Underground delay status

[danielcanning]

In anyone else’s world, a wait of 15 minutes for a tube train would constitute a delay, yet according to TfL a good service is running. Why are they so insistent on sticking to their ‘formula’?

 

[SynthD]

True Tube Status – Better Tube line statuses

Machine-powered statuses for the London Underground (Tube) based on live wait times and train speeds.

truetubestatus.com

Are you asking for a new formula, or for them to take temporary breaks from the existing system?

 

[skyhigh]

You can read all about it here:

diamond geezer

diamondgeezer.blogspot.com

If you've ever found yourself sitting on a delayed tube train while a loudspeaker on the platform booms out "There is a good service on all lines", you may have wondered what the hell a 'good service' actually means.

Service Status Criteria

TfL have an official definition as part of their Service Status Criteria, a set of documents which has recently been revealed through a Freedom of Information request. As you might expect, it's complicated.

 

[Mawkie]

You can read all about it here:

And here!

(An incredibly complex matrix depending on what line, what section of each line, whether stopped, or slow running, etc)

 

[DavyCrocket]

It is designed that way so that it can be chosen based on giving the best impression for those sat at home watching. There is pressure applied to have the delay status improved.
The delay status is not for the benefit of those travelling.

Otherwise long ago, it would have been modernised by automation of the API data like what True Tube Status has done.

 

[Mawkie]

It is designed that way so that it can be chosen based on giving the best impression for those sat at home watching. There is pressure applied to have the delay status improved.
The delay status is not for the benefit of those travelling.

Why do the Line Information Specialists give endless Status Updates over my train radio in the hope that I'll convey those updates to travelling passengers then?

 

[Mojo]

It is designed that way so that it can be chosen based on giving the best impression for those sat at home watching. There is pressure applied to have the delay status improved.
The delay status is not for the benefit of those travelling.

Otherwise long ago, it would have been modernised by automation of the API data like what True Tube Status has done.

This is not true. ‘Good service’ status does not sit on any scorecard

The official performance measures for London Underground is the percentage of services operated. This data is gathered automatically from the Trackernet system by monitoring scheduled times of trains against the actual headway achieved at predetermined locations across each line.

Other performance measures include lost customer hours for key incidents, this again is gathered automatically based upon booked incidents.

The only performance measure that is done manually is lost customer hours for smaller incidents, these rely on individual delays being ‘booked’ by the service control team on duty.

 

[321over360]

The system isn't good, as sometimes it will show a good service yet significant waiting times on the departure boards, or remains showing as disruption whilst trains are flowing regularly. The status system of tfl has never been that reliable of an indicator as to true service status

 

[Taunton]

This is not true. ‘Good service’ status does not sit on any scorecard

This one has come up before.

Quite frankly, we cannot believe that the statistics about "Good Service" are not used at some point to justify what has been achieved, or not. It may not be on managers' Balanced Scorecard, a 1990s management technique now both outmoded and discredited, and which I hope the Underground has discarded as well, but I bet the figures turn up somewhere. If nothing else they present an incorrect position of the service status to those considering paying for a journey, so it's a surprise the Advertising Standards Agency has not yet got involved, or even Trading Standards. And what a coincidence that what looks a substantial misrepresentation to the passengers is always on the side of making things look better than they really are.

 

[Mawkie]

This is not true. ‘Good service’ status does not sit on any scorecard

Doesn't the percentage of good service operated sit on the Daily Network Performance Report - as a comparison to the percentage of timetabled services operated in the preceeding column?

 

[xtmw]

Not every system is perfect, especially as the service status has to be inputted manually.

 

[Mojo]

Doesn't the percentage of good service operated sit on the Daily Network Performance Report - as a comparison to the percentage of timetabled services operated in the preceeding column?

The DNPR lists incidents that has resulted in the service status being changed; its purpose being part of the agenda of the daily conference call. It is not a performance metric.

 

[Mawkie]

Yes but the purpose of this is for discussion in the daily network conference call; it does not sit on any scorecard and thus is not an performance measure in any regard.

Understood.

There is a pervasive feeling of suspicion around reporting of service levels - do you think there is a better way to get the message across to passengers (customers)?

 

[bramling]

Why do the Line Information Specialists give endless Status Updates over my train radio in the hope that I'll convey those updates to travelling passengers then?

Because it gives the ability for someone (a mystery shopper) to go around measuring whether drivers pass this on to passengers. It then allows a manager to identify a given period and claim they have “improved information” if they manage to improve the number of announcements going out. This then goes on said manager’s CV and helps them obtain a promotion.

There is no intention of making a useful improvement for the end-user. Facile shallow management is TFL all over.

 

[Mawkie]

Because it gives the ability for someone (a mystery shopper) to go around measuring whether drivers pass this on to passengers. It then allows a manager to identify a given period and claim they have “improved information” if they manage to improve the number of announcements going out. This then goes on said manager’s CV and helps them obtain a promotion.

