Where to put the numbers?

[q8]

Having seen the pix of the "D" stock refurbs I think the cosmetics have worked and they'll be good for another 20 years odd. However I can't understand why they stayed with the number "plate" system and left it in the position it is. If they must persist in plates then the holder should be in the space at the bottom of the drivers window. where they are easier to change and to see from the platform.

I have seen in other systems and transport sites from around the world much better and more visible ways of identification not bigger than the plates. For instance those white LED types things (NOT LCD) give a crisp clear visual. Another thing. The finest way of numbering so far on the tube is the roller blind type of the "A" stock which has the advantage of being backlit as well. I think it should be a pre-requisite that train numbers are illuminated in the dark.

One thing I can never fathom though is why they persist in putting that leading zero in low train numbers "061" or "045" for instance. why not just have the zero replaced by a blank with no number shown at all in that position? Furthermore I don't understand either why passenger train numbers always start at "1" The 1-77 series should be reserved for engineers trains and the passenger trains numbered between 100 and 777.

I would like to see Mr Citysigs views on the subject from the controlling side of things?

[Admin Team]

I *think* the reason they've stayed with the old position, rather than include then in the LED display as they've done on the 73TS for example, is that the available space on the display is already very limited, and there are some issues already about the font size of the display, and adding a number 'up there' would make it all unreadable.

Although I take your point about putting them in the drivers window, from a practical point of view that'd be tricky, as the space between the back of the desk to get 'down' there is very limited. Too many opportunities for drivers to 'hurt themselves' and cry 'industrial And, in truth, there are very few occasions that do need the changing of numbers whilst in service - reforms, stock & crew's are about it, and they don't happen often enough to warrant it I guess.

A thing to remember too is that the refurbs are being done quite 'minimally' as the life extension is 'relatively' short, so they've kept new kit to a minimum.

As for the zeros - at the moment the number of metal plates used mean that there's a number on both sides, so the addition of a blank plate would no doubt have cost implications.

As for the overall numbering philosophy - no idea. Perhaps Citysig can enlighten!

[c5]

Leave the numbers where they are. Otherwise all the CCTV cameras that look at the numbers of the front of the train will have to be moved. (though you CitySig see them more than me....I hope )

The current "flip-over" system is good as its clear and easy to see.
When I was an apprentice at Rayner's Lane Cabin, it was a nightmare to try and work out the numbers on the Picc trains on their LED/LCD system and sometimes they weren't on at all!

Of course some drivers don't know how to put the right number on at the moment (or take the right train) so a Computer Type-In system might be good.

C5

[Deleted]

At least numbers on plates are immune from computer problems! If the train number and destination are both computerised, then if it goes wrong you've got a train with no destination AND no train number.

[q8]

at the moment the number of metal plates used mean that there's a number on both sides,.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
They're still using METAL plates? I thought they had changed them to that fibreboard stuff ages ago? Incidentally in my day the plates were both metal or fibreboard (and sometimes wood!) Also the numbers were not always enamelled/printed on the plate but were vinyl stickers on a blank board. The "zeroes" were soon ripped off though.

[Harsig]

c5 said:

When I was an apprentice at Rayner's Lane Cabin, it was a nightmare to try and work out the numbers on the Picc trains on their LED/LCD system and sometimes they weren't on at all!

You should have tried reading the unlit numbers on the unrefurbished Piccadilly trains in the dark. Now that was a challenge. Rayners Lane signal cabin was specially equipped with a torch for shining on the train numbers (which were reflective) However I never used it unless I knew the train driver had left the cab (normally to detrain) as I had some funny idea that drivers might get upset if the signalmen made a habit of shining a bright white light at the front of their train during the hours of darkness.

On the subject of moving the train numbers I believe Baker St SCC may be making a request shortly to have the train numbers on C & D stocks relocated below the driver's window as suggested by Q8. The reason for this is because the CCTV camera at Aldgate East that we use to check train numbers has been moved so that it only shows the drivers side of the front of the train when it is stationary in the platform. In this confused world of PPP we probably have as much chance of solving the problem by having the numbers relocated as we do have of having the camera moved back to its proper position.

[citysig]

q8 said:

I would like to see Mr Citysigs views on the subject from the controlling side of things?

And you shall.

First off, as I mentioned elsewhere, I think that by now there must be modern equipment available that would suit the task. But then again, simple can sometimes be best and the current number boards certainly fill that catergory. The only problems arise when a driver neglects to display the correct number (or attempts to display it but gets it round the wrong way - the times i've seen 232 displayed as 223 or even 323.)

Mr Q8. The leading zero (or even two leading zeros) is essential to avoid any confusion, and also keeps all numbers in the standard 3-digit format we use elsewhere. As for the number series we use, I've told you before, leave them alone! We're happy with what we've got ;D Whilst it may not always appear to be the most sensible to some, to service controllers it's a very good system.

