Do not travel! [Kings Cross weekend closures Jan/Feb 2020]

CaptainHaddock · 1 Jan 2020

transmanche said:
Do you know, I don't think they did put up a sign saying where the nearest Greggs was.

Following the logic of some on here, they should have put a 'sandwich and pasty shop replacement van' outside the shop being renovated. But as it happened, I guess some people took the more expensive route and went to M&S, others went to the branch of Milligans (but had to queue for much longer) and I guess some just had a sandwich at home instead.

But did they put up a sign saying "DON'T EAT SANDWICHES" on the days their shop was closed for renovations?

The point I'm trying to get across is "DO NOT TRAVEL" is a ridiculous statement for a transport operator to make. If they want to sum up the service they're providing on a weekend when the line is shut in a short sentence, wouldn't "NO DIRECT TRAINS TO LONDON" or "YOU CAN TRAVEL BUT EXPECT DISRUPTION" get the point across in a much more helpful way?

RailUK Forums

ashkeba · 1 Jan 2020

transmanche said:
That makes no sense...

Neither does putting up Do Not Travel signs at Leeds because some stations in the southeast are closed!

Harbon 1 · 1 Jan 2020

ashkeba said:
Neither does putting up Do Not Travel signs at Leeds because some stations in the southeast are closed!

So if you put “NO TRAINS BETWEEN PETERBOROUGH AND LONDON” instead, you’ll still end up with everyone who normally travels or is an occasional traveller, or attending hypothetical funerals, turning up for the regular 09whatever service to stations other than Peterborough or Kings Cross, to find out it isn’t running/there’s a different timetable, because there isn’t the capacity on the route.

like another poster has said, if people DESPERATELY need to travel SPECIFICALLY BY TRAIN, and SPECIFICALLY ON LNER with NO POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE, they will punch Leeds - wherever into a journey planner, and be given a service that is running. Not that hard really. It’s only two days :rolleyes:

The Planner · 1 Jan 2020

theironroad said:
Thanks. If , for example, HNR say we need a 72hr possession between X and y and are going to cancel 1,000 trains and this is the compensation due to you TOC X, TOC Y and TOC Z.

So I'm guessing the compensation is deducted from the track access charges rather than paid as an extra sum.

However, do TOCs have freedom to do what they want with that notional 'compensation'?
Do they have to provide a certain amount of buses/taxis ?
Could they offer discounts if a RRB was involved through a % discount on the ticket bought.

No, the TOC get an extra amount of money dependent on what trains/service groups it affects. They also get an amount of RRB based on trains cancelled. It is their cash to do with how they please and bidders/TOCs will include Schedule 4 compensation as part of their bids and plans. What they provide in terms of extra RRB is up to them. The way it works is that if NR do not do any engineering work over a year (hypothetically) then we are quids in, if NR do loads the the TOC profits. For example in 2016/17, TOCs paid £224 million in access charge supplements, NR paid out £301 million in Schedule 4 compensation.

theironroad · 1 Jan 2020

ashkeba said:
Who is HNR?

Apologies, should have been NR as in network rail.

I've edited it to correct it.

Class 170101 · 1 Jan 2020

I think the biggest weakness is the alterantives are not used and possibly not compensated if there are available.

By way of Example, why not extend EMR services from Nottingham to Grantham and from Sheffield to Doncaster? Do EMR get compensated for these extra services and their associated costs?

Horizon22 · 1 Jan 2020

The wording could be "You are strongly advised NOT TO TRAVEL" or similar. The majority of the message is there, but its less harsh.

Where you have a inter-city service cut, there is simply no equal capacity replacement. You'd need hundreds of buses for what would be say 1 hours worth of trains from somewhere like Kings Cross. Alternative routes won't cope, so it is perfectly reasonable expectations management to discourage travel where the normal service provision cannot be provided.

