Destination keeps changing (use of false destinations on information screens)

[Esker-pades]

Seems like outrage over nothing

Exactly. It isn't false information: it's useful to prevent people going on a 1 hour round trip, for a journey that could be done in 8 minutes.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

I don't see why it is particularly confusing, if you are driving round the M25, you just see signs for the next routeing point, so if you are joining at the M23, you see Heathrow (M4, M1) or Dartford (M20, M11). This approach seems to work for the roads, and is readily understood, so why not the railway?

Probably because, with roads, everyone knows that routing points are just that: Routing points, and they don't convey any sense of that this is where the road ends, and that you can't go any further.

On the other hand, train destinations have always carried a strong sense that, that is where that particular train ends its journey. If a train is advertised as going to - say - Brighton - then the implication is that Brighton is where everyone has to get off because that's where the train terminates. And of course, where a train terminates is not something that you'd think can change. That's why it's so potentially confusing to passengers when train destinations change en route. And why it's especially confusing when the train destinations don't match between the platform indicators, the on-train indicators, and online departure boards - mismatches there can easily make people think they've got on the wrong train, because the destination feels like something that would be fixed and unchanging for any given train diagram.

The problem is that we are used to all trains being advertised by final destination, but for circular services at early points in their journey, the final destination is not important to passengers and is itself confusing - and so inappropriate to show.

Personally I think the best solution to the dilemma is to advertise trains as 'circular via X and Y'. That way you can give meaningful information about the route, and since people are going to expect a 'via' to change en route as the train passes through stations, it's going to be less confusing to passengers when that information changes during a train's journey.

But one thing that I think really needs to happen is to make sure that at any given station, the displayed destination is consistent between the online, platform, and on-board indicators.

 

[317666]

For many years, slow trains to Cambridge were shown with a destination of Foxton (on the departure boards), presumably to encourage people to take the fasts or semifasts. The train itself showed Cambridge as a destination, as indeed did the information screens at Finsbury Park and beyond. Trains never actually terminated at Foxton - it would have been difficult for them to do so.

Slows to Peterborough, conversely, always showed Peterborough as a destination, both on the departure boards and the train itself (despite the fact that trains did a couple of times a day, terminate at Huntingdon).

That was because the xx:06 slow to Cambridge was overtaken by the xx:15 fast at Hatfield, which got to Cambridge a long time before the stopper eventually did! In the opposite direction the stopper would be shown as terminating at Finsbury Park at Cambridge, but then as a Kings Cross train from Foxton onwards. I'd imagine that slow Peterborough trains were still shown as going to Peterborough because there were no Great Northern trains which would overtake them en route, and an intercity service arriving first wouldn't be much good to anyone with a WAGN/FCC only ticket!

 

[Esker-pades]

That was because the xx:06 slow to Cambridge was overtaken by the xx:15 fast at Hatfield, which got to Cambridge a long time before the stopper eventually did! In the opposite direction the stopper would be shown as terminating at Finsbury Park at Cambridge, but then as a Kings Cross train from Foxton onwards. I'd imagine that slow Peterborough trains were still shown as going to Peterborough because there were no Great Northern trains which would overtake them en route, and an intercity service arriving first wouldn't be much good to anyone with a WAGN/FCC only ticket!

This still happens. But the slow services are advertised all the way through to Cambridge/Cambridge North, which confuses the large raft of tourists who jump on the stopper, ignoring the XX:12/42 Flyer.

 

[bcarmicle]

This still happens. But the slow services are advertised all the way through to Cambridge/Cambridge North, which confuses the large raft of tourists who jump on the stopper, ignoring the XX:12/42 Flyer.

I thought that with the May timetable (and the interim timetable as well), KGX trains to Cambridge would no longer be overtaken, so you should always get on the first one. Is this not the case?

 

[Esker-pades]

I thought that with the May timetable (and the interim timetable as well), KGX trains to Cambridge would no longer be overtaken, so you should always get on the first one. Is this not the case?

That is not the case. Stoppers are overtaken. The Thameslink service to/from Brighton is overtaken. On Saturdays, the only service worth getting is the XX:42.

 

[Esker-pades]

More details:
There are 5 trains per hour during the weekday, leaving Kings Cross (or St Pancras) at XX:12 (Flyer), XX:21 (Stopper), XX:31 (Semi-Fast), XX:42 (Flyer) and XX:52 (Stopper). The stoppers are overtaken by the flyers at Digswell Junction, whilst the semi-fast is overtaken by the flyer between Woolmer Green and Hitchin.

There are 3 trains per hour on Saturday, all from Kings Cross. They leave at XX:35 (Semi-Fast), XX:42 (Flyer) and XX:51 (Stopper). The Semi-Fast is overtaken between Woolmer Green and Hitchin by the Flyer. The Stopper is not overtaken, but it does take 90 minutes.

There are 3 trains per hour on a Sunday, all from Kings Cross. They leave at XX:02 (Stopper), XX:12 (Flyer) and XX:42 (Semi-Fast). The XX:02 is overtaken, the other two are not.

 

[Bedpan]

As far as I remember the platform indicators showed (and presumably still do show) the Kingston Loop clockwise destinations as being Strawberry Hill from Waterloo to Clapham Junction, Richmond from Wimbledon to Kingston, Waterloo via Richmond from Kingston and round the back of the loop, and then just Waterloo.

Far more sensible than the Thameslink Sutton loop services which still show the destination as Sutton even at West Sutton and Carshalton - giving no indication that you can make the short distance between the two on the same train. I suppose though that this is a better scenario than showing the final destination on the pre May St Albans to Luton service which went via Wimbledon and Sutton!

