ValleyLines142
Established Member
All showing now.
-
Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
RealTimeTrains website
- Thread starter Nagora
- Start date
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Prudhoe
Member
allocations of TW loco hauled trains on Holyhead-Cardiff no longer shown since 24/10/22 (+ 5D68 on 22nd), although drawings of loco hauled sets still shown.
TfW loco hauled not showing up has largely nothing to do with us. Sometimes they allocate it, sometimes they don't.
Whether we can do anything about it is another question, but we're working with the ad provider to mitigate it. It may be that the top ad unit goes away in the long run on detailed mode (we're looking into it at the moment, but are unlikely to change it until January at the earliest.)
Can you email support please with more details about your browser, OS and versions please. There's something we're looking into that causes the bottom ad unit to come up with the keyboard on some devices and not on others (gets hidden underneath the keyboard).
Whether we can do anything about it is another question, but we're working with the ad provider to mitigate it. It may be that the top ad unit goes away in the long run on detailed mode (we're looking into it at the moment, but are unlikely to change it until January at the earliest.)
SteelWeelApeal
Member
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 265
There is a bug I noticed that I have been meaning to post on here and email support about for awhile, and I wondered if anybody else experiences it.
Basically, if you ask for trains at A, with a subsequent stop at B, it also shows trains that have previously stopped at B, provided that they pass through (and don’t stop at) A. In other words, it shows trains going the wrong direction if they are non stop at A. This is in addition to the correct trains you’d expect.
For example, if you request Maidenhead with a subsequent stop at Slough, it also shows all the Oxford/Cotswold bound trains. If you request Didcot with a subsequent stop at Reading, it shows all the nonstop South Wales bound trains. If requesting Stevenage, with a subsequent stop at Peterborough, it shows all non stop trains from the north that have called at Peterborough.
Basically, if you ask for trains at A, with a subsequent stop at B, it also shows trains that have previously stopped at B, provided that they pass through (and don’t stop at) A. In other words, it shows trains going the wrong direction if they are non stop at A. This is in addition to the correct trains you’d expect.
For example, if you request Maidenhead with a subsequent stop at Slough, it also shows all the Oxford/Cotswold bound trains. If you request Didcot with a subsequent stop at Reading, it shows all the nonstop South Wales bound trains. If requesting Stevenage, with a subsequent stop at Peterborough, it shows all non stop trains from the north that have called at Peterborough.
ABB125
Established Member
Email sent to feedback@ email address
anamyd
On Moderation
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 3,011
Thanks for changing 1 coaches to 1 coach and apologies for Tom and the team, TT or anyone else for coming across as demanding.
Sent from my 153
Sent from my 153
Wychwood93
Member
Just done a Maidenhead stopping at Slough for 'now' - all trains in the right direction come up. Add 'passenger calls' and you get all those in the right direction. Did the same for tomorrow - all fine. A search restriction exists for trying the same for more than 24 hours in the past.
SteelWeelApeal
Member
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 265
I know about the restriction for more than 24 hours ago, and it definitely wasn’t that. It must just be for me then.
I’ve uploaded a screenshot so you can see what I mean.
Freightmaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 3,499
As per Wychwood93's reply, you need to select 'passenger calls' from the [Service Type] dropdown menu...
MARK
SteelWeelApeal
Member
- Joined
- 24 Sep 2017
- Messages
- 265
Yes that does stop those services from appearing, but it nonetheless seems inaccurate to show services that have previously stopped at a station when requesting those subsequently stopping there, whether or not they pass/stop at the “current” station. Thus I assumed it was a bug, but maybe it‘s just a deliberate quirk.
I think it's a bug, and the cause appears to be that if the train doesn't stop at the current station then the current station is incorrectly believed to first in the running order of the train - maybe the code is meant to look up the position of the current station in the running order but incorrectly concludes it to be the first position, which is then used in comparing with the position of the filtering point.
For example, at Stevenage (where non-stop trains originate from King's Cross (KGX) northbound and terminate at KGX southbound):
1. As you say, filtering for subsequent calls at Peterborough (PBO) results in all non-stop trains that call at PBO in any direction. (Every non-stop train that calls at PBO satisfies the incorrect criterion to have a call at PBO at any point after the first position in the running order.)
2. Filtering for previous calls at PBO (or indeed any other station) results in no non-stop trains at all. (No train has a call at PBO, or any other station, before the first position in the running order.)
3. Filtering for subsequent calls at King's Cross (KGX), which is a terminus, "correctly" results in southbound trains only. (Northbound trains start at KGX so do not have a call at KGX at any point after the first position in the running order.)
Attachments
It was done away with as found un-necessary as today's mobile phones all have internet access via the browser along with the App had limited facilities too compared with main site. I think also 'duplication' of work came into it which meant Tom could more time on the main site. I am sure Tom may confirm in due course.
I agree. Sticking to a website makes it way simpler and cheaper.
So a software industry viewpoint. Simplified. (I'm sure Tom will pop up to correct me if I've completely missed the mark)
1) Costs per channel
Usually the costs of running a service are pretty much a factor of how many channels there are to view the data.
So if having a website costs x, having a website and iphone app will cost 2 * x (double). A website, public API, iPhone app and android app costs 4 times as much as just having a website.
Actually probably 5 times if you do proper testing of the website on a range of mobile devices, and also simulate things like slow mobile data.
