"Mizter T" typed


I find that the stop-specific timetables are most useful, even where
they do state 'about every x minutes'. They're very clear, and I'd
suggest it's a more honest way of presenting the information rather
than having specific times given, when there can be no guarantee that
the bus will indeed turn up at that time.

However the bus journey results of the 'interactive' Journey Planner
service is not something that I've analysed that carefully so I'll bow
to your wisdom on that!

Journey Planner times are rather optimistic IME. It is wise to add 20-30
minutes to any suggestion (especially if you have a mainline train to
catch!)

'About every x minutes' timetables have left me cold and miserable more
frequently than 'proper' timetables. I had a particularly bad time with
the N16 one winter weekend; waited ages for a bus, got dumped at
Cricklewood Bus Garage, then waited for about an hour...

Horrible!

--
Helen D. Vecht:
Edgware.

On 9 Aug 2005 10:29:25 -0700, "Mizter T" wrote:

Paul Corfield wrote:
snip
Be warned that the TfL official information using the journey planner is
often hideously wrong. I really don't trust it all because the computer
programme that generates the stop specific information applies overly
simplistic rules to generate the "every x minutes" type information.

It annoys me intensely that TfL are in possession of fully detailed
schedules for all routes and yet will not make them available. Overly
simplistic information is next to useless in my view unless your route
runs every 2 minutes or so.

Is your criticism of the TfL Journey Planner merely related to the
'interactive' element, or are the stop-specific PDF bus timetables also
coming under fire? (I refer to the timetables that are a copy of what
would be found at a bus stop.)

I don't like some aspects of the "interactive" element although I will
concede it has got better with time.

I don't like the stop specific timetables. The concept such as they
provide on the continent (Amsterdam, Vienna are two examples that spring
to mind) with the exact minutes for each hour, each day was what I hoped
for. What we got is over simplistic nonsense.

I find that the stop-specific timetables are most useful, even where
they do state 'about every x minutes'. They're very clear, and I'd
suggest it's a more honest way of presenting the information rather
than having specific times given, when there can be no guarantee that
the bus will indeed turn up at that time.

I would prefer the complete honesty of what the timetable that is
submitted by the operator and accepted by TfL says. It is the basis of
how the operator's performance is measured (in part) and therefore
should be what the public expects.

The timetable at my stop is different to that shown for the same stop in
the Journey Planner itself - they've changed the journey planner one!
The one at the stop says there is a bus every 10 minutes from 05.55 -
incorrect. Buses are every 15 minutes then 10 then 8 then 10 then 7 then
8 then 10 minutes as the headway slips a bit in the shoulders of the
peak to reflect longer running times building up. However in the off
peak buses are supposed to be every 10 minutes - the stop specific
timetable says 8-11 minutes. What does that actually mean? 8 then 11
then 8 then 11 minutes or some sort of average time somewhere between 8
and 11 which by simplistic maths is 9.5 minutes. Why on earth TfL
cannot simply show the exact times I do not know - it is not difficult.
I hate, even on a 10 min headway, walking out the door to see the bus at
the stop knowing I've got a 10 minute wait (at best) when if I'd known
the mins past the hour that the bus was due I'd have got there in due
time. (This assumes the bus is running to time of course). Car drivers
don't have to wait 10 minutes to set off in their car. Why should bus
passengers?

However the bus journey results of the 'interactive' Journey Planner
service is not something that I've analysed that carefully so I'll bow
to your wisdom on that!

Not sure I posses wisdom. There are some trips that are simple to do if
you have a decent knowledge of the bus system that the journey planner
simply will not generate unless you manipulate the options to a
ludicrous extent. A recent example was from a newspaper article where
someone was trying to get from Victoria to London Bridge by bus. The
poor chap was sent halfway round the world via Vauxhall and Elephant &
Castle using at least 3 buses when the 211 or 148 to County Hall and a
381 from round the corner would suffice. There are other options
involving the 11 and 17 or 521 Red Arrow changing at St Pauls. You try
getting the Journey Planner to provide that option without applying
"rules". Surely the planner should provide the simplest and least
complicated route as first choice?

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!