whitby to chinley not darlington help

Chapeltom · 30 Jul 2011

Hi all

Got tickets - Whitby to York Not Darlington and York to Chinley. Both singles

Am I right in thinking

1241 to 1407 - [stn]WTB[/stn] to Middlesbrough
1450 to 1550 - Middlesbrough to York
1606 to 1720 - York to Sheffield
1814 to 1855 - Sheffield to Chinley

Is the quickest way home?

Cheers

RailUK Forums

gnolife · 30 Jul 2011

Chapeltom said:
Hi all

Got tickets - Whitby to York Not Darlington and York to Chinley. Both singles

Am I right in thinking

1241 to 1407 - [stn]WTB[/stn] to Middlesbrough
1450 to 1550 - Middlesbrough to York
1606 to 1720 - York to Sheffield
1814 to 1855 - Sheffield to Chinley

Is the quickest way home?

Cheers

I'm going to assume you are travelling on a weekday
Youre better off changing at Manchester Piccadilly, so stick with that 14:50
12:41 Whitby - Middlesbrough 14:07
14:50 Middlesbrough - Manchester Piccadilly 17:25 (train continues to Man Airport)
17:43 Manchester Piccadilly - Chinley 18:08 (train continues to Nottingham)

Chapeltom · 30 Jul 2011

Would York to Chinley (18.40 single) be valid via Manchester then as its any permitted?

hairyhandedfool · 30 Jul 2011

York and Chinley are both routeing points, and bring up maps CE or ER+SH, neither show Manchester as a valid route.

yorkie · 30 Jul 2011

Chapeltom said:
Would York to Chinley (18.40 single) be valid via Manchester then as its any permitted?

The shortest route by regular services is, I believe, 76 miles (York > Doncaster > Sheffield > Chinley).

York > Stalybridge > Guide Bridge > Chinley is also 76 miles, so is a permitted route (any route up to 3 miles longer than the route via Doncaster & Sheffield should be permitted). However as trains from Stalybridge do not call at Guide Bridge, I believe the easement that allows journeys from Stalybridge and beyond to Guide Bridge applies, which means that double-backing through Manchester Piccadilly is permitted.

Of course, in reality, the guard is obviously just going to accept the ticket, and not get out the National Rail Timetable and calculate shortest routes, and the easement list. If they did, they'd not get many tickets checked.

hairyhandedfool · 30 Jul 2011

The only easements I know of in that area are....

30261 Customers travelling between Manchester Piccadilly and Stalybridge may
travel via Guide Bridge. This easement applies in both directions.

300433 Customers travelling from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge and beyond may
doubleback via Manchester Piccadilly. This easement applies in both
directions.

Furthermore, it is dubious as to if they would apply to the shortest route, as it is a permitted route BEFORE consulting the routeing guide.

yorkie · 30 Jul 2011

hairyhandedfool said:
Furthermore, it is dubious as to if they would apply to the shortest route, as it is a permitted route BEFORE consulting the routeing guide.

But as it's only not the shortest route because of the service patterns, which force you to double-back against your will, you then consult the RG to see if there is an easement.

If there is any doubt, then there is legislation that deals with that.

The Unfair Terms in Consumer Contracts Regulations 1999
Written contracts
7. - (1) A seller or supplier shall ensure that any written term of a contract is expressed in plain, intelligible language.
(2) If there is doubt about the meaning of a written term, the interpretation which is most favourable to the consumer shall prevail but this rule shall not apply in proceedings brought under regulation 12.
http://www.opsi.gov.uk/si/si1999/19992083.htm

The interpretation that is most favourable to the consumer in this case is that the easement does apply, as it's a positive easement.

If we were debating whether or not a negative easement applied, then that would not be the interpretation which is most favourable to the consumer.

It is my belief that a negative easement cannot rule out a route which is valid as per the shortest route, because the NRCoC gives us the right to use the shortest route. However a positive easement can benefit the customer, who then consults the RG when it is realised that double-backing would be involved, to determine if an easement permits it.

Needless to say I have never had this debate with a guard when on such tickets, nor would I expect to! :lol:

hairyhandedfool · 30 Jul 2011

The NCoC says the permitted routes are the shortest route, direct trains and those shown in the RG.

The Routeing Guide says that you only consult it when the shortest route and direct trains are not being used.

