Victoria line map
 

The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly the
line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what dribbling ****wit
decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be the other way around
with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

I swear that one day LU will have to be quarantined because there'll be an
outbreak of common sense which will throw the whole organisation into
complete chaos.

On a side note I rode on a 2009 stock today which was already looking
distinctly grubby on the seats and armrests. If that fabric lasts 5 years
I'll be amazed.

B2003

Victoria line map
 

On 2011\01\01 16:58, d wrote:
The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly the
line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what dribbling ****wit
decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be the other way around
with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Do they not have different maps on the two sides anymore?

Victoria line map
 

On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 17:05:14 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2011\01\01 16:58, d wrote:
The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly the
line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what dribbling ****wit
decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be the other way around
with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Do they not have different maps on the two sides anymore?

Nope, was the same on both sides.

B2003

Victoria line map
 

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 17:05:14 +0000
Basil Jet wrote:
On 2011\01\01 16:58, d wrote:
The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly
the
line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what dribbling
****wit
decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be the other way
around
with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Do they not have different maps on the two sides anymore?

Nope, was the same on both sides.

B2003


If I sit on a longitudinal seat and look at the strip map opposite me and
Walthamstow is on the left it will be at what I will call the A end of the
train.

If I then switch seats to the opposite side of the carriage and Walthamstow
is on the left it will be at the B end of the train.

That is what would happen if the map was the same on both sides of the car.

Victoria line map
 

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 17:47:40 -0000
"Graham Harrison" wrote:
If I sit on a longitudinal seat and look at the strip map opposite me and
Walthamstow is on the left it will be at what I will call the A end of the
train.

If I then switch seats to the opposite side of the carriage and Walthamstow
is on the left it will be at the B end of the train.

That is what would happen if the map was the same on both sides of the car.

If I look on a map , east is on the right, west on the left. I'm afraid
the direction of travel argument is just BS. You might as well say turn
a car map upside down if you're heading south!

B2003

Victoria line map
 

On 2011-01-01, d wrote:
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 17:47:40 -0000
"Graham Harrison" wrote:
If I sit on a longitudinal seat and look at the strip map opposite me and
Walthamstow is on the left it will be at what I will call the A end of the
train.

If I then switch seats to the opposite side of the carriage and Walthamstow
is on the left it will be at the B end of the train.

That is what would happen if the map was the same on both sides of the car.

If I look on a map , east is on the right, west on the left. I'm afraid
the direction of travel argument is just BS. You might as well say turn
a car map upside down if you're heading south!

B2003


Here is Boltar looking at the "incorrect" map:

map
Side of Train W---------B

==== Direction of Travel ==== W
Boltar
Side of Train ?---------?
map

Is the map above Boltar's head like this:

W---------B

or like this:

B---------W

If the former, they have printed two sets of maps and put them on the
wrong sides. If the latter, there is only one type of map, and if you
don't like it you have to sit on the other side!

My bet is on the latter.


Eric

Victoria line map
 

On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:58:53 +0000, boltar2003 wrote:

The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly
the line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what
dribbling ****wit decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be
the other way around with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Not really that big a deal though, is it?

Victoria line map
 

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 17:47:40 -0000
"Graham Harrison" wrote:
If I sit on a longitudinal seat and look at the strip map opposite me and
Walthamstow is on the left it will be at what I will call the A end of the
train.

If I then switch seats to the opposite side of the carriage and
Walthamstow
is on the left it will be at the B end of the train.

That is what would happen if the map was the same on both sides of the
car.

If I look on a map , east is on the right, west on the left. I'm afraid
the direction of travel argument is just BS. You might as well say turn
a car map upside down if you're heading south!

B2003


I wasn't suggesting otherwise but trying to identify the precise condition
you are trying to describe. I think what you're saying is that whichever
side of the train you sit on the end of the map showing Walthamstow is at
the end of the train pointing towards Brixton. To achieve that they must
have printed two separate sets of maps but they've printed them both the
"wrong way round".

