"Mystery Flyer" wrote in message
...
:Jerry: wrote:
"Mystery Flyer" wrote in message
...
James Farrar wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 14:29:27 +0000, Mystery Flyer
wrote:

wrote:
The TFL website had difficulties updating due to the volume of
hits or
the amount of changes being made, not sure which.

Both of which would have been acceptable in 1994 at the dawn of
the Internet but really arent acceptable excuses in 2007
Internet traffic is liable to grow faster than the infrastructure
can
cope with it, in the same way that motor vehicle traffic has
proven to
grow faster than the infrastructure can cope with it.
Buying hardware and bandwidth for your portal to cope with spikes
in demand is a well understood aspect of the provision of Internet
based services.

Its an entirely different case to the whole demand growing over
time beyond what the infrastructure can cope with.


Look moron, if the severity of the storm had been known of in
advance (I don't think God works for any TOC...) they would have
made provision...

Start using your remaining brain cell rather than showing the world
how many dead one you have.
Thanks so much for the mindful contribution to the discussion. Are
you connected to Endemol ?

In comparison, you come a close second to Jade Goody in not using your
brain.

"Jack Taylor" wrote in message
...
:Jerry: wrote:

Look moron, if the severity of the storm had been known of in
advance
(I don't think God works for any TOC...) they would have made
provision...

Actually the severity of the storm was fairly accurately predicted
as early as last Sunday, when the BBC1 "Countryfile" long-range
forecast for the week was predicting severe gale force winds for
late Wednesday night into the Thursday morning rush hour (actually
the arrival was a few hours delayed) with structural damage and
severe disruption to transport on Thursday morning.

Err, no they got it wrong, 'severe gale force winds' is not the same
as 'severe storm force winds' which is what we got - only on the night
before was there any mention of 'severe storm force winds' (bordering
on hurricane force).

Jonathan Morris wrote:

alex_t wrote:
TFL Realtime travel news page
(http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/realtime/?mode=tube&time=now) was working at
18:00 with up-to-date information for Tube and DLR. They replaced usual
graphics with text-only page, but it worked.

I was a bit disappointed by the info on the FCC website on Friday,
which had lots of individual bulletins but no simple summary saying
what was happening *right now*. Having to read 4 or 5 service updates
and line updates is rather conffusing at the best of times. It wasn't
helped by a service bulletin that hadn't been removed from earlier in
the week!

Colleagues at work were looking at their respective TOC sites and most
had gone for the single page, plain text, pages to help cope with
demand. Even the Journey Check had simplified itself for some of the
day on Thursday. Overall, I think everything was done incredibly well
on Thursday, given the circumstances, but Friday was a bit more of a
mess as the 'clean up' took place.

Jonathan

I agree. Online information was virtually non existant.
I tried to travel on SWTtrains from Waterloo after 6 on the day.

I had the feeling there would be no trains at Waterloo but the SWTrains
website made little mention of the fact.
However, they had been updating it, and made reference to the storms
and the shut lines.

But no mention of the fact that next to no trains were running from
Waterloo that evening.
Luckily I had the option of the District line and a bus to get me home.
And that seemed to run okay despite the Tube.com saying there was sever
disruption.

I felt very sorry for the people who didn't have the option of the tube
to get home that night.

Jonathan Morris wrote:

alex_t wrote:
TFL Realtime travel news page
(http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/realtime/?mode=tube&time=now) was working at
18:00 with up-to-date information for Tube and DLR. They replaced usual
graphics with text-only page, but it worked.

I was a bit disappointed by the info on the FCC website on Friday,
which had lots of individual bulletins but no simple summary saying
what was happening *right now*. Having to read 4 or 5 service updates
and line updates is rather conffusing at the best of times. It wasn't
helped by a service bulletin that hadn't been removed from earlier in
the week!

Colleagues at work were looking at their respective TOC sites and most
had gone for the single page, plain text, pages to help cope with
demand. Even the Journey Check had simplified itself for some of the
day on Thursday. Overall, I think everything was done incredibly well
on Thursday, given the circumstances, but Friday was a bit more of a
mess as the 'clean up' took place.

Jonathan

I agree. Online information was virtually non existant.
I tried to travel on SWTtrains from Waterloo after 6 on the day.

I had the feeling there would be no trains at Waterloo but the SWTrains
website made little mention of the fact.
However, they had been updating it, and made reference to the storms
and the shut lines.

But no mention of the fact that next to no trains were running from
Waterloo that evening.
Luckily I had the option of the District line and a bus to get me home.
And that seemed to run okay despite the Tube.com saying there was sever
disruption.

I felt very sorry for the people who didn't have the option of the tube
to get home that night.

"BH Williams" wrote in message
...

"Joyce Whitchurch" wrote in message
...
Neil Spellings wrote:
I'd like to congratulate National Rail, Transport for London, Southern
Trains and the BBC for all failing to provide any kind of up-to-date
travel information on station closures during the storms on Thursday.

