Over 50 years ago I watch the back of one Bakerloo train vanish almost as the front of the next one arrived - that was probably at Oxford Circus.
-
Our new ticketing site is now live! Using either this or the original site (both powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Why is TfL's web site rubbish
- Thread starter Kevin51
- Start date
Over 50 years ago I watch the back of one Bakerloo train vanish almost as the front of the next one arrived - that was probably at Oxford Circus.
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
SECR 65
Member
I'm always amused by how people in London view bus services. Some people might find a 20 minute wait for a bus shocking. My village has five buses a day, or none on Sundays.
Train wise, I'm used to between one and four tph. I go to Wales, and it's a bus or train once every 2 hours!
Train wise, I'm used to between one and four tph. I go to Wales, and it's a bus or train once every 2 hours!
I'm trying to remember where it was I saw the next train coming into one end of the platform, while the previous train was leaving the other end.
On Tramlink (not quite the same thing, as on sight rather than block working) its not uncommon at busy stops in the central area.
I've seen two trams one almost right behind another in Edinburgh. Trams there are only running to West End at present because of an unsafe building on Princes Street. Buses are going via unusual routes as well.
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Thinking about that a bit more, I'm wondering how that is workable to only work to frequency and not scheduled times. Sure, for something like the Victoria line where the entire line has a very high frequency, you can do that without inconveniencing anyone. But some of the tube lines have a 2-3 minute frequency in central London that drops to gaps of 10 minutes in the outer branches, and if you don't work to the timetable in the centre (where it arguably doesn't matter because another train will be along in 2 minutes), then the trains won't be running to timetable when they reach the branches (where it presumably does matter).
My local station is Abbey Wood, where the Elizabeth line runs to a strict 7-8 minute timetable off-peak. Even at that frequency, I pay attention to the scheduled departure times and typically plan to get to the station 1-2 minutes before a train is due to leave. Judging from the way there's usually a mass of people arriving at the same time, it's clear I'm far from being the only one. So if people care about scheduled departure times when trains run every 7-8 minutes, you can bet they would care even more when trains only run every 10 minutes - as is the case on some tube branches.
johncrossley
Established Member
Tube passengers don't get a choice in the matter as there is no (widely advertised) timetable. Passengers just turn up and hope for the best. Same for bus passengers when the frequency is every 12 minutes.
Recently the Mildmay Line was closed early for emergency engineering works. If that was pretty much any TOC it would be highlighted on their home page in the service disruption section and probably have a scrolling banner as well. The Tfl version:
Service status shows "Good service"
Click on "all statuses"
Scroll down the page
Click "today"
Click to expand the relevant section only to find it doesn't tell you actual last train times only a vague "no service after 2300"
The disruption information is frankly abysmal most of the time.
Service status shows "Good service"
Click on "all statuses"
Scroll down the page
Click "today"
Click to expand the relevant section only to find it doesn't tell you actual last train times only a vague "no service after 2300"
The disruption information is frankly abysmal most of the time.
Why a timetable might be needed:
- Overground and Elizabeth lines must run to a published timetable, and may be necessary for other rail connections
- Services to Amersham and Chesham
- Services calling at less served stations such as Kensington Olympia & Turnham Green (Pic)
- First and last service of the day, e.g Airport connections
- First and last trains at local stations before and after peak times
- Night tube services for branches
johncrossley
Established Member
TfL provide a pdf timetable for the Metropolitan Line but not for the Woodford to Hainault line, which only runs every 20 minutes.
I know, I do wish they’d stop bleating on about how hard it is to get around London.
Just turn up and go, it’s not hard! (I do understand the step free access needs a lot more planning, but that’s a where, not a when/how frequent problem).
As for the rest of you, take a good hard think about life and realise those extra 27 seconds stood of central line delay stood in a dry warm tube station could be an hour stuck at the end of a country lane in the dark when it’s chucking it down with no real time info about when your 30 year old inaccessible old diesel bus might show up.
Don’t know why I’m bothering, they’re in a world of their own
Plenty of outer areas in London with half hourly bus, train & in a few cases tube services (and sometimes hourly on a Sunday). No it's not the 2 buses a day that some villages get but equally it's not turn up and go.
