Desiro Destination Displays

[Deepgreen]

Apologies if this is an old topic (I searched 'destination displays'), but I'm interested to know the background to the appalling exterior cab-end destination displays fitted to 'second generation' 'Desiros' (700s, etc.). It's not just in sunlight that they are unreadable, but any normal cloudy, even downright dull, daylight! They are both tiny and dim. Is it thought that destination displays are a luxury and therefore could be installed as an afterthought in these units' design?

As they stand, they are pretty much useless in above-ground sections during the day. To me this is yet another example of the TOCs/others really not 'getting' the concept of providing useful passenger information.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I think platform displays have largely replaced them, and they mainly just act as low-level confirmation. Also, people will look at the ones on the side far more.

In Silverlink days the 321 front displays never worked at all (pretty much) and this was no great issue.

 

[TFN]

I just wish they displayed "via" information on the Sutton loop services. Other than that no complaints really as a regular user

 

[Bletchleyite]

On the older Desiros the flipdot displays are less flexible but very clear.

FWIW, one thing of note about the Desiro flipdots is that you never see corruption on them, ever. This being the case, does that demonstrate a difference in maintenance standards between bus and rail? In the days when buses used flipdot displays, corruption was the norm - it was rare to see a bus without at least one pixel inverted.

 

[ValleyLines142]

The 185s destination displays are crystal clear on the side, one of them was on a Middlesbrough service high up on the Manchester viaduct the other day and I could see it a mile off!

 

[dgl]

As has been said the older Desiros use a flip-led display, these are similar to a flip dot display but with an added LED in each pixel that when combined with the flip-dot gives a high readability in both daylight and at night without having to be overly bright.
I'm guessing the new Desiros use just LED's of which the readability of such displays are affected more by having bright sunshine acting upon them than flip-dot/LED displays which aren't really affected at all.

 

[Deepgreen]

As has been said the older Desiros use a flip-led display, these are similar to a flip dot display but with an added LED in each pixel that when combined with the flip-dot gives a high readability in both daylight and at night without having to be overly bright.
I'm guessing the new Desiros use just LED's of which the readability of such displays are affected more by having bright sunshine acting upon them than flip-dot/LED displays which aren't really affected at all.

Yes, the earlier 'Desiros' are better, so why can't displays which actually work be adopted universally? As I mentioned in my opening post, the 700 displays are unreadable in cloudy daylight, not just sunlight. Who checks and approves these things - do they actually test them in real conditions from the perspective of the users? It appears not.

 

[whhistle]

I think they're a thing of the past.
People will look for them because trains have them, but most display wrong information.
There's a Cross Country 170 that's been displaying "Out of Service" for years. Similarly, another that shows "Class 170 -- Turbostar" so Cross Country at least don't seem to care about them.

 

[Deepgreen]

I think they're a thing of the past.
People will look for them because trains have them, but most display wrong information.
There's a Cross Country 170 that's been displaying "Out of Service" for years. Similarly, another that shows "Class 170 -- Turbostar" so Cross Country at least don't seem to care about them.

I don't agree that "most display wrong information" by any means. On SWR, Southern, Thameslink, Gatex and SE they are usually right (even if the 700s and 707s can't be read!).
As for being "a thing of the past", I was under the impression that they were required by law - under the Disability Discrimination Act. The SWT class 458s had to have them fitted for that reason when they were refurbished by SWT (I think). The SWT 456s lacked working ones for a couple of years after their refurbishment but they were eventually brought into use.
The amazingly poor quality of the second generation Desiros' displays can be seen here, when compared with an 'Electrostar' in the background. The class 707's display is almost invisible.
I ask again; given that a workable display type has been available for many years, why on earth would newer units have such abysmal ones? It is a simple requirement - to be large enough to be read as a train approaches and to be bright enough to read in sunlight. It baffles me how the current versions have passed any sort of quality/functional tests.

 

[Skie]

I think their usefulness is fairly high in areas with packed platforms and regular, varied destinations. Merseyrail platforms don't have enough platform displays and you can be fairly far away from them when your train arrives. They thankfully don't have constant automated announcements (instead relying on humans with the LU style walkie-talkie style thing hooked up to the platform speakers during peak) so being able to just look at the front of the train as it arrives is essential. Their trains have fairly decent displays on the front, though hard to read at a distance they are mostly all working.

 

[bengley]

A certain member of this forum involved in the 700s' commissioning insisted they were both large and bright enough and didn't need to be changed.

He was, of course, wrong.