Commuter knew better than apps

[43066]

How did you gather that? It’s no worse than in the 80s or 90s

I bet it is actually lot better than the 80s/90s, certainly in terms of quality of the displays. Indeed the quality of CIS has improved exponentially even since I started commuting regularly in the early 00s. Let down as you say by fewer staff and/or potentially less operational knowledge amongst the staff who remain.

Presumably most on here know how to use RTT/OTT and have the knowledge to tell when a route has been set through a particular platform due to observing signals etc. so the criticism is largely about a perceived problem assumed to be experienced by others. I’d be interested to know how many complaints are received (or delay repay claims paid out) due to passengers actually missing trains due to late platform changes.

 

[Geswedey]

When I worked for GA in Romford ROC there were 3 of us monitoring the whole of the GA network as Manager I monitored the whole network and 1 colleague monitored the East side of the Network via Shenfield and 1 the West via Broxbourne, prior to the split off of the Elizabeth Line and the London Overground we were responsible between us of paging train delays, platform alterations etc for the entire network except for Liverpool Street which had two members of staff controlling it. on nights between 2100 and 0700 there were just 3 of us. I had computer screens that covered the whole network with feeds from the signalling centre using the Control Centre for the Future technology and from this we could see platform alterations after trains had been routed by Signallers, however we couldn't be watching everywhere and alterations could occur at very short notice especially at stations like Shenfield. We had a lot of pro-active signallers as well who would ring us or radio us of alterations when they could. So yes things could and did get missed.

I remember when doing a similar communications job at Liverpool Street being visited by a customer liaison manager with a particularly frequent complaining customer who when they saw what we did and how and why decisions were made he left a changed person.

 

[Taunton]

Happens frequently at Bristol Parkway as well (usually not much of an issue as the change is cross-platform) and at Bath where the PIS somehow expects one train to leapfrog the other between Bathampton Junction and the station.


So it has been programmed or commissioned incompetently as it has got noticeably worse with the introduction of new systems.

Of course, the old much maligned way, where any platform alteration at Taunton was just shouted across from whichever signaller decided on it to the station announcer, who worked at the end of the box, and was instantly given out, is now seen as ludicrously antiquated ...

 

[43066]

Of course, the old much maligned way, where any platform alteration at Taunton was just shouted across from whichever signaller decided on it to the station announcer, who worked at the end of the box, and was instantly given out, is now seen as ludicrously antiquated ...

Yes indeed. Of course these days it’s hard to shout from West Hampstead to Bedford, or from Derby to Wellingborough etc.

 

[norbitonflyer]

. I’d be interested to know how many delay repay claims paid out due to passengers actually missing trains due to late platform changes.

Good luck with that - "our records show the train ran to time"

 

[saismee]

The fact that people are spouting about "AI" CIS systems is insane to me... it shows a clear lack of understanding of what a "Large Language Model" (often called "AI") *actually* is. It takes in training data (sentences in this case), converts words or phrases into "tokens" (numbers to be manipulated), then feeds it through a network which is effectively just performing math on the tokens. This them forms a reply by stringing together new tokens with some slight (actually quite a lot of) randomness thrown in.

Train routes and signalling systems don't change often, there is no need to "train" a new AI to determine where a train may be going when the signalling system can already reliably show that through the layout. In OP's particular case, I don't see why the CIS boards cannot be modified to look at an earlier berth and update when the train is already set on that particular path. I don't know a great deal about the actual workings of these systems, but causing passengers to rush or potentially miss connections through something out of their own control should NOT be considered standard. I'd imagine the unsuspecting station staff having to deal with irate customers would agree.

 

[jon0844]

I've talked about this on other threads and it would be great to rewrite the systems to be more able to predict platform changes based on route settings or earlier berths that would show the change potentially miles away (take trains leaving Harpenden towards St Albans where you can see if a train will change from platform 3 to 1 a long time in advance).