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 1, 5:58*pm, wrote:
If I look on a map , east is on the right, west on the left. I'm afraid
the direction of travel argument is just BS. You might as well say turn
a car map upside down if you're heading south!

.... which can often be a convenient way of navigating.

As it happens, though, the diagrams you are looking at aren't maps,
they are diagrams. If they were maps they'd need more vertical
space. The diagrams are usually arranged so that, where possible,
they "point" in the direction the train is travelling. Like it or
not, a lot of people find that very helpful.

PhilD

--

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 1, 10:34*pm, PhilD wrote:
On Jan 1, 5:58*pm, wrote:

If I look on a map , east is on the right, west on the left. I'm afraid
the direction of travel argument is just BS. You might as well say turn
a car map upside down if you're heading south!

... which can often be a convenient way of navigating.

As it happens, though, the diagrams you are looking at aren't maps,
they are diagrams. *If they were maps they'd need more vertical
space. *The diagrams are usually arranged so that, where possible,
they "point" in the direction the train is travelling. *Like it or
not, a lot of people find that very helpful.

Not usually at all, because most lines have branches.

On the Victoria and Bakerloo they have used maps which are different
on each side, corresponding to the direction of travel.

For most lines, they stick to west or north is left. Variation from
that tends to be confusing in my experience, not helpful.

They did attempt the direction-of-travel idea a few years back on the
District, but abandoned it. I don't know what feedback they received
to make them abandon it, but I certainly found it completely wrong to
show that one had to turn right after Earls Court to get to Wimbledon.

I also find it very confusing when I come to those maps in the street
which try to show things the way that you are facing (eg with
southeast at the top or whatever). I have definitely adapted to the
conventions of map-drawing, whether everyone else has or not.

I actually agree with Boltar that unless you are going to put all maps
flat on the ground, they are already so far from reality (being on a
vertical surface) that it's best to stick with conventions that are
well understood, like north at the top.

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 1, 7:58*pm, Martin Petrov
wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:58:53 +0000, boltar2003 wrote:
The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly
the line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what
dribbling ****wit decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be
the other way around with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Not really that big a deal though, is it?

It's certainly a lot easier to fix than those tiny windows, cramped
interior due to thick walls and rock hard seats angled so that you
can't sit in them.

Victoria line map
 

In article
,
(MIG) wrote:

On the Victoria and Bakerloo they have used maps which are different
on each side, corresponding to the direction of travel.

Not recently on The Victoria. Did they ever on the Bakerloo?

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 2, 12:52*am, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On the Victoria and Bakerloo they have used maps which are different
on each side, corresponding to the direction of travel.

Not recently on The Victoria. Did they ever on the Bakerloo?

Yes, there was a time when they both did. I am not often paying
attention though, because I tend to know where the lines go.

Victoria line map
 

On 2011\01\01 20:13, Graham Harrison wrote:

wrote in message
...
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 17:47:40 -0000
"Graham Harrison" wrote:
If I sit on a longitudinal seat and look at the strip map opposite me
and
Walthamstow is on the left it will be at what I will call the A end
of the
train.

If I then switch seats to the opposite side of the carriage and
Walthamstow
is on the left it will be at the B end of the train.

That is what would happen if the map was the same on both sides of
the car.

If I look on a map , east is on the right, west on the left. I'm afraid
the direction of travel argument is just BS. You might as well say turn
a car map upside down if you're heading south!

B2003


I wasn't suggesting otherwise but trying to identify the precise
condition you are trying to describe. I think what you're saying is that
whichever side of the train you sit on the end of the map showing
Walthamstow is at the end of the train pointing towards Brixton. To
achieve that they must have printed two separate sets of maps but
they've printed them both the "wrong way round".

That's a joke, right? They haven't printed them the wrong way around,
they've stuck them on the wrong sides.

Victoria line map
 

In article
,
(MIG) wrote:

On Jan 2, 12:52*am, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On the Victoria and Bakerloo they have used maps which are different
on each side, corresponding to the direction of travel.

Not recently on The Victoria. Did they ever on the Bakerloo?

Yes, there was a time when they both did. I am not often paying
attention though, because I tend to know where the lines go.

