Took the slow train from Paddington to Reading and back today (thus
saving money by using Freedom Pass to maximum extent).

On the way back, the train information display in the main hall at
Reading showed the train terminating at Ealing Broadway, as did the
dot matrix indicators on the platforms.

On a different display screen, which I almost missed, was the
information that all such trains are shown as terminating at Ealing
Broadway, but "of course" (in the words of the second display panel)
they run to Paddington.

Couldn't they have said that in the first place? If I hadn't seen the
second display panel, I'd have got out at Ealing and taken the tube.
Is there a reason for any of this?

Just curious.

On 6 Dec, 01:32, pedan3 wrote:
Took the slow train from Paddington to Reading and back today (thus
saving money by using Freedom Pass to maximum extent).

You dont need to do that. With your freedom pass you can buy a
boundary zone 6 ticket return to reading and travel on any train.

On the way back, the train information display in the main hall at
Reading showed the train terminating at Ealing Broadway, as did the
dot matrix indicators on the platforms.

On a different display screen, which I almost missed, was the
information that all such trains are shown as terminating at Ealing
Broadway, but "of course" (in the words of the second display panel)
they run to Paddington.

Couldn't they have said that in the first place? *If I hadn't seen the
second display panel, I'd have got out at Ealing and taken the tube.
Is there a reason for any of this?

If you are going from Reading direct to Paddington I cant think of
anybody who need to do that on the slow train. Unfortunatly many
people just see Paddington and jump on the train and then spend about
an hour on a journey that should take 25 minutes. So the decision has
been taken, correct in my view, to advertise the trains as you
describe.

The same applies to the slow trains from Pad to Oxford which usually
show terminating at Radley .

On Dec 6, 1:32*am, pedan3 wrote:
Took the slow train from Paddington to Reading and back today (thus
saving money by using Freedom Pass to maximum extent).

On the way back, the train information display in the main hall at
Reading showed the train terminating at Ealing Broadway, as did the
dot matrix indicators on the platforms.

On a different display screen, which I almost missed, was the
information that all such trains are shown as terminating at Ealing
Broadway, but "of course" (in the words of the second display panel)
they run to Paddington.

Couldn't they have said that in the first place? *If I hadn't seen the
second display panel, I'd have got out at Ealing and taken the tube.
Is there a reason for any of this?

Was there not a display inside the train showing all the calling
points (I know they often don't work)? That would show Paddington if
it was working.

On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, pedan3 wrote:

Took the slow train from Paddington to Reading and back today (thus
saving money by using Freedom Pass to maximum extent).

On the way back, the train information display in the main hall at
Reading showed the train terminating at Ealing Broadway, as did the
dot matrix indicators on the platforms.

On a different display screen, which I almost missed, was the
information that all such trains are shown as terminating at Ealing
Broadway, but "of course" (in the words of the second display panel)
they run to Paddington.

The point is that a slow train is a really bad way to get to Paddington,
but if you advertise it as a Paddington train, some people who aren't
fully on the ball will take it to do just that, and then be very
disappointed about how slow it is. Thus, it's advertised as running to the
last stop before Paddington, so such people won't get on it.

You get this on the ECML too, with slow trains from Cambridge being
advertised as going to Finsbury Park and so on.

It is a bit weird, but i think it's a good idea. Ideally, the details for
on the display should show it going to Paddington, but use Ealing Broadway
as the headline destination - this is what the displays on the ECML do.

tom

--
Better to die on your feet than live on your knees. -- Emiliano Zapata

On Dec 6, 5:39*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, pedan3 wrote:
Took the slow train from Paddington to Reading and back today (thus
saving money by using Freedom Pass to maximum extent).

On the way back, the train information display in the main hall at
Reading showed the train terminating at Ealing Broadway, as did the
dot matrix indicators on the platforms.

On a different display screen, which I almost missed, was the
information that all such trains are shown as terminating at Ealing
Broadway, but "of course" (in the words of the second display panel)
they run to Paddington.

The point is that a slow train is a really bad way to get to Paddington,
but if you advertise it as a Paddington train, some people who aren't
fully on the ball will take it to do just that, and then be very
disappointed about how slow it is. Thus, it's advertised as running to the
last stop before Paddington, so such people won't get on it.

You get this on the ECML too, with slow trains from Cambridge being
advertised as going to Finsbury Park and so on.

