Hey, there! Log in / Register
Speaking of pointless MBTA alerts
By roadman on Mon, 05/13/2013 - 12:13pm
Case in point:
Haverhill 213 10:30 AM OB experiencing 30-45 min delays due to residual delay 5/13/2013 11:46 AM
Are the people who write these things really that dumb? Oh wait, I guess that's a rhetorical question.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
I've been getting these
I've been getting these alerts all day... and I can't figure out what the residual delay is from. It is suspected to be related to track work up in Andover, but these alerts fail to explain that at all. Luckily my 258 was on time, but that short turns at Reading, thus it was not impacted.
And the
"delay due to delay" continues. Latest alert:
Haverhill 217 01:10 PM OB experiencing 30-45 min delays due to residual delay 5/13/2013 1:40 PM
In theory
traffic in one place, causes traffic elsewhere.... so maybe delay at one point, creates more delay later...
basically, the delays, are caused by previous delays and not a new problem..
But it would be simpler to say, we are still experiencing delays.
Not really sure what the
Not really sure what the problem here is. The train sets follow schedules,, so if there's a delay for any reason on a previous trip that day, it's likely to spill over onto later trips. Hence, residual delays.
Bad alert writing
One of those transit terms that makes sense on the inside, but the T'lert writers need to be trained to translate it to "due to earlier [insert reason here] delays."
Sometimes it's legitimately just due to something like that (train gets delayed inbound and can't make its next outbound departure). Since I also get these alerts, and they started with the first train of the morning (5:05ish out of Haverhill), there's clearly something bigger. Mid-afternoon they finally started citing "track problems," which would seem to be related to the big bridge/track project in Andover this weekend.
The problem is it makes no
The problem is it makes no sense to say a delay is caused by a delay.
Instead, they should say, "Residual delay due to earlier problem", specifying the type of problem if possible.
One other suggestion I'd offer
Delay issuing alerts until you have some idea as to the nature of the problem. Instead, we get "cascading" alerts (We have a problem - we have a problem on X - we have a problem on X for (insert vague reason here) - we have a problem on X for (insert less vague reason here).
Just as annoying is the fact that, once the "less vague reason" alert goes out, they have to keep repeating it to us until the problem goes away. They obviously don't understand the principle of e-mail and texting - you will receive the message regardless of whether you have the phone or computer on.
The other day I got an alert
The other day I got an alert that my bus was delayed due to "Track issues". I didn't think buses ran on rails.
And, apparently the Green Line
no longer runs on tracks. Witness the latest gem:
And as you've likely figured by now, I read the T alerts not so much for the information, but for the entertainment value they provide.
My favorite is, because of
My favorite is, because of all the extra strings of characters the text alerts add, the message gets cut off and all I get is something like "the red line is"
thanks MBTA, because honestly, I am never entirely sure it is going to still exist later in the day.
If the T can't fix this
If the T can't fix this software problem, I'd be glad to apply for the job.
Perhaps the T should focus
on fixing the problems that require them to issue these delay alerts instead. For example:
Twelve + hours to repair a "track problem" seems very dubious to me. And nine hours to even admit to their patrons the reason for the delays - inexcusable!
If only the MSM even cared about investigative reporting anymore.
As Susie Derkins said, "and while I'm dreaming, ...." However, perhaps a pony (or several) would get Haverhill Line commuters to and from work faster than the MBCR does.
Right, because it's a
Right, because it's a one-for-one tradeoff between making their existing software engineers fix bugs, and doing preventive maintenance on the commuter rail tracks.
I'm wondering
Do we need to post the Benny Hill theme everytime this robotic, yet enraged nonsense gets posted yet again?
With respect,
perhaps we should play the Benny Hill theme whenever MBTA management announces they're giving their passengers more needless baubles and trinkets instead of a more reliable and efficent transportation system.
It wasn't a track problem...
They shifted the tracks for the double tracking project. And they put a pretty good curve in the tracks, plus they have equipment and workers all over the place. In addition, they need to work on the signals for the new switches and trackage, so that's likely to get very buggy.
The problem here is more a failure to anticipate and announce, rather than to fix. They should have known this would happen -- and I'm sure they did, they just didn't bother to tell the public.