By your own admission York-Doncaster-Sheffield-Chinley is shorter than York-Manchester-Chinley.

Unless you can show that an easement says that passengers travelling via Stalybridge and Guide Bridge may travel via Manchester and that it applies to the shortest route, I can't agree with you and I don't think a court (if it ever came to that) would either.

For the record, it is my belief that easements, regardless of being positive or negative cannot apply to the shortest route and direct trains because they are noted in the RG as valid before consulting the RG and are listed in the NCoC as valid, regardless of what the RG says.

yorkie · 30 Jul 2011

Here we go again :roll:

hairyhandedfool said:
The NCoC says the permitted routes are the shortest route, direct trains and those shown in the RG.

The Routeing Guide says that you only consult it when the shortest route and direct trains are not being used.

Yes, because sometimes a route will involve doubling back, requiring an easement. If it's the absolute shortest, you do not need to check the guide. But if the shortest route has an infrequent service then it is worth checking the guide to determine if there is an easement that permits doubling back.

hairyhandedfool said:
By your own admission York-Doncaster-Sheffield-Chinley is shorter than York-Manchester-Chinley.

It's not the customers' fault that the York-Manchester trains do not call at Guide Bridge! The fact that these trains do not call there means that an easement exists to enable passengers to double-back into Manchester.

hairyhandedfool said:
Unless you can show that an easement says that passengers travelling via Stalybridge and Guide Bridge may travel via Manchester

Ah, I see, you're now being pedantic about the wording "from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge and beyond", well obviously the "and beyond" must, clearly, apply to both Guide Bridge and Stalybridge. It could be worded a bit better - like many of ATOCs easements and rules!

If you are claiming that only journeys to/from Guide Bridge are valid, then that makes journeys like York-Hadfield impossible without going via Victoria! That is clearly not the case.

Your argument on this point is a complete red herring. Are you seriously telling me that I can't go York-Man Picc-Hadfield because that journey is via Guide Bridge rather than specifically to Guide Bridge? If so, you're wrong.

hairyhandedfool said:
and that it applies to the shortest route

There's nothing to say it doesn't, and it would be daft to suggest that.

hairyhandedfool said:
I can't agree with you and I don't think a court (if it ever came to that) would either.

Well, I doubt a court would agree with you!

hairyhandedfool said:
For the record, it is my belief that easements, regardless of being positive or negative cannot apply to the shortest route and direct trains because they are noted in the RG as valid before consulting the RG and are listed in the NCoC as valid, regardless of what the RG says.

I agree that a negative easement cannot prevent the shortest route or direct trains being valid, because if they are the shortest or direct you have no need to consult the RG.

But I do not agree with your statement that a positive easement can only apply to a mapped route. This is not stated anywhere and defies reasonable logic. Not only that, but it would render easements such as the following useless:

30007 Journeys to and from Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill may doubleback via Bristol Temple Meads.

Given that these stations share a common Routeing Point, clearly there are no mapped routes. But the easement does allow doubling back. This is proof that your statement is wrong, and is not how the Routeing Guide is implemented.

hairyhandedfool · 31 Jul 2011

yorkie said:
I agree that a negative easement cannot prevent the shortest route or direct trains being valid, because if they are the shortest or direct you have no need to consult the RG....

So you are saying that "an easement" cannot affect the shortest route, but that "an easement" can affect the shortest route?

Case closed!

Olympian · 31 Jul 2011

None of the booking engines I've tried will allow York to Chinley to go via Stalybridge, Guide Bridge or Manchester, and National Rail Enquiries consistently says you need two tickets for these journeys. Are they all wrong?

yorkie · 31 Jul 2011

hairyhandedfool said:
So you are saying that "an easement" cannot affect the shortest route, but that "an easement" can affect the shortest route?

Case closed!

If a route is the shortest, then it is valid and a negative easement cannot prevent that as once you determine it's the shortest there is no need to consult the RG. If there is no regular service on the shortest route without doubling back, then it appears your argument is that you cannot consult the RG to determine if an easement permits it. I do not accept that argument.

You are claiming that the easement for Bristol quoted above does not apply. But it does.

Olympian said:
None of the booking engines I've tried will allow York to Chinley to go via Stalybridge, Guide Bridge or Manchester, and National Rail Enquiries consistently says you need two tickets for these journeys. Are they all wrong?

