RealTimeTrains website

The Planner · 18 Oct 2019

Must be one of the few who don't rate the change. Was easy to see the allowances on the right hand side before and unless Im missing something, seeing the freight timing load was useful. Much quicker than messing about in TRUST if you needed something quickly, not so much now.

RailUK Forums

AndrewE · 18 Oct 2019

I was happy with the previous version, no doubt I shall get used to this one...
Having a "+ 1 hr" button at the bottom of the departures column is a definite improvement, and the lack of it was my only niggle about the old site/appearance.

Trainfan2019 · 18 Oct 2019

I much prefer the look and feel of the old version of the site. I guess I'll have to get used to the new version eventually .

Kite159 · 18 Oct 2019

Seems the ability to get the mileage data on a phone has gone, even changing to desktop mode (which used to bring it up for those services with mileage data)

ABB125 · 18 Oct 2019

The addition of a +1hr button at the bottom is very good.
However, this new site doesn't feel as space efficient as the old one. I mostly use RealTime Trains on my phone when on a trip somewhere. A lot less appears on the screen now than previously. The following screenshot illustrates the point:

The whole screen is taken up by stuff I don't need. If all the service information was hidden under a "show service information" button as previously this view would, in my opinion, be much enhanced.

Nevertheless, thank you for running the website, it's very useful.

Tom · 18 Oct 2019

Time for a long post! There's a not entirely complete list of the changes listed at https://blog.realtimetrains.com/2019/10/the-new-realtime-trains/.

TVLUser said:
Electric (Class 91/MkIV) LNER services, which now seem to show as a "Diesel Locomotive" instead of Electric. HST services still show as HST.

Fixed.

TVLUser said:
Also, correct me if I'm wrong, but is Class 172 a new timing load with the new RTT (it exists on WMR Snow Hill services)? I don't recall ever having seen that before.

As @louis97 said, we've added a couple more. This also includes Class 80x on electric or diesel.

Bletchleyite said:
It's the same thing with a fancy skin on it. The one thing I can't seem to find is the option to switch to detailed from each simple screen which could do with coming back.

This has been re-added.

Bletchleyite said:
I love RTT and don't have a major objection to these changes, though TBH I agree with those saying they preferred the "cleaner" look before. However, I'd love to know how it took 3 years to fiddle with the CSS a bit - that's not something I would show off about in my publicity.

This isn't just a change of the CSS code. The entirety of the front-end code has been rewritten substantially adding support for future back-end features that will be coming in due course. From a quick scan it looks like there's about 45,000 lines of code gone into the front-end.

MikeWM said:
The 'simple' view for a station shows far fewer trains than previously at the resolution of a phone screen, resulting in much more scrolling being necessary. Each train now takes at least three lines of text on my screen, often 5, whereas before it was 2. That's a significant regression for me because usually I start there and then drill down as necessary.

I have tightened up some of the styling.

Kite159 said:
Bit of a dodgy advert positioning when I'm using IE on the work PC

IE is a load of crud and I'll make some efforts to fix IE11.

03_179 said:
Now you cannot copy paste to an excel spreadsheet (I usually do when going to an unfamilar location) to "tick off" the services.

Siemens Staines said:
It appears the data fields have changed from <TAB> delimitted to <LF> delimitted which is why Excel doesn't like it. I am guessing <LF> delimitted is more effiecient for data retrieval/updates which is maybe why this change was made (else why change it).

This was never supported and was merely a benefit of the way it was laid out. This may be something for a paid version in the future with a direct Excel extract. A significant number of changes have been made to the layout and rendering to increase maintainability, there used to be several versions of most pages for desktop and mobile - it is now one page each reformatted by styling.

Siemens Staines said:
My only minor grumble is that passing trains have been changed from being in grey italics to being in standard font with the exception of their time which is grey standard font, so there is less contrast between them. Obviously selecting Passenger Calls removes through trains but when you want to see both services and quickly look to differentiate between them it is a little harder. As I say, a minor grumble from what is otherwise an excellent website.

There appears to be a bug when looking at train services more than 24 hours in advance which is being checked.

DarloRich said:
gosh you lot complain a lot This is a free service and a damn good one to boot!

Perhaps we should turn off all this data stuff and go back to the past. I am sure spotting is harder not knowing what is coming and when.

That would be a nice change sometimes.

The Planner said:
Must be one of the few who don't rate the change. Was easy to see the allowances on the right hand side before and unless Im missing something, seeing the freight timing load was useful. Much quicker than messing about in TRUST if you needed something quickly, not so much now.

The reason for allowances moving to underneath the location text is primarily because it was a waste of space that can be better used for other things in the future. It was also part of a frequent request of having more data displayed on the mobile detailed train views.

