LNER were seriously proposing airline style check-in for rail travel?!

[Bletchleyite]

It wasn’t about baggage. There were questions on how early you’d be prepared to arrive etc.

I gave them both barrels in my responses and hopefully so did others.

While it’s amusing to hear stories like this the serious side is it shows the sort of thing some people in train companies like LNER want to do. It’s as though the people that think of these ideas never travel by train….

Would love to know more about what on earth they were proposing, so I've spun out another thread as it's gone way off the compulsory reservation thing that Grand Central and LNER are doing.

Can you elaborate on what this utterly ridiculous proposal was entailing?

Thanks.

 

[SargeNpton]

I do wonder whether someone has unearthed one of Mr Branson's early press releases on how he intended to run his new rail franchises.

 

[Topological]

A slightly mischievous question, how does check in differ from validating an e-ticket?

 

[Bletchleyite]

A slightly mischievous question, how does check in differ from validating an e-ticket?

@Hadders whose post I quoted was surveyed on it, perhaps they could clarify? But it did involve arriving in advance of the train time as you would for a plane.

 

[TheSel]

@Hadders whose post I quoted was surveyed on it, perhaps they could clarify? But it did involve arriving in advance of the train time as you would for a plane.

To be fair, arriving in advance of a train time is surely better than arriving [at the departure station] AFTER the train time.

 

[HSTEd]

Well it is the logical conclusion of compulsory reservations, and it would certainly be required on HS2 really have been stupid enough to base safety cases for their tunnels on anything less than crush loadings of trains.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Well it is the logical conclusion of compulsory reservations

Why? Other than the budget operations like Ouigo, does any operation with compulsory reservations actually do it?

and it would certainly be required on HS2 really have been stupid enough to base safety cases for their tunnels on anything less than crush loadings of trains.

Again, why? TGV InOui (classic TGV) doesn't have it. RENFE doesn't have it. Trenitalia and Italo don't have it. There's nothing whatsoever about compulsory reservations that requires it (but please let's not turn this thread into another debate on compulsory reservations!).

 

[Topological]

I briefly thought about a whole check-in process with dropping off bags etc. Might have been useful for some, but I could not see how they were going to employ baggage handlers etc.

It seems more likely it is a way to encourage people to say whether they will use their ticket or not. That will streamline refunds for unused tickets etc. But it is really just a way to move towards validation of e-tickets when there are no actual inspectors.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It seems more likely it is a way to encourage people to say whether they will use their ticket or not. That will streamline refunds for unused tickets etc. But it is really just a way to move towards validation of e-tickets when there are no actual inspectors.

Again, compostage (which I'm kind-of surprised we don't have, because it would reduce refund fraud) wouldn't require check-in in advance of departure, it'd just mean you would need to scan your e-ticket before boarding even if the gateline was open or not present, or proactively approach the guard if you couldn't. Indeed I've sort of done this because I wanted there to be proof I was at specific locations at specific times so as to validate a slightly awkward Delay Repay claim where they may not have believed I actually did what I did without evidence.

 

[HSTEd]

Again, why? TGV InOui (classic TGV) doesn't have it. RENFE doesn't have it. Trenitalia and Italo don't have it. There's nothing whatsoever about compulsory reservations that requires it (but please let's not turn this thread into another debate on compulsory reservations!).

Because no one up to now has been imbecilic enough to base evacuation requirements on anything other than all trains being crush-loaded.

It would only become necessary to enforce reservation-only travel if you use the idea of reservation-only travel to make a safety claim.

If, as is often claimed on this forum but I have seen no primary sources to support, HS2's safety cases for their tunnels require only seated passengers on their trains, the argument used to justify compulsory reservations, then they will have to provide a serious system to prevent unauthorised people being aboard the train.

 

[sprunt]

A slightly mischievous question, how does check in differ from validating an e-ticket?

It applies to those who have chosen to use a paper ticket as well.

To be fair, arriving in advance of a train time is surely better than arriving [at the departure station] AFTER the train time.

True, but enforced arrival (say) 30 minutes before departure would be annoying. For example, there are lots of people who work within walking distance of King's Cross and could be going away somewhere after work on a Friday. Under the current system they know that they can buy a ticket for the 5.30 train and be sure that they'll be able to get there in time for it. If they have to check in 30 minutes prior to departure they'll then need to catch the 6.00 train instead and be hanging round the station for an unnecessary half hour.