They are all occasionally wrong, and that is a fact. The question is whether this is one of the occasions when they are wrong? I believe it is, yes.

hairyhandedfool · 31 Jul 2011

I am claiming that:

The shortest route is always valid, regardless of doubleback or ANY easements.

Direct Trains are always valid, regardless of doubleback or ANY easements.

Only routes shown in the Routeing Guide are affected by ANY Routeing Guide Easements.

yorkie said:
If a route is the shortest, then it is valid and a negative easement cannot prevent that as once you determine it's the shortest there is no need to consult the RG....

Absolutely. No easements apply before consulting the routeing guide.

yorkie said:
....If there is no regular service on the shortest route without doubling back, then it appears your argument is that you cannot consult the RG to determine if an easement permits it. I do not accept that argument....

What you "accept" is irrelevant. The shortest route is always valid. If you do not consult the Routeing Guide, the easements cannot apply. If you do consult the Routeing Guide, you are not using the shortest route or direct trains.

The NRCoC says....

13. The route you are entitled to take

(a) You may travel between the stations shown on the ticket you hold in:
(i) a through train;
(ii) trains which take the shortest route which can be used by scheduled
passenger services; or
(iii) trains which take the routes shown in the National Routeing Guide
(details as to how you can obtain this information will be available
when you buy your ticket).

(b) If you are using a Zonal Ticket you may travel in trains which take any route within
the zone or zones shown on the ticket.

(c) Together, the routes referred to in (a) (ii), (a) (iii) and (b) above are the
“permitted routes”.

(d) The use of some tickets may be restricted to trains which take:
(i) routes passing through, or avoiding, particular locations; or
(ii) the most direct route.
These restrictions will be shown on the ticket.

(e) If you make your journey by a route other than those referred to in (a) and (b)
above, you will be liable to pay an excess fare. This excess fare will be the
difference between the price paid for the ticket you hold and the price of the
lowest priced ticket(s) available for immediate travel that would have entitled you
to travel by that route.

(f) For the purposes of this Condition, a “through train” is one which may be
used by a passenger to make their entire journey without changing trains.

The Routeing Guide says....

WHEN TO USE THE NATIONAL ROUTEING GUIDE

Most customers wish to make journeys by through trains or by the
shortest route. In both cases they will be travelling on a permitted route,
provided the correct fare has been paid to reflect any routeing indicated by
the fares manual. You only need refer to the Routeing Guide when a
customer is not using an advertised through train or the shortest route. A
through train is advertised in the passenger railway timetable as a direct
service which offers travel between a customer’s origin station and final
destination, as printed on the ticket for the journey being made. This route
may not be a permitted route if a change of train is necessary to complete
the journey. The shortest route is calculated by reference to the National Rail
Timetable.

CALCULATING SHORTEST DISTANCES

As the shortest route for any journey is always a permitted route, this can be
checked, and the distance between stations calculated, from the National Rail
Timetable. Mileages appear in the station column at the beginning of each
major table, except table 51. To arrive at the throughout distance for travel
between every station by any route, add mileages together for the
component parts of the journey by referring to the relevant timetables.

Given that the National Routeing guide makes no differentiation between when any of the easements are applied, where do you think the easements fit in exactly????

In your example, Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill are on the same line into Bristol, the shortest route is direct meaning this and direct trains are always permitted routes.

IF YOU ARE NOT USING THE SHORTEST ROUTE OR DIRECT TRAINS YOU MAY USE THE ROUTEING GUIDE TO DETERMINE THE PERMITTED ROUTES.

The Routeing Guide says they are both part of Bristol Group, so the Routeing Guide allows the shortest route. HOWEVER, there is an easment which applies to allow you to travel via Bristol Temple Meads, this is now a permitted route even though it doubles back.

For a so called "ticketing expert" this really should be childs play.

yorkie said:
....I believe it is....

And that is what matters isn't it???? (rhetorical)

For your next trick, you will feed the five thousand. (sarcasm, no offense intended to any believers)

yorkie · 31 Jul 2011

hairyhandedfool said:
What you "accept" is irrelevant.

The feeling is mutual

hairyhandedfool said:
The shortest route is always valid.

So, do you accept that York-Guide Bridge-Chinley is valid?

hairyhandedfool said:
If you do not consult the Routeing Guide, the easements cannot apply.