Bus timetables on the TfL site are nowhere near as bad, and for the routes that are more than every 15 minutes they are treated as low frequency and meant to run to timetable.
3rd rail land
Member
Not all of London has turn up and go frequency so timetables are needed. Personally I don't consider 20 minute frequency to be turn up and go.
izvor
Member
For infrequent bus routes I use http://www.londonbusroutes.net/timetables.htm
Not official but nice downloadable pdf files and far more user-friendly than the TfL effort.
Not official but nice downloadable pdf files and far more user-friendly than the TfL effort.
Mattplans
Member
The quality of information provided by TfL is far inferior to most TOCs in almost every regard.
In most cases, TfL can get away with it (or it isn’t necessarily an issue) as most of the network is high frequency.
There have been many situations where NRE will publish a page on forecast/ongoing LO delays, but TfL will remain silent. I’ve observed this on numerous occasions. Before TfL update their website/line status, a specific benchmark must be met and unless a major incident (ie: fatality) has occurred there doesn’t appear to be much flexibility or deviation from this policy.
In locations where the Underground runs less frequently such as on the Bakerloo or Metropolitan, it is difficult to ‘check before you travel’. There is no live tracker that will tell you your train is cancelled. The timetable pages mentioned upthread are not dynamic. The only way to find out if the train is running is to attempt to travel. This is a bit of an issue when you consider not everyone lives within walking distance of a station, and may need to travel on a bus to arrive just to find out their journey will be delayed. Had the passenger been more informed, or had access to a higher quality of information, they might’ve been able to replan their journey/travel via alternative means.
It’s not uncommon to see the Met line status updated with “Next train at xxxx” due to this issue.
As well, countdown boards across the network are poorly maintained, and again the quality of information you can reach on your phone is inferior to the NR network. This is common at “origin stations” where the train begins its’ journey. In some places, they go broken without repair for months (even years) on end, or are just plain incorrect and show information for trains that have already departed which is rare on the NR network.
In most cases, TfL can get away with it (or it isn’t necessarily an issue) as most of the network is high frequency.
There have been many situations where NRE will publish a page on forecast/ongoing LO delays, but TfL will remain silent. I’ve observed this on numerous occasions. Before TfL update their website/line status, a specific benchmark must be met and unless a major incident (ie: fatality) has occurred there doesn’t appear to be much flexibility or deviation from this policy.
In locations where the Underground runs less frequently such as on the Bakerloo or Metropolitan, it is difficult to ‘check before you travel’. There is no live tracker that will tell you your train is cancelled. The timetable pages mentioned upthread are not dynamic. The only way to find out if the train is running is to attempt to travel. This is a bit of an issue when you consider not everyone lives within walking distance of a station, and may need to travel on a bus to arrive just to find out their journey will be delayed. Had the passenger been more informed, or had access to a higher quality of information, they might’ve been able to replan their journey/travel via alternative means.
It’s not uncommon to see the Met line status updated with “Next train at xxxx” due to this issue.
As well, countdown boards across the network are poorly maintained, and again the quality of information you can reach on your phone is inferior to the NR network. This is common at “origin stations” where the train begins its’ journey. In some places, they go broken without repair for months (even years) on end, or are just plain incorrect and show information for trains that have already departed which is rare on the NR network.
Overground lines and Elizabeth line have published timetables. As indeed do others, as listed up thread.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
Nor do TfL. The threshold is 4tph (15 mins). Personally I think 6tph is more reasonable, but that’s besides the point.
rmHawk765
Member
Many London buses are only 2-3bph and their punctuality (early or late) is err questionable. And some areas like a considerable part of north east London get a 2tph off-peak rail frequency, with little improvements in sight.
Those rail services have a timetable (I guess you wouldn’t know the service was 2tph without one), and the buses at that frequency do too. So what’s the problem? Why does every route that runs in Greater London need 15 buses per hour? It doesn’t. I’m sure the 3 per hour is perfectly acceptable for an off peak service.