Does anyone know what alleged problem this is supposed to solve?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Because no one up to now has been imbecilic enough to base evacuation requirements on anything other than all trains being crush-loaded.

It would only become necessary to enforce reservation-only travel if you use the idea of reservation-only travel to make a safety claim.

If, as is often claimed on this forum but I have seen no primary sources to support, HS2's safety cases for their tunnels require only seated passengers on their trains, the argument used to justify compulsory reservations, then they will have to provide a serious system to prevent unauthorised people being aboard the train.

Most people do as they're told, particularly if there's a penalty (e.g. a base £50 Penalty Fare; no fare would be applicable on top as that has been paid) for failing to do so. Just like most people respect pick up/set down only despite there being no proper way to enforce it.

If it is true, and it's been quoted enough times, there'll also be a leeway on top to take account of the possibility of gateline jumpers and people getting on the wrong train by mistake. That doesn't need to extend to a crush load - if the guard sees they've got a crush load they'll just not dispatch and call BTP for assistance removing the errant passengers.

 

[thelongestroad]

I quite like the idea of trains that only have enough tickets for seats, but understand it isn't really practical here.

 

[HSTEd]

Most people do as they're told, particularly if there's a penalty (e.g. a base £50 Penalty Fare; no fare would be applicable on top as that has been paid) for failing to do so. Just like most people respect pick up/set down only despite there being no proper way to enforce it.

In disruption it would go out of the window extremely rapidly however.
People won't sit shivering at a station in midwinter for hours (on the vague promise that they be handled 'later') when they could just board that train that can easily accommodate them and be home in an hour

If it is true, and it's been quoted enough times, there'll also be a leeway on top to take account of the possibility of gateline jumpers and people getting on the wrong train by mistake. That doesn't need to extend to a crush load - if the guard sees they've got a crush load they'll just not dispatch and call BTP for assistance removing the errant passengers.

The cost of simply assuming a crush load for evacuation purposes would be minuscule compared to the endless delay minutes from trains stuck at Crewe or elsewhere trying to get people to deboard the train.
Then you will have to filter all the passengers to determine who can, in fact, be aboard.

Like I said, it has not been stated in an official documents (that I've seen, and I've gone looking) so I will retain some small hope that they've not been this stupid.

 

[Topological]

It applies to those who have chosen to use a paper ticket as well.



True, but enforced arrival (say) 30 minutes before departure would be annoying. For example, there are lots of people who work within walking distance of King's Cross and could be going away somewhere after work on a Friday. Under the current system they know that they can buy a ticket for the 5.30 train and be sure that they'll be able to get there in time for it. If they have to check in 30 minutes prior to departure they'll then need to catch the 6.00 train instead and be hanging round the station for an unnecessary half hour.

Does anyone know what alleged problem this is supposed to solve?

Presumably, said check in for a paper ticket would involve the input of a ticket number or booking reference? If so it would stop paper tickets being used multiple times.

It would be interesting to know what the proposed timeline for travel would be, but it would seem surprising if the expectation was more than 10 minutes before the train. In the context of a station it is also hard to think what the check-in physically looks like.

At an airport, if you have hand luggage then you just need to be at the airport in time to clear security. Without any security then the only thing to clear is a ticket barrier (possibly)

I can see it working in some way as part of an integrated app offering journey services etc. Not fully thought that part through.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I quite like the idea of trains that only have enough tickets for seats, but understand it isn't really practical here.

It's true of most long-distance trains even though the ticketing system doesn't enforce it. Very rare in my experience to stand on long journeys outside of disruption, and often when there is a bit of standing or sitting in vestibules it's where people have chosen to do that in preference to sitting next to a stranger.

 

[Krokodil]

It would only become necessary to enforce reservation-only travel if you use the idea of reservation-only travel to make a safety claim.

Not really, the TOC that operates HS2 can insist on compulsory reservations on any pretext it chooses, or indeed no pretext at all. It may opt to enforce compulsory reservations but waive them during disruption.

 

[sheff1]

Until we know what LNER were actually suggesting it is rather difficult to discuss it.

