Technical information in delay message (03/09)

[Re 4/4]

Saw this today in a GWR network status message:

Some axle counters, part of the signalling system, have stopped working between Didcot Parkway and Swindon. Axle counters tell the signalling system if a section of track has a train on it. If an axle counter stops working, trains need to stop at the affected signal so that the Driver can speak to the Signaller to confirm if the track ahead is clear.
-
The line affected this morning is the one used by trains travelling from Didcot Parkway towards Swindon. These trains are having to use a small section of the other line, used by trains travelling from Swindon to Didcot Parkway. This will cause congestion and delays as trains, in both directions, are having to take it in turns to use the one line available. To reduce this congestion some trains between London and South Wales and between London and Bristol (in either direction), may be cancelled or diverted via alternative routes.

I'm impressed they're giving some technical detail like this, and it certainly makes me more sympathetic to what's going on.

Is this new that they go into this level of detail? If so, long may it remain.

 

[Mcr Warrior]

Good stuff, but it does seem that GWR are quite keen here to convey the message that the issue affecting the trains is not due to GWR. Essentially, don't blame us!

 

[800301]

Saw this today in a GWR network status message:

I'm impressed they're giving some technical detail like this, and it certainly makes me more sympathetic to what's going on.

Is this new that they go into this level of detail? If so, long may it remain.

There is a list of generic-ish explanations that can be used, it more depends on the person and time constraints if they actually get used or if that person is actually being told the correct information to start with, there are some that are better at updating it than others as we get more information that is frequently updated on our internal systems as well, I do appreciate that team responsible do have other things to do rather just update disruption information

 

[Blindtraveler]

I've long argued that explanations like this should be standard by everyone across the network and on all platforms and stations, trains, etc. 25% will understand it, the remaining 75 will just be glad not to be fed. Some ultra processed bland beige, corporate wibble or management speak which is of little or no use when you're trying to explain to your child why you won't be home to read them, a bedtime story or why that romantic dinner with your girlfriend is going to have to be rescheduled for another night or when you're going to be late for work for the 11th time in a row.
Please just treat us like adults who are paying not insignificant sums of money to suffer this nonsense on an increasingly regular basis or so it feels

 

[WelshBluebird]

Good stuff, but it does seem that GWR are quite keen here to convey the message that the issue affecting the trains is not due to GWR. Essentially, don't blame us!

I wonder if that is due to how many issues the infrastructure on the GWML has been causing them!

 

[Horizon22]

As much as people on this forum might want extra detailed analysis, the vast majority of passengers do not care and something such as “fault with the signalling system between X and Y” is completely satisfactory.

Unless there are pre-populated answers which can be copied and pasted (which to be fair is easy enough) spending extra time writing a bespoke message is extra time that could have been spent doing other aspects of customer information.

 

[sor]

As someone who works in a technical field, I'm on the side of providing relevant detail and despise vague hand-wavey nonsense. The industry I work in has resorted to occasional use of over simplified terminology and language that in my opinion only makes things more confusing for non-technical customers.

Of course many passengers might not want the detail, but no one's forcing them to read it.

Ditto on-train announcements where the guard actually explains the reason for the sudden stop (if known) instead of "waiting for a signal" or "fault on the train".

 

[Horizon22]

Ditto on-train announcements where the guard actually explains the reason for the sudden stop (if known) instead of "waiting for a signal" or "fault on the train".

Often the guard may not know the exact reasoning, certainly not initially. Better to be vague than incorrect and/or cause worry/panic.

Whilst reasoning is good to know, most people want to know how long it will be and what their onward travel options are.

Again this is somewhere where these forums will be significantly out-of-step with what the average passenger wants.

 

[Ediswan]

Again this is somewhere where these forums will be significantly out-of-step with what the average passenger wants.

Has anybody ever asked the average passenger ?

 

[AlterEgo]

Has anybody ever asked the average passenger ?

Many passengers in my experience do appreciate some sort of explanation. How detailed that is will vary, but it's worth noting that American airlines like United, AA, and Delta, are all moving towards providing more explanation of technical issues to the level of detail outlined in the OP. It's no bad thing.

 

[endofthetunnel]

The problem with giving more information is that there are people - many of them in this forum - who are the first to complain or point out if the technical information given is even slightly wrong. So it’s often easier to not give anything rather than give slightly incorrect information.

(For example - if in this case GWR had said track circuit instead of axle counters, but otherwise conveyed the same message, they would have been flooded with people telling them it’s an Axle counter area )

 

[Re 4/4]

Whilst reasoning is good to know, most people want to know how long it will be and what their onward travel options are.

To be fair, they did that. The message is gone now, but the first paragraph gave the non-technical information (trains delayed up to half an hour and may be cancelled between Swindon and Didcot, expect to last until early afternoon) and a basic reason (signalling system). Then if you wanted to read on, you got the detail.

if in this case GWR had said track circuit instead of axle counters, but otherwise conveyed the same message, they would have been flooded with people telling them it’s an Axle counter area

Well, if you are going to provide details then you'd better get them right!