But surely you can consult the Routeing Guide, if you discover that a route you wish to take on the shortest route rule has no service (except in the opposite direction on a Friday morning)

hairyhandedfool said:
If you do consult the Routeing Guide, you are not using the shortest route or direct trains.

Given that the National Routeing guide makes no differentiation between when any of the easements are applied, where do you think the easements fit in exactly????

The easements can surely apply to the journey irrespective of whether or not it's the shortest route or a mapped route. The easements apply if you consult the RG. If on the shortest route there is nothing compelling you to read them or abide by them, though ATOC obviously think otherwise.

hairyhandedfool said:
In your example, Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill are on the same line into Bristol, the shortest route is direct meaning this and direct trains are always permitted routes.

IF YOU ARE NOT USING THE SHORTEST ROUTE OR DIRECT TRAINS YOU MAY USE THE ROUTEING GUIDE TO DETERMINE THE PERMITTED ROUTES.

The Routeing Guide says they are both part of Bristol Group, so the Routeing Guide allows the shortest route. HOWEVER, there is an easment which applies to allow you to travel via Bristol Temple Meads, this is now a permitted route even though it doubles back.

For a so call "ticketing expert" this really should be childs play.

No need for insults :roll: You are now agreeing that you can use the Routeing Guide to determine if there is an easement when doubling-back on a route that is not a mapped route!

hairyhandedfool · 31 Jul 2011

yorkie said:
....So, do you accept that York-Guide Bridge-Chinley is valid?....

I cannot vouch for the mileages you quoted, but if it is the shortest route then yes it is valid, provided a sheduled passenger service operates.

yorkie said:
....But surely you can consult the Routeing Guide, if you discover that a route you wish to take on the shortest route rule has no service (except in the opposite direction on a Friday morning)....

If we say there is no service on the route between Stalybridge and Guide Bridge, what is the shortest route by which a sheduled service runs?

If you are using the shortest route or direct trains you do not need to consult the Routeing Guide.

If the route you intend to take is NOT the shortest route or by direct trains, you need to consult the Routeing Guide.

yorkie said:
....The easements can surely apply to the journey irrespective of whether or not it's the shortest route or a mapped route. The easements apply if you consult the RG. If on the shortest route there is nothing compelling you to read them or abide by them, though ATOC obviously think otherwise....

The easements only apply when you consult the Routeing Guide since the shortest route and direct trains are always valid. If you are using the shortest route or a direct train, why would you consult the Routeing Guide?

yorkie said:
....No need for insults :roll: You are now agreeing that you can use the Routeing Guide to determine if there is an easement when doubling-back on a route that is not a mapped route!

Okay, I'll try to put this in very simple terms so even you can understand it.

The National Conditions of Carriage say the shortest route is ALWAYS valid.

The National Conditions of Carriage say direct trains are ALWAYS valid.

The National Conditions of Carriage say routes allowed by the Routeing guide are ALWAYS valid.

The Routeing Guide says you do not need to consult the Routeing Guide if you are using the shortest route or direct trains (why would you? You are using a valid route!).

The only reason you would use the routeing guide is if the route is not the shortest or on a direct train, why would you need to if the shortest route and direct trains are always valid?

So, we can safely say in your Bristol example that via Bristol is not the shortest route, nor is it using a direct train. Lets look at the routeing guide then.

Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill are both part of Bristol Group

Oh look, it says the shortest route is the only one allowed by the guide...

...But wait a minute, there is an easement which helps us and now we can go via Bristol.

Does this mean via Bristol is the shortest route? Not a chance, it is just an easement in the Routeing Guide which allows that route.

yorkie · 31 Jul 2011

hairyhandedfool said:
The Routeing Guide says you do not need to consult the Routeing Guide if you are using the shortest route or direct trains (why would you? You are using a valid route!).

That is not being disputed. The problem is where a route is included within the definition of the shortest route, but the trains do not call at the station en-route where you wish to change, then you may wish to consult the RG to see if there is an easement.

hairyhandedfool said:
The only reason you would use the routeing guide is if the route is not the shortest or on a direct train, why would you need to if the shortest route and direct trains are always valid?

So, we can safely say in your Bristol example that via Bristol is not the shortest route, nor is it using a direct train. Lets look at the routeing guide then.

Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill are both part of Bristol Group

Oh look, it says the shortest route is the only one allowed by the guide...

...But wait a minute, there is an easement which helps us and now we can go via Bristol.

Does this mean via Bristol is the shortest route? Not a chance, it is just an easement in the Routeing Guide which allows that route.

So this is further confirmation then that you admit that easements can apply to non-mapped routes that would not normally be valid, thus making the longer route to include doubling-back valid.

To go back to this claim..

hairyhandedfool said:
Unless you can show that an easement says that passengers travelling via Stalybridge and Guide Bridge may travel via Manchester

I have demonstrated that it is for travel via Guide Bridge and not just to Guide Bridge with my Hadfield example. As you have not contested this, I will assume we are not debating on this particular issue.

hairyhandedfool said:
and that it applies to the shortest route,

If it does not apply to the shortest route, you are suggesting it only applies to mapped routes? In my Bristol example the only permitted routes are the shortest route and direct trains, but you may consult the RG to determine if there is an easement, and if you do, you discover that doubling back via Bristol is permitted.

I do not claim that makes the shortest route via Bristol or that the mileage via Bristol can be given to to be the shortest route, so please don't suggest I am. You can word it however you like, it's valid. Perhaps one way of viewing it would be to consider the easement is effectively allowing the additional mileage to/from Bristol to count as zero.

The fact is that via Bristol would not be valid unless the easement permits it, and the easement does permit it, because customers may view the RG to determine if there is an easement. I agree that they may choose not to because, as you say, the shortest route is valid without consulting the RG. But that doesn't mean they can't view the RG if they want.

OwlMan · 31 Jul 2011

Surely travelling via Manchester then makes the route over 3 miles longer than the shortest route and therefore invalid.

Peter

yorkie · 31 Jul 2011

collybs said:
Surely travelling via Manchester then makes the route over 3 miles longer than the shortest route and therefore invalid.

Peter

I would agree, but surely the easement makes routes that would otherwise be invalid, valid?

It is absurd that the quickest route can possibly be deemed invalid anyway, but ignoring that issue for now...

Stapleton Road to Filton Abbey Wood via Bristol TM is more than 3 miles longer than the shortest route and therefore invalid.

So are all easements to be ignored if they are trumped by the shortest route rule? If so, that renders various easements unusable and makes some journeys impossible!

Someone should tell the TOCs to stop selling York to Hadfield tickets (to name just one example) then!

hairyhandedfool · 31 Jul 2011

If you had read the Routeing Guide you would know....

Journeys on direct trains or taking the route of shortest distance or a distance longer
by no more than 3 miles are always following a permitted route. Journeys following a
route given by the Routeing Guide are following a permitted route.

A journey not obeying these rules is not taking a permitted route unless an
easement allows it.

So you can see how "Positive Easements" can allow a non-mapped route to be valid.

Lets appy this to Stapleton Road-Lawrence Hill

We want to go Stapleton Road-Bristol Temple Meads-Lawrence Hill.

Is that the shortest route?....No.
Is it a direct train?....No.
Is it allowed by the Routeing Guide instructions?....No.
Is there an easement?....Lets see....

30007 Journeys to and from Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill may doubleback via Bristol Temple Meads.

It is a valid route.

Lets now apply this to York-Chinley.

We want to go York-Stalybridge-Manchester-Guide Bridge-Chinley.

Is that the shortest route?....No.
Is it a direct Service?....No.
Is it allowed by the Routeing Guide instructions?....No.
Is there an easement?.... Well, lets see....

30261 Customers travelling between Manchester Piccadilly and Stalybridge may
travel via Guide Bridge. This easement applies in both directions.

No help there, we are travelling from York to Stalybrige to Manchester to Guide Bridge to Chinley.

300433 Customers travelling from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge and beyond may
doubleback via Manchester Piccadilly. This easement applies in both
directions.

Well, we are travelling from beyond Stalybridge and that is specifically mentioned, but travelling beyond Guide Bridge is not, guess that doesn't apply then.

It is not a valid route.

So whilst the easements are of great benefit to the people of Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill, they don't help those travelling from York to Chinley or vice versa.

yorkie · 31 Jul 2011

hairyhandedfool said:
No help there, we are travelling from York to Stalybrige to Manchester to Guide Bridge to Chinley.

Amazing.