It would also be great that it disruption has resulted in a train starting from another platform, any trains booked to use that platform that clearly can't because it's occupied will change to the platform it can use. Example, Welwyn Garden City where a train from Moorgate comes into platform 3 because it was late and platform 4 was occupied by something else. The next Cambridge train is due at, say xx28 and the Moorgate goes at xx30 or xx35. Clearly it will now use platform 4 that has now become free.

Automated platform alteration messages won't trigger until it's showing on the platform 4 berth, although staff often announce earlier because it is quite obvious what's going to happen.

It's a bigger issue at stations where a platform change involves stairs and lifts.

 

[arb]

Of course, the old much maligned way, where any platform alteration at Taunton was just shouted across from whichever signaller decided on it to the station announcer, who worked at the end of the box, and was instantly given out, is now seen as ludicrously antiquated ...

And the point in time when things were changed such that the signaller could no longer shout to the station announcer is the same point in time at which the passenger information systems were upgraded to be able to automatically determine this information from the signalling system for themselves. Right? Surely there's no way that any customer-focussed organisation would make the first change without the second?

 

[jon0844]

Surely there's no way that any customer-focussed organisation would make the first change without the second?

Probably done by people who didn't think about or realise the consequences, or didn't care.

At many stations it won't matter, while at some it can cause chaos (St Albans, Finsbury Park are two I can think of that might impact me if I wasn't checking) with people being left behind due to a late platform change. A train with a train manager might wait in such cases, but that's not going to happen with DOO services unless the signaller gets a request to contact the driver.

Imagine if there was a wheelchair assist on/off the train and even staff were caught out as they might be if they're already on the platform waiting?

 

[Taunton]

It did of course matter far more in past times, when there were parcels and mail to be loaded and unloaded. The platform inspector at Taunton in the described situation would have been on the phone to The Box in no uncertain terms if an alteration was not advised - the PA was as necessary for the staff as for the passengers.

 

[jon0844]

It did of course matter far more in past times, when there were parcels and mail to be loaded and unloaded. The platform inspector at Taunton in the described situation would have been on the phone to The Box in no uncertain terms if an alteration was not advised - the PA was as necessary for the staff as for the passengers.

I think the accessibility issues might be the way to get the industry to try and find a way to improve things, and I really do hope that with the new signalling this issue can be resolved with platforms allocated based on the actual routes, not what's booked. (Well, show the booked and dynamically update as and when).

 

[Horizon22]

Of course, the old much maligned way, where any platform alteration at Taunton was just shouted across from whichever signaller decided on it to the station announcer, who worked at the end of the box, and was instantly given out, is now seen as ludicrously antiquated ...

Considering station boxes increasingly do not physically exist then yes it is "ludicrously antiquated".

 

[Peter0124]

Its always fun when arriving into a terminal station, to check what the route signalled is, meaning you can know what side of the train you get off from a few minutes before

 

[Horizon22]

In OP's particular case, I don't see why the CIS boards cannot be modified to look at an earlier berth and update when the train is already set on that particular path.

You evidently did not read OP's case - or subsequent posts fully - because there were two possible platforms for the service to arrive on. Where something like AI could (still think we're some way away from it) be useful is determining whether Platform 4 is more likely than Platform 5 (it is) and displaying it there.

At other stations making such assumptions would be completely unsatisfactory.

Good luck with that - "our records show the train ran to time"

The records would still show the platform (and therefore any relative change) as well, and even a very basic review of standard industry systems (e.g. TRUST) would show a train away from the booked platform. Further investigations can be done as to when the CIS displayed the platform change, in the event of a dispute.

 

[AndrewE]

You evidently did not read OP's case - or subsequent posts fully - because there were two possible platforms for the service to arrive on. Where something like AI could (still think we're some way away from it) be useful is determining whether Platform 4 is more likely than Platform 5 (it is) and determining it there.

but given the enormous (hidden) costs of AI might it not be quicker, cheaper and easier to train somebody with a Mk I human brain to do the job? It would have other benefits too... Why are we so obsessed with not paying people to do jobs?

 

[The exile]

How did you gather that? It’s no worse than in the 80s or 90s but you have less station staff around now with working operation knowledge and relationships with signallers. This is more of a problem than the actual systems themselves.

