Breaking journey at common routeing point then doubling back on a local journey

[Yeovilfan]

Suppose we have a railway line between routeing points X and Y with intermediate stations A, B, C, D, E and F (none of which are routeing points), with all trains between X and Y stopping at all intermediate stations. Suppose we have a single ticket (any permitted route) from B to A.

By my understanding, page F7 of the National Routeing Guide in Detail means that taking a train from B to Y (calling at C, D, E, F and Y) then a train from Y back to A (calling at F, E, D, C, B and A) is a permitted route (provided each of these two legs doesn't require a change of train - if that's the meaning of "direct" train?).

I have read previous threads' fors and againsts (e.g. most(all?) journey planners allow this) about whether it is allowed to break a journey at Y in such a scenario but I still struggle to believe that this even might be allowed, because SURELY an explicit rule would have been written to stop this? Am I misunderstanding something?

journey planners don't* allow this

 

[OscarH]

You'd be unlikely to find a case where the rule applies because of the fare check you need to do, Y-A must be no more expensive than B-A

Also, calling at B in both legs is something I don't think I'd allow personally in a routeing implementation - double calling at journey destinations is definitely banned, and I don't see any good reason to allow it for origins. I'm not sure that's explicitly banned though. The use case for this is mainly when B is a pass point on the second service

Forgot to address the main point: I don't think there's anything wrong with a break of journey at Y in this case, provided the doubleback is valid. The fares check is basically there to prevent that loophole. Whether the gateline would like it is a different matter

 

[Benjwri]

Also, calling at B in both legs is something I don't think I'd allow personally in a routeing implementation - double calling at journey destinations is definitely banned, and I don't see any good reason to allow it for origins. I'm not sure that's explicitly banned though. The use case for this is mainly when B is a pass point on the second service

It's banned in the guide in detail when defining what an appropriate routeing point is, stating a point may be used if it does not (among other things):

make the journey double back through the origin or destination station unless the fare permits (for example Ealing Broadway to Swindon via London).

(provided each of these two legs doesn't require a change of train - if that's the meaning of "direct" train?

This is an incorrect interpretation. The direct train rule only applies when the train goes direct from your origin to your destination with no changes. Routeing points do not matter in this circumstance. If the train calls at your destination twice you must get off the first time, and the same but other way round for the origin.

As to why routeing engines are validating it, it'll likely by a different reason, but it is hard to guess what that might be from this.

 

[OscarH]

It's banned in the guide in detail when defining what an appropriate routeing point is, stating a point may be used if it does not (among other things):

Ta, I haven't read the normal version in ages, spend all my time with the electronic rules one! Not as clear as I'd like - passing vs stopping is important .

Right, I realised I mixed up the rules you were asking about earlier - my mention of fares checks was about the "doubling back through the origin or destination" rule. You mean the "through trains to and from common routeing point" which I forgot about momentarily.

The Electronic rules in RSPS5047 make the intent clear in section 7.2.9. In particular:

the Local Journey does not include any station twice, except for other stations in the
same station-group as the change station

The "normal" doc you reference does imply this with its "you can't use Banbury or Cov", but it's vague and useless as ever

 

[Benjwri]

The "normal" doc you reference does imply this with its "you can't use Banbury or Cov", but it's vague and useless as ever

Not to mention it’s just wrong, given trains between Birmingham and Stratford do call at Tyseley these days….

 

[Watershed]

Suppose we have a railway line between routeing points X and Y with intermediate stations A, B, C, D, E and F (none of which are routeing points), with all trains between X and Y stopping at all intermediate stations. Suppose we have a single ticket (any permitted route) from B to A.

By my understanding, page F7 of the National Routeing Guide in Detail means that taking a train from B to Y (calling at C, D, E, F and Y) then a train from Y back to A (calling at F, E, D, C, B and A) is a permitted route (provided each of these two legs doesn't require a change of train - if that's the meaning of "direct" train?).

Yes, that section of the Routeing Guide permits doubling back to & from a common Routeing Point for 'local' journeys.

