"Allow less time to transfer through London" problem

[extendedpaul]

The minimum connection time has to allow for a passenger arriving at the country end of of platform 18 at Euston to get to the far end of platform 13 at St Pancras. You know where you’re going and will probably be able to walk at a fast pace but the interchange time has to allow for someone walking a little slower then average who might have luggage or children with them.

Many people unfamiliar with rail travel would say the interchange times are too short. I don’t agree with this bit you need to understand that they have to be suitable for the majority of passengers, not the few who can do the copposite nnection much quicker.

There is a facility on National Rail Enquiries to request EXTRA time to change trains and that does allow a ticket to be purchased with connections allowing longer to get between stations . Given that, and that allowing LESS time isn't permitted, surely it makes sense to make the default on a transfer like Euston to St Pancras or Kings Cross a bit less than 40 minutes ?

 

[A Challenge]

The problem is partly it is the STP minimum time (for SEHS to Thameslink I guess) which takes longer than to the exit!

 

[Hadders]

That makes sense for the default, but it's not sensible to leave essentially no way to book what is an entirely achievable journey for the many passengers who have been to London before and aren't encumbered by 8 suitcases and a brood of screaming children

How's that going to work in reality? Consider someone with little rail experience who books a ticket, there's nothing to stop them selecting less interchange time across London. They make the journey and get delayed and miss the connection. Are they entitled to Delay Repay? They would certainly expect it?

What 'qualification' would you need to be able to use of less interchange time? Be able to walk/run a certain speed? Provide evidence of making such journeys successfully before? Be able to demonstrate 'cut-throughs' between stations. Maybe this forum could offer the 'qualification' following attendance at a Fares Workshop and test?

It really isn't feasible.

 

[extendedpaul]

The bottom line here is that the facility to select less interchange time should probably be removed from the National Rail Enquiries website altogether. The circumstances in which it might be relevant or useful are outweighed by the circumstances in which, as in my case, it creates an expectation that cannot be fulfilled with a ticket purchase and is therefore a negative customer experience.

I needed an advance ticket. I started on NRE as I always do. I found a suitable departure from Birmingham. I scanned the details and noticed I had a schedule with 62 minutes between arrival at Euston and departure from St Pancras. I felt that was too long. I ticked the box "Allow less time to transfer through London". There is a ? icon beside that which reads simply "Reduces the amount of time it takes to make journeys between London stations". It makes no reference to a minimum interchange time. Ideal, so I ticked that box. I then had a schedule with 32 minutes to transfer between Euston and St Pancras. Just what I wanted. I clicked on Buy Ticket and was initially transferred to Virgin West Coast. The schedule was back to a 62 minute connection. I couldn't understand why. I tried a couple of other train operating companies but none would recognise the schedule with 32 minutes between the stations. I have now booked with the 62 minute connection but feel "the system" has unnecessarily wasted my time and should be revised or at least clarified.

 

[aye2beeviasea]

Perhaps the rules on Advance tickets could be relaxed to allow you to travel on services say 30 mins either way of your specified train.

 

[Hadders]

Perhaps the rules on Advance tickets could be relaxed to allow you to travel on services say 30 mins either way of your specified train.

Where do you draw the line? If you need flexibility then book a flexible ticket.

 

[aye2beeviasea]

Where do you draw the line? If you need flexibility then book a flexible ticket.

Well, you could draw the line at half an hour for a start

No flexibility at all isn't the only possible alternative to complete flexibility.

 

[takno]

Well, you could draw the line at half an hour for a start

No flexibility at all isn't the only possible alternative to complete flexibility.

The trouble with that is that half an hour extra isn't all that long to wait. It's When the next train is a nice generous 35 minutes later from St Pancras with the next train not for another hour and it gives you the hour and a half. The delay repay is easy enough to manage: you are agreeing to a transit time, and if the incoming train arrives early enough for you have that time to transit then you are required to make that train and not claim delay repay, while if it doesn't then you aren't.

