Circular Services and the Routeing Guide (and break of journey)

[SWT_USER]

You can't be PFed for having a ticket that is invalid only because of being used on the wrong route. Only issued an excess, which may be a zero excess.

Apologies, I thought I had read a thread on here where somebody had been PF'd for not having the correct excess which in this case was a zero excess. I have looked and can't find the thread so I must be mis-remembering.

 

[island]

It's entirely possible someone was PFed in those circumstances, it just means the RPI isn't competent

 

[tony_mac]

It was for over-distance not off-route.

 

[table38]

There are a number of services which are, in the WTT Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Piccadilly services which go via Glossop and Hadfield. Are they shown in the passenger timetable as such - No. Does this mean that a Ashburys to Manchester ticket is valid to go round the scenic tour of Glossop and Hadfield? No.

But they often are on the LDB... if I walk down now and get on the 16:01 from Flowery Field, the LDB says it's going to Piccadilly!

 

[Solent&Wessex]

But they often are on the LDB... if I walk down now and get on the 16:01 from Flowery Field, the LDB says it's going to Piccadilly!

And as I said earlier, they are not shown as such in the public timetable anywhere, but only on NRES - which I believe shouldn't show them as such. I believe it is one of the faults with NRES. Table 79 does not show them as through services, and I suspect it isn't the intention to show them as such. Imagine the chaos if they had departure screens and every train in either direction was shown as going to Manchester Piccadilly?

 

[John @ home]

The (official) rule for DIRECT is the shortest mapped route, irrespective of timetable.

Are you sure? Can you please quote a source for this official rule? Must the route be 'mapped'?

 

[Solent&Wessex]

Are you sure? Can you please quote a source for this official rule? Must the route be 'mapped'?

I don't think that there is an official rule as such, which is why they are trying to eliminate the term with more specific routeings wherever possible. It certainly doesn't mean "Direct Train" as the fares from Leeds to Filey are all "Rte Direct" and there are no direct trains. In this instance it could be inferred as the shortest route, i.e. via Seamer (which would be logical as the fare is derived from Leeds - Scarborough), but I don't think this is written anywhere.

 

[table38]

Imagine the chaos if they had departure screens and every train in either direction was shown as going to Manchester Piccadilly?

It seems rather odd to suggest they would, given the screens at Guide Bridge don't.

 

[First class]

Are you sure? Can you please quote a source for this official rule? Must the route be 'mapped'?

The statement appeared on an ORCATS Appeal investigation following a complaint from a TOC who felt they should have a share of the route DIRECT on a certain flow.

Will try and have a peek through the online archives.


It was noted that Pricing Managers/Analysts should try to use specific geographical references and phase route DIRECT out where possible. I can only think of 2-3 flows with this route in, and 1 of them has been corrected (withdrawn- well made useless) for NFM11.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

As has been said above Condition 13(f) makes no reference to any timetable, public or otherwise. It simply says 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. I think there can be no doubt that this applies to the Merseyrail services?

Well, the same argument could be had for many many trains across the whole country. The TPE services from Hull arrive at Manchester, have a 5 minute turn round before going back to Hull again. A passenger does not need to "change trains" they can just sit on it and go back again if they so wished as the train is not emptied out and locked up. Therefore they can make a journey "without changing trains". Is it a through train from Brough to Hull by going via Manchester? A passenger can travel from Brough to Hull via Manchester without changing trains.

Is it a through train?

The Northern service from Leeds to Heysham Port gets to Heysham Port, the crew change ends without locking the unit up and forcing everyone to get off, then the unit goes back to Leeds again. Does this mean it is a through service from Shipley to Leeds via Heysham Port? The passenger can do the journey without changing trains! They can just get on the train at Shipley at 1032 then get off at Leeds at 1547 if they so wished, without having even to move out of their seat.

Is it a through train?

No, I think you are taking the meaning of "not changing trains" too literally. A train in this sense is a timetabled train - not a physical train as an object. Timetable 106 does not show the Merseyrail services as "through trains" one service finishes and another one begins. Ditto on the Manchester - Hadfield services. Table 79 shows them as individual train services. While they may physically be the same actual train, that does not mean they are the same train! NRES may show them as such - and I will concede that while it does show it as a through service it could be reasonably argued that it is - but I don't think it is intended to show them as a through service, because as far as the public timetable is concerned they are not. In the working timetable they are, but in the passenger timetable they are not. As far as the public is concerned the working timetable is irrelevant. Sadly NRES is reading too much into the working timetable as the information would probably been entered incorrectly into the main timetable database.