I have read previous threads' fors and againsts (e.g. most(all?) journey planners allow this) about whether it is allowed to break a journey at Y in such a scenario but I still struggle to believe that this even might be allowed, because SURELY an explicit rule would have been written to stop this? Am I misunderstanding something?

The section of the Routeing Guide states that the ability to double back in this way is limited to 'interchange purposes'. That doesn't explicitly spell out a restriction on break of journey, but it implies it fairly clearly. I don't think you could say you are doubling back for interchange purposes if you then break your journey at the interchange.

journey planners don't* allow this

Journey planners work by a different set of rules and data - the electronic National Routeing Guide (eNRG). So they don't always validate routes which are permitted under the written version of the Routeing Guide.

You'd be unlikely to find a case where the rule applies because of the fare check you need to do, Y-A must be no more expensive than B-A

The fares check wouldn't apply in the example the OP gives, since it's a "local" journey where A and B are common Routeing Points for both the origin and destination.

Also, calling at B in both legs is something I don't think I'd allow personally in a routeing implementation - double calling at journey destinations is definitely banned, and I don't see any good reason to allow it for origins. I'm not sure that's explicitly banned though. The use case for this is mainly when B is a pass point on the second service

A fair point, but such a restriction isn't communicated in the public-facing version of the Routeing Guide and as such, I don't think it can be enforced on members of the public.

It's banned in the guide in detail when defining what an appropriate routeing point is, stating a point may be used if it does not (among other things):

There is no need to determine appropriate Routeing Points for "local" journeys - you simply use the common Routeing Point(s). The supposed ban on using Routeing Points that involve double backs is contradicted by the example given on page F7.

It's also very ambiguous what "unless the fare permits" means. There are plenty of fares which permit double backs - indeed are priced that way - but which aren't explicitly routed via the double-back location.

This is an incorrect interpretation. The direct train rule only applies when the train goes direct from your origin to your destination with no changes. Routeing points do not matter in this circumstance. If the train calls at your destination twice you must get off the first time, and the same but other way round for the origin.

Page F7 of the Routeing Guide in Detail, which the OP refers to, is not about the direct trains rule. Routing Points do matter in that instance.

The Electronic rules in RSPS5047 make the intent clear in section 7.2.9. In particular:

I agree, however as above, that's not something that can be enforced on members of the piblic.

Not to mention it’s just wrong, given trains between Birmingham and Stratford do call at Tyseley these days….

The example may no longer be accurate but the principle remains unchanged.

 

[OscarH]

The fares check wouldn't apply in the example the OP gives, since it's a "local" journey where A and B are common Routeing Points for both the origin and destination

Indeed, I had 7.2.8 in my head rather than 7.2.9 when I wrote my first post. I'm not sure the former even comes up at all in the public documentation

 

[Benjwri]

Page F7 of the Routeing Guide in Detail, which the OP refers to, is not about the direct trains rule. Routing Points do matter in that instance.

Yes, like Oscar I got a big confused by all the letters and didn’t realise we were talking about the common routeing point rule.

The supposed ban on using Routeing Points that involve double backs is contradicted by the example given on page F7

The example may no longer be accurate but the principle remains unchanged.

Surely both these statements cannot be true. As Oscar said the example on page F7 shows 3 routeing points with double backs required, and none are the shortest route. It shows that the only valid route is the one where the same station isn’t stopped at twice.

Sorry, sent slightly too early, I would also argue this ambiguity is further clarified in the simple guide, under ‘Common Routeing Points’.

No doubling back (passing through the same station twice on a single journey) is allowed which may require customers to change trains short of the routeing point

I think between this and the guide in detail example it is clear what is intended here. The double back rule here is clearly referring to through trains, as in such a situation the shortest route would not be via the routeing point either way.

 

[kieron]

The "normal" doc you reference does imply this with its "you can't use Banbury or Cov", but it's vague and useless as ever

I think it's hard to tell what they were trying to say there. They're trying to draw some sort of distinction between Leamington and Tyseley. Perhaps they assume that trains through Leamington stop there. Or perhaps that they didn't stop in Solihull. Me, I don't know how old F7 is.