There is an added complication is that once you get so big, it is going to be a multi person team. It is very rare to find somebody who does more than 1 channel really well. Which means you even though there might be similarities between the iPhone and Android app, you have an additional cost because of the need to coordinate (see 3)
2) Costs of people
The other complication is that software people aren't cheap right now. Advertise a job with a salary less than £70k, and you aren't going to get many applications. Good app programmers expect even more pay. Day rates of £600 are not unusual. It is also really hard to take junior people into a small team. A good developer can be 100 times more effective than a mediocre developer.
3) Team size
You kind of have an option of whether you run a small and lean team. 1 or 2 key really good people and a bit of help. 3 at a push. Who are able to self coordinate, work together and not end up stood on each others toes.
Or whether you go big and professional: With a project manager and then per channel a programmer, User interface designer and tester. So a website takes 4 people. A full set for website, 2 apps and API means 13 people. And requires a million+ pounds a year budget. This is a really difficult jump to make, and almost impossible unless you are owned by a company with serious money. And actually, really you might need a dedicated backend data person as well. The advantage is that once you have scaled like this, new features just drop out all the time and you really can make massive progress quickly. And also at this size, you can include some non UK people in the team.
***
Realtimetrains is really not a simple website. Tom + team are doing amazingly well.
miklcct
On Moderation
Even Network Rail is advertising dev roles with less than £40k salary! Looking at the market £35k is the norm of a mid-level developer outside London.
The apps were removed in late 2017 when there were a number of issues in my personal life and I was seriously considering selling off RTT to one of my customers (and a level of negotiations did occur at that time). They were quite dated even then and needed a considerable amount of maintenance on both sides. Fortunately for me now I snapped somewhat out of that and took 2018 largely out for my own benefit and 2019 obviously saw the new version of RTT and what we have now.
Both the iOS and Android apps back then were contracted out to people I trust who are no longer able to work on them as life moves on a bit. They probably both need a complete rewrite now.
The reason they're not back ... well @Tim_UK covers the commercial and practical scenarios around it quite well. RTT is an extremely complex system with many moving parts and the current total number of developers is one: me. The total number of people involved in running it is four.
I did put out a job advert a few months ago to take someone on to release a bit more of my time to work on pet projects like the apps. That didn't go so well for various reasons and a similar role will be advertised again soon. There will be another position being advertised relatively soon to work on back-end work - but the business can't afford the top whack salaries that some of the London businesses offer. RTT has never taken in outside investment, VC or otherwise, and has essentially been at my risk from the start. If anyone is interested before the adverts go up, then drop me an email - the tech stack is a mix of Java, Python, PHP, C++, bash scripts
Last edited:
I am amazed at what you have been able to do with so little to be honest. I know these sorts of things are not meant to be used for operational purposes but for us on the ground RTT and the numerous map based sites are a godsend. So thanks to all involved for that!
I agree. The quality and level of innovation is amazing for a website run by such a small team.
anamyd
On Moderation
- Joined
- 17 Aug 2018
- Messages
- 3,011
https://www.realtimetrains.co.uk/service/gb-nr:W37443/2022-11-22/detailed apparently, the 22/11/22's Northern 1N56 1046 Manchester Airport to Blackpool North is pathed as an "electric locomotive, trailing load 331 tonnes" and planned for 100mph max. Is this an error of Class 331 EMU?
Very likely. The class of EMU is stored in the same field as the trailing load, so it will have been put in as a traction type of E rather than EMU
All services planned to be a 331 use that timing load.
Freightmaster
Established Member
- Joined
- 7 Jul 2009
- Messages
- 3,499
the 325s which work Royal Mail services are the same:
Realtime Trains | 1M44 1620 Shieldmuir Mail Terminal to Warrington Royal Mail(Dbs) | 11/11/2022
Real-time train running information for 1M44 1620 departure from Shieldmuir Mail Terminal to Warrington Royal Mail(Dbs) on 11/11/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.
As is always the case, this is because it is just a timing load rather than an allocation.
MARK
the 325s which work Royal Mail services are the same:
Realtime Trains | 1M44 1620 Shieldmuir Mail Terminal to Warrington Royal Mail(Dbs) | 11/11/2022
Real-time train running information for 1M44 1620 departure from Shieldmuir Mail Terminal to Warrington Royal Mail(Dbs) on 11/11/2022. From Realtime Trains, an independent source of train running info for Great Britain.www.realtimetrains.co.uk
As is always the case, this is because it is just a timing load rather than an allocation.
MARK
Indeed. You get the occasional post asking Tom (the creator) why some services are still timed as Pacers in the Valleys and on Northern.
william.martin
On Moderation
I understand it’s an issue with the data coming to RTT from Northern
DanNCL
Established Member
Likewise I’ve seen the occasional post asking why some London - Edinburgh services are still timed under the class 91 timing load of ‘Electric Locomotive, trailing load 410 tonnes’
SuperLuke2334
Established Member
It's a data feed bug, nothing you can do about it.
william.martin
On Moderation
Thanks for that, I was just wondering if it was perhaps an issue with my browser or my device, glad too hear it's not!
Peter Mugridge
Veteran Member
Yep... all that's happening is the data feed is providing the vehicle numbers in number order.
To be fair, I don't think that's strictly true. You are never going to have a non-driving carriage as the first or last coach of a unit, and even then, it is really quite rare for the coaches in units to be swapped around nowadays.
So it would be possible to "sense check" the data against a known list of coach ordering. Obviously that wouldn't allow the orientation of the train to be determined, but at least it would show the coaches in the correct order.