Seems that theres been a failure this morning between T123 and T5
according to the traffic news. Can't even virtually brand new signals
work without failing on this system? Whats the reason, cheap
components, poor maintenance, bad design?

B2003

On 20 Feb, 09:26, wrote:
Seems that theres been a failure this morning between T123 and T5
according to the traffic news. Can't even virtually brand new signals
work without failing on this system? Whats the reason, cheap
components, poor maintenance, bad design?

Bad luck?

Ganesh

On Feb 20, 10:37*am, Ganesh Sittampalam
wrote:
On 20 Feb, 09:26, wrote:

Seems that theres been a failure this morning between T123 and T5
according to the traffic news. Can't even virtually brand new signals
work without failing on this system? Whats the reason, cheap
components, poor maintenance, bad design?

Bad luck?

Luck shouldn't come into it. These systems are supposed to be
professionally built and maintained. There might be an excuse for
endless failures on older bits of the system but this was only opened
last year.

B2003

Once upon a time -- around about 2/20/09 04:26 --
possibly wrote:

Can't even virtually brand new signals work without failing on this system?
No. Thanks for asking.


--
Buying a Lenovo with Vista is like buying a Ferrari with Square tires. --
Barry Sonnenefeld (director Men in Black)

wrote in news:220e123d-f5c9-4190-8502-
:

Seems that theres been a failure this morning between T123 and T5
according to the traffic news. Can't even virtually brand new signals
work without failing on this system? Whats the reason, cheap
components, poor maintenance, bad design?

It's done deliberately just to **** you off. Because you're special.

"James Farrar" wrote :
Seems that theres been a failure this morning between T123 and T5
according to the traffic news. Can't even virtually brand new signals
work without failing on this system? Whats the reason, cheap
components, poor maintenance, bad design?
It's done deliberately just to **** you off. Because you're special.

That's true.
Boltar is under 24 hour surveillance, they get to predict when she's about
to hit the Piccadilly Line, and instructions are sent out to mess up her
journey.
Because she's worth it.
Well, no. It's actually because she's an idiot and it gives them something
to laugh at.
--

Andrew

"She plays the tuba.
It is the only instrument capable
of imitating a distress call."

On Feb 21, 12:53*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 01:26:43 -0800 (PST), wrote:
Seems that theres been a failure this morning between T123 and T5
according to the traffic news. Can't even virtually brand new signals
work without failing on this system? Whats the reason, cheap
components, poor maintenance, bad design?

What's interesting is that I checked our internal real time service
information page when I saw your post. *I then went to the "history"
page for the Picc line that would list every single disruption affecting
the service on Friday. *There was no failure since start of traffic at
the locations you cite or indeed anywhere on the Picc Line. *Perhaps the
travel news got it wrong or was it Heathrow Express that went wrong?


That morning, I had a text from TfL about a points failure meaning no
service to T5 and minor delays to the rest of the line. The disruption
was also on the TfL live travel new page.

In message of Sat, 21 Feb
2009 13:32:07 in uk.transport.london, Paul Corfield
writes
On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 05:10:24 -0800 (PST), wrote:

On Feb 21, 12:53*pm, Paul Corfield wrote:
On Fri, 20 Feb 2009 01:26:43 -0800 (PST), wrote:
Seems that theres been a failure this morning between T123 and T5
according to the traffic news. Can't even virtually brand new signals
work without failing on this system? Whats the reason, cheap
components, poor maintenance, bad design?

What's interesting is that I checked our internal real time service
information page when I saw your post. *I then went to the "history"
page for the Picc line that would list every single disruption affecting
the service on Friday. *There was no failure since start of traffic at
the locations you cite or indeed anywhere on the Picc Line. *Perhaps the
travel news got it wrong or was it Heathrow Express that went wrong?


That morning, I had a text from TfL about a points failure meaning no
service to T5 and minor delays to the rest of the line. The disruption
was also on the TfL live travel new page.

Odd - oh well, cue Boltar making some remark about LUL not knowing what
it's doing if it can't update its internal system.

He might be right. As is my usual practice, I checked the service status
on http://www.tfl.gov.uk/ on Friday morning and saw the report Boltar
referenced. There was no mention of access to HEX or Heathrow Connect.

Tfl's information is not as accurate as I would like. On Thursday about
16.30, I reported the following to Chemisa, the duty LU Customer
Services Supervisor. It has still not been fixed.
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/tfl/livetravel...aspx?offset=we
ekend and reality today show no Metropolitan service between Aldgate
and Moorgate. There is a link entitled "Track Closures" from there to
http://www.tfl.gov.uk/assets/livetravelnews/realtime/tube/track-closures.pdf
where that closure is not mentioned. I find Lu's inability to accurately
report service withdrawal - particularly when planned - is a farce. They
don't seem to recognise that changing information to reflect reality is
necessary. e.g. look at the link between Monument and Bank on the Tube
Map; listen on a train at Monument to the interchange information
advising interchange to Central, Northern and Waterloo & City lines.

Pretty well everywhere on a Saturday after 08.00 on a manuscript Service
Update whiteboard, you will see the Waterloo & City status as "Planned
Closure". Unusually, it is true this weekend. It took me a good 5
minutes at Holloway Road to persuade the gateline CSA to correct this
error a couple of weeks ago. Today, no gateline CSA was to be seen.

I HATE operational gates without staff in sight. It scorns customers.
--
Walter Briscoe

"Paul Corfield" wrote in message

On Sat, 21 Feb 2009 19:32:55 +0000, Walter Briscoe
wrote:

[picc line info]

He might be right. As is my usual practice, I checked the service
status on http://www.tfl.gov.uk/ on Friday morning and saw the
report Boltar referenced. There was no mention of access to HEX or
Heathrow Connect.

Fine - for whatever reason I couldn't see it. Having seen the daily
report he is quite correct that there was a failure - of a shunt
signal in the sidings at T5.

Tfl's information is not as accurate as I would like.

But nothing is ever as good as you would like it to be is it? Your
posts are usually a long list of criticisms and when we met at the utl
meet I don't recall you having a positive thing to say about LUL.
I'll readily accept things go wrong at times but I won't accept that
everything is a non stop, never ending disaster either. Just because
something is not done to your personal timescales does not mean it
will not get fixed or that no one is doing anything about a problem.
Also sometimes people make a mistake and something might not be
correct. Is everything else you encounter perfect all of the time and
it's just LUL that is a blot on your life?

A sense of perspective from people might be nice just occasionally -
it would be rash of me to expect it *all the time*!

I wonder how accurate the live travel bus information is? My local bus
is the H17, which was shown as running normally on the 19th, even though
Sudbury Hill was closed all afternoon after a serious road accident.
Even pedestrians were prevented from passing for some time, and no
vehicles were allowed through for at least four hours. If the H17 was
running at all, it must have been on a highly diverted route.

The H17 was also shown as running normally on the recent snowy days,
which might be true, but seems unlikely. Is the bus travel news not
actually live?

On Feb 20, 11:27*am, wrote:
On Feb 20, 10:37*am, Ganesh Sittampalam
wrote:

On 20 Feb, 09:26, wrote:

Seems that theres been a failure this morning between T123 and T5
according to the traffic news. Can't even virtually brand new signals
work without failing on this system? Whats the reason, cheap
components, poor maintenance, bad design?

Bad luck?

Luck shouldn't come into it. These systems are supposed to be
professionally built and maintained. There might be an excuse for
endless failures on older bits of the system but this was only opened
last year.

You can reduce failure rates with high quality production and
maintenance, but you can't eliminate them. A single failure doesn't
tell you much about the quality of the underlying system.

Ganesh