 

[LewFinnis]

HS1 rounders from St Pancras going via Dover usually show Sandwich, but are sometimes announced as going to Ramsgate. At Ashford this changes to Whitstable, because the fastest way to Faversham and Medway is by changing at Dover. At some point after Dover (I've never travelled beyond Martin Mill) they change to St Pancras. I'm not sure what happens the other way round, other than from St Pancras they show Ramsgate as the destination.

 

[Mintona]

Seems like outrage over nothing

You must be new here.

 

[Bedpan]

You must be new here.

If only we still had a "like" button!

 

[xotGD]

TPE use false destinations a lot. They say that a train is going to Manchester Airport and then it terminates at Piccadilly.

 

[Ethano92]

What does determine when a circular service changes its advertised destination. You'd think that it's when a journey is faster getting another service but sometimes they seem to change. For example on the Kingston loop, at Wimbledon it will be advertised as Richmond although on board it will say "Richmond via strawberry hill", either way wouldn't it be faster to go to Clapham and change if you were going to Richmond

 

[youngac]

Cathcart Circle:
Glasgow Central Arrival/Departure boards: Cathcart
Pollokshields East/West and onwards: Glasgow Central
Class 314: Cathcart Circle via Maxwell Park/Mount Florida
Class 380: Cathcart Circle

and Class 318/320: Glasgow Central

 

[Bedpan]

What does determine when a circular service changes its advertised destination. You'd think that it's when a journey is faster getting another service but sometimes they seem to change. For example on the Kingston loop, at Wimbledon it will be advertised as Richmond although on board it will say "Richmond via strawberry hill", either way wouldn't it be faster to go to Clapham and change if you were going to Richmond

Well, yes, but there is only 7 minutes in it in either direction, and getting a direct train avoids the need to have to walk all the way from one side of Clapham yard to the other. And, if teh destination was shown as "Richmond, but it's quicker to go in the other direction and change at Clapham Junction" it would be likely to confuse the occasional passengers, whilst the regulars would know anyway.

 

[edwin_m]

In all these situation I'm pretty sure the displayed destination covers any journeys that can sensibly be made on that train without changing, even if there's a quicker way of getting there with a change.

 

[MotCO]

Just so long as we don't move to the Parisian approach of "mission" codes (at least I don't find "take the ECCO, ICAR, IDIL or EBON train" particularly memorable)

I never understood the Parisian destinations on trains; all I could assume was that the 4-letter word began with the same first letter as the actual destination. Is this correct if not what does it all mean?

 

[island]

There is a one to one correspondence between the first letter of the headcode and the final destination, though it is not generally (if ever) the same letter.

The only one I remember off the top of my head is Q for Marne-la-Vallée–Chessy. That is one that really could have done with being M to allow for headcodes like MIKY and MINI, given the destination.

The second letter is a calling pattern and the third and fourth have no special meaning beyond attempting to make the combination pronounceable.

 

[MotCO]

There is a one to one correspondence between the first letter of the headcode and the final destination, though it is not generally (if ever) the same letter.

The only one I remember off the top of my head is Q for Marne-la-Vallée–Chessy. That is one that really could have done with being M to allow for headcodes like MIKY and MINI, given the destination.

The second letter is a calling pattern and the third and fourth have no special meaning beyond attempting to make the combination pronounceable.

Thanks for explaining. Is there a list of all the codes - I've Googled it but can't find it. How would intending passengers know what the code is?

 

[U-Bahnfreund]

Thanks for explaining. Is there a list of all the codes - I've Googled it but can't find it. How would intending passengers know what the code is?

RER codes:

RER A https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligne_A_du_RER_d'Île-de-France#Noms_des_missions

RER B https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligne_B_du_RER_d'Île-de-France#Noms_des_missions

RER C https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligne_C_du_RER_d'Île-de-France#Noms_des_missions

RER D https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligne_D_du_RER_d'Île-de-France#Noms_des_missions

RER E https://fr.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ligne_E_du_RER_d'Île-de-France#Noms_des_missions

 

[island]

Thanks for explaining. Is there a list of all the codes - I've Googled it but can't find it. How would intending passengers know what the code is?

In practice passengers use station displays rather than headcodes to determine whether the train is the one they want to take.

 

[kevjs]

Personally I think the best solution to the dilemma is to advertise trains as 'circular via X and Y'. That way you can give meaningful information about the route, and since people are going to expect a 'via' to change en route as the train passes through stations, it's going to be less confusing to passengers when that information changes during a train's journey.

But one thing that I think really needs to happen is to make sure that at any given station, the displayed destination is consistent between the online, platform, and on-board indicators.

I've seen on buses before something like "AAA then BBB" with the "then BBB" being much smaller. Doing that would reassure you the trains match, while highlighting it's not the fastest way to BBB (especially if that format was consistent - e.g. a "then BBB" means you'll get there but it will take a while

 

[transmanche]

I've seen on buses before something like "AAA then BBB" with the "then BBB" being much smaller. Doing that would reassure you the trains match, while highlighting it's not the fastest way to BBB (especially if that format was consistent - e.g. a "then BBB" means you'll get there but it will take a while

Up here in the northeast, it's not used on buses to show it's a slower service - but just to break it up into sections.

For example:
A 685 from Newcastle to Carlisle might show:
Hexham 685
then Brampton and Carlisle

I've assumed this is either a) due to the route being split for registration purposes or b) so that passengers travelling to Hexham realise that they can catch that bus.

Similarly, X14/X15/X16/X18 buses heading north show Morpeth, then xxx - thus allowing passengers to see a regular 15 mins service between Newcastle and Morpeth