 

[Paul Kelly]

I suppose we're down to trying to define "What is a train?". I would say that the journey from Manchester back to Hull operates under a different headcode and is therefore a different train. Obviously I realise this is making up definitions as I go along to suit my interpretation of the rules...

 

[BOBmcbob]

I've been doing this for a few years now on the London Bridge - Victoria route via Crystal Palace. Initially had a few questions from the gate guys at Forest Hill, I gave them a copy of 13(f) and they now they let me through no problem. I've contacted southern a few times (who set the price on this route) and they continue to say its 'invalid', and so wont re program the barriers at FH...

 

[MikeWh]

Well, the same argument could be had for many many trains across the whole country. The TPE services from Hull arrive at Manchester, have a 5 minute turn round before going back to Hull again. A passenger does not need to "change trains" they can just sit on it and go back again if they so wished as the train is not emptied out and locked up. Therefore they can make a journey "without changing trains". Is it a through train from Brough to Hull by going via Manchester? A passenger can travel from Brough to Hull via Manchester without changing trains.

Is it a through train?

The Northern service from Leeds to Heysham Port gets to Heysham Port, the crew change ends without locking the unit up and forcing everyone to get off, then the unit goes back to Leeds again. Does this mean it is a through service from Shipley to Leeds via Heysham Port? The passenger can do the journey without changing trains! They can just get on the train at Shipley at 1032 then get off at Leeds at 1547 if they so wished, without having even to move out of their seat.

Is it a through train?

Neither of these examples is a through train, no. Once they arrive at their destination they are done, completely. However ...

No, I think you are taking the meaning of "not changing trains" too literally. A train in this sense is a timetabled train - not a physical train as an object. Timetable 106 does not show the Merseyrail services as "through trains" one service finishes and another one begins. Ditto on the Manchester - Hadfield services. Table 79 shows them as individual train services. While they may physically be the same actual train, that does not mean they are the same train! NRES may show them as such - and I will concede that while it does show it as a through service it could be reasonably argued that it is - but I don't think it is intended to show them as a through service, because as far as the public timetable is concerned they are not. In the working timetable they are, but in the passenger timetable they are not. As far as the public is concerned the working timetable is irrelevant. Sadly NRES is reading too much into the working timetable as the information would probably been entered incorrectly into the main timetable database.

The problem with table 106 is the Liverpool loop. Trains into Liverpool are shown terminating at Central while trains out of Liverpool are shown starting at Moorfields. They both call at the three stations on the loop in the same order. Therefore, when a train arrives at Moorfields it becomes both an incoming (to Central) train and an outgoing (from Moorfields) train at the same time.

Hadfiled and Glossop is a different problem in that it appears that at certain times of the day all trains go to Hadfield first and then Glossop, while at others it is the other way round. Nevertheless, between the two the train is both heading for it's country end and returning to Manchester at the same time.

 

[All Line Rover]

Why can't these "circular" services simply terminate at the station where they "turn around" - in the Merseyrail case Liverpool Lime Street - and immediately start again as a new service? It would prevent this "direct train" anomaly in the majority of cases, as well as helping to avoid passenger confusion. When I used Merseyrail for the first time, it certainly confused me that trains in one direction were going to "Chester, Chester, Chester," whilst trains in the other direction were going to "Chester, Chester, Chester!"

 

[MikeWh]

Why can't these "circular" services simply terminate at the station where they "turn around" - in the Merseyrail case Liverpool Lime Street - and immediately start again as a new service? It would prevent this "direct train" anomaly in the majority of cases, as well as helping to avoid passenger confusion. When I used Merseyrail for the first time, it certainly confused me that trains in one direction were going to "Chester, Chester, Chester," whilst trains in the other direction were going to "Chester, Chester, Chester!"

Because they don't turn around! If the Merseyrail services "terminated" at Lime Street you wouldn't be able to get from Moorfields to anywhere beyond Lime Street.

 

[sheff1]

Timetable 106 does not show the Merseyrail services as "through trains" one service finishes and another one begins. .

As I have pointed out before, NRCoC 13 does not require consideration of 'Timetables', public or otherwise. However, as you insist on continuing to refer to them, I must point out that Timetable 106 does in fact show the trains as 'through' as per the NRcoC defintion.

Take the first train of the day - 0619 from Ellesmere Port. In the Northbound direction the last station listed in Table 106 is Liverpool Central at 0700, before that are stops at Moorfields 0656 & Lime St 0658. In the Southbound direction the first stop listed in 106 is Moorfields 0656, followed by Lime St at 0658, then Central at 0700 before continuing to Ellesmere Port (arr 0737). Clearly a through train which does not finish or begin in Liverpool. Indeed, when it arrives at Moorfields and Lime St, it will show a destination of Ellesmere Port, not Liverpool Central.

