Great Western Coffee Shop

Okay. This is Platform 1 at Temple Meads last evening. What's wrong here?

(http://i598.photobucket.com/albums/tt68/bignosemac/100_0930_zps760c2b03.jpg)

Possible that the CIS realises the 2nd train forms the 1st train and then assumes the 1st train will be 2 minutes late, but won't show a 2 minute delay as the CIS system generally doesn't.

You're not wrong Southern Stag.

It just surprises me somewhat that the CIS can't be a little more intelligent. It is, after all, programmed by humans. It can't be beyond the wit of man to show the timetabled services in a bay platform in the correct order, with the delay to the inbound added to the estimated departure of the outbound. Updated as necessary.

Actual timings were 2219 arrival, followed by 2221 departure. Kudos to staff for the swift turnaround. Conductor is a sometime contributor to this forum. The small delay was due to a trespass incident at Stapleton Road. This also affected the 2216 (actual 2221) departure as we waited for a couple of minutes at Lawrence Hill for BTP to join the train and then proceeded at walking pace to Stapleton Road. One BTP officer riding up front with the driver.

Always strikes me a daft that SVB trains are often displayed something along the lines of:

1st hh.mm This train terminates here, do not attempt to board this train.
2nd hh.mm+a few mins Severn Beach

There are only one train. The train that arrives are the next departure, and it is OK to get on them really.

This kind of thing could easily confuse a stupid person like me.

Yes - it is idiotic programming - or rather programming that has not been written in sufficient detail to cover every little circumstance. I have been in contact with FGW re "funnies" on the CIS screens at Hanborough but the response is that it would cost too much to allow for such things in the programming.

The CIS does not make mistakes... It can only do what it is told... The person who programmed the CIS however... Well that is a different story! :-X ;D

or "1st ... does not stop here
2nd ... xx:xx to yyyyy"

Except that the train not stopping is the empty stock for the train to yyyyy  ;D


At least FGW have given a consistent answer on that one ... we have asked too about some "funnies".   Items that relate to specific locations / geography would be expensive per-incident, I know ... and probably a code maintenance nightmare.  But there may be some generic things that would be possible.

I'm also minded to suggest that we're still very much in the embryonic stage of the information age, and there's a lot of other stuff and fine tuning that can and will come along.   Systems are so far ahead of what they were 10 or 20 years ago and they will be dramatically better still in a further 10 or 20 years.  Some of us - myself included - are just a bit impatient at times!

With the rise of the smart phone apps, I wonder if the CIS will become obsolete as I find the information on the smart phone apps, far more reliable than the CIS.

There may be a certain logic in combining the two rather than duplicating analysis.   You can't be certain (yet?) that everyone will have a mobile device, an app, and be in an area of signal and be clued-up to use it ... but projection of the same data onto a local set of LEDs / display screen ...

On a more serious note. I was having discussions with some Rail Staff at a nearby station who were commenting about not being allowed to use their smart phones on the platform.

Whilst I fully appreciate the staff concerns here. Their comments along the lines of "It would be so handy to be able to see where the trains are like you can" did strike me as some what daft.

It's not been unknown for a staff member to ask me to check if train x, y or z is within the vicinity ;D