You appear to have dropped your claim that you can't look up easements under the shortest route rule. But you have gone back to your earlier claim that it's the easement itself that isn't sufficient!

So we'll have to look at the easement then...

hairyhandedfool said:
Well, we are travelling from beyond Stalybridge and that is specifically mentioned, but travelling beyond Guide Bridge is not, guess that doesn't apply then.

It is not a valid route.

So whilst the easements are of great benefit to the people of Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill, they don't help those travelling from York to Chinley or vice versa.

So, you are saying that York-Hadfield is not valid for double-backing between Guide Bridge and Manchester because of the fact that the way it is worded and interpreted by you is that only journeys specifically to Guide Bridge itself are valid by that easement?

So a York-Hadfield ticket can't be used for doubling-back between Guide Bridge and Manchester Piccadilly?!

hairyhandedfool · 31 Jul 2011

You were the one suggesting via Manchester is valid by the shortest route, even though, by your own admission it is not the shortest route.

You are the one saying easements do apply, unless they don't, even when the documents you are using don't specify a difference, assuming you need to read them, which you don't.

You have on a few occasions in this thread avoided answering the questions I have put to you, yet you continue to try to undermine my understanding of the guide. You can produce no credible evidence that your interpretation is correct which leads me to suspect you have no further point to make on the subject and can only try to pick apart my explanation. In my opinion, this is the first sign of a losing an arguement/discussion.

This is not the first time you have done so and given the pm you sent me, stating your bias on the subject, I will presume you have no interest in seeing this as the rules state.

I think you know the rules are not as you claim, but have an interest in them not being that way, that makes your claims somewhat tarnished.

I see no point in continuing this discussion whilst you refuse to acknowledge the facts presented to you.

bb21 · 1 Aug 2011

yorkie said:
30007 Journeys to and from Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill may doubleback via Bristol Temple Meads.

Given that these stations share a common Routeing Point, clearly there are no mapped routes. But the easement does allow doubling back. This is proof that your statement is wrong, and is not how the Routeing Guide is implemented.

hairyhandedfool said:
Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill are both part of Bristol Group

Oh look, it says the shortest route is the only one allowed by the guide...

...But wait a minute, there is an easement which helps us and now we can go via Bristol.

Does this mean via Bristol is the shortest route? Not a chance, it is just an easement in the Routeing Guide which allows that route.

hairyhandedfool said:
In your example, Stapleton Road and Lawrence Hill are on the same line into Bristol, the shortest route is direct meaning this and direct trains are always permitted routes.

IF YOU ARE NOT USING THE SHORTEST ROUTE OR DIRECT TRAINS YOU MAY USE THE ROUTEING GUIDE TO DETERMINE THE PERMITTED ROUTES.

The Routeing Guide says they are both part of Bristol Group, so the Routeing Guide allows the shortest route. HOWEVER, there is an easment which applies to allow you to travel via Bristol Temple Meads, this is now a permitted route even though it doubles back.

I have no intention to interrupt your debate on this subject matter, however can I ask a question?

Am I the only one seeing similarities between these two examples?

I will list them side by side to illustrate my point.

Code:

                            Bristol Example    Manchester Example
Shortest Route              Direct             via Stalybridge and Guide Bridge
Route Proposed              via Bristol        via Manchester Piccadilly
Proposed Route Shortest?    No                 No
Proposed Route Direct?      No                 No
Proposed Route Mapped?      No                 No
Any Easements Applicable?   Yes, 30007         Yes, 300433
                           (Applied on        (Applied on
                            shortest           shortest
                            route)             route)

Hence if one accepts that the first proposed journey doubling back via Bristol Temple Meads is permitted, then they must accept the second proposed journey doubling back via Manchester Piccadilly is permitted too.

The mileages, according to the NRT, are:

York - Doncaster - Sheffield - Chinley = 32.5 + 19 + 25.5 = 77 miles
York - Leeds - Huddersfield - Stalybridge - Guide Bridge - Romiley - Chinley = 25.5 + 17.25 + 18 + 2.75 + 5.75 + 9 = 78.25 miles

(Stalybridge - Guide Bridge has no mileage recored in the NRT. I obtained it by subtracting Manchester Piccadilly - Guide Bridge (4.75 miles) from Manchester Piccadilly - Stalybridge (7.5 miles), giving 2.75 miles.)

tony_mac · 1 Aug 2011

hairyhandedfool said:
I think you know the rules are not as you claim, but have an interest in them not being that way, that makes your claims somewhat tarnished.

