HELP! WHERE’S MY TRAIN?

Rail travel can be stressful. Insufficient, poorly-presented or inaccurate information makes it

more so, leading to information anxiety. Research on different groups’ information ‘wants’
and ‘needs’ has a long history – but, surprisingly, travel has had little attention.

Britain’s railways have become increasingly popular. This has been matched by investment
in technology to deliver effective, timely and accurate information to travellers. But has it
been effective?

To find out, the IET’s Railway Network used York’s National Railway Museum on 18th
November for a fascinating seminar on Railway Customer Information Systems. The event
was popular, delegates coming from all sectors of the industry.

The day was a full one with nine speakers crammed into the programme. Had I been asked
to rate the presentations, all would have scored ‘good’ or ‘excellent’. That was impressive: it
is rare to find not a single ‘dud’ amongst so many papers!

We are faced with information issues every time we travel: before, during and after the
journey. Travellers must know in advance about station access and facilities, parking, times,
fares, routes and connections. They need to understand on-board facilities (overcrowding,
toilets, catering, bicycles) and have destination information (location, local transport, etc.).
Unfortunately, as seminar speakers made clear, information and communication gaps are
too common.

One operator, having introduced a new time-table in December, immediately cut alternate
trains without any indication at stations; another’s station has a chalked notice: “Our
departure displays have a problem. Please wait on the platform. Most trains depart from
platform 4”. But what if yours doesn’t? And if the train is on Platform 2 and you are elderly,
disabled, blind or heavily-laden?; passengers have been ‘exposed’ by toilet doors opening
unexpectedly, due to unclear door-locking instructions; trains show such meaningless
destination information as : “This is an Electrostar!”; platforms have dot-matrix describers
that cannot be read in sunshine.

Such instances should not occur.

Harvinder Bhatia (Network Rail) opened the day with a keynote presentation on the meaning
of ‘customer information’ - balancing the challenges of real-time information against benefits
for passengers, while Mike Short’s afternoon keynote presented O2’s ideas on what mobile
applications can deliver to the rail industry.

There was a series of demonstrations from operators: Trans-Pennine Express (Ian Benger), a
‘seat-eye’ view of London Underground’s Victoria Line (Michael Milner) and TFL’s real-time
journey planner (Ian Henderson).

Duncan Henry (National Rail Enquiries) looked at information ‘beyond the station’ using
remote self-service approaches (telephony, web-based and SMS), as well as National Rail’s
Train-tracker speech-recognition software for handling passengers’ needs.
Valentin Scinteie (Alstom, Canada) gave us a view of the IP-connected train – with a
demonstration of how to integrate operations, monitoring, security, train control and
ancillary systems to provide effective passenger information.

These presentations emphasised the role of technology as information media. Two, however,
took more critical views.

Jason Durk (National Rail Enquiries) entertained us with a look at how the industry measures
up to passengers’ expectations: the statistics are not impressive after nearly two centuries.
He focused on wants (timely, relevant, accurate and consistent information), and needs
(information that is both accessible and understandable), asking how close the industry is to
meeting passengers’ expectations. Examples included how station staff handle unusual
situations, such as delays due to flooding, and the impact of home access.

Joe Silmon, a Birmingham University systems engineer, looked at passenger information

over the ages – suggesting that, years ago, displays were clear. But they were neither
flashing nor electronic – and, so, were scrapped in the 1980s as old-fashioned. He described
“our modern electronic dystopia” which, rather than making effective use of technology,
patronises, confuses and discourages. His theme: we need requirements-driven solutions,
not technology-driven ones; if we don’t understand the benefits computerised information
systems bring (and if passengers lose faith) they have no point. Lower-technology might be
more cost-effective.

Where does that leave us as passengers? Information systems are expensive and need to be
funded. They also take long to implement. Train Operating Companies use their own, each
working in isolation, rather than with integrated systems. Jason Durk pointed out that
technology is relatively new to railway staff who may see trains from a different perspective
and not consider information as core to their jobs. Neither, when travelling, do they
experience disruption in the way ‘normal’ passengers do: a two-hour delay may be seen as
funny, or overcome after a few words with a controller.

Information is not easy to handle and often may not be targeted at the right people: a guard
might receive an important message but not realise that it affects his passengers, so the
information is not passed on.

Consistency is important. Unlike the London Underground displays shown by Michael Milner,
National Rail’s platform indicators vary: frequently in different parts of a single station.

A key message of the seminar was that high-quality design and training are crucial. Let’s
hope the message is taken on-board so that passengers find the right trains and reach their
destinations stress- and anxiety-free!

Ralph Adam, Jan. 2009