 

[Wirewiper]

Or just go back to having the St Pancras Intl. - Rainham leg as a "required connecting service". (Is that the right term?)

 

[Hadders]

Or just go back to having the St Pancras Intl. - Rainham leg as a "required connecting service". (Is that the right term?)

I agree with this. The OP's situation is an unintended consequence of Southeastern offering Advance fares on their own services.

 

[Paul Kelly]

I think the itinerary being offered by NRE is valid. If you look at the full details of the itinerary it's suggested (see attached screenshot), you can see that it has provided the full 15 minutes connection time at Euston and St Pancras, so I think the arguments about less mobile passengers aren't so relevant. All it is doing is allowing 2 minutes instead of 10 minutes for the Underground journey, which I think is very reasonable for the short hop on the Victoria line from Euston to King's Cross St Pancras.

I don't think NRE has just made up this shortened time. I think it is just using a different source of minimum connection time data that hasn't yet been made available to other booking engines. Also worth noting that there isn't a definitive single source of cross-London connection data and there have been threads on the forum before about how, particularly in the late evening, different booking engines offer different itineraries depending on which data they're using, e.g. https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/cross-london-transfer-times.94791/

 

[extendedpaul]

I agree with this. The OP's situation is an unintended consequence of Southeastern offering Advance fares on their own services.

This is true. There are some journeys from and into Kent which do not currently have any Southeastern Advances. On those routes advance tickets with connections allow the customer to travel on any reasonable connecting service. As such tickets are not annotated as not valid on High Speed services they can be used on HS1 and the last time I had one it operated the gateline at St Pancras Intl.

 

[robbeech]

such tickets are not annotated as not valid on High Speed services they can be used on HS1 and the last time I had one it operated the gateline at St Pancras Intl.

Whilst correct, the barriers are not a good indication of validity. A Day Travel Card will open the HS1 barriers at St Pancras.

 

[talldave]

Whilst correct, the barriers are not a good indication of validity. A Day Travel Card will open the HS1 barriers at St Pancras.

Whilst, annoyingly, some valid tickets will not.

 

[robbeech]

Whilst, annoyingly, some valid tickets will not.

Pretty much like every barrier ever then I guess.

 

[Kite159]

I think the itinerary being offered by NRE is valid. If you look at the full details of the itinerary it's suggested (see attached screenshot), you can see that it has provided the full 15 minutes connection time at Euston and St Pancras, so I think the arguments about less mobile passengers aren't so relevant. All it is doing is allowing 2 minutes instead of 10 minutes for the Underground journey, which I think is very reasonable for the short hop on the Victoria line from Euston to King's Cross St Pancras.

I don't think NRE has just made up this shortened time. I think it is just using a different source of minimum connection time data that hasn't yet been made available to other booking engines. Also worth noting that there isn't a definitive single source of cross-London connection data and there have been threads on the forum before about how, particularly in the late evening, different booking engines offer different itineraries depending on which data they're using, e.g. https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/cross-london-transfer-times.94791/

As expected, changing the default website where NRE directs you to, to a Webtis powered site (such as GWR) produces this result:

I've used that "allow less time to transfer through London" before with VT+ Connections tickets, where NRE will produce a journey involving arriving at Waterloo around 06:49 and booked onto the 07:30 Euston - Glasgow service [or 07:35 Euston - Manchester], although you loss the ability to select seats if going via GWR/TPE.

 

[sheff1]

You tell me - the tickets cannot and will not be sold by a retailer with such a short connection time. Try it.

I have tried it and my chosen retailer can and will sell such a ticket.

Edit: I see kite159's chosen retailer will sell it as well, so that is at least two who will.

 

[AlterEgo]

I have tried it and my chosen retailer can and will sell such a ticket.

Edit: I see kite159's chosen retailer will sell it as well, so that is at least two who will.

Would you mind letting me know which retailer? (I am not going to get it corrected, I promise!) - PM if you like.

This would be reasonably helpful to me in the future and I have never got it to work.