Kite159 said:
Seems the ability to get the mileage data on a phone has gone, even changing to desktop mode (which used to bring it up for those services with mileage data)

Browsers will not be able to differentiate as mileage is displayed on the basis of how wide your browser is. Maintainability, again.

xotGD · 18 Oct 2019

I like the appearance of the revamped site. Nice job!

trainmania100 · 18 Oct 2019

Any chance you could remove the adverts from the top of the train schedule pages , it pushes the timetable far below the fold on mobile.

Tom · 18 Oct 2019

trainmania100 said:
Any chance you could remove the adverts from the top of the train schedule pages , it pushes the timetable far below the fold on mobile.

No. I have to make a living somehow.

MikeWM · 18 Oct 2019

Tom said:
I have tightened up some of the styling.

Just given it a whirl. That's much better, many thanks

(and thanks again for all the effort you make for our benefit - RTT is a really wonderful resource).

trainmania100 · 18 Oct 2019

Tom said:
No. I have to make a living somehow.

No problems , looks great nonetheless, you've done a good job young man

158820 · 18 Oct 2019

Thanks Tom for this great resource and all your hard wprk on it. Well done.

Siemens Staines · 18 Oct 2019

Tom - thank you for taking the time to answer the various points raised today.

Keep up the good work. RTT is very much appreciated!

td97 · 18 Oct 2019

Always loved the website. For me, there was no need to change the previous version, but I can understand why the backend needed updating. I'd say the new version is good, and it may grow on me more in the future.
Agree that the loss of pathing allowances on the right side is a shame.
One suggestion:
Since the update has focused on the UI, is there any chance a favicon/home screen icon could be added? How about status bar colours too?
Thanks for your time and effort that's gone into this.

Nunners · 18 Oct 2019

First of all, thank you very much for the website. It has been invaluable.

I'm currently having problems searching by head code, which the blog says should be the same as before. Screenshot is attached.

Am I doing something wrong or is this not implemented yet?

ABB125 · 18 Oct 2019

Nunners said:
First of all, thank you very much for the website. It has been invaluable.

I'm currently having problems searching by head code, which the blog says should be the same as before. Screenshot is attached.

Am I doing something wrong or is this not implemented yet?

Do you perhaps have to use the quick search function, found under the menu button?

Ladder23 · 18 Oct 2019

New version is great - it glad to see a return of the auto prediction

Nunners · 18 Oct 2019

ABB125 said:
Do you perhaps have to use the quick search function, found under the menu button?View attachment 69545

Yes, thanks! Head code search looks much better than before

ilkestonian · 18 Oct 2019

Another regular user of RTT here, and very happy with both the old and the new improved version.

Can I ask a question which has bugged me for a while?

Some schedules show cumulative distances in miles and chains (at least the old version did, not checked the new one yet) and some don't.

I've never been able to work out whether there is a logic to whether mileages show or not. Is it just certain routes, or is it more complex than that?

louis97 · 18 Oct 2019

ilkestonian said:
Another regular user of RTT here, and very happy with both the old and the new improved version.

Can I ask a question which has bugged me for a while?

Some schedules show cumulative distances in miles and chains (at least the old version did, not checked the new one yet) and some don't.

I've never been able to work out whether there is a logic to whether mileages show or not. Is it just certain routes, or is it more complex than that?

Typically there are two main reasons why a train has no mileage:
1) There is a location in the schedule which is not in the mileage database
2) There are two timing points where the average speed for the distance calculated is greater than the max timed for speed. In this situation the mileage between these two points is not calculated. This is a circumstance of some code to stop the system sending trains on long incorrect routes between two points. This is something being looked at to be resolved in the future.

ilkestonian · 18 Oct 2019

louis97 said:
Typically there are two main reasons why a train has no mileage:
1) There is a location in the schedule which is not in the mileage database
2) There are two timing points where the average speed for the distance calculated is greater than the max timed for speed. In this situation the mileage between these two points is not calculated. This is a circumstance of some code to stop the system sending trains on long incorrect routes between two points. This is something being looked at to be resolved in the future.

Thank you. So am I right in assuming that any route might or might not show mileages, depending on the factors you mention?

I guess this means that if I search services between two points, some will and some won't display mileages, depending on specific timing points used for that service?

Deepgreen · 18 Oct 2019

I don't like the new version yet, BUT, there will be an element of unfamiliarity clouding that view. I find the colour framing and overall format less clear than before. However, it needs a fair trial, and, no matter what, Tom certainly deserves praise and thanks for providing the site in the first place.

pdeaves · 18 Oct 2019

From my perspective, the biggest irk is the really tall, narrow font in the titles/headings. For the rest I'm ambivalent. It worked before, it works now. What's not to like?!

