Richard J. wrote:
Paul Corfield wrote:

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 14:40:06 +0000, Dave Newt
wrote:

Some stations achieve a balance but the odd one doesn't and a
wait of more than two minutes can mean you hear a stream of
noise over and over again.


Agreed. Hearing more than once that there is a "good service" while
waiting for your train is particularly irritating. Or at Leicester
Square last night awaiting a westbound Piccadilly: "There is a good
service on the Northern line". The Paris Metro answer is to display
network-wide service disruption details on a monitor as you enter the
station, and I find this much more sensible.

That is done to some extent at places like Baker Street and Notting Hill
Gate where there is a large LED display showing the status of each line,
although an actual disruption map would be more useful to those
unfamiliar with the network.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On 9 Feb 2005 01:10:42 -0800, "Boltar" wrote:

There was a short piece on BBC london news on TV last night about
the new vic line trains and an interview with some bod at (I
think) Bombardier. Anyway , turns out that it looks like the
prototypes at least will have less seating (quelle surprise) and
a lot of what seating is left will be flip up so theres room for
all these mythical wheelchair bound passengers we keep hearing
about but no one has ever actually seen.

The reason we never see wheelchair passengers is because so few
stations are step-free, and the ones with lifts usually have the
out-of-order type of lifts.

It's bad enough try to get a push-chair around...

--
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing on Usenet and in e-mail?

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:23:11 +0000, Michael Hoffman
wrote:

Richard J. wrote:

Has there been any research into the effectiveness of general
exhortations about keeping your belongings with you, about CCTV
coverage, about not smoking, etc.?

I have always found it particularly hard to believe that the warning
not to leave personal belongings on the train was useful whatsoever.
While not smoking is a rule someone might not know, people will
not purposefully leave their belongings on trains, and I never think
"have I left anything on the train?" when I hear the announcement.

Maybe that's because I think about it before I get up and many people
don't? It really puzzles me.

You would not be puzzled if you read the daily report every day and saw
how many times there are disruptions because of luggage and items being
left behind. People can be completely clueless at times.

There is a security issue which cannot be ignored and while it may be
tiresome LU is required to respond in a particular way for a given
security rating. We have no choice and therefore prevention is better
then people being delayed.
--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 23:19:56 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 14:40:06 +0000, Dave Newt
wrote:

How different to here, where the same old mantra is repeated 6
times at almost every station, and is routinely ignored.

Well yes but I have to say that the constant exhortations to "do
this, do that, breath in, breath out, this line is running, this
one isn't, don't leave your bag" drive me crazy even though there
are good reasons for making the announcements.

There are only good reasons if the announcements are effective. Since
there is, as you say, a constant stream of the damned things, it seems
to me very unlikely that they are effective, since people just switch
off or get irritated with them.

Yes I would agree with this. If things have gone wrong then you need
good, timely, helpful and accurate information. Too much of the time
that does not happen.

Has there been any research into the effectiveness of general
exhortations about keeping your belongings with you, about CCTV
coverage, about not smoking, etc.? (Though I realise that if a station
supervisor sees on his TV monitors someone smoking or walking away from
their baggage, a one-off targeted announcement may be useful.)

The luggage issue is related to the security rating applied to the LU
network. Advice has to be given in order to keep disruption to a minimum
because if stuff is left behind then we have to close stations or
interrupt the service.

The smoking aspect these days is more likely to be triggered by someone
being observed as you suggest above.

Similarly, has there been any research into comparative dwell times at
stations which do or don't have "closing doors" announcements?

Station dwell time is measured and the whole issue of the management of
train arrivals and departures was the subject of a lot of research to
support the decision to employ more people and make the announcements.
We don't have the sophisticated signalling and control systems that the
Paris Metro has which counts down for the drivers at each station and
advises when to sound buzzers etc. Therefore we use people to do that
and while some announcements are condescending and make we wish to
scream I think the overall effect of providing a more consistent spacing
of trains is genuine and beneficial. If the service has completely
collapsed then the role changes to one of crowd management and
information provision. There is also the reassurance / personal security
aspect of having staff on the platforms which we know customers value.
There is therefore a business case for having these people around.

Some stations achieve a balance but the odd one doesn't and a
wait of more than two minutes can mean you hear a stream of
noise over and over again.

