds of those concerned.

To do so would require a realtime link to pick up this information
whereas
the present system can be updated at depots. I'm sure your idea has
crossed
the minds of those concerned but perhaps their investigations showed that
the present control-to-bus link was not up to the job and upgrading it
just
for this not cost effective.

Dave


I friend of mine writes on this subject:

------------------------------------------------------------
The problem in the UK has been that whilst it is all theoretically
possible, the environment on a bus going over the UK's somewhat
indifferently maintained roads has proved much more challenging to the
equipment than when it was being tested sitting on a desk or bench
top. There have therefore been a very large number of reliability
problems resulting in partial or complete failures of the systems
(hence different displays externally on front and sides).

Generally for external displays, the electrically operated roller
blind (as fitted to Croydon Tramlink) has proved to be more cost
effective and more reliable. You can get into quite high costs with
LED's particularly if you want true descenders on the lower case
(requires more lines of LED's for effectively the same size of
lettering). From a DDA perspective (for poorly sighted people of whom
there are many more than wheelchair bound) , I personally think blinds
are much easier to read than LED's on a moving vehicle. Internally I
think that most companies have now managed to get their acts together
and the equipment is now robust enough to be reliable (I saw some very
good location based internal displays on buses in the Harrogate area,
so they do exist in the UK).

One thing that you have to get right and often separates the skilled
'sheep' from the cheapo 'goats' is the issue of buses being diverted
or not completing whole routes. This is of course a matter of
compiling the logical algorithms thoroughly enough to allow for all
likely possibilities. There are unfortunately companies (often the
well known 'big boys') who seem to either lack the skills or
motivation or both to achieve this and hence the problems!
----------------------------------

Surely the *main advantage of using electronic technology* is the
possibility of changing the displayed information en route, to take account
of unforeseen situations - and there are various ways of compensating for
any potential loss of readability, such as using larger font sizes with
scrolling. So there's little point in making the change unless and until
real-time updating is available as part of the *system*. And don't all TfL
buses already have mobile radio facilities that could easily be adapted for
selective text broadcasting?

Regards,

- Alan (in Brussels)


Your observations required a fair amount of effort for a reply and so
my friend has come to the rescue with this response:
----------------------------------------
Information displayed on screens/LED displays inside buses is
technologically now possible. There are two types of information.

If the information is available on the bus, there is no problem (and
no costs) for communications. Thus it is easy to have adverts and/or
news information and if you wish you can create a ’virtual newspaper’
which can be updated each night in the garage. Clearly if advertising
covers (or better exceeds) the costs of doing the daily updates, this
becomes commercially attractive to the operator.

Similarly where the bus is actually physically located along a route
at any time, can be displayed from information that the bus itself
has. This can be obtained from various Global Positioning Systems or
the ticket machine inputs from the driver. This can optionally be
enhanced by then comparing the information to schedules held in a
database on board the bus itself and thus the passenger informed of
whether the bus they are on is early, on time or late at that point.
This is more complex but again no communications are involved and thus
there are no difficulties and no costs for this, although there is the
requirement to update the schedules within the database, to ensure
that the algorithms are still relevant to present services and to
allocate the bus to a schedule each day (the last item is normally
required anyway for most systems using GPS for bus monitoring).

The information, to which reference has been made, that would be
really useful is what is happening to any further transport system
that passengers intend to change into next. Thus a display on a bus on
an appropriate route for what is happening for example on main line
rail at Euston ,or the Northern Line at Oval, or Croydon Tramlink at
Addington Village or even another bus route at Camberwell Green would
be very useful to passengers who intended to continue their journeys
via one of those modes.

There are two problems. The information is of course only available
externally to the bus in question and secondly it changes frequently.
To make it available on the bus therefore requires an efficient
communication system for the data from a central source to the bus(es)
and also considerable usage of that communication channel to maintain
the timeliness of the data. Conventional radio systems of the type
frequently used for operational messages to the drivers of buses are
not generally particularly good for larger more complex data packets
which need to be sent very often. This is for a number of different
reasons. In particular poor reception in built up areas can often
scramble the data transfer and require its re-sending with consequent
wasteful usage of the comms. link. More reliable systems have been
available previously but because the frequent updating of all the
different possible interchange modes to all the different vehicles
required considerable bandwidth usage, the costs have been higher than
operators have wished to pay based on the perceived marketing
advantage of such a service. (Imagine for instance the total costs of
sending a conventional SMS type mobile phone message to each bus
every minute or so.)

The advent of both more reliable transmission and more reasonable
tariffs using GPRS (General Packet Radio Service) may now begin to
make a difference and it is probable that we shall see more ‘off the
bus’ real-time information available inside buses. This may still be
very much ‘an act of faith’ by the operators concerned as I am not
aware of any great research into the fiscal value of this display of
information to bus operators in terms of extra passenger journeys made
or its negative equivalent of passenger journeys not lost.
--------------------------------

I suppose the bottom line with the technology currently available is
whether the business advantage to the bus operator is sufficient to
have a return on the investment and operating costs. Would you pay a
higher ticket price for the delivery of this information while
travelling to your ultimate destination? Or, because of the on board
technology, would it attract more passengers than competition without
such facilities?

David Bradley