That being said some of the new entrants to the field of CIS provision do have software that isn’t as reliable at picking up platform changes & unit swaps in service.

I gather that by personal daily observations - comparing the state now not with the 80s or 90s (when we didn’t usually have the information available to make the judgement) but much more recently.
Public information needs to be all of a) accurate, b) useful and c) timely. There can be no excuse for the auto announcements announcing that train “days” is arriving on platform 3 as it pulls into platform 4 - especially when the “staff info” screens and the signals have made it clear that it’s going into 4 for several minutes.

 

[Horizon22]

but given the enormous (hidden) costs of AI might it not be quicker, cheaper and easier to train somebody with a Mk I human brain to do the job? It would have other benefits too... Why are we so obsessed with not paying people to do jobs?

I'm not obsessed by it at all. Of course a human could do it, but you could double the amount of staff in a control room (at some cost) and you would still never reach perfection. I encourage anyone to try and stare at several pages of Trasky or Signal Maps for 8 hours where 95% of the time there will not be a single platform alteration (outside of major hubs with dedicated station controllers)

This post gives a small insight into the reality of what a control room actually needs to look at

 

[The exile]

but given the enormous (hidden) costs of AI might it not be quicker, cheaper and easier to train somebody with a Mk I human brain to do the job? It would have other benefits too... Why are we so obsessed with not paying people to do jobs?

Hear hear!

 

[Horizon22]

Public information needs to be all of a) accurate, b) useful and c) timely. There can be no excuse for the auto announcements announcing that train “days” is arriving on platform 3 as it pulls into platform 4 - especially when the “staff info” screens and the signals have made it clear that it’s going into 4 for several minutes.

But as explained, the technology for the CIS is not at that level realistically. I agree in many cases - where there are not multiple available platforms from the last available signal - it should be better and it seems bizarre that it isn't and it is frustrating for everyone really but there are certain constraints.

Outside of generalised service performance, and cost of travelling it's probably one of the major complaints to operators. And it has been for a while and multiple approaches have been taken and it's still never fully complete. There is one station I know where the platform can change and be routed alternatively without any prior warning and the train arrive at the affected station 45 seconds later because of the way the infrastructure is set up. This is an extreme example, but it does happen and highlights just how difficult it is to resolve.

 

[AndrewE]

I'm not obsessed by it at all. Of course a human could do it, but you could double the amount of staff in a control room (at some cost) and you would still never reach perfection. I encourage anyone to try and stare at several pages of Trasky or Signal Maps for 8 hours where 95% of the time there will not be a single platform alteration (outside of major hubs with dedicated station controllers)

This post gives a small insight into the reality of what a control room actually needs to look at

I was thinking of more localised staff. Feet on the ground, recognisable faces, familiarity with their station and passenger flows etc. All that old-fashioned crap.

 

[Horizon22]

I was thinking of more localised staff. Feet on the ground, recognisable faces, familiarity with their station and passenger flows etc. All that old-fashioned crap.

Sure, but that's still thousands of extra staff who will need to be trained on CIS systems and functionality.

 

[AndrewE]

Sure, but that's still thousands of extra staff who will need to be trained on CIS systems and functionality.

Yep... but a better outcome for all.

 

[Horizon22]

Yep... but a better outcome for all.

Well that's arguable for the taxpayer I guess!

 

[AndrewE]

Well that's arguable for the taxpayer I guess!

A secure job (not in the gig economy) so paying all applicable taxes, able to get a mortgage and start a family, doing something socially useful every working day - hence reducing physical and mental ill-health...
what's not to like?
It's a pity that the Treasury seems blind to anything other than the narrowest costs of each silo and is completely incapable of recognising the wider benefits of any progressive policy.

 

[Winthorpe]

It's a pity that the Treasury seems blind to anything other than the narrowest costs of each silo and is completely incapable of recognising the wider benefits of any progressive policy.

Yes. The best way to look at software is to tackle the easy, mundane stuff. That’s what the current CIS software does. The edge cases are best left to people on the ground.

