Conflicting/unrelated train information

[AlbertBeale]

I was puzzled, earlier, when on the northbound Northern Line platform at Waterloo a train arrived with "High Barnet (via Bank)" showing on the front. I did a double take, given the incompatibility of "via Bank" and being at Waterloo... (The platform indicator wasn't showing destinations of the next trains, just giving a "Northern Line trains" text.)

On board, both the public address system and the visual displays also kept saying "... via Bank"; but the other information, interspersed with that "information", was correct - "The next station is Embankment; change for ..." etc. Then, immediately after that, the "... via Bank" again as part of the destination information. There had been a few minutes' wait for the train, and it picked up quite a number of people at Waterloo; many of them were obviously out-of-towners or tourists - the sort of people who keep an eye on a tube map or in-car diagram to check where they are. At least a couple of those looked puzzled (more puzzled than visitors normally look on the Underground...).

The repeated reference to Bank, interspersed with the correct "next station" information, was still going on when I left the train at TCR.

So is the seamless looking and seamless sounding information output in the carriages actually being sourced from two parallel systems, that are capable of contradicting one another?

 

[bramling]

I was puzzled, earlier, when on the northbound Northern Line platform at Waterloo a train arrived with "High Barnet (via Bank)" showing on the front. I did a double take, given the incompatibility of "via Bank" and being at Waterloo... (The platform indicator wasn't showing destinations of the next trains, just giving a "Northern Line trains" text.)

On board, both the public address system and the visual displays also kept saying "... via Bank"; but the other information, interspersed with that "information", was correct - "The next station is Embankment; change for ..." etc. Then, immediately after that, the "... via Bank" again as part of the destination information. There had been a few minutes' wait for the train, and it picked up quite a number of people at Waterloo; many of them were obviously out-of-towners or tourists - the sort of people who keep an eye on a tube map or in-car diagram to check where they are. At least a couple of those looked puzzled (more puzzled than visitors normally look on the Underground...).

The repeated reference to Bank, interspersed with the correct "next station" information, was still going on when I left the train at TCR.

So is the seamless looking and seamless sounding information output in the carriages actually being sourced from two parallel systems, that are capable of contradicting one another?

The driver will have put in the wrong destination code (or perhaps the train was diverted at the last minute and the driver didn’t change the code). However the train knows its position from the signalling system, hence the position announcements were correct.

 

[MCR247]

Not quite the same thing, but I often find on the Jubilee line the platform indicators will say Stanmore whilst the train will be saying Wembley Park/Willesden Green etc

 

[Turtle]

Not quite the same thing, but I often find on the Jubilee line the platform indicators will say Stanmore whilst the train will be saying Wembley Park/Willesden Green etc

I can remember the Met indicators at the Baker St terminus giving incorrect information in the mid 1970s. It would then be corrected seconds before the train departed. One learnt by experience!

 

[AlbertBeale]

The driver will have put in the wrong destination code (or perhaps the train was diverted at the last minute and the driver didn’t change the code). However the train knows its position from the signalling system, hence the position announcements were correct.

Thanks - if the destination/branch information is manually input separately, and not linked to the signalling system in the same way as the "this station is..." announcements, then that makes sense.

When the screens and the audio on board also give a third category of information (such as "There are severe delays on..." etc), is that added automatically "from outside" too, so that it's solely the destination info to be put in by the driver?

Lastly - are there different habits, as between lines, as to how much drivers add individualised announcements to the automated ones? Or is that generally discouraged on all lines now?

 

[Mawkie]

Lastly - are there different habits, as between lines, as to how much drivers add individualised announcements to the automated ones? Or is that generally discouraged on all lines now?

On the contrary, LU have recently been over-encouraging the "Real Time Information" benefits for passengers. A 'higher up' manager has been visiting every depot to spread the word and take nice snap for Yammer publicity.

Of course the usual 30/90 second message is being reinforced too (supposed to make a reassuring verbal message before 30 seconds if held in a tunnel and 90 seconds if held in a platform.)