If you say so but, although I've not used the Bakerloo often I don't
remember ever seeing different maps since the line split in the 1970s.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Victoria line map
 

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 18:29:27 +0000
Eric wrote:
Is the map above Boltar's head like this:

W---------B

Yes.

If the former, they have printed two sets of maps and put them on the
wrong sides. If the latter, there is only one type of map, and if you
don't like it you have to sit on the other side!

Lets get this straight - walthamstow was on the LEFT on all the maps on
BOTH sides of the carraige. Now perhaps the eejit who glued them there was
supposed to have used different ones - I noticed the central area map still
had the old LU ELL on it - but he/she didn't.

B2003

Victoria line map
 

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 14:34:17 -0800 (PST)
PhilD wrote:
On Jan 1, 5:58=A0pm, wrote:
If I look on a map , east is on the right, west on the left. I'm afraid
the direction of travel argument is just BS. You might as well say turn
a car map upside down if you're heading south!

.... which can often be a convenient way of navigating.

If you're a woman.

As it happens, though, the diagrams you are looking at aren't maps,
they are diagrams. If they were maps they'd need more vertical
space. The diagrams are usually arranged so that, where possible,
they "point" in the direction the train is travelling. Like it or
not, a lot of people find that very helpful.

Sorry , I've NEVER come across someone who found it convenient having a map
the opposite way around to the diagram on the main map. Perhaps the central
line should do it too so that epping is on the "west" side and ruislip on
the "east" then on one side of the train?

B2003

Victoria line map
 

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011 16:11:26 -0800 (PST)
MIG wrote:
I actually agree with Boltar

I shall note this day in my memoirs ;)

B2003

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 2, 6:13*am, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On Jan 2, 12:52 am, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On the Victoria and Bakerloo they have used maps which are different
on each side, corresponding to the direction of travel.

Not recently on The Victoria. Did they ever on the Bakerloo?

Yes, there was a time when they both did. *I am not often paying
attention though, because I tend to know where the lines go.

If you say so but, although I've not used the Bakerloo often I don't
remember ever seeing different maps since the line split in the 1970s.

But you'll probably remember the awful District Line attempt, and it
would probably have been around the same time.

Victoria line map
 

It's certainly a lot easier to fix than those tiny windows, cramped
interior due to thick walls and rock hard seats angled so that you can't
sit in them.

Meh, maybe - however "seats" on the Victoria Line are things that happen
to other people so the fact that I can stand completely upright in the
doorways (I'm 6 foot 3) is a big win.

Victoria line map
 

On Sun, 02 Jan 2011 02:35:15 -0800, MIG wrote:

On Jan 2, 6:13Â*am, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On Jan 2, 12:52 am, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On the Victoria and Bakerloo they have used maps which are
different on each side, corresponding to the direction of travel.

Not recently on The Victoria. Did they ever on the Bakerloo?

Yes, there was a time when they both did. Â*I am not often paying
attention though, because I tend to know where the lines go.

If you say so but, although I've not used the Bakerloo often I don't
remember ever seeing different maps since the line split in the 1970s.

But you'll probably remember the awful District Line attempt, and it
would probably have been around the same time.

Yeah, you're right about it being awful. They could just about get away
with North/South lines being mirrored left-to-right, but it just plain
didn't work on the District going East/West.

And, of course, the loops on the Central, Piccadilly and Northern meant
there were never any mirrored maps on those lines.

(Were there ever any on the Jubilee?)

Victoria line map
 

I wasn't suggesting otherwise but trying to identify the precise condition
you are trying to describe. I think what you're saying is that whichever
side of the train you sit on the end of the map showing Walthamstow is at
the end of the train pointing towards Brixton. To achieve that they must
have printed two separate sets of maps but they've printed them both the
"wrong way round".

I thought what he is saying is that the diagrams are the same on both sides
of the train so that on one side the diagram does indeed align with the
direction of the train. His point is that if you are only going to print
one version of the diagram it would be more intuitive to have Brixton on the
left and Walthamstow on the right to make it correspond better with a
typical map.