 

[sheff1]

TPE

Unnecessary sentence added as the forum will not allow posts with less then 5 characters, even though only 3 are needed to answer your question

 

[Paul Kelly]

I am not going to get it corrected, I promise!

Are you sure it's an error though?

 

[AlterEgo]

Are you sure it's an error though?

It must be as the itineraries foul minimum connection times. The connection times are there for a reason.

 

[sheff1]

I do not understand how it can be deemed "incorrect" or an "error" for a retailer to sell a ticket which is stated by NRES to be an appropriate one for an itinerary returned in response to a specific journey search request. Especially when it is NRES who have passed the ticket details through to the retailer on behalf of the passenger

Whether it is correct that NRES are returning such a ticket for that itinerary is a different matter altogether.

 

[tony_mac]

It must be as the itineraries foul minimum connection times. The connection times are there for a reason.

AFAIK, there aren't any specific 'minimum connection times' for cross-London journeys.
There were some guideline times in the timetable, but some journeys e.g., Victoria to Euston, are routinely sold which are under this time.
Also AFAIK, they are no longer published - https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/cross-london-transfer-times.125063/ )

 

[AlterEgo]

AFAIK, there aren't any specific 'minimum connection times' for cross-London journeys.
There were some guideline times in the timetable, but some journeys e.g., Victoria to Euston, are routinely sold which are under this time.
Also AFAIK, they are no longer published - https://www.railforums.co.uk/threads/cross-london-transfer-times.125063/ )

They’re still on BRTimes - not an official site of course, but it is a very good source.

 

[Paul Kelly]

They’re still on BRTimes - not an official site of course, but it is a very good source.

True, but as the creator/maintainer of BR Times I'll be the first to admit that it doesn't even show all the connection data that is available to booking engines (it shows that from the ALF (alternative fixed links) file, not the FLF (fixed links file), even though both are available in the data downloads on http://data.atoc.org/). And NRE appears to have access to a third source of fixed link data which other booking engines do not yet have access to, but in my opinion that doesn't necessarily make it invalid or erroneous.

But it's a grey area with several fine lines of course. And it's entirely possible that the people putting together the fixed link data sources haven't always realised the significance of the data in terms of valid itineraries, entitlement to delay compensation etc. - I definitely accept that point.

 

[Starmill]

It must be as the itineraries foul minimum connection times. The connection times are there for a reason.

What are the minimum connection times, and what official source have you used to determine them?

 

[extendedpaul]

TPE

Unnecessary sentence added as the forum will not allow posts with less then 5 characters, even though only 3 are needed to answer your question

Thank you for this information. Trans Pennine Express will indeed sell me a ticket with the 32 minute transfer time I wanted, whereas the three companies I tried would not do so. While it is too late for the journey that prompted my original post, subsequently booked, it is very useful to know. Unless and until it changes of course ....

I remain confused by the "rights and wrongs" of the whole business. I don't really understand what "Webtis powered site" means but a booking system where one's choice of ticket retailer from National Rail Enquiries impacts the minimum connection times between the same two London stations seems bizarre. Neither of the train operating companies on whose services I will be travelling allows a reduced transfer time but another one, with no involvement in my journey or indeed any services in the Midlands or South of England, permits it.

 

[talldave]

FWIW, I just walked the Wellbeing Walk between Euston and St Pancras in 9 minutes, so 20 mins would probably be a safe estimate for train to train transfer.

 

[Hadders]

FWIW, I just walked the Wellbeing Walk between Euston and St Pancras in 9 minutes, so 20 mins would probably be a safe estimate for train to train transfer.

I agree with this. I can comfortably walk train to train from Euston to Kings Cross in 20 minutes but I'd never advocate shortening the official minimum connection time to this.

 

[TheManOnThe172]

Why can't the option to catch an earlier connection become the default for Advance tickets?

You'd need a rule that the earliest allowable departure from any point would be the timetabled arrival for the previous rail leg - to avoid people starting short, early, during a peak period using a ticket timed for after the peak.

But having done that, what would be the risk of revenue loss?