How far in advance something such as "DO NOT TRAVEL" should be mentioned is a discussion for communications and control teams; ultimately you'd want a cascade approach with bare information at the beginning getting more detailed closer to the event.

transmanche · 1 Jan 2020

CaptainHaddock said:
The point I'm trying to get across is "DO NOT TRAVEL" is a ridiculous statement for a transport operator to make.

Sadly you've failed to make that point, as I demonstrated.

CaptainHaddock said:
If they want to sum up the service they're providing on a weekend when the line is shut in a short sentence, wouldn't "NO DIRECT TRAINS TO LONDON" or "YOU CAN TRAVEL BUT EXPECT DISRUPTION" get the point across in a much more helpful way?

That's exactly what they did.

No Trains To London, Do Not Travel.

It's short.
It's straight to the point.
It's managing expectations.
Most importantly, it will suppress demand for discretionary journeys on the affected dates, as people will arrange their journeys for different dates.
It does not signpost alternative routes to avoid them being swamped, especially where capacity is already limited.
Those determined to travel or have urgent travel needs will still manage to find alternative routes suggested by the journey planners - and understand that journeys will be slower and busier.

And it's entirely appropriate where no realistic alternative travel options are available for the normal amount of passengers.

As a message, it worked well over the August Bank Holiday. And I see no reason why it will not be just as successful in January, September and for the dates yet be announced in 2021.

ExRes · 1 Jan 2020

Class 170101 said:
I think the biggest weakness is the alterantives are not used and possibly not compensated if there are available.

By way of Example, why not extend EMR services from Nottingham to Grantham and from Sheffield to Doncaster? Do EMR get compensated for these extra services and their associated costs?

Are there enough EMR drivers that sign through to Grantham and Doncaster to make that an option though?

The Planner · 1 Jan 2020

Class 170101 said:
I think the biggest weakness is the alterantives are not used and possibly not compensated if there are available.

By way of Example, why not extend EMR services from Nottingham to Grantham and from Sheffield to Doncaster? Do EMR get compensated for these extra services and their associated costs?

No, they get nothing. Their route is not blocked so they do not get compensated. Anything they do is at their own cost.

bb21 · 1 Jan 2020

sheff1 said:
How does offering cheap advance tickets via Sheffield minimise the probabality of overcrowding ?

Sigh! (Not at you, but this alleged silliness.) Do you want the long answer or the short answer?

Let's just say different functions in a company don't necessarily always talk to each other, and sometimes have different priorities.

bb21 · 1 Jan 2020

CaptainHaddock said:
But did they put up a sign saying "DON'T EAT SANDWICHES" on the days their shop was closed for renovations?

What are you talking about? How is this even relevant?

CaptainHaddock said:
The point I'm trying to get across is "DO NOT TRAVEL" is a ridiculous statement for a transport operator to make. If they want to sum up the service they're providing on a weekend when the line is shut in a short sentence, wouldn't "NO DIRECT TRAINS TO LONDON" or "YOU CAN TRAVEL BUT EXPECT DISRUPTION" get the point across in a much more helpful way?

Let me interpret this for you in the eyes of many passengers:

NO DIRECT TRAINS TO LONDON - there will be other trains so we will be fine.

YOU CAN TRAVEL BUT EXPECT DISRUPTION - a little bit of delay and disruption always happens so no big deal.

Bikeman78 · 2 Jan 2020

bb21 said:
What are you talking about? How is this even relevant?

Let me interpret this for you in the eyes of many passengers:

NO DIRECT TRAINS TO LONDON - there will be other trains so we will be fine.

YOU CAN TRAVEL BUT EXPECT DISRUPTION - a little bit of delay and disruption always happens so no big deal.

I think the lack of direct trains would manage demand pretty well in itself. Anyone looking at a journey planner will find the journey time has increased from 1h40 to well over three hours with one or two changes.