I think the same argument can be made for most of the lines, though there
would have to be a bunfight over the Northern line :-)

Victoria line map
 

In article
,
(MIG) wrote:

On Jan 2, 6:13*am, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On Jan 2, 12:52 am, wrote:
In article
,

(MIG) wrote:
On the Victoria and Bakerloo they have used maps which are
different on each side, corresponding to the direction of
travel.

Not recently on The Victoria. Did they ever on the Bakerloo?

Yes, there was a time when they both did. *I am not often paying
attention though, because I tend to know where the lines go.

If you say so but, although I've not used the Bakerloo often I don't
remember ever seeing different maps since the line split in the 1970s.

But you'll probably remember the awful District Line attempt, and it
would probably have been around the same time.

Indeed I don't. Must have been before 2001 when my visits to London were
less frequent.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

Victoria line map
 

solar penguin wrote:

And, of course, the loops on the Central, Piccadilly and Northern meant
there were never any mirrored maps on those lines.

(Were there ever any on the Jubilee?)

I recall a few in the mid 1990s. The Waterloo & City also had them in its
early LT years.

Victoria line map
 

On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 10:37:30 +0000 (UTC), Martin Petrov
wrote:
Meh, maybe - however "seats" on the Victoria Line are things that
happen
to other people so the fact that I can stand completely upright in
the
doorways (I'm 6 foot 3) is a big win.

I'm with you on that. And big windows, while I like these on
mainline trains, aren't that high up the list on a line that is
completely underground.

All in all, they are a worthy replacement, IMO.

Neil

--
Neil Williams, Milton Keynes, UK

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 2, 3:58*pm, Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 2 Jan 2011 10:37:30 +0000 (UTC), Martin Petrov

wrote:
Meh, maybe - however "seats" on the Victoria Line are things that
happen
to other people so the fact that I can stand completely upright in
the
doorways (I'm 6 foot 3) is a big win.

I'm with you on that. *And big windows, while I like these on
mainline trains, aren't that high up the list on a line that is
completely underground.

All in all, they are a worthy replacement, IMO.

Neil

speechless

/speechless

Victoria line map
 

In message , Graham Harrison
wrote:
If I sit on a longitudinal seat and look at the strip map opposite me
and Walthamstow is on the left it will be at what I will call the A end
of the train.

If I then switch seats to the opposite side of the carriage and
Walthamstow is on the left it will be at the B end of the train.

Just a note: the two ends of a train are the A and D end (if you
consider the four axles of a car as being A to D, you'll see why). On
the Victoria Line, the A end faces Walthamstow and the D end Brixton.

--
Clive D.W. Feather | Home:
Mobile: +44 7973 377646 | Web: http://www.davros.org
Please reply to the Reply-To address, which is:

Victoria line map
 

On Sat, 1 Jan 2011, MIG wrote:

On Jan 1, 7:58*pm, Martin Petrov
wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:58:53 +0000, boltar2003 wrote:
The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly
the line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what
dribbling ****wit decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be
the other way around with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Not really that big a deal though, is it?

It's certainly a lot easier to fix than those tiny windows, cramped
interior due to thick walls and rock hard seats angled so that you can't
sit in them.

Oh, you can sit in them. If you can't, try harder, or consult someone who
has more experience at sitting down. No, they aren't comfortable (they
*really* aren't comfortable), but how long are you planning on spending on
a Victoria line train in one go anyway?

If you want to moan about the 2009 stock, the reliability so far would be
my suggestion of where to start!

tom

--
Formal logical proofs, and therefore programs - formal logical proofs
that particular computations are possible, expressed in a formal system
called a programming language - are utterly meaningless. To write a
computer program you have to come to terms with this, to accept that
whatever you might want the program to mean, the machine will blindly
follow its meaningless rules and come to some meaningless conclusion. --
Dehnadi and Bornat

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 3, 3:13*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011, MIG wrote:
On Jan 1, 7:58�pm, Martin Petrov
wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:58:53 +0000, boltar2003 wrote:
The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly
the line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what
dribbling ****wit decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be
the other way around with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Not really that big a deal though, is it?