FWIW, I can't really follow your claims - I don't know if you are claiming that positive easements cannot apply to shortest routes or that the easement does not apply because it says 'from' not 'via'.

You seem to have both disagreed and agreed with both things during the course of this thread.

I see no point in continuing this discussion whilst you refuse to acknowledge the facts presented to you.

I imagine he is still trying to understand what it is that you are claiming as fact.

bb21 · 1 Aug 2011

tony_mac said:
FWIW, I can't really follow your claims - I don't know if you are claiming that positive easements cannot apply to shortest routes or that the easement does not apply because it says 'from' not 'via'.

I think his point is that easements (positive or negative) do not apply to shortest routes as shortest routes are always valid. In such case, there should be no consultation with the Routeing Guide, hence easements are not relevant as easements only apply if the Routeing Guide needs to be consulted. I agree with him, however what we are discussing here (doubling back via Manchester Piccadilly) is not the shortest route, hence the easements could apply based on this argument.

Edit:
Also let's consider this. Positive easements are not needed for shortest routes as they're always valid. They are not intended to apply to direct services for the same reason. They do not apply to mapped routes either as they're also valid. Therefore the only time when positive easements apply is when the proposed route is neither shortest, on a direct service, nor mapped, which is exactly what happened in our examples.

exile · 1 Aug 2011

Though I still have scars from my last participation in such a discussion, York to Hadfield comes up with changes at Manchester Piccadilly on online ticket sites, as does Stalybridge to Hadfield. However I suspect that is the shortest route.

As an aside - how does the "shortest route" calculation cater for journeys where you have to walk between stations? That is, is 6 miles on a train shorter than 3 miles, a 2 mile walk and another 2 miles?

yorkie · 1 Aug 2011

exile said:
As an aside - how does the "shortest route" calculation cater for journeys where you have to walk between stations?

The short answer is "we don't really know".

There are not many journeys where you are forced to walk. An example would be Cheshunt to Stevenage Rte Hertford, though there is an Any Permitted to avoid that. Another example would be Sherborne to Thornford, although the booking site suggests FGW run a connecting bus - is this the case? There may be some in the Warrington area that force a walk.

hairyhandedfool · 2 Aug 2011

bb21 said:
....Hence if one accepts that the first proposed journey doubling back via Bristol Temple Meads is permitted, then they must accept the second proposed journey doubling back via Manchester Piccadilly is permitted too....

The Temple Meads example is not valid by the shortest route, it is valid by an easement in the Routeing Guide, a specific easement which specifically says it is valid. The shortest route between York and Chinley is not via Manchester, there is no easement to allow journeys from beyond Guide Bridge to Stalybridge or beyond (or vice versa) to go via Manchester.

exile said:
Though I still have scars from my last participation in such a discussion, York to Hadfield comes up with changes at Manchester Piccadilly on online ticket sites, as does Stalybridge to Hadfield. However I suspect that is the shortest route....

I would also suspect this is the case, however I can't confirm it, there are other routes suggested in the Routeing Guide, only one might be shorter, (York-Stalybridge-Manchester Victoria-Manchester Piccadilly-Guide Bridge-Hadfield) however, it is probably within three miles.

exile said:
....As an aside - how does the "shortest route" calculation cater for journeys where you have to walk between stations? That is, is 6 miles on a train shorter than 3 miles, a 2 mile walk and another 2 miles?

My understanding (and it is only an understanding) is that walking interchanges between recognised 'local' stations count as 0 miles. For example, Warrington Bank Quay to Warrington Central would be 0 miles.

However I think the older National Timetables showed mileages for these, to tell people unfamiliar with the journey how far it is. They accompanied a smallish local map. I don't know if these mileages are shown anywhere now.

That said, these mileages never appeared in the timetables themselves to my knowledge, which is what we are supposed to use for the shortest route.

yorkie · 2 Aug 2011

hairyhandedfool said:
The Temple Meads example is not valid by the shortest route, it is valid by an easement in the Routeing Guide, a specific easement which specifically says it is valid.