You Hull - Manchester - Hull example does not fall into the same category at all.

 

[All Line Rover]

Because they don't turn around! If the Merseyrail services "terminated" at Lime Street you wouldn't be able to get from Moorfields to anywhere beyond Lime Street.

I don't see your point? They still wouldn't "terminate" at Liverpool Lime Street!

On the way from Chester to Liverpool Lime Street, the announcement says: "This is the xx.xx Merseyrail service to Liverpool Lime Street." The front of the train says "Liverpool Lime Street."

When the train arrives at Liverpool Lime Street, the announcement says: "We have now arrived at Liverpool Lime Street. This train terminates here." Then the driver immediate changes the front of the train to "Chester," and the announcement says: "Welcome aboard this xx.xx Merseyrail service to Chester."

So really they are separate - but consecutive - services. It prevents people using the "this is a direct train" excuse, helps to avoid confusion, and still allows passengers travelling from Moorfields and stations prior to take direct trains to Liverpool Central and stations beyond.

Then again, I have seen a fatal flaw in this reasoning, which is that people won't know which station to train continues to after Liverpool Lime Street until it arrives at Liverpool Lime Street! But I'm sure there would be ways around that...

 

[Solent&Wessex]

As I have pointed out before, NRCoC 13 does not require consideration of 'Timetables', public or otherwise. However, as you insist on continuing to refer to them, I must point out that Timetable 106 does in fact show the trains as 'through' as per the NRcoC defintion.

Take the first train of the day - 0619 from Ellesmere Port. In the Northbound direction the last station listed in Table 106 is Liverpool Central at 0700, before that are stops at Moorfields 0656 & Lime St 0658. In the Southbound direction the first stop listed in 106 is Moorfields 0656, followed by Lime St at 0658, then Central at 0700 before continuing to Ellesmere Port (arr 0737). Clearly a through train which does not finish or begin in Liverpool. Indeed, when it arrives at Moorfields and Lime St, it will show a destination of Ellesmere Port, not Liverpool Central.

You Hull - Manchester - Hull example does not fall into the same category at all.

Yes it does fall into the same category. You are arguing the point that:

As has been said above Condition 13(f) makes no reference to any timetable, public or otherwise. It simply says 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.

You then go on to argue that the timetable is irrelevant.

If the timetable is irrelevant and bears no relation to the point, then surely the fact that the train from Hull has got to Manchester is also irrelevant. The Leeds - Heysham Port is irrelevant. It is a through train as you don't need to change trains to get back again. I.e. - the passenger can make their entire journey from Shipley to Leeds (via Heysham Port) without changing trains. As they haven't changed trains it must therefore be a through train? Why is this any different to the MerseyRail trains? If it is because, as someone has said, that the headcodes are the same on the MerseyRail train throughout then that should be ignored, as you have said timetables are irrelevant.

If you insist that the MerseyRail example IS a through train - then why is the Leeds - Heysham - Leeds NOT a through train?

 

[First class]

I don't see your point? They still wouldn't "terminate" at Liverpool Lime Street!

On the way from Chester to Liverpool Lime Street, the announcement says: "This is the xx.xx Merseyrail service to Liverpool Lime Street." The front of the train says "Liverpool Lime Street."

When the train arrives at Liverpool Lime Street, the announcement says: "We have now arrived at Liverpool Lime Street. This train terminates here." Then the driver immediate changes the front of the train to "Chester," and the announcement says: "Welcome aboard this xx.xx Merseyrail service to Chester."

So really they are separate - but consecutive - services. It prevents people using the "this is a direct train" excuse, helps to avoid confusion, and still allows passengers travelling from Moorfields and stations prior to take direct trains to Liverpool Central and stations beyond.

Then again, I have seen a fatal flaw in this reasoning, which is that people won't know which station to train continues to after Liverpool Lime Street until it arrives at Liverpool Lime Street! But I'm sure there would be ways around that...

That's all rubbish about Merseyrail, sorry.

For starters the PIS shows it as going to Liverpool Central. On arrival at James St, the driver changes the PIS to Chester, saying next stop is Moorfields. The Wirral Line PIS does not do a "terminates here" message. No timings are mentioned on any announcement.

 

[MikeWh]

It would help if I knew the order of stations on the loop. Ooops! I'll amend my posts above.

How do you get from Chester to Liverpool Central?
How do you get from Moorfields to Chester?

 

[First class]

It would help if I knew the order of stations on the loop. Ooops! I'll amend my posts above.

How do you get from Chester to Liverpool Central?
How do you get from Moorfields to Chester?