I wouldn't choose to travel to London on a date when trains are diverted, let alone when it involved a bus. Exceptions are when the diversion itself is of interest, e.g. HSTs into Marylebone, but that doesn't apply to the general public.

I think the industry is a bit nervous after the chaos at Gatwick recently. However, that is on a route where almost everyone uses walk up tickets and the journey time is shorter. They were caught out by the sunny weather so lots of people thought "lets go to the seaside."

CaptainHaddock · 2 Jan 2020

CaptainHaddock said:
But did they put up a sign saying "DON'T EAT SANDWICHES" on the days their shop was closed for renovations?

The point I'm trying to get across is "DO NOT TRAVEL" is a ridiculous statement for a transport operator to make. If they want to sum up the service they're providing on a weekend when the line is shut in a short sentence, wouldn't "NO DIRECT TRAINS TO LONDON" or "YOU CAN TRAVEL BUT EXPECT DISRUPTION" get the point across in a much more helpful way?

bb21 said:
What are you talking about? How is this even relevant?

Let me interpret this for you in the eyes of many passengers:

NO DIRECT TRAINS TO LONDON - there will be other trains so we will be fine.

YOU CAN TRAVEL BUT EXPECT DISRUPTION - a little bit of delay and disruption always happens so no big deal.

The "don't eat sandwiches" comment is a reference to the Greggs analogy mentioned by transmanche and Mag-seven earlier in the thread. What I'm saying is that LNER are doing the equivalent of a shop putting up a sign saying "DON'T BUY OUR PRODUCTS THIS WEEKEND", which is misleading and not customer-friendly. LNER may not be running trains to London that weekend but they are running to many other destinations.

I don't wish to repeat myself, but what LNER should have done is find a concise way of saying "We're not running any direct services to London on 25-26 January. You can still get there but it will take a lot longer and services will be very busy". No matter what message they put out, someone will misinterpret it but the two examples I mentioned above are much more friendly and appropriate than "DO NOT TRAVEL"

jon0844 · 2 Jan 2020

The posters do say more than just 'do not travel'.

Dave W · 2 Jan 2020

Horizon22 said:
How far in advance something such as "DO NOT TRAVEL" should be mentioned is a discussion for communications and control teams; ultimately you'd want a cascade approach with bare information at the beginning getting more detailed closer to the event.

Which is pretty much what happened for August, certainly on the Hertford Loop.

It started with pretty vague statements like this on notice boards and so forth, and developed into a comprehensive campaign, which went as far as a vast billboard advertisement on the embankment at Enfield Chase explaining what work was going on. Posters everywhere, announcements galore, local newspaper ads, I might even have heard about it on the radio. I’m sure folks still did rock up to travel, but you’d have had to be living under a rock to not have heard about it.

... of course if the solution for you is to get a frequent bus to (eg) Enfield Town or Finsbury Park for the tube, barely extending your journey, that’s a bit of an easier message to swallow.

transmanche · 2 Jan 2020

CaptainHaddock said:
LNER may not be running trains to London that weekend but they are running to many other destinations.

Which is why the signs say:

"No Trains To London. Do Not Travel."

CaptainHaddock said:
I don't wish to repeat myself, but what LNER should have done is find a concise way of saying "We're not running any direct services to London on 25-26 January. You can still get there but it will take a lot longer and services will be very busy".

I will repeat myself. They (and that is the industry and not just LNER) have found a concise way of getting their message across. It's:

"No Trains To London. Do Not Travel."

CaptainHaddock · 2 Jan 2020

transmanche said:
Which is why the signs say:

"No Trains To London. Do Not Travel."

I will repeat myself. They (and that is the industry and not just LNER) have found a concise way of getting their message across. It's:

"No Trains To London. Do Not Travel."

They could make it even more concise and just state "No Trains To London". The choice of whether to travel or not rests with the customer and is not an order a train company has any right to make to its potential customers.

transmanche · 2 Jan 2020

CaptainHaddock said:
The choice of whether to travel or not rests with the customer and is not an order a train company has any right to make to its potential customers.

