So my wife has got stuck because of the victoria line being down. Just
how many "signal" failures per day are there? Would it not be possible
to design something which doesn't fail quite so damn often and also
design procedures so reversing trains doesn't take forever so at least
the rest of the line can continue running some semblance of a service?

B2003

wrote in message
...
So my wife has got stuck because of the victoria line being down. Just
how many "signal" failures per day are there? Would it not be possible
to design something which doesn't fail quite so damn often and also
design procedures so reversing trains doesn't take forever so at least
the rest of the line can continue running some semblance of a service?

B2003

I have often wondered why signalling systems are so prone to falling over
all the time. Mind you they are installing a new system on the Victoria line
so was it really a failure or may be due to the installation work.
The DLR is the one that gets me. It was built in the 80's and plagued with
problems since day one.

Kevin

On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 07:17:25PM -0000, Zen83237 wrote:

I have often wondered why signalling systems are so prone to falling over
all the time.

Because they're designed by paranoids to be hypochondriac and always
call for a doctor when they've got a bit of a sniffle.

--
David Cantrell | Official London Perl Mongers Bad Influence

You may now start misinterpreting what I just
wrote, and attacking that misinterpretation.

In message
,
writes
So my wife has got stuck because of the victoria line being down. Just
how many "signal" failures per day are there? Would it not be possible
to design something which doesn't fail quite so damn often and also
design procedures so reversing trains doesn't take forever so at least
the rest of the line can continue running some semblance of a service?


I was caught up in all that at Finsbury Park and managed to get on a
Piccadilly line train. Then it was stood at the platform for a good 5-6
minutes being "regulated".

At one time the most frightening sound on the Underground was "This is
Northern Line Information". Now it's being given a challenge by "This
train will be held here to be regulated".

Why keep an already over full train stood at the platform ? People get
stressed, LU staff get stressed, and you could tell the driver was
getting stressed.

Pointless jobsworth regulation doesn't help the public and it doesn't do
much good for LU staff.

I wasn't surprised when the Pic Line was delayed because of a passenger
being taken off a train at Kings Cross..... keep people crushed like
cattle unnecessarily and they'll get ill !!

--
Edward Cowling "Last Austral-B Heretic !!"

On Feb 19, 8:44*am, Edward Cowling London UK
wrote:
Northern Line Information". Now it's being given a challenge by "This
train will be held here to be regulated".

I think they seem to think if they delay the train it'll somehow
magically be able to alleviate overcrowding further down the line when
theres a gap in the service. Trouble is , what the geniuses in the
control room don't seemed to have worked out is that a full train aint
gonna pick up any more people whether it leaves now or in 10 minutes
so they might just as well let it go on its way so at least the
passengers it already is carrying won't be delayed along with everyone
on the platforms.

B2003

On Feb 19, 9:38*am, wrote:
On Feb 19, 8:44*am, Edward Cowling London UK

wrote:
Northern Line Information". Now it's being given a challenge by "This
train will be held here to be regulated".

I think they seem to think if they delay the train it'll somehow
magically be able to alleviate overcrowding further down the line when
theres a gap in the service. Trouble is , what the geniuses in the
control room don't seemed to have worked out is that a full train aint
gonna pick up any more people whether it leaves now or in 10 minutes
so they might just as well let it go on its way so at least the
passengers it already is carrying won't be delayed along with everyone
on the platforms.

I expect that there are appropriate and inappropriate situations.

This morning I was standing on the northbound Northern Line platform
at London Bridge, along with many others, looking at a very full train
that was being held for several minutes.

It certainly didn't help us or anyone arriving later to be able to
look at this full train that we couldn't get on.

And it certainly didn't help the high proportion of people on the
train who were likely to be intending to get off at Bank, one stop
away.

I suppose it might just have helped a few people arriving late at Bank
to enter the space vacated when those people finally got off, but the
doors are generally shut at Bank Northbound before everyone has got
off, let alone anyone has got on, so who knows.

"Edward Cowling London UK" wrote ...
Why keep an already over full train stood at the platform ? People get
stressed, LU staff get stressed, and you could tell the driver was getting
stressed.
Pointless jobsworth regulation doesn't help the public and it doesn't do
much good for LU staff.

regulation really isn't pointless - though it is not always successful and
could probably be managed much better.