 

[Hadlow Road]

I should prefer the detail, where possible. I quite appreciate the challenges of trying to disseminate information, but it does make a difference. I recall being delayed at Aberdeen airport, because “your incoming ‘plane caught fire and has returned, safely, to Shetland. We will shortly be arranging your hotel accommodation.”

Clear, precise and helpful, with the added bonus of treating us as adults. I valued the information, as a non-airline employee, just as I value information as a non-railway person - despite some fifty-odd years CTR - EUS.

 

[alxndr]

The problem with giving more information is that there are people - many of them in this forum - who are the first to complain or point out if the technical information given is even slightly wrong. So it’s often easier to not give anything rather than give slightly incorrect information.

Even with the limited information that's available currently people still get worked up about it being "wrong". Albiet a fairly extreme example, I remember one incident where people were getting upset on twitter that it was being reported as disruption due to a signalling/point failure when their train had stopped to transport an injured trackworker to an ambulance waiting at an access point. In their eyes they were being lied to, but in reality saying it was a point failure wasn't a lie; the injury had occured when walking down to attend to it.

On the other hand, explaining that the fault is with the points/track circuits/etc that make up the signalling system would stop complaints along the lines of "but you said it was a signalling failure earlier!" when people don't realise that there's lots of different aspects to the signalling system.

(For example - if in this case GWR had said track circuit instead of axle counters, but otherwise conveyed the same message, they would have been flooded with people telling them it’s an Axle counter area )

And then someone else would come along to point out that there's a 2 1/2 mile section between Didcot and Swindon which is still track circuits [or at least was two years ago, but I've not heard that it's changed].

 

[Surreytraveller]

Saw this today in a GWR network status message:

I'm impressed they're giving some technical detail like this, and it certainly makes me more sympathetic to what's going on.

Is this new that they go into this level of detail? If so, long may it remain.

To be even more accurate, axle counters tell the signalling system there isn't a train in the section, same as track circuits, rather than there is a train. That's why when they stop working, the signal reverts to danger, and trains have to be cautioned through the section, as the signalling system cannot know for certain that the section is clear

 

[johnr57]

Has anybody ever asked the average passenger ?

Next time I see him (her or ….. you get the idea) I’ll ask

 

[Horizon22]

Has anybody ever asked the average passenger ?

Yes there’s been lots of research on this topic and surveys from organisations like Passenger Focus and RDG. Perhaps not the “average passenger” but “68% agree that…”

 

[yorkie]

The wording is fine.

It's clearly explained, it's not undefined jargon and if anyone doesn't want the extra detail, they can just skim read it; the key elements are there, i.e. signalling system, between Didcot and Swindon, some trains cancelled or using alternative routes.

I suppose it could be argued they could have a very brief summary in bold, with more detail underneath, which could be skipped by anyone not interested, but that's nitpicking really.

Either way, some people will complain there is "too much information" but for others, having that extra information generates a level of understanding. Train companies can never win with this sort of message, because there is no wording that would please absolutely everyone!

 

[SuspectUsual]

I like it. It's technical but written in everyday English that a normal could understand if they wanted to. In the past I can remember pointing out to GWR that using the terms "up line" and "down line" in a message like this wouldn't mean much to the average passenger and that "eastbound" and "westbound" might be better terms, and they seemed to change the wording

 

[Senex]

Clear, precise and helpful, with the added bonus of treating us as adults. I valued the information, as a non-airline employee, just as I value information as a non-railway person - despite some fifty-odd years CTR - EUS.

I think it's the "treating us as adults" bit that's really important — and no just in the transport industries! Ever since "Public Relations", "Corporate Affairs", etc really got going there's been a tendency to infantilise the general public, not only in all sorts of consumer-facing industries but also by politicians. Whereas most people are much more inclined to be tolerant and sympathetic if they're given a decent explanation and the chance to understand.

 

[Re 4/4]

Today, they're treating us as adults again. First this:

Due to the emergency services dealing with an incident at Taunton all lines are blocked. Disruption is expected until 10:30 04/09.
Impact:
Train services between Taunton and Exeter St Davids may be cancelled or delayed.

And then the detail:

It is with great sadness that we report a person has been struck by a train, leading to all lines being blocked. It is necessary to bring all trains in the affected area to an immediate stop. Where we can, we will divert trains to run on other lines around the affected area.

And then some more about alternative routes and ticket acceptance on buses.
I'd have personally put the ticket acceptance second and the detail last, but apart from that, it's the perfect way to communicate a severe disruption as far as I'm concerned.

If it has the secondary effect of saying "not GWR's fault", at least that's completely true in this case.