As I mentioned up thread, the best solution would be for software to identify potential edge cases (potential platform changes) and notify someone on the platform for review. (I.e. this is a potential platform change. If it is, take action).

 

[The exile]

But as explained, the technology for the CIS is not at that level realistically. I agree in many cases - where there are not multiple available platforms from the last available signal - it should be better and it seems bizarre that it isn't and it is frustrating for everyone really but there are certain constraints.

Outside of generalised service performance, and cost of travelling it's probably one of the major complaints to operators. And it has been for a while and multiple approaches have been taken and it's still never fully complete. There is one station I know where the platform can change and be routed alternatively without any prior warning and the train arrive at the affected station 45 seconds later because of the way the infrastructure is set up. This is an extreme example, but it does happen and highlights just how difficult it is to resolve.

I’m talking about situations where only resetting an already set route can change what is going to happen and yet the auto announcements continue to spout drivel even while the train is pulling into platform. As for the other examples, except in emergencies and very perturbed working, there should be no need for the platform a train is to be routed into to be only determined when the final set of points are set.

 

[Horizon22]

It's a pity that the Treasury seems blind to anything other than the narrowest costs of each silo and is completely incapable of recognising the wider benefits of any progressive policy.

Well quite, but that is a decades-long problem!

As for the other examples, except in emergencies and very perturbed working, there should be no need for the platform a train is to be routed into to be only determined when the final set of points are set.

I mean this is fundamentally untrue.

 

[43066]

As for the other examples, except in emergencies and very perturbed working, there should be no need for the platform a train is to be routed into to be only determined when the final set of points are set.

Workings don’t need to be “very perturbed” for platform allocations to change, I can assure you.

Can I ask, do you have any operational railway experience, to inform your comments?

 

[Geswedey]

Workings don’t need to be “very perturbed” for platform allocations to change, I can assure you.

Can I ask, do you have any operational railway experience, to inform your comments?

At GA we would regularly have platform alterations during normal running at Audley End Down Trains into Up platform to allow ease of access for passengers with reduced mobility for example, although that wouldn't be done at short notice. other examples can be to allow patrolling at places like Ilford flyover where a few stopping trains would use the Up Main rather than the Up Electric platform, I can't remember now as it is nearly 10 years since I was responsible for Ilford if these were programmed or we had to do manual changes, Hackney Downs was another location where platforms could be swapped at short notice during normal running.

You have to also realise control room staff are not only monitoring trains and altering platforms, they are also communicating with station staff etc, and in my case as a manager potentially with the Police, London Buses, London Underground, replacement bus co-ordinators, other TOC's, NRES, local and senior managers including in major incidents the media via GA press team. You could have shifts where you have very little to do and others where all hell lets loose the moment you takeover, I remember one particular late turn where I had 3 major incidents occur within an hour of each other in 3 different senior and local manager areas, they only had to worry about their one incident I had to be on top of all three. those incidents and their aftermaths lasted all shift but time flew. So as I said before things can get missed I never wanted it to happen on my shift none of us did or do but it does happen.

On a slightly different but related theme our busiest through Southminster train at Liverpool Street in the evening peak used to leave from platform 12 and regular customers knew this and waited on the platform before the incoming train arrived so they could bag their favourite spot, one night a Norwich set arrived in twelve (services were running ok but there had been a slight late departure from the Norwich's normal platform) and despite announcements for Southminster line customers to return to the main concourse as this wasn't their train to await further announcements a fair number boarded the Norwich service which hadn't been advertised as it was being cleaned and prepared and returned later to complain etc. so sometimes the poor old info team and announcers just can't win.

 

[Nippy]

The opposite happens at Harrow and Wealdstone. If we run a train Fast Line from Euston, with the intention of crossing At Willesden North, the CIS at Harrow updates at the signal approaching Willesden North. So there will be a platform alteration displayed at Harrow. If the train does cross to the Slow Line, the CIS doesn’t then re-update until the train has passed North Wembley Junction. So the train is advertised as P5 then P3 and then P5 again. All within about 2-3 minutes.