Well I can't comment on TfL or Southern, but I thought NRES and the BBC
did a pretty good job on Thursday. I should think both were getting a
hundred times the normal number of hits, probably even more, and the NRES
system only fell over for about an hour or so. (The "Current Service
Alterations" page kept going but "Live Arrivals and Departures" froze for
a while.)

And, as with any operating difficulty on the railway, the problem is more
about getting the information from the people on the ground than
disseminating it to the passengers. It's no use asking somebody like Ross
how long his train is going to be delayed while he's still underneath it
with his Junior Hacksaw.
--
Joyce Whitchurch, Stalybridge, UK
=================================
To which he might have replied, as a driver of my acquaintance did 'A
F****** sight quicker if I didn't have to keep answering the radio'
Brian


Done something similar myself. Major Aircon failure in a data centre and
some senior idiot
ringing 5 minutes - told him that we'd get sorted a lot quicker if he got
off the phone and also
that if he didn't stop his onsite muppet poking around inside aircon units
he would be held responsible
for a few million pounds worth of Disaster Recovery charges ( he also
thought two comms
cables into one cabinet was adequate DR contingency........ A bit like the
government organisation
that invoked DR after their backup generators ran out of diesel - and then
discovered that their
plan didn't work!).

G

:Jerry: wrote:

Err, no they got it wrong, 'severe gale force winds' is not the same
as 'severe storm force winds' which is what we got - only on the night
before was there any mention of 'severe storm force winds' (bordering
on hurricane force).

Did you see the "Countryfile" forecast? Do you know that they got it wrong?
Perhaps I got it wrong? Unlike yourself, I'm not perfect enough to remember
the *exact* wording from a week ago. They did (whatever term they used)
forecast structural damage and severe disruption to transport last Sunday -
which *IS* what we got.

In article . com,
(Boltar) wrote:

:Jerry: wrote:

Look moron, if the severity of the storm had been known of in
advance (I don't think God works for any TOC...) they would have made
provision...

Aside from the fact that the severity was known in advance (Hint:
its called a Weather Forecast - look it up in the dictionary) , wtf has

the storm got to do with whether a website can cope with a spike in the
number of hits? Did you think the webserver took one look out the
window and thought "bugger this , I'm not serving any pages till
this blows over"??

That's what the live departures bit of the NRES site seemed to have done.
Either that or it was blown over at about 4.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

:Jerry: wrote:
snip
Its an entirely different case to the whole demand growing over
time beyond what the infrastructure can cope with.

Look moron, if the severity of the storm had been known of in
advance (I don't think God works for any TOC...) they would have
made provision...

Start using your remaining brain cell rather than showing the world
how many dead one you have.
Thanks so much for the mindful contribution to the discussion. Are
you connected to Endemol ?

In comparison, you come a close second to Jade Goody in not using your
brain.

Is that even a sentence?

On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 21:19:13 GMT someone who may be "Jack Taylor"
wrote this:-

Did you see the "Countryfile" forecast? Do you know that they got it wrong?
Perhaps I got it wrong? Unlike yourself, I'm not perfect enough to remember
the *exact* wording from a week ago. They did (whatever term they used)
forecast structural damage and severe disruption to transport last Sunday -
which *IS* what we got.

Remember that, like many other organisations, the railways pay for
far more detailed weather forecasts than are given on the
television. These are usually very accurate and the railways seem to
have done what was possible to deal with the weather. I'm sure
nearly everyone would have liked more to be possible, but there are
limits to the money and staff that are available. I also doubt if
anyone would like to go back to the era of several staff deaths
keeping trains running at normal speeds in bad weather.


--
David Hansen, Edinburgh
I will *always* explain revoked encryption keys, unless RIP prevents me
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts2000/00023--e.htm#54

David Hansen wrote:
On Sat, 20 Jan 2007 21:19:13 GMT someone who may be "Jack Taylor"
wrote this:-

Did you see the "Countryfile" forecast? Do you know that they got it wrong?
Perhaps I got it wrong? Unlike yourself, I'm not perfect enough to remember
the *exact* wording from a week ago. They did (whatever term they used)
forecast structural damage and severe disruption to transport last Sunday -
which *IS* what we got.

Remember that, like many other organisations, the railways pay for
far more detailed weather forecasts than are given on the
television. These are usually very accurate and the railways seem to
have done what was possible to deal with the weather. I'm sure
nearly everyone would have liked more to be possible, but there are
limits to the money and staff that are available. I also doubt if
anyone would like to go back to the era of several staff deaths
keeping trains running at normal speeds in bad weather.



Is is just me, or does the NRES Web keep crashing Internet Explorer as
soon as one tries to use it? I have tried to enquire about the same
journey about ten times, and rebooted and tried again, and IE crashes
every time.