I prefer using the automated announcements, primarily as they are also displayed on the in-car screens, which helps those with partial hearing (and those wearing headphones) although I acknowledge there are somewhat limited automatic announcements.

However, they pay me, so I do what they ask.

 

[MCR247]

On the contrary, LU have recently been over-encouraging the "Real Time Information" benefits for passengers. A 'higher up' manager has been visiting every depot to spread the word and take nice snap for Yammer publicity.

Of course the usual 30/90 second message is being reinforced too (supposed to make a reassuring verbal message before 30 seconds if held in a tunnel and 90 seconds if held in a platform.)

I prefer using the automated announcements, primarily as they are also displayed on the in-car screens, which helps those with partial hearing (and those wearing headphones) although I acknowledge there are somewhat limited automatic announcements.

However, they pay me, so I do what they ask.

I kind of wish that manager was onboard the trains. I’m not one too complain about announcement on trains generally, but is saying (for example) London Overground is part suspended at every station that helpful? Especially when it gets cut off short half of the time and then you don’t even get to hear the trains destination - surely a far more important piece of information

 

[bramling]

Thanks - if the destination/branch information is manually input separately, and not linked to the signalling system in the same way as the "this station is..." announcements, then that makes sense.

When the screens and the audio on board also give a third category of information (such as "There are severe delays on..." etc), is that added automatically "from outside" too, so that it's solely the destination info to be put in by the driver?

Lastly - are there different habits, as between lines, as to how much drivers add individualised announcements to the automated ones? Or is that generally discouraged on all lines now?

On the Northern the only thing the driver does is input a code which determines the final destination that is announced (and displayed on the front of the train). Everything else is done by the train. In times past the train used to send this code to the signalling system, so putting in the wrong code could in certain circumstances result in a wrong route, but this doesn’t happen with the current system. On some lines the driver has to input more.

The only other announcements triggered by the driver is the library of special announcements, but these are quite rarely heard. 95 stock is also setup to announce “this train is about to depart” when the driver puts his key in.

The service update messages heard on some lines are arranged by the control room. The Northern doesn’t have this facility.

 

[davews]

As I commented before, I once got on a north bound Northern train which was announcing 'this is a Northern line train terminating at Morden' which religiously updated the 'next' station each stop to be the one before. Most strange.
Does the driver actually hear these announcements, I suspect not otherwise he would be aware he had got it wrong.

 

[Mawkie]

I’m not one too complain about announcement on trains generally, but is saying (for example) London Overground is part suspended at every station that helpful?

Precisely. There is tiny chance that a passenger boarding at (eg) Edgware will need to know there is disruption on the Croydon Tram. I tend not to make those announcements as the journey time is so great, the disruption may even be over by the time they get there!

However there are a larger percentage of passengers that will interchange at a central London London station. So if the (eg) Central Line was part suspended I would make announcements that there is no interchange at Tottenham Court Road so people can plan accordingly.

Does the driver actually hear these announcements, I suspect not otherwise he would be aware he had got it wrong.

Will air con on, probably not. With air con and ear defenders, definitely not.

 

[Bigchris]

On a similar topic, I was at Farringdon on Tuesday and noticed repeated platform announcements stating "The next train at platform 1 is a Metropolitan Line service to mind the gap between the train and the platform"! Initially I thought the mind the gap announcement had just cut the first one short but it seemed to happen every time for the hour that I was there.

 

[bakerstreet]

On a similar topic, I was at Farringdon on Tuesday and noticed repeated platform announcements stating "The next train at platform 1 is a Metropolitan Line service to mind the gap between the train and the platform"! Initially I thought the mind the gap announcement had just cut the first one short but it seemed to happen every time for the hour that I was there.

I think it might also be at Farringdon where there is a tendency for the announcement to begin ‘Metropolitan Line’ and then describe a train bound for Hammersmith

Of course this was once, a few decades ago, correct.

 

[bramling]

As I commented before, I once got on a north bound Northern train which was announcing 'this is a Northern line train terminating at Morden' which religiously updated the 'next' station each stop to be the one before. Most strange.
Does the driver actually hear these announcements, I suspect not otherwise he would be aware he had got it wrong.