Peter Mugridge · 18 Oct 2019

The only thing I'm having trouble getting my head round is the delays showing as, for example, +2 and the early running as -1. Is there a reason why it doesn't show 2L or 1E as previously?

theironroad · 18 Oct 2019

Firstly I think that RTT has been a great project from the outset and all kudos to Tom for all the work he has and does put into it.

I've been a regular user of the detailed version on my phone for a while now and apart from the odd occasion has always been easy to use and pretty reliable.

I've used it a few times this afternoon/evening and a couple of things have been apparent and I'm afraid they may be seen as criticism...

1) having the stations text that a train was booked to call at in bold blue and everything else in a grey in the old version was a lot easier to contrast and view than the revamped one.

2) in the older version, 'RT' '2E' and 1L for whether the train was running on time etc seem a lot clearer to view at a glance than the new set up not showing rt and using +/- instead.

3) in the detailed version, the screen , especially the right hand side , seems really cramped and 'busy' whereas the older version was just easier to view. Maybe on a big screen or desktop it looks ok, but I've been finding it awkward to view today.

4) the extra information section at the top , which used to be hidden could be better at the bottom as most of the stuff in there isn't really relevant to the real time running of the train.

I'm not a techy so don't know about the under the hood stuff that may have changed but , yes it's partly familiarity with the old version but right now I find the old version easier to use.

Bevan Price · 18 Oct 2019

I like the new version, and thank Tom for making RTT freely available.

But may I make one minor suggestion. If I view the full schedule of a train, and then click on the name of an intermediate station, it displays all trains at that station - but the time range defaults to "About Time" - it would be helpful if the default setting was "All Day" - and then, particularly if viewing as a webpage on a smartphone, I have to fiddle about resetting it to "all day" -
(or alternatively, if there was an option for users to set All Day as the default.).

anamyd · 18 Oct 2019

After a few minutes the new look already grew on me @Tom , and the functionality seems to be at least as good as it was before! It's a thumbs up from me

Dren Ahmeti · 19 Oct 2019

Tom said:
As @louis97 said, we've added a couple more. This also includes Class 80x on electric or diesel.

Backend wise, how do you process the traction changes with bi-modes en-route?

As, in VoyagerPlan, there *were* specific SRT’s and timing loads for the Electric-Diesel-Electric switchover at Steventon, and as of today, all 80x’s are still changing over at Bristol Parkway to Diesel/Electric?
I assume it either uses the main timing load with adjustment allowance for any discrepancies between the SRT and the differences in timing load.

louis97 · 19 Oct 2019

Dren Ahmeti said:
Backend wise, how do you process the traction changes with bi-modes en-route?

As, in VoyagerPlan, there *were* specific SRT’s and timing loads for the Electric-Diesel-Electric switchover at Steventon, and as of today, all 80x’s are still changing over at Bristol Parkway to Diesel/Electric?
I assume it either uses the main timing load with adjustment allowance for any discrepancies between the SRT and the differences in timing load.

We don't get involved in this, the data we show is what we are given. We do receive information on when the timing load changes however at present only the timing load at the beginning of the schedule is shown. This could change in the future.

Tom · 19 Oct 2019

theironroad said:
1) having the stations text that a train was booked to call at in bold blue and everything else in a grey in the old version was a lot easier to contrast and view than the revamped one.

The light blue shading I am surprised is not sufficient. A very common request was to darken the grey text for those who were less well sighted - this mitigates that concern in a way that should work for everyone.

theironroad said:
2) in the older version, 'RT' '2E' and 1L for whether the train was running on time etc seem a lot clearer to view at a glance than the new set up not showing rt and using +/- instead.

Personally I think the contrast between the grey italics and bold text is adequate and this literally didn't come up at all with the testing group.

theironroad said:
3) in the detailed version, the screen , especially the right hand side , seems really cramped and 'busy' whereas the older version was just easier to view. Maybe on a big screen or desktop it looks ok, but I've been finding it awkward to view today.

Detailed version of what page? Location pages have barely changed apart from a few formatting adjustments to make everything work responsively. Train pages have indeed changed substantially and am looking at some alterations today.

theironroad said:
4) the extra information section at the top , which used to be hidden could be better at the bottom as most of the stuff in there isn't really relevant to the real time running of the train.

Will be toggled again soon.

Bevan Price said:
it would be helpful if the default setting was "All Day" - and then, particularly if viewing as a webpage on a smartphone, I have to fiddle about resetting it to "all day" - (or alternatively, if there was an option for users to set All Day as the default.).

All day won't happen by default as it's a fairly ridiculous idea for somewhere like Clapham Junction where the page load would be somewhere in the region of 2000 services at a rough guess. I think making it configurable is ultimately unlikely as well.

RealTimeTrains website

Veteran Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Attachments

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Attachments

Established Member

Established Member

Member

Member

Established Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Member

Established Member

Member