How people can’t arrange their lives around a 20 minute window is laughable
SECR 65
Member
The question I ask myself is 'is there a bus this hour or not till next hour or the hour after that?'
Adam Williams
Established Member
Agree with all this.
I understand some of the infrastructure and (lack of) investment makes it hard to do better, but the customer experience is still worse. Some of the decisions being made are entirely within TfL's power (for example, deleting the online web-based status map and replacing it with something only app-accessible did not have a valid technical justification).
Oh, and the contactless / Oyster portal is rubbish as well. SMS based 2FA in 2026.
Last edited:
I think the replies were all to the assertion that everything in London is turn up & go and the suggestion that people are upset waiting 3 minutes rather than 2.
A lot of the low frequency services are completely inadequate at school/rush hour times to the extent you can't rely on actually being able to board because they're so over crowded. And to go go back to the question that was originally posed actual timetable information can be harder to find than it should be unless you know some of the more obscure third party sites.
I wanted to see the comparative journey time Baker Street to Wateroo Jubilee verses Bakerloo. What has that got to do with not displaying the Bakerloo time table?
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
What is wrong with using the time table. Ok it means using simple maths, is that an issue?
DynamicSpirit
Established Member
Exactly. Journey planners generally require you to type in or at least click to select all sorts of information, including where you want to travel to and from, when you want to travel. For someone used to reading a timetable, it can be much quicker to get the information they need from the timetable.
Besides, journey planners often require maths too. The TfL one for example tends to give total journey times that include walking from street to platform and then back to street at your destination. To make sense of that information, I have to subtract those numbers from the times given, and then delve into the results to find out what time it says the train is actually going to depart. That actually ends up rather more complicated than simply looking at a timetable.
I don't know, you're the one who said you were accessing it and not finding the information you wanted.
This is not how the Underground works as a public service; there is a working timetable but not a public one. If you want to compare journey times taking into account all factors then you are better off using something like Citymapper or Google Maps.
The TfL website is rubbish but not because there isn't a PDF timetable for services which run on a turn up and go basis every few minutes. It's an incredibly niche request and it is just not how most people would think about planning a journey on the Tube given there are multiple variable factors like length of interchange and depth of platform. Citymapper even has a step free option which would help you plan your journey given the constraints you list in the OP. In this case the best option for someone wanting to make that trip and avoid steps is via the Elizabeth Line and change at Bond Street.
Nothing is “wrong” with doing that. It’s that the vast majority of people don’t want to do that and are simply looking to go from A-B. So yes it is simply more difficult to find information which is not as requested, which should not be a surprise.
izvor
Member
That sounds rather condescending to me. This thread, and most of the comments, is about quality of information, not frequency. I can arrange my life around 20bph or 2 buses (or trains) per day but for headways greater than around 10 minutes I want to know times, preferably from a timetable, with maybe real time info as back-up. The point being made is that TfL is poor at this, and I agree.
I have always worked on the basis of two minutes per stop. Some are closer together, and others further apart, especially outside zone 1, but it's always worked for me.
If all you want is a comparison of journey times then the journey planners will do that for you much quicker than looking up several timetables. The reality is it’s going to be only a couple of minutes difference so why wouldn’t you just go with the no change easy option.
I tend to agree that a timetable in the high frequency core isn’t needed but maybe is for the lines that creep out into Essex or Bucks where the frequency extends to 15 minutes or more.
What I generally want from a tube timetable is first train, last train and expected frequency at various parts of the day. Couldn’t care less that they’re at 1,4,7,10 etc past each hour.
== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: ==
I think it drifted into 20 minute frequency isn’t enough territory, but I agree, timetables are vital for lower frequency transit, unlike the tube in the core.
For the OP, I've looked on the TfL, WTT (Working Time Tables) infomation and the Bakerloo line seems to be around 9½-10½ minutes and the Jubilee is around 9-9½ minutes, a negligible difference. Hope this helps you decide, apologies if this is quoted elsewhere, I looked but couldn't see anything.
While I actually agree with OP's general assertion that both the website and real time information could be much improved I have to say that the number of people looking for this kind of granularity of information will be pretty tiny and shouldn't be dictating the approach to the website.