Agreed. Hearing more than once that there is a "good service" while
waiting for your train is particularly irritating. Or at Leicester
Square last night awaiting a westbound Piccadilly: "There is a good
service on the Northern line".

As I use Leicester Square every day I hear this all the time. I usually
hear the Northern Line announcement just as a train leaves and the next
one is 5 minutes away. I'm afraid I consider that to be an appalling
level of service for Central London when everywhere else has a train
every 2-3 mins. The announcement just makes me think the opposite to
what it is telling me.

The Paris Metro answer is to display
network-wide service disruption details on a monitor as you enter the
station, and I find this much more sensible.

There is work going on with this. We have a "heartbeat" display on the
Intranet at work which is now very good and has a very regular update
facility. We also have "Tracker" which shows where the trains are and on
the recently enhanced version you can click on a station and see a big
list of the next 20 trains or so and how long it will take to get there.
On the Jubilee Line it even includes those trains which are still
heading west to Stratford if you click to see the e/b list at Canary
Wharf for example. Not sure when this will be publicly available but I
believe the intention is to provide something via the Tube website in a
similar vein to that for DLR.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005, Paul Corfield wrote:

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:23:11 +0000, Michael Hoffman
wrote:

Richard J. wrote:

Has there been any research into the effectiveness of general
exhortations about keeping your belongings with you, about CCTV
coverage, about not smoking, etc.?

I have always found it particularly hard to believe that the warning
not to leave personal belongings on the train was useful whatsoever.
While not smoking is a rule someone might not know, people will not
purposefully leave their belongings on trains, and I never think "have
I left anything on the train?" when I hear the announcement.

Maybe that's because I think about it before I get up and many people
don't? It really puzzles me.

You would not be puzzled if you read the daily report every day and saw
how many times there are disruptions because of luggage and items being
left behind. People can be completely clueless at times.

There is a security issue which cannot be ignored and while it may be
tiresome LU is required to respond in a particular way for a given
security rating. We have no choice and therefore prevention is better
then people being delayed.

Freeze! Put your hands on your head and step AWAY from the fallacy!

It is a security and operational issue, and LU do of course have to do
something about it. However, those announcements are only "doing
something" if they *work*, and the contention being bandied about is that
they don't. As has been pointed out, the kind of person (which might be
normal people in a certain state of mind) who forgets their baggage is
probably not going to be much affected by the announcements. Has this been
tested empirically?

tom

--
Don't trust the laws of men. Trust the laws of mathematics.

Tom Anderson wrote:
On Thu, 10 Feb 2005, Paul Corfield wrote:


On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:23:11 +0000, Michael Hoffman
wrote:


Richard J. wrote:


Has there been any research into the effectiveness of general
exhortations about keeping your belongings with you, about CCTV
coverage, about not smoking, etc.?

I have always found it particularly hard to believe that the warning
not to leave personal belongings on the train was useful whatsoever.
While not smoking is a rule someone might not know, people will not
purposefully leave their belongings on trains, and I never think "have
I left anything on the train?" when I hear the announcement.

Maybe that's because I think about it before I get up and many people
don't? It really puzzles me.

You would not be puzzled if you read the daily report every day and saw
how many times there are disruptions because of luggage and items being
left behind. People can be completely clueless at times.

There is a security issue which cannot be ignored and while it may be
tiresome LU is required to respond in a particular way for a given
security rating. We have no choice and therefore prevention is better
then people being delayed.


Freeze! Put your hands on your head and step AWAY from the fallacy!

It is a security and operational issue, and LU do of course have to do
something about it. However, those announcements are only "doing
something" if they *work*, and the contention being bandied about is that
they don't. As has been pointed out, the kind of person (which might be
normal people in a certain state of mind) who forgets their baggage is
probably not going to be much affected by the announcements. Has this been
tested empirically?

What alternative is there? Get everyone to check in their personal
belongings item-by-item on entry to the system, store it on an Oyster
card and then check them out upon exit?

It's inevitable that forgetful people will... erm... forget. Making
announcements might not affect some people, but probably will affect others.

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Paul Corfield wrote:
On Wed, 09 Feb 2005 23:19:56 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:


Paul Corfield wrote:

(snip)
The Paris Metro answer is to display
network-wide service disruption details on a monitor as you enter the
station, and I find this much more sensible.