It is a bit weird, but i think it's a good idea. Ideally, the details for
on the display should show it going to Paddington, but use Ealing Broadway
as the headline destination - this is what the displays on the ECML do.

The problem is the lack of consistency and the potential for
confusion. Instead of a fake destination, it would probably be better
to find a consistent way of showing that a train will be overtaken by
at least one other.

If you know that your train to Potters Bar is the 1406 to Cambridge,
you might well ignore the departure to Foxton (which no one has heard
of) shown on the display at Kings Cross.

On 6 Dec, 17:49, MIG wrote:
If you know that your train to Potters Bar is the 1406 to Cambridge,
you might well ignore the departure to Foxton (which no one has heard
of) shown on the display at Kings Cross.

Conversely if you get on the train to "Foxton" and the driver
announces on the PA that it's the train to Cambridge, it might take a
moment or two wondering what's going on.

(which has happened to me)

U

MIG wrote:
The problem is the lack of consistency and the potential for
confusion. Instead of a fake destination, it would probably be better
to find a consistent way of showing that a train will be overtaken by
at least one other.

Yes. There should be a better way than lying.

In the old days, you got a painted board with all the stops on in one
go, so you knew at a glance which were the slow trains - but not whether
the next train would be any quicker.

I can think of at least two better options:
1. SLOW or FAST in the abbreviated display
2. Colour code trains that get overtaken

Colin McKenzie


--
No-one has ever proved that cycle helmets make cycling any safer at the
population level, and anyway cycling is about as safe per mile as walking.
Make an informed choice - visit www.cyclehelmets.org.

On 7 Dec, 12:17, Colin McKenzie wrote:
MIG wrote:
I can think of at least two better options:
1. SLOW or FAST in the abbreviated display
2. Colour code trains that get overtaken

Paddington's summary departure boards have a special column marked
"Fast Reading" where an asterisk appears. I don't know if there's an
equivalent at Reading, or indeed anywhere else in the country.
Paddington also has "Heathrow Airport" and "Heathrow via Hayes &
Harlington" to differentiate fast and slow services, and the same is
done at Heathrow.

U

In message , Tom
Anderson writes
On Sat, 6 Dec 2008, pedan3 wrote:

Took the slow train from Paddington to Reading and back today (thus
saving money by using Freedom Pass to maximum extent).

On the way back, the train information display in the main hall at
Reading showed the train terminating at Ealing Broadway, as did the
dot matrix indicators on the platforms.

On a different display screen, which I almost missed, was the
information that all such trains are shown as terminating at Ealing
Broadway, but "of course" (in the words of the second display panel)
they run to Paddington.

The point is that a slow train is a really bad way to get to
Paddington, but if you advertise it as a Paddington train, some people
who aren't fully on the ball will take it to do just that, and then be
very disappointed about how slow it is. Thus, it's advertised as
running to the last stop before Paddington, so such people won't get on it.

You get this on the ECML too, with slow trains from Cambridge being
advertised as going to Finsbury Park and so on.

It also happens on the Central Line, with trains leaving Woodford for
Central London via Hainault being advertise as for "Hainault", until
they get to Roding Valley, when they suddenly become destined for Ealing
Broadway (or wherever).

It is a bit weird, but i think it's a good idea.
As good as any, yes. There's no ideal solution in these situations and
each one will have pros and cons.
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

On Dec 7, 12:58*pm, Mr Thant
wrote:
On 7 Dec, 12:17, Colin McKenzie wrote:

MIG wrote:
I can think of at least two better options:
1. SLOW or FAST in the abbreviated display
2. Colour code trains that get overtaken

Paddington's summary departure boards have a special column marked
"Fast Reading" where an asterisk appears. I don't know if there's an
equivalent at Reading, or indeed anywhere else in the country.
Paddington also has "Heathrow Airport" and "Heathrow via Hayes &
Harlington" to differentiate fast and slow services, and the same is
done at Heathrow.

U

I prefer Colin's (not my) option 2 as being generalisable. If colours
aren't possible, maybe an "OV" or something.

The "fast" thing does work at Paddington (and I can't remember seeing
it anywhere else either) but that's a fairly limited situation.

"Fast" is relative. Down my way I've heard the "fast" used to mean
"not calling at Deptford".

There's a whole load of fake destinations used on the south eastern
where the overtaking tends to involve totally different routes, and
the confusion could be solved by comprehensive use of route codes,
instead of which they are being abolished (but that's several other
threads).