Re: More 'PIDS'

[mcfergus@my-dejanews.com]

In article <37480514.7D5EF342@mail.usyd.edu.au>,
  Mr Simpson <mdoyle@mail.usyd.edu.au> wrote:
>
> physically broke apparently.. but the concept isn't, a clear
distinction.
>
> the layout of the traditional design, as has also been mentioned
plenty
> before
> that it is very simple and clear in what it conveys. I am yet to see a
> PID variation
> that matches let alone betters the ability of the old
> light-next-to-the-name
> indicator.
>
>

I haven't seen the Martin Place PIDs, so I can't comment, but personally
I think SPI is a far better system than the old style. It is more
practical in the sense that an infinite number of messages can be
conveyed with limited physical space, if you remember Parramatta
station's magnetic flip-dot PIDs, you'll remember that they were massive
with the amount of stations they needed to list. With the opening of the
Cumberland Line, replacement with SPI was the only logical solution. SPI
also allows special text messages to be displayed when necessary, and
lists the timetabled departure time and destinations of the next two
trains, the older indicators don't.

AFAIC, roll out SPI, the sooner the better. My main enhancement to the
system (apart from automated centralised control) would be to include
space for a three digit route number, should they be needed in future.


Rob

Sydney (Australia)


--== Sent via Deja.com http://www.deja.com/ ==--
---Share what you know. Learn what you don't.---