In a LT minute
 

On Mon, 23 Apr 2007 20:59:37 +0100, John Rowland wrote:

I wonder why Hammersmith has this unusual system? As you say, it's
less useful (if pedantically more accurate) than the usual listings
of the next three trains. Was it an experiment that failed, and so
wasn't repeated?

In the case descibed the system fails to be useful, but if you have three
trains to Heathrow followed by a Rayners train, the Hammersmith system is
certainly more useful than LU's idiotic standard of showing the next three
trains, or worse, showing the next two trains soldly and the third and
fourth trains alternately. LU seem incapable of asking themselves "What do
passengers want to know?" and providing it.

Bearing in mind that LU trains are sometimes too crowded for it to be
possible to board, I don't think it's completely idiotic to inform
passengers that the next 2 trains are both going to Heathrow. Knowing
that there is another Heathrow train 1 minute behind will provide
reassurance and help to reduce the scrummage to get on the one in the
platform.

In a LT minute
 

asdf wrote:

Bearing in mind that LU trains are sometimes too crowded for it to be
possible to board, I don't think it's completely idiotic to inform
passengers that the next 2 trains are both going to Heathrow. Knowing
that there is another Heathrow train 1 minute behind will provide
reassurance and help to reduce the scrummage to get on the one in the
platform.

I'd say it's incredibly invaluable. Here in New York, where information
on the next arriving trains isn't posted (except for a very recent
installation on the L), conductors on crowded trains resort to
announcing that "there's another train directly behind this one!" Only
problem is that just about every New Yorker has once tried to cooperate
with such an announcement only to wait 12 minutes for the next train.
So everybody just pushes and shoves as the conductor fights to get the
doors closed.
--
David of Broadway
New York, NY, USA