While your train may be packed - and on time - the train behind may be even
more packed, meaning longer loading/unloading and so falling more behind,
thus meeting more and more full platforms and falling even more behind ...
etc.

But it would probably be better to spot the problem before five minutes
'regulation' was needed; a quiet word to the driver to dawdle by 15 seconds
at each station would be smoother and much less in-yer-face and frustrating.

An even better solution would be to run more trains - but the Picc has
another ten years before that happens - not just the extra trains, but the
signalling to go with it.
--

Andrew

"If A is success in life, then A = x + y + z.
Work is x; y is play; and z is keeping your mouth shut." ~ Albert Einstein

"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
...
"Edward Cowling London UK" wrote ...
Why keep an already over full train stood at the platform ? People get
stressed, LU staff get stressed, and you could tell the driver was
getting stressed.
Pointless jobsworth regulation doesn't help the public and it doesn't do
much good for LU staff.

regulation really isn't pointless - though it is not always successful and
could probably be managed much better.

While your train may be packed - and on time - the train behind may be
even more packed, meaning longer loading/unloading and so falling more
behind, thus meeting more and more full platforms and falling even more
behind ... etc.

But it would probably be better to spot the problem before five minutes
'regulation' was needed; a quiet word to the driver to dawdle by 15
seconds at each station would be smoother and much less in-yer-face and
frustrating.

An even better solution would be to run more trains - but the Picc has
another ten years before that happens - not just the extra trains, but the
signalling to go with it.

The Picc used to run 27 tph in the peaks, and I've never seen a credible
explanation of why they decided it was too difficult. Now that 24 tph
doesn't cope with passenger demand, they decided to slow down the timetable
to cover the increased dwell times, rather than run more trains. Makes
their life easier, but doesn't do a lot to provide a service that matches
demand.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

On Feb 19, 10:29*pm, "Richard J." wrote:
The Picc used to run 27 tph in the peaks, and I've never seen a credible
explanation of why they decided it was too difficult. *Now that 24 tph

Things did improve with a new timetable about 3 or so years ago. Not
sure if that was the change to 24 tph but before that things were just
getting ridiculus. Trains would be backed up northbound all the way
from Arnos Grove to in some cases Finsbury Park. No doubt if they'd
introduced stepping back at arnos and the signallers had pulled their
fingers out it so trains could reverse back from there in a minute or
less then it would never have occured but in cant-be-arsed britain I
guess they had to find another solution.

B2003

"Richard J." wrote in message
...


"Andrew Heenan" wrote in message
...
"Edward Cowling London UK" wrote ...
Why keep an already over full train stood at the platform ? People get
stressed, LU staff get stressed, and you could tell the driver was
getting stressed.
Pointless jobsworth regulation doesn't help the public and it doesn't do
much good for LU staff.

regulation really isn't pointless - though it is not always successful
and could probably be managed much better.

While your train may be packed - and on time - the train behind may be
even more packed, meaning longer loading/unloading and so falling more
behind, thus meeting more and more full platforms and falling even more
behind ... etc.

But it would probably be better to spot the problem before five minutes
'regulation' was needed; a quiet word to the driver to dawdle by 15
seconds at each station would be smoother and much less in-yer-face and
frustrating.

An even better solution would be to run more trains - but the Picc has
another ten years before that happens - not just the extra trains, but
the signalling to go with it.

The Picc used to run 27 tph in the peaks, and I've never seen a credible
explanation of why they decided it was too difficult. Now that 24 tph
doesn't cope with passenger demand, they decided to slow down the
timetable to cover the increased dwell times, rather than run more trains.
Makes their life easier, but doesn't do a lot to provide a service that
matches demand.
--
Richard J.
(to email me, swap 'uk' and 'yon' in address)

It seems a disgrace that of the Tubelines lines to get a new signalling
system first in the less than 10 year old Jubilee Line, that quite frankly
should have been built right in the first place. Well at least the extention
at least.
The Jubilee got completely new trains 20 odd years ago as well. Why does the
Jubilee get preferential treatment. Poor old Bakerloo line gets stuffed.
I accept with the Piccadilly line the new signally is not much use without
the new trains.

Kevin