It's certainly a lot easier to fix than those tiny windows, cramped
interior due to thick walls and rock hard seats angled so that you can't
sit in them.

Oh, you can sit in them. If you can't, try harder, or consult someone who
has more experience at sitting down. No, they aren't comfortable (they
*really* aren't comfortable), but how long are you planning on spending on
a Victoria line train in one go anyway?

If you want to moan about the 2009 stock, the reliability so far would be
my suggestion of where to start!


Why would I moan that they aren't reliable enough to replace the
existing trains any sooner?

Victoria line map
 

On Mon, 3 Jan 2011, MIG wrote:

On Jan 3, 3:13*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011, MIG wrote:
On Jan 1, 7:58�pm, Martin Petrov
wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:58:53 +0000, boltar2003 wrote:
The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly
the line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what
dribbling ****wit decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be
the other way around with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Not really that big a deal though, is it?

It's certainly a lot easier to fix than those tiny windows, cramped
interior due to thick walls and rock hard seats angled so that you can't
sit in them.

Oh, you can sit in them. If you can't, try harder, or consult someone who
has more experience at sitting down. No, they aren't comfortable (they
*really* aren't comfortable), but how long are you planning on spending on
a Victoria line train in one go anyway?

If you want to moan about the 2009 stock, the reliability so far would be
my suggestion of where to start!

Why would I moan that they aren't reliable enough to replace the
existing trains any sooner?

Point taken!

tom

--
In Milan, [traffic lights] are instructions, in Rome suggestions, and
in Naples Christmas decorations. -- James Dowden

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 3, 3:13*pm, Tom Anderson wrote:
On Sat, 1 Jan 2011, MIG wrote:
On Jan 1, 7:58�pm, Martin Petrov
wrote:
On Sat, 01 Jan 2011 16:58:53 +0000, boltar2003 wrote:
The victoria line in general heads southwest - northeast. Particularly
the line before walthamstow is definately heading east. So what
dribbling ****wit decided that the line map in the 2009 stock would be
the other way around with walthamstow on the left, brixton on the right?

Not really that big a deal though, is it?

It's certainly a lot easier to fix than those tiny windows, cramped
interior due to thick walls and rock hard seats angled so that you can't
sit in them.

Oh, you can sit in them. If you can't, try harder, or consult someone who
has more experience at sitting down. No, they aren't comfortable (they
*really* aren't comfortable), but how long are you planning on spending on
a Victoria line train in one go anyway?

If you want to moan about the 2009 stock, the reliability so far would be
my suggestion of where to start!

tom

--
Formal logical proofs, and therefore programs - formal logical proofs
that particular computations are possible, expressed in a formal system
called a programming language - are utterly meaningless. To write a
computer program you have to come to terms with this, to accept that
whatever you might want the program to mean, the machine will blindly
follow its meaningless rules and come to some meaningless conclusion. --
Dehnadi and Bornat

Regarding moans about the Victoria Line, it would be nice if they
could fix the platform indicators so that they actually correspond
with the destination of the train. I have lost count of the number of
times I have stood on the platform at Kings Cross with the platform
indicator showing Seven Sisters, and yet when the train arrives it
shows Walthamstow Central. It also happens the other way round. For
information, the destination on the front of the train is more
reliable than what is shown on the platform indicators. Isn't
technology wonderful?

Victoria line map
 

On Wed, 5 Jan 2011 00:27:18 -0800 (PST)
Paul wrote:
shows Walthamstow Central. It also happens the other way round. For
information, the destination on the front of the train is more
reliable than what is shown on the platform indicators. Isn't
technology wonderful?

The platform indicators don't work properly on any line AFAIK. On the
piccadilly they're only of any use for a rough guide as to when the
next train will show, the destination could be random numbers for all
the use it is.

B2003

Victoria line map
 

Victoria line map
 

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 11:09:48 +0000
"Richard J." wrote:
The platform indicators don't work properly on any line AFAIK. On the
piccadilly they're only of any use for a rough guide as to when the
next train will show, the destination could be random numbers for all
the use it is.