It's not an order. It's sound advice.

CaptainHaddock · 2 Jan 2020

transmanche said:
It's not an order. It's sound advice.

We're getting into semantics now, but I would interpret any sign that starts "DO NOT" as an order.

However they word it, it IS possible to get to London by public transport operated by LNER on 25-26 January, so what they're effectively doing is providing a service and telling people not to use it!

londonbridge · 2 Jan 2020

What about if they just said "There are no direct trains toLondon. Please visit (website address) to plan alternative routes"?

30907 · 2 Jan 2020

londonbridge said:
What about if they just said "There are no direct trains toLondon. Please visit (website address) to plan alternative routes"?

That's fine if there's serious alternative capacity, which there isn't
And the LNER website address appears on the original display.

Andyh82 · 2 Jan 2020

londonbridge said:
What about if they just said "There are no direct trains toLondon. Please visit (website address) to plan alternative routes"?

Because they want people not to plan alternative routes, as said routes won’t be able to handle the volume.

Imagine if all LNER passengers independently worked out that they could travel via Sheffield?

And then 500 people per hour turn up to board the 3 car TPE to Sheffield, and then try and board the EMR service along with everyone who travels with EMR anyway

Cue footage on social media and then the wider media of people standing down aisles on trains or people queuing down the street outside a station as capacity is overwhelmed.

sheff1 · 2 Jan 2020

bb21 said:
Sigh! (Not at you, but this alleged silliness.) Do you want the long answer or the short answer?

I would be most interested in the long answer. Always goood to get the full details.

Starmill · 2 Jan 2020

Andyh82 said:
Because they want people not to plan alternative routes, as said routes won’t be able to handle the volume.

Except the ones who've got Advance tickets on the alternative trains (Northern and EMR) via Sheffield, presumably?

sheff1 · 2 Jan 2020

Andyh82 said:
And then 500 people per hour turn up to board the 3 car TPE to Sheffield, and then try and board the EMR service along with everyone who travels with EMR anyway

Are there really 500 people an hour travelling from Doncaster to London on Saturdays and Sundays ?

45107 · 3 Jan 2020

sheff1 said:
Are there really 500 people an hour travelling from Doncaster to London on Saturdays and Sundays ?

No.
How many trains per hour stop at or pass through Doncaster for London ?
How many passengers are on these from the north ?
How many will decide to travel via Sheffield ?

Change at Doncaster for the MML instead of bus from Peterborough seems a good option.
Is 500 an unrealistic figure unless efforts are made to suppress demand.

Andyh82 · 3 Jan 2020

sheff1 said:
Are there really 500 people an hour travelling from Doncaster to London on Saturdays and Sundays ?

Well no probably not, but you’ll also have those from Leeds, Wakefield, York, Durham, Darlington and Newcastle probably thinking about travelling via Sheffield so overloading the 4 car Crosscountry Voyager in that case.

jon0844 · 3 Jan 2020

Andyh82 said:
Well no probably not, but you’ll also have those from Leeds, Wakefield, York, Durham, Darlington and Newcastle probably thinking about travelling via Sheffield so overloading the 4 car Crosscountry Voyager in that case.

Certainly not every hour, but at certain times (especially Sunday afternoon and into the evening) Intercity services are very busy indeed, with people going home from various places.

CaptainHaddock · 3 Jan 2020

Andyh82 said:
Well no probably not, but you’ll also have those from Leeds, Wakefield, York, Durham, Darlington and Newcastle probably thinking about travelling via Sheffield so overloading the 4 car Crosscountry Voyager in that case.

If only Cross Country knew about this in advance so they could double up their Voyagers on the busier services....

Do not travel! [Kings Cross weekend closures Jan/Feb 2020]

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Emeritus Moderator

Emeritus Moderator

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member

On Moderation

Established Member

Veteran Member

Established Member