As both stations are mandatory timing points (i.e. appear in timetables whether or not the train stops there), rule 7.2.9 would stop retailers from offering an itinerary via either if they used the routeing points on that diagram.

On another point, do you know how 7.2.9.3 is supposed to be used? nre.co.uk seems to compare the distance of the route actually used with the shortest routes to and from other routeing points, rathe than do something which is similar to how things work with a single common routeing point. For instance:

It shows Whifflet–Maryhill tickets as being valid via Hamilton as it's a direct train to the routeing point and one away from it. It doesn't for Whifflet-Croy as there are two common routeing points (Falkirk and Glasgow). Using the data, the shortest distance via Glasgow is 22.64 miles and the shortest via Falkirk 26.64, whereas the route via Hamilton is 30.82 miles long.

I haven't seen anything in the Conditions of Travel to support 7.2.9.3, so it may not be something they'd ever use in court, but being able to get an itinerary is useful.

 

[OscarH]

On another point, do you know how 7.2.9.3 is supposed to be used? nre.co.uk seems to compare the distance of the route actually used with the shortest routes to and from other routeing points, rathe than do something which is similar to how things work with a single common routeing point. For instance:

It shows Whifflet–Maryhill tickets as being valid via Hamilton as it's a direct train to the routeing point and one away from it. It doesn't for Whifflet-Croy as there are two common routeing points (Falkirk and Glasgow). Using the data, the shortest distance via Glasgow is 22.64 miles and the shortest via Falkirk 26.64, whereas the route via Hamilton is 30.82 miles long.

I haven't seen anything in the Conditions of Travel to support 7.2.9.3, so it may not be something they'd ever use in court, but being able to get an itinerary is useful.

My view would be that (subject to the other requirements) you could do the direct train to and from the Glasgow Group, and not Falkirk Group (though via Falkirk is permitted anyway by the 3 miles off the shortest route rule), as via Glasgow is shorter than via Falkirk - the shortest route via each common routeing point being what matters, purely being about filtering which common routeing point can be used. The actual itinerary is only relevant once you know what common routeing point you can use.

Apparently last time I looked at this I decided the opposite - I should compare the journey length (30.82), not the shortest route via the routeing point. I still allow this case though because the shortest route by rail via Falkirk is 33.10 miles, which is more than the itinerary.

I'd be interested to hear others views on this, I could read it either way to be honest (and the passenger may be benefited or lose out in both cases - sometimes the shortest route by rail will be shorter than eg going round the houses via Hamilton, and sometimes the actual itinerary will involve a walk between stations like the Glasgows that makes it shorter than the shortest route strictly by rail). The exact text for those who don't have the document handy is:

When the journey origin and journey destination have two, three or four common routeing
points then the journey is only permitted if the journey via the change station is shorter than the journey via
any other common routeing point.

 

[kieron]

33.1 miles is, I take it, the shortest Whifflet–Falkirk High–Croy distance?

I was thinking in terms of the shortest route to and from one of the stations in Falkirk Group, although I missed the shortest option. Going by the distances in the data, Whifflet–Camelon–Croy is only 25.05 miles.

You couldn't follow the route as there are no direct trains between Croy and Camelon, but I presume you don't need to find trains to calculate distances for the other common routeing points.

 

[Starmill]

33.1 miles is, I take it, the shortest Whifflet–Falkirk High–Croy distance?

I was thinking in terms of the shortest route to and from one of the stations in Falkirk Group, although I missed the shortest option. Going by the distances in the data, Whifflet–Camelon–Croy is only 25.05 miles.

You couldn't follow the route as there are no direct trains between Croy and Camelon, but I presume you don't need to find trains to calculate distances for the other common routeing points.

My interpretation of this has always been that you may only use cumulative distances, between stations, which passenger trains take. Even if you're relying on the slightly different wording and context of the expression shortest route in use here. So you can't "pick" any route from Croy that goes to Camelon without going elsewhere first. For another example if you start at Dronfield you cannot pick any route that goes straight to Dore & Totley or Grindleford. You can only pick one starting with the mileage to Chesterfield or Sheffield, then continue adding it up.