There is no intention of making a useful improvement for the end-user. Facile shallow management is TFL all over.

There has been a recent campaign by management to improve customer information on trains - the Real Time Information campaign. I do think LU is primarily driven by customer satisfaction, but doesn't always get it right.

You do seem to have a differing view, and more cynical than mine.

 

[bramling]

There has been a recent campaign by management to improve customer information on trains - the Real Time Information campaign. I do think LU is primarily driven by customer satisfaction, but doesn't always get it right.

You do seem to have a differing view, and more cynical than mine.

One can never be too cynical with these sorts of things!

 

[philthetube]

Why do the Line Information Specialists give endless Status Updates over my train radio in the hope that I'll convey those updates to travelling passengers then?

To give you something to concentrate on while you should be driving and then either make an announcement while driving, or alternatively at a station where you can override the auto announcer.

A typical move from a number cruncher who has no idea about the consequences of their actions. In reality they are ignored by drivers, (sensibly), and unless LUL wanted to discipline someone for concentrating on a message rather than driving nothing would be done about it.

 

[Horizon22]

I’ve done some work in this area. It’s complicated and the PDF obviously lists everything in a pure format but nothing is ever so black and white. An assessment has to be made and it’s often a fine line and obviously requires manual input and an attempted overview across over the whole line (or certain blocks in that line dependent on frequent) when other duties are also busy. This means it can never be perfect although that being said some digital assistance could be helpful.

I wouldn’t go as far as some have to say there’s some conspiracy for better “service status” or that it’s being pumped up to improve metrics (it’s not) as whilst it’s an objective measure there’s ultimately subjective humans at the centre. The key point is for customer info as best possible; there’s plenty of other incident & performance data to look at to see how well a line is doing on a hourly/daily/weekly/periodic basis. Also “good service” can include some delays just not quite the threshold met. I’ve occasionally thought good / minor / moderate (or other middle adjective) / severe might be better as a 4 way split so that minor can be a bit more generous, but that might damage a well-defined and simple to understand system.

Ideally new tube stock has this service status built into PIS like on 345 / 700 / 707 / 720 stock as it’s not really ideal for a driver to do it unless it’s a really serious issue at an interchange.

 

[bramling]

To give you something to concentrate on while you should be driving and then either make an announcement while driving, or alternatively at a station where you can override the auto announcer.

Or to come blaring out in the cab whilst the driver is actually trying to make a useful announcement about something, thus making it impossible to make said useful announcement.

A typical move from a number cruncher who has no idea about the consequences of their actions. In reality they are ignored by drivers, (sensibly), and unless LUL wanted to discipline someone for concentrating on a message rather than driving nothing would be done about it.

Agreed.

== Doublepost prevention - post automatically merged: 7 Sep 2022 ==

I’ve done some work in this area. It’s complicated and the PDF obviously lists everything in a pure format but nothing is ever so black and white. An assessment has to be made and it’s often a fine line and obviously requires manual input and an attempted overview across over the whole line (or certain blocks in that line dependent on frequent) when other duties are also busy. This means it can never be perfect although that being said some digital assistance could be helpful.

I wouldn’t go as far as some have to say there’s some conspiracy for better “service status” or that it’s being pumped up to improve metrics (it’s not) as whilst it’s an objective measure there’s ultimately subjective humans at the centre. The key point is for customer info as best possible; there’s plenty of other incident & performance data to look at to see how well a line is doing on a hourly/daily/weekly/periodic basis. Also “good service” can include some delays just not quite the threshold met. I’ve occasionally thought good / minor / moderate (or other middle adjective) / severe might be better as a 4 way split so that minor can be a bit more generous, but that might damage a well-defined and simple to understand system.

Ideally new tube stock has this service status built into PIS like on 345 / 700 / 707 / 720 stock as it’s not really ideal for a driver to do it unless it’s a really serious issue at an interchange.

The problem is that any subjective measure gets hijacked. “Why was my line the only one not showing a good service on Carnival day?”.

LU has serious form for this sort of thing. When the “snapshots” (number of trains in service at a given time versus number of trains scheduled to be in service in the timetable) were a key measure, there were all sorts of shenanigans. It might be that a train would be brought out just to stand in a platform for a few minutes at the snapshot time and then return to depot. Or the cancellations might be geared round having as many trains on the railway at snapshot time, even if this meant a more negative overall impact on the passenger. Or eventually some managers wised up to the reality that no one actually verified any of this, so mysteriously trains might be in service at 11:59 when actually they weren’t, or the logical conclusion that mysteriously when some managers were on there was always a 100% service.

A healthy organisation doesn’t lie to itself… To be fair, I think this sort of thing has been tightened up a bit, but I don’t doubt it still happens in places.