Just like the Guide Bridge/Stalybridge example then!

hairyhandedfool said:
The shortest route between York and Chinley is not via Manchester,

Neither is the shortest route from Stapleton Road to Filton via Bristol Temple Meads!

(This could go on forever! You just don't appear to like one particular easement!)

hairyhandedfool said:
there is no easement to allow journeys from beyond Guide Bridge to Stalybridge or beyond (or vice versa) to go via Manchester.

It clearly, quite obviously does include beyond Guide Bridge. The "and beyond" applies to both Guide Bridge and Stalybridge. Yes, ATOC should have worded it better.

Are you seriously telling me that if I get a York to Manchester TPE train, I am permitted to remain on the train to Manchester if going to Guide Bridge only, but anywhere beyond that (e.g. York to Flowery Field, York to Hadfield) I have to change at Huddersfield or Stalybridge and walk from Victoria to Piccadilly?! So far you have avoided answering this question, but what you say implies you believe this to be the case. No guard would ever try to claim this, and clearly it is not intended to read that way!

hairyhandedfool said:
My understanding (and it is only an understanding) is that walking interchanges between recognised 'local' stations count as 0 miles. For example, Warrington Bank Quay to Warrington Central would be 0 miles.

Yes, they do count as 0 miles. The problem is figuring out when we must walk, and when we have the option to walk, and when we cannot walk. I am aware of the existence of an 'OSI map' in London (which could probably be obtained with an FOI request; the list already has) but not a national one.

hairyhandedfool · 2 Aug 2011

yorkie said:
Just like the Guide Bridge/Stalybridge example then!....

What Easement are you attempting to use? As you are not travelling to/from Guide Bridge, I don't see how the easements mentioned in this thread help you.

yorkie said:
....Neither is the shortest route from Stapleton Road to Filton via Bristol Temple Meads! ....

Are you now using another example? Or did you mean Stapleton Road to Lawrence Hill?

yorkie said:
....(This could go on forever! You just don't appear to like one particular easement!)

It clearly, quite obviously does include beyond Guide Bridge. The "and beyond" applies to both Guide Bridge and Stalybridge. Yes, ATOC should have worded it better....

It is not 'clearly' like that at all. It 'quite obviously' says "....from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge and beyond...". Maybe ATOC got it spot on! You don't know, so you are interpreting it as you see fit, not as it is clearly and obviously written.

yorkie said:
....Are you seriously telling me that if I get a York to Manchester TPE train, I am permitted to remain on the train to Manchester if going to Guide Bridge only, but anywhere beyond that (e.g. York to Flowery Field, York to Hadfield) I have to change at Huddersfield or Stalybridge and walk from Victoria to Piccadilly?! So far you have avoided answering this question, but what you say implies you believe this to be the case. No guard would ever try to claim this, and clearly it is not intended to read that way!....

If you are on the shortest route you can doubleback as there is no rule to stop you doing so. THE SHORTEST ROUTE IS ALWAYS VALID.

If you are on a direct train you can doubleback as there is no rule to stop you doing so. DIRECT TRAINS ALWAYS TRAVEL ALONG A PERMITTED ROUTE.

If you are not using the shortest route or a direct train, you should consult the Routeing Guide to see if it is valid.

If you are on a route which has not so far been identified as a permitted route by any of the the above, you can check the easements to see if it allowed.

yorkie · 2 Aug 2011

hairyhandedfool said:
What Easement are you attempting to use? As you are not travelling to/from Guide Bridge, I don't see how the easements mentioned in this thread help you.

So, you really do think that York-Hadfield can't be done with one change at Manchester Piccadilly!

I rest my case :lol:

hairyhandedfool said:
Are you now using another example? Or did you mean Stapleton Road to Lawrence Hill?

It's the same easement, use whichever example you want!

hairyhandedfool said:
It is not 'clearly' like that at all. It 'quite obviously' says "....from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge and beyond...". Maybe ATOC got it spot on! You don't know, so you are interpreting it as you see fit, not as it is clearly and obviously written.

Think what you want to think! A York-Flowery Field ticket is just as valid for double-backing between Guide Bridge & Manchester Picc as a York-Guide Bridge ticket is.

whitby to chinley not darlington help

Established Member

RailUK Forums

Established Member

Established Member

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Emeritus Moderator

Established Member

Emeritus Moderator

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff

Established Member

Forum Staff