A bit like the chances of one of your posts being a true account of what
really happens.

Don't travel on the tube much do you.

B2003

Victoria line map
 

Victoria line map
 

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:54:57 +0000
"Richard J." wrote:
Don't travel on the tube much do you.

That statement rather proves my point.

I didn't notice that you had a point other than just to fire off lame putdowns.

The indicators on many lines are hopelessly unreliable at getting the
destination right. Certainly the northern and piccadilly systems are very poor.
Or are you going to say otherwise just to be contrary?

B2003

Victoria line map
 

The indicators on many lines are hopelessly unreliable at getting the
destination right. Certainly the northern and piccadilly systems are very poor.
Or are you going to say otherwise just to be contrary?

B2003

Worst platform indicators I remember were during the lengthy Central
line upgrade of the late 90s, where every bit of information had "The
above information may be incorrect" written beneath it. One day, at
Epping, it just said "Westbound Central Line - the above information
may be incorrect" which was pretty uninformative.

Rob

Victoria line map
 

Victoria line map
 

On Jan 5, 10:00*pm, "Richard J." wrote:
wrote on 05 January 2011 16:08:37 ...

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 15:54:57 +0000
"Richard *wrote:
wrote on 05 January 2011 11:17:41 ...
On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 11:09:48 +0000
"Richard J." wrote:
wrote on 05 January 2011 09:40:20 ...
The platform indicators don't work properly on any line AFAIK. On the
piccadilly they're only of any use for a rough guide as to when the
next train will show, the destination could be random numbers for all
the use it is.
A bit like the chances of one of your posts being a true account of
what really happens.
Don't travel on the tube much do you.
That statement rather proves my point.
I didn't notice that you had a point other than just to fire off lame putdowns.

It helps if you don't delete the context (now restored above). *The
point I was making, since it seems I have to spell it out for you, is
that much of what you say here is an exaggerated view of LU's failings.
* Yes, sometimes the indicators don't reflect the actual destination,
but generally in my experience (which includes the Piccadilly) the
indicators do show the correct destination. Your statement (there was no
question mark) about my use of the tube just showed that you weren't
really concerned with the truth.

The indicators on many lines are hopelessly unreliable at getting the
destination right. Certainly the northern and piccadilly systems are very poor.
Or are you going to say otherwise just to be contrary?

You may be right about the Northern. *In my experience on the District,
Piccadilly, Bakerloo, and Central, the indicators generally correspond
with the on-train information, other than the Richmond branch of the
District line where the Network Rail system doesn't seem to interface
properly with the LU one. *To say that "the destination could be random
numbers for all the use it is" is typical of your cavalier approach to a
balanced view of what actually happens.

But if the display was wrong, say, 10% of the time (not saying it is),
it would actually be 100% useless, wouldn't it?

The most reliable (and readable) displays I can remember were the
boards in the cab windows on the Central line when they couldn't use
the electronics for some reason that I can't remember now.

Victoria line map
 

On Wed, 05 Jan 2011 22:00:39 +0000
"Richard J." wrote:
It helps if you don't delete the context (now restored above). The
point I was making, since it seems I have to spell it out for you, is
that much of what you say here is an exaggerated view of LU's failings.

No it isn't, sorry. Their failings are very real. Ask anyone who was stuck
on tuesday when despite the fare rises the tube had 3 major failures.

Yes, sometimes the indicators don't reflect the actual destination,
but generally in my experience (which includes the Piccadilly) the
indicators do show the correct destination. Your statement (there was no
question mark) about my use of the tube just showed that you weren't
really concerned with the truth.

On the piccadilly my experience is the indicators are wrong about 50% of
the time going westbound. Which is essentially useless. Not that it personally
makes any difference to me since I never travel as far as acton anyway.

Piccadilly, Bakerloo, and Central, the indicators generally correspond
with the on-train information, other than the Richmond branch of the

The central line tends to be ok , the bakerloo only has one destination
going south so it would require a special kind of ****up to get that wrong.

B2003