![]() |
In a LT minute
While waiting at the London Bridge northbound Northern line stop I thought
I'd time the countdown. For every declared 'minute' to go, I counted 1 minute 20 seconds. Is there a LT/real time ratio available? |
In a LT minute
It's always been like this since the dot matrix indicators were
installed in the late-80s. |
In a LT minute
wrote in message
ups.com... It's always been like this since the dot matrix indicators were installed in the late-80s. Fair enough. But how do LT work out their minutes? |
In a LT minute
On Apr 21, 12:03 am, "Movilla" wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... It's always been like this since the dot matrix indicators were installed in the late-80s. Fair enough. But how do LT work out their minutes? There was an old episode of Have I Got News For You where they read out the press release about the introduction of 'next bus' indicators at bus stops. It went something like: "Minutes will not always consist of 60 seconds. Sometimes the indicator will say 2 minutes but it will actually take longer." |
In a LT minute
I think its based on "where" the train is in relation to your station.
if it gets held up when its 2 min away then it will still take 2 min to reach you once it actually departs after being delayed. see - easy as quantum physics (or trying to spell it even) |
In a LT minute
"Movilla" wrote in message ... wrote in message ups.com... It's always been like this since the dot matrix indicators were installed in the late-80s. Fair enough. But how do LT work out their minutes? The story I was told was they were designed to make customers feel like they are getting a better service as people would not notice the difference between lu and real time. |
In a LT minute
Frank Incense wrote:
I think its based on "where" the train is in relation to your station. if it gets held up when its 2 min away then it will still take 2 min to reach you once it actually departs after being delayed. see - easy as quantum physics (or trying to spell it even) That's what I thought. I understood that it was all transponder based these days. Train reports position to computer, computer calculates time to subsequent stations and updates platform displays. I've certainly never noticed any "standard" LT minute, I've even seen displays adjust from '1 min' to '2 mins' whilst I've been waiting. |
In a LT minute
Movilla wrote:
While waiting at the London Bridge northbound Northern line stop I thought I'd time the countdown. For every declared 'minute' to go, I counted 1 minute 20 seconds. Just as with the bus Countdown system - these are really indicators of *where* the corresponding vehicle is. They are misleading when it stops or otherwise travels at speeds above or below the anticipated one. ESB |
In a LT minute
Movilla wrote:
wrote in message ups.com... It's always been like this since the dot matrix indicators were installed in the late-80s. Fair enough. But how do LT work out their minutes? Basically they were the estimated time for off peak trains (senior operators did not like the idea of a train arriving "early"). The original signs (on the Northern Line) were fed from the central control computer (at Coburg Street) data for each platform. This computer was only reading states - not actually performing control (political reasons) functions. I wrote the interface software from the computer to the signs. When we commissioned a specific sign the guy who wrote the software interfacing the train running data to my output process calculated the approach time for a reasonable off peak timing and would then go (or send someone else) to the appropriate platform (checking that the service was running fairly well before he left the office) and time trains entering the platform with those of us at the computer end making hand adjustments to each sign. This allowed the local run in to be fairly accurate as long as the approaching train was not held on the approach by a tardy departure by the previous train. The computer was monitoring the position of trains by track circuit occupancy. The times generated were usually off peak - bearing in mind that the average interstation time on LUL tube sections is less than 2 minutes, any time longer than 2 minutes was subject to the vagaries of platform dwell time at intermediate stations as well as the difference in timing due to loading and traction voltage variations which were than common. The system was designed to blank the time for any train which overdwelled and only restart the timing when the train moved again. The system was only passive and was subject coping with signallers changing train details or destinations to try and get service back on time. Junctions were only monitored and it was almost coincidental that the run from Camden Town to Euston was about 2 minutes. If the system was projecting a train down a particular route it would count down on the Euston signs until it got to Camden (2 mins shown). If it was held by the signaller the time would blank and if he let the one from the other platform go first this would be detected as the train left the platform and displayed shortly thereafter (usually still as 2 mins). If the destination of the new train had changed you would get the "CORRECTION" display. I thought (and still do) that most regular travellers would much prefer to be told the actual position of the train (e.g. "at TCR") because they would soon get the hang of working out how long a train would take to arrive - but simple displays were preferred by the operators. The stand-alone system developed for most other lines was basically independant of the signalling system using three trigger points (taken from the signalling track circuits) which counted down from each timing point with each timing point recalibrating the count (or holding/blanking, if required). The train description was taken from whatever system was in use on the line. This was still subject to the vagaies of train running and platform dwells. I can't remember what we did to the Victoria Line Identra System! As the centralised computers became more of a real control system (signallers using them for control functions as well as monitoring & info - Met & Jubilee plus Bakerloo Lines at Baker Street) the signs controls were updated (Met signs again came from the computer control points). The Central Line displays were, I think, integrated within the computer system - eventually full ato operation would be able to give much more accurate arrival data. PTI (Positive Train Identification) also had a role to play - this is the transponder bit you may have been thinking about. This is a system which identifies each train, its destination, number and crew at transponders sited at critical points around the lines - it provides positive identification at fixed points only which the other systems can use as appropriate. Fully integrated systems now being intalled should allow a much better (more accurate) display. -- Peter & Elizabeth Corser Leighton Buzzard, UK ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==---- http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---- |
In a LT minute
|
All times are GMT. The time now is 08:32 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2006 LondonBanter.co.uk