 

[Failed Unit]

When the Azuma's came along they were seriously considering baggage limitations, back in the days of the IC225 you had a lovely baggage coach (DVT). The Azuma's don't have enough baggage space for the anglo scottish route. Not sure if that was related. They have since taken out some seats. But they have done baggage check in before (to put you bag in the DVT but that was more for security)

 

[DanNCL]

Surely this would be like DB’s Komfort Check In, where it’s an optional service available for those with pre booked tickets to ‘check in’ to their seat or any other seat on that train. That gets sent pretty much instantly to the guard/revenue staff telling them that the person in for example coach B seat 12 has a valid ticket, which means they skip past you when doing a ticket check and you don’t get disturbed.
If that is what LNER have in mind then it’s actually not a bad idea at all. I used DB’s Komfort Check In on an ICE in October, it worked as intended and was easy to use even as a Brit who was unfamiliar with the DB app.

Mandatory check in like at an airport or on Eurostar would never work. For it to work LNER would need segregated platforms at every station, it simply isn’t viable and would do nothing but drive people off rail and onto the roads.

 

[edwin_m]

Again, compostage (which I'm kind-of surprised we don't have, because it would reduce refund fraud) wouldn't require check-in in advance of departure, it'd just mean you would need to scan your e-ticket before boarding even if the gateline was open or not present, or proactively approach the guard if you couldn't. Indeed I've sort of done this because I wanted there to be proof I was at specific locations at specific times so as to validate a slightly awkward Delay Repay claim where they may not have believed I actually did what I did without evidence.

It's not definitive proof, as you could have sent your e-ticket to someone else to scan at the appropriate place.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Can you elaborate on what this utterly ridiculous proposal was entailing?

I don’t know if this is related, but LNER/VTEC/EC/NXEC used to have ‘baggage check-in’ at peak times, usually Christmas and the Edinburgh Festival, where the luggage would go in the DVT/power car. It was useful too.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's not definitive proof, as you could have sent your e-ticket to someone else to scan at the appropriate place.

It's not, but it's better than no evidence.

 

[jayah]

Again, compostage (which I'm kind-of surprised we don't have, because it would reduce refund fraud)

SNCF have just got rid of compostage in the past year.

They claim 10% of their tickets by usage are paper but then perhaps they don't have the daft UK refund rules where people can claim a refund after usage if they didn't get checked onboard or use a gateline.

 

[43096]

Because no one up to now has been imbecilic enough to base evacuation requirements on anything other than all trains being crush-loaded.

It would only become necessary to enforce reservation-only travel if you use the idea of reservation-only travel to make a safety claim.

If, as is often claimed on this forum but I have seen no primary sources to support, HS2's safety cases for their tunnels require only seated passengers on their trains, the argument used to justify compulsory reservations, then they will have to provide a serious system to prevent unauthorised people being aboard the train.

How's that going to work when, inevitably, a service (or a whole day's services are binned because the wind is in the wrong direction or there's a giraffe entangled in the overhead wires) gets cancelled?

 

[Sealink]

If LNER were providing non stop trains between the cities they serve, I might get it

But thet aren't. There are walk on fares, local journeys etc.

It all boils down to what our railways are for. Basically, competing with airlines, or providing a service...

 

[Western 52]

How would a check-in system work when you need to change trains enroute, perhaps between different TOCs?

 

[CapabilityB]

Why? Other than the budget operations like Ouigo, does any operation with compulsory reservations actually do it?



Again, why? TGV InOui (classic TGV) doesn't have it. RENFE doesn't have it. Trenitalia and Italo don't have it. There's nothing whatsoever about compulsory reservations that requires it (but please let's not turn this thread into another debate on compulsory reservations!).

It was certainly the case a few years ago that HS2 was developed on a booked train only approach

 

[Bletchleyite]

It was certainly the case a few years ago that HS2 was developed on a booked train only approach

I know. But compulsory reservations do not require airline style check-in.

 

[Hadders]

It was a most bizarre survey. I can't remember exactly when it was but it was post-pandemic. It was asking questions about checking in before starting your journey. I was quite robust in my answers.

Of course we all know that a train is not an airline and that checking in, mandatory reservations etc would not work.

Thankfully nothing seems to have come of it.