Now, my interpretation could, of course, be completely incorrect. But it's so ambiguous, that's the point.

 

[crablab]

The section of the Routeing Guide states that the ability to double back in this way is limited to 'interchange purposes'. That doesn't explicitly spell out a restriction on break of journey, but it implies it fairly clearly. I don't think you could say you are doubling back for interchange purposes if you then break your journey at the interchange.

The lack of definition for the extent of "interchange purposes" does leave this open to ambiguity, particularly at groups where the fares from members of the group have been rationalised.

If you're travelling from A to C via a group at B, can you be permitted to break your journey at any member of B, and then resume onwards? Even if your journey doesn't technically require you to go to another member of the group?
Presumably yes, since you're travelling via that group of stations (a routeing point) and so your inter-group travel would be for the purpose of interchange, to break your journey at your desired group station.

I infer this must be the case, since several accredited booking engines either refuse to offer me a sample itinerary with an explicit 'via B' in this scenario, or do so for the same price as the direct A to C.
For example: Didcot to Paddington, via Reading West - £43 single from GWR, whether or not you generate an itinerary via the group member or not. Same with Trainsplit.

Otherwise, how could you get to the group station to break your journey as required?

Just to quote the section exactly:

A customer may travel via any station in such a group, including doubling back, provided that the group is on one of the permitted routes between their origin and destination stations. This extended availability is for interchange purposes only and does not apply where the origin or destination stations are part of a group

Which I think is fairly clear.
I see nothing to indicate break of journey is restricted in this scenario, and I don't reasonably see how it could be.

 

[Yeovilfan]

Thanks all.

The section of the Routeing Guide states that the ability to double back in this way is limited to 'interchange purposes'.

Which section of the (public-facing version of the) Routeing Guide are you referring to here? The only potentially relevant instances of the word "interchange" I have found refer to doubling back within a station group, and therefore I don't think they apply to my proposed situation, where Y could well be a single station as opposed to a group.

The fares check wouldn't apply in the example the OP gives, since it's a "local" journey where A and B are common Routeing Points for both the origin and destination.

(Think you mean X and Y here, not A and B. Sorry for chucking in more letters than I needed to haha.)

The double back rule here is clearly referring to through trains, as in such a situation the shortest route would not be via the routeing point either way.

Please could you explain what you mean with this bit? I'm not quite following what applies to through trains and what doesn't.
Part of my issue might be that I don't understand some terms fully:
1. Does "passing through" a station mean "stopping at (without getting on or off)", "travelling through without stopping" or "either of the above"?
2. What is a "through" train in this context?

 

[Benjwri]

Please could you explain what you mean with this bit? I'm not quite following what applies to through trains and what doesn't.
Part of my issue might be that I don't understand some terms fully:
1. Does "passing through" a station mean "stopping at (without getting on or off)", "travelling through without stopping" or "either of the above"?
2. What is a "through" train in this context?

It’s not actually relevant to this scenario, I got confused by all the letters with what you were doing. I was referring to through trains, which is one of the two scenarios you don’t need to use the routeing guide.

A through train is when there is a single service going from your origin to your destination. My reference to passing through refers to stopping at.

A good example of this is a journey from Waterloo to Queenstown Road. If you were so inclined you could take one of the rouser trains via Kingston, in the clockwise direction, and stay on it all the way round back to Queenstown Road. This is because it calls at Queenstown Road for the first time at the end of the loop, even though it passes through without stopping at the start. However to a station like Vauxhall, for example you wouldn’t be able to do the whole loop, as you have to get off when it stops at Vauxhall the first time.

It is worth noting the right to break your journey is often thought as not allowed, as it would then no longer be a through train.

 

[OscarH]

33.1 miles is, I take it, the shortest Whifflet–Falkirk High–Croy distance?

Yeah, specifically Whifflet-Camelon-Falkfirk Grahamston-Polmont-Falkirk High-Croy, which I get as the shortest continuous route from Whifflet to Croy that goes via any station in Falkirk group.

My view is that the route should be continuous, not the sum of the shortest route to any station in the group, and the shortest route from any (potentially different) station in the group