Poor information and lack of thought about how passengers could effect their journeys in periods of disruption seem almost as much a problem as the disruption itself.

I went to Wimbledon last night, and arrived at the down platform at Forest Hill as the Crystal Palace overground service arrived. I decided to wait for the 19:36 direct to Clapham Junction which was shown as on time on the indicator. This information was changed several times until it stated a 19:44 arrival. The train did arrive at that time and came to a brief halt at Forest Hill, but unfortunately for those intending to catch it, on the fast line. I then caught the next overground to Crystal Palace and changed there after which it was an easy journey. I could have been at my destination 25-300 minutes earlier if I had know that the Victoria train was not going to stop.

I accept that, in these difficult times, there may be operational reasons for cancellling the intermediate stops for the Victoria train (incidentally almost empty). However, it isn't helpful not just to keep passengers in the dark, but to provide them with false information. Have railway managers and staff become so absorbed in computerised signaling and scheduling systems that they have forgotten that the are running a real railway with real passengers, not some virtual railway in cyberspace?

There seems to be a systematic loss of contact with reality in some big enterprises. For example, when Kings Cross was out on the 27th December, someone decided to send passengers to Finsbury Park. Anyone who has visited Finsbury Park might have been expected to know that it was unlikely to absorb the number of passengers. And given that it has been correctly worked out that the interim layout at London Bridge won't work if Southeastern trains stop there, why weren't these suspensions synchronised rather than have a few days of unmanageability?