-From Chester/Wirral
Birkenhead Hamilton Square
James St
Moorfields (timetabled start of train)
Liverpool Lime St
Liverpool Central
James St
Birkenhead Hamilton Square
-Then stations to Chester/Wirral

 

[MikeWh]

-From Chester/Wirral
Birkenhead Hamilton Square
James St
Moorfields (timetabled start of train)
Liverpool Lime St
Liverpool Central
James St
Birkenhead Hamilton Square
-Then stations to Chester/Wirral

Thanks. Unfortunately the thread was so busy that my reply didn't appear after the post it refered to (should have quoted I guess). The person I was asking was All Line Rover, really.

 

[All Line Rover]

Thanks. Unfortunately the thread was so busy that my reply didn't appear after the post it refered to (should have quoted I guess). The person I was asking was All Line Rover, really.

You won't often catch me on a 507/8 (), so I have little experience with Merseyrail. I'm just saying that it may be a good idea for a Chester to Chester train, for example, to be two separate "Chester to Liverpool" and "Liverpool to Chester" trains. Even though the trains are consecutive (and are really the same train) it would help to prevent confusion (well, it would help to prevent me being confused at the very least!) and would prevent people from doing circular journeys.

 

[142094]

Anyone thinking of doing something similar using a 3 zone single on the Tyne and Wear Metro then don't. I've had confirmation that you'd need a 3 zone Daysaver to be valid going via the Coast on a 'loop' service.

 

[sheff1]

Yes it does fall into the same category.

I was responding to your comment that Timetable 106 indicates that one service finishes and another one begins. It does not.

Hull - Manchester - Hull does not fall in the same category as the Merseyrail services as it is not a circular service and the timetable does show one service finishing and another beginning.

 

[MikeWh]

You won't often catch me on a 507/8 (), so I have little experience with Merseyrail. I'm just saying that it may be a good idea for a Chester to Chester train, for example, to be two separate "Chester to Liverpool" and "Liverpool to Chester" trains. Even though the trains are consecutive (and are really the same train) it would help to prevent confusion (well, it would help to prevent me being confused at the very least!) and would prevent people from doing circular journeys.

I don't know whether you're deliberately missing the point or really don't understand. Trains run one way St James -> Moorfields -> Lime Street -> Central -> St James. Wherever on that loop you choose to make the train 'terminate' you will create a situation where it is impossible for people to get to a station or from a station. Surely that would create more confusion*.

* Though not as confusing as the Routeing Guide that you love, and as for Oyster ...

 

[Solent&Wessex]

I was responding to your comment that Timetable 106 indicates that one service finishes and another one begins. It does not.

Hull - Manchester - Hull does not fall in the same category as the Merseyrail services as it is not a circular service and the timetable does show one service finishing and another beginning.

But You've said that the timetable is irrelevant. I was trying to point out the error in your thinking, which you still haven't answered.

A passenger can make their entire journey from Shipley to Leeds (via Heysham Port) without changing trains. As they haven't changed trains it must therefore be a through train? Why is this any different to the MerseyRail trains, or the Manchester Piccadilly to Manchester Piccadilly trains?

Are you saying this is a through train as well? And if not, why not?

 

[All Line Rover]

I don't know whether you're deliberately missing the point or really don't understand. Trains run one way St James -> Moorfields -> Lime Street -> Central -> St James. Wherever on that loop you choose to make the train 'terminate' you will create a situation where it is impossible for people to get to a station or from a station. Surely that would create more confusion*.

* Though not as confusing as the Routeing Guide that you love, and as for Oyster ...

You wouldn't need to "terminate" the train at Liverpool Lime Street and get everyone onto a new one. Everyone would STAY ON THE TRAIN (!) but it would form a "new" service (in the timetable and on NRE). That way, people couldn't travel on a circular route.

 

[Solent&Wessex]

I was responding to your comment that Timetable 106 indicates that one service finishes and another one begins. It does not.

Well if you read it it does show separate trains, albeit with an overlap. They are on separate tables, each showing a different direction, with no footnote denoting "This train continues to ..." or suchlike.

 

[Eagle]

You wouldn't need to "terminate" the train at Liverpool Lime Street and get everyone onto a new one. Everyone would STAY ON THE TRAIN (!) but it would form a "new" service (in the timetable and on NRE). That way, people couldn't travel on a circular route.

So you're proposing that at Moorfields, every single train would say "Liverpool Lime St" on the front, and the automated announcements would say "This train is for Liverpool Lime Street only". Then how the hell do I know which train I should get on if I want to go from Moorfields to Chester? You say "everyone would stay n the train at Lime Street" but they wouldn't, three-quarters of them would be on the wrong train and have to change.

I'm sorry to be blunt, but your system is far more confusing and ultimately ridiculous.