There is work going on with this. We have a "heartbeat" display on the
Intranet at work which is now very good and has a very regular update
facility. We also have "Tracker" which shows where the trains are and on
the recently enhanced version you can click on a station and see a big
list of the next 20 trains or so and how long it will take to get there.
On the Jubilee Line it even includes those trains which are still
heading west to Stratford if you click to see the e/b list at Canary
Wharf for example. Not sure when this will be publicly available but I
believe the intention is to provide something via the Tube website in a
similar vein to that for DLR.

This may be available on the Sky Active service launched recently which
apparently has "live departure boards" for Tube stations. I haven't had
a chance to check it out yet (although I will be able to at the weekend).

--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

Dave Arquati wrote:
Tom Anderson wrote:

On Thu, 10 Feb 2005, Paul Corfield wrote:


On Thu, 10 Feb 2005 00:23:11 +0000, Michael Hoffman
wrote:


Richard J. wrote:


Has there been any research into the effectiveness of general
exhortations about keeping your belongings with you, about CCTV
coverage, about not smoking, etc.?


I have always found it particularly hard to believe that the warning
not to leave personal belongings on the train was useful whatsoever.
While not smoking is a rule someone might not know, people will not
purposefully leave their belongings on trains, and I never think "have
I left anything on the train?" when I hear the announcement.

Maybe that's because I think about it before I get up and many people
don't? It really puzzles me.


You would not be puzzled if you read the daily report every day and saw
how many times there are disruptions because of luggage and items being
left behind. People can be completely clueless at times.

There is a security issue which cannot be ignored and while it may be
tiresome LU is required to respond in a particular way for a given
security rating. We have no choice and therefore prevention is better
then people being delayed.



Freeze! Put your hands on your head and step AWAY from the fallacy!

It is a security and operational issue, and LU do of course have to do
something about it. However, those announcements are only "doing
something" if they *work*, and the contention being bandied about is that
they don't. As has been pointed out, the kind of person (which might be
normal people in a certain state of mind) who forgets their baggage is
probably not going to be much affected by the announcements. Has this
been
tested empirically?


What alternative is there? Get everyone to check in their personal
belongings item-by-item on entry to the system, store it on an Oyster
card and then check them out upon exit?

It's inevitable that forgetful people will... erm... forget. Making
announcements might not affect some people, but probably will affect
others.

Personally I doubt it. Although I could be convinced with the appropriate
experiment, which would be relatively easy to do--just stop making the
announcements on a particular stretch of the system for a month and see
what changes in lost items are experienced.
--
Michael Hoffman

Paul Corfield wrote:

I have always found it particularly hard to believe that the warning
not to leave personal belongings on the train was useful whatsoever.
While not smoking is a rule someone might not know, people will
not purposefully leave their belongings on trains, and I never think
"have I left anything on the train?" when I hear the announcement.

Maybe that's because I think about it before I get up and many people
don't? It really puzzles me.

You would not be puzzled if you read the daily report every day and saw
how many times there are disruptions because of luggage and items being
left behind. People can be completely clueless at times.

I'm not puzzled that people leave things on the train. I'm puzzled at the
thought that announcement would actually reduce the number of people who
leave things on the train. Is there any data to suggest this, or is it a
knee-jerk reaction to the problem?

No, I can't suggest any better solutions, but I don't think this is one
either, and adds to our general annoyance.

There is a security issue which cannot be ignored and while it may be
tiresome LU is required to respond in a particular way for a given
security rating. We have no choice and therefore prevention is better
then people being delayed.

Oh gawd, this isn't some British Standard thing like the reason my
workplace has an earsplitting fire alarm test every week, is it?
--
Michael Hoffman

Michael Hoffman wrote:


Personally I doubt it. Although I could be convinced with the
appropriate experiment, which would be relatively easy to do--just
stop making the announcements on a particular stretch of the system
for a month and see what changes in lost items are experienced.

There is already substantial evidence that people leave things on trains and
buses when not reminded. Announcements to remind people to take their
belongings are very recent in the history of train and bus travel. In
previous years the Lost Property Office did a roaring trade in returning
lost items to their owners and selling off unclaimed property to help LT's
funds.

Whether or not the announcements have actually caused a reduction in lost
property I don't know.