This will have been pre the TBTC signalling, where the next station announcements were generated differently. It was done off a combination of the previous station and the destination put in by the driver, and the relevant message would be triggered upon passing a beacon on the track. Since the new signalling came in the train knows where it is at all times.

 

[davews]

This was quite recent, a couple of months ago so the new signalling. Yes, it knew what stations it was at but it announced the next station as being the one we had last past through.

(sorry tried to quote your reply in #13 but can never get my head round how quotes work on this forum, why do you make it so difficult...)

 

[Horizon22]

On train PIS can trip and be buggy from time to time. Normally because it's more subject to both a) user error, and b) more GPS/positioning errors than those on a platform/station managed by an operator. The same things happens on the Elizabeth Line with trains showing going in the wrong direction or suddenly kicking into life. And other National Routes where it's downright wrong or blank completely.

As I commented before, I once got on a north bound Northern train which was announcing 'this is a Northern line train terminating at Morden' which religiously updated the 'next' station each stop to be the one before. Most strange.
Does the driver actually hear these announcements, I suspect not otherwise he would be aware he had got it wrong.

Probably do but are sometimes limited in what they can do to resolve it; normally the only option is switch it off.

 

[Lewlew]

This was quite recent, a couple of months ago so the new signalling. Yes, it knew what stations it was at but it announced the next station as being the one we had last past through.

(sorry tried to quote your reply in #13 but can never get my head round how quotes work on this forum, why do you make it so difficult...)

Press the reply button instead

 

[FormerBritInMe]

On the Northern the only thing the driver does is input a code which determines the final destination that is announced (and displayed on the front of the train). Everything else is done by the train. In times past the train used to send this code to the signalling system, so putting in the wrong code could in certain circumstances result in a wrong route, but this doesn’t happen with the current system. On some lines the driver has to input more.

How then do they determine if a train is going via Bank or Charing Cross? I assume some sort of code would have to be input for this as well?

 

[bramling]

How then do they determine if a train is going via Bank or Charing Cross? I assume some sort of code would have to be input for this as well?

The destination code includes the route. This is all a bit of a hangover from the old signalling where the code put in by the driver was sent to the signalling system, and could (in certain circumstances) affect how the train was routed.

So from memory, as an example, the driver will put in 111 for Morden via Bank, but 101 for Morden via Charing Cross. There’s loads of oddities, not least a different code for a train terminating in Kennington Siding as opposed to Kennington Loop.

Most drivers still religiously follow this, even when their train is running empty and changing the code no longer has any effect on signalling! It’s surprising in a way an opportunity hasn’t been taken to simplify all this, but by the same token drivers will know many of the regular codes from memory, so if it ain’t broke don’t fix it…

 

[FormerBritInMe]

The destination code includes the route. This is all a bit of a hangover from the old signalling where the code put in by the driver was sent to the signalling system, and could (in certain circumstances) affect how the train was routed.

So from memory, as an example, the driver will put in 111 for Morden via Bank, but 101 for Morden via Charing Cross. There’s loads of oddities, not least a different code for a train terminating in Kennington Siding as opposed to Kennington Loop.

Most drivers still religiously follow this, even when their train is running empty and changing the code no longer has any effect on signalling! It’s surprising in a way an opportunity hasn’t been taken to simplify all this, but by the same token drivers will know many of the regular codes from memory, so if it ain’t broke don’t fix it…

Interesting, thanks. Sounds similar to the system used on Boston's Green Line where a 3 digit code is used to indicate origin, route, and destination, which then sets points etc. accordingly.

 

[rebmcr]

This will have been pre the TBTC signalling, where the next station announcements were generated differently. It was done off a combination of the previous station and the destination put in by the driver, and the relevant message would be triggered upon passing a beacon on the track. Since the new signalling came in the train knows where it is at all times.

The train might know where it is at all times, but the PIS still receives trigger information from that system, and thus can still end up in a de-synced state.