I agree with Mr C5. Leave the numbers where they are. Move them around and we won't know where to look!

But then when all is said and done, if we ran nice quiet services, bang on time and in turn, and had decent signalling staff company-wide (particularly on the green line where the cameras see most use) and drivers picking up trains on time in booked platforms, we wouldn't in theory need any numbers stuck to the front as we would always know where everything is.

[Deleted]

One of the things I like about the D stocks is having the large numbers!
The 96 stock LED train numbers were so small and impossible to see during daylight hours... I you were waiting to pick up at Wembley Park, you had to walk up and ask the driver what the train number was!

Also, I have a memory like a seive, therefore with the D stock if I forget what train number I am (when the controller is shouting for a train, for example), I can simply have a peek at the number!
The 96s you had to wake up the screen (which reverts to a blank screensaver after a minute or so) on the TMS to check your number!

[Deleted]

I have to admit the old style 'flip over' numbers are much easier to read, especially from a long distance. The LED / LCD type ones are hard to see and in some cases not very legible.

[citysig]

alanl said:

...wake up the screen (which reverts to a blank screensaver after a minute or so) ...

Had to laugh at this. I think the whole new part of the Jub is using the same software, as quite often you find yourself having to "wake" them their system up. Just the image of one of those windows screensavers like the pipes or flying box, then just when you want to do something it goes to that send/don't send box. Progress.

[Deleted]

Progress indeed! I remember at least half-a-dozen occasions when the controller would call us up and inform us we were under manual signalling because the computer had crashed!!

[q8]

Mr Q8. The leading zero (or even two leading zeros) is essential to avoid any confusion, and also keeps all numbers in the standard 3-digit format we use elsewhere. As for the number series we use, I've told you before, leave them alone! We're happy with what we've got ;D Whilst it may not always appear to be the most sensible to some, to service controllers it's a very good system. ]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
No, no, no Mr C It's WRONG! wrong! wrong! Zero is NOT a number or even a digit. By all means have 3 digit numbers in the present position but they MUST start at 100. There IS no number zero so the whole thing starts wrong on the first place and is just not logical. I just cannot see the sense in putting the leading zero in the display. When you write down the number 24 or 76 or 15 you don't put a zero in front of it do you? I'll fight to my dying day to get the whole caboodle changed especially the stupid octal numbering system. I am going to write to some uni's to see if to get clarification about numbers and see what is what. It won't affect LUL I just want to get things RIGHT.

[banana]

q8 said:

Zero is NOT a number or even a digit.

Oh dear!

However your post is timed at post 11pm so you have 12 hours to redeem yourself

[solidbond]

q8 said:

No, no, no Mr C It's WRONG! wrong! wrong! Zero is NOT a number or even a digit. By all means have 3 digit numbers in the present position but they MUST start at 100. There IS no number zero so the whole thing starts wrong on the first place and is just not logical. I just cannot see the sense in putting the leading zero in the display.

So do you think we should change James Bond's Licence to kill number as well? ;D ;D ;D ;D

[q8]

So do you think we should change James Bond's Licence to kill number as well? ;D ;D ;D ;D[/quote]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Oh VEEEERY good ;D (you know wot I mean)

[Colin]

Well it's not often you see a driver agree with a signaller, but on this occasion, Mr citysig - well said!!

[citysig]

q8 said:

Zero is NOT a number or even a digit. By all means have 3 digit numbers in the present position but they MUST start at 100. There IS no number zero so the whole thing starts wrong on the first place and is just not logical. I just cannot see the sense in putting the leading zero in the display. When you write down the number 24 or 76 or 15 you don't put a zero in front of it do you?

Just like white isn't a colour but an amalgamation of all the colours. Strange shelves full of paint coloured that fake colour in my local DIY shop.

Zero may not be an official "figure" in terms of counting, but it has a very important place for those of us who work in decimal. How many telephone numbers would work without that first number being dialled. Not many.

As has been pointed out in the past, we are already quite short of numbers. To begin at 100 would lose us a few more (99 in fact). Of course we don't use the number 0 on it's own - but even that has a purpose where I work. If the system sees train "000" it won't route it.

In answer to your last question, when I write down the numbers 24, 76 and 15, if I am at work I generally do put a zero in front to avoid confusion with 224, 376 or 415 ;D

[banana]

Zero IS a number. It may not be a "natural number" (these start from one - and only include whole numbers) BUT it is a number.

[q8]

]Zero IS a number. It may not be a & quot;natural number" (these start from one - and only include whole numbers) BUT it is a number.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
I still beg to differ with you banana. Zero is an INVENTION. Before a few hundred years ago it did not exist which is why the centuries start at year 1 and the Chinese still reckon time in that manner. I'm gonna try and find the website where I got the info from. All due respect to you though

[q8]

I WAS WRONG FRIEND and I ajolopise to all and sundry. I read it all wrong. Go to the following and see why?

www.wonderquest.com/zero.htm