False destinations on trains from Reading heading towards Paddington

[cholsey-choose]

1. At Reading there are a lot of trains with false destinations, eg the slow train to Paddington is listed as for Ealing Broadway. But in the past week a lot of the slow trains have been skipping Ealing, which shows up some of the limitations of this system. Slow trains have been announced as for Paddington, even if they stop at every station (except Ealing) along the way.

 

[FGW_DID]

Let me get this right, you are complaining that the stopper shows 'Ealing Broadway' when it continues on to Paddington but also complaining that the stopper shows Paddington (if it doesn't call at Ealing for some reason) when it is in fact the stopper!

 

[cholsey-choose]

Let me get this right, you are complaining that the stopper shows 'Ealing Broadway' when it continues on to Paddington but also complaining that the stopper shows Paddington (if it doesn't call at Ealing for some reason) when it is in fact the stopper!

Yes that's right. It shows how crappy the false destinations system is. Instead if it just said 'Paddington (slow service with many stops)' or something, then it wouldn't matter whether Ealing was one of those many stops.

Edit: and if we were going to stick with the current system, in the situation where the slow train doesn't stop at Ealing, it should be listed as 'Southall' or whatever the actual last stop before Paddington is.

 

[Fawkes Cat]

For a railway running A-B-C-D, my understanding is that information boards show the last point for which a train is the best service.

So a fast A-D train will be shown at A as ending at D. If there is a slow A-B-C-D train, that will also show at A as ending at D unless it is overtaken by another train. So if our slow all stations train is overtaken by an A-D fast service, the destination of the slow will be shown as C.

But there's disruption. C Broadway is being skipped, giving A-B-D. So I can see maybe a couple of possibilities (assuming that we only have the two calling patterns and there aren't scheduled A-C-D/A-B-D trains)
- an A-D fast train will still pass our skip stopping train: result - boards at A show our train to B, because the fast is the best available way to get to D
- no A-D train will pass the skip-stopper (maybe the disruption has also interfered with the fast service): result - boards at A show our train to D as it's now the best way to get there.

I'm guessing that in this real world case (where there are more than two RDG - PAD stopping patterns) nothing was booked to overtake the train normally shown for Ealing - so the system sensibly displayed Paddington as the final useful destination.

It would be nice if (when no disruption) the system would show something like ''Ealing, continues to Paddington". But knowing that it's the best train for Ealing is the important thing.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Given that the ATOS PIS (which I think GWR use) can show arrival times at a given destination, this is to me a better choice than false destinations. I often don't take the fastest train out of Euston in order that I might get a seat, for example; take the 1805 to Northampton as an example, you're quicker taking one of the fasts, but if you take the 1705 you'll only be standing as far as Harrow rather than most of the way. Or maybe you like Class 319s, or whatever. And then you have cases of disruption when a train in the platform, even a slow one, is worth 10 on the departure board.

Add to that, putting something like "Local stopping service" as a "please note" can further emphasize that it isn't the best choice for a through journey, such as they do at Manc Picc for the Hope Valley stopper. Those aren't shown as "Dore and Totley", which would just confuse people.

At Paddington and Reading you've then got a further reason not to do this - peak evening restrictions don't apply to the stoppers (unless that's changed), so why hide them?

 

[WelshBluebird]

Of course the answer is what they do elsewhere in the country and not use false destinations.
A combination of "next fastest service to" and additional descriptions such as "stopping service" should be more than good enough.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Of course the answer is what they do elsewhere in the country and not use false destinations.
A combination of "next fastest service to" and additional descriptions such as "stopping service" should be more than good enough.

Agreed, the other options are much better as they don't confuse people in the same way.

 

[swt_passenger]

Wonder if it’ll be much different in a year or so when the all stations service will have Abbey Wood on the boards...

 

[Bletchleyite]

Wonder if it’ll be much different in a year or so when the all stations service will have Abbey Wood on the boards...

I would *expect* that to have a "via London Paddington" subtext on it. But that said, on the Tube people get used to a destination *past* theirs being shown, the main confusion is caused by it being *before*.

 

[robbeech]

At Paddington and Reading you've then got a further reason not to do this - peak evening restrictions don't apply to the stoppers (unless that's changed), so why hide them?

Why hide them? Probably because evening peak restrictions don’t apply and that reduces potential revenue*



*pkeaae note this is not really what happens.

 

[Mag_seven]

I'd much prefer they just labelled them as "stopping service". There could be problems though as some people might take that to mean they call at all stations when this is generally not the case e.g. only alternate services call at Iver/Langley and Burnham/Taplow respectively.

 

[Ken H]

Leeds-harrogate-york trains show Poppleton on the station PIS (have done for years) But show york on the front/back of the train. Why not 'York via harrogate'

 

[Bletchleyite]

Leeds-harrogate-york trains show Poppleton on the station PIS (have done for years) But show york on the front/back of the train. Why not 'York via harrogate'

Confused the life out of me when I travelled up that way a few months ago. I pratted about with RTT for ages before I worked out what was going on.

 

[Bletchleyite]

I'd much prefer they just labelled them as "stopping service". There could be problems though as some people might take that to mean they call at all stations when this is generally not the case e.g. only alternate services call at Iver/Langley and Burnham/Taplow respectively.

"Local service" might do without having that implication.

 

[cholsey-choose]

I'm guessing that in this real world case (where there are more than two RDG - PAD stopping patterns) nothing was booked to overtake the train normally shown for Ealing - so the system sensibly displayed Paddington as the final useful destination.

I recognise that this *could* be the case, and I don't have any rock solid evidence against, but I'm dubious. This was during the morning peak, and there are services every 10 minutes or so which go direct to Padd or just Slough and Paddington. The train I was getting off had about 10 stops to go, just not including Ealing. I'm very skeptical that there wasn't a fast Paddington service that wouldn't arrive there before.

My guess was that the logic was much cruder: if the train stops at Ealing, must be a stopper, show destination as Ealing. IF it doesn't stop at Ealing, show destination as Paddington. Normally a good rule of thumb, but wouldn't work here.

 

[cholsey-choose]

"Local service" might do without having that implication.

Unfortunately 'local service' also implies that it doesn't go very far! It's not pretty, but I would go for 'express' and 'non-express'.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unfortunately 'local service' also implies that it doesn't go very far! It's not pretty, but I would go for 'express' and 'non-express'.

Slough, at last count, showed the xx10 and xx40 as "Express service" in the notes and on the one-line-per-train summary display and the others with no note. That seems to work.

 

[cholsey-choose]

Slough, at last count, showed the xx10 and xx40 as "Express service" in the notes and on the one-line-per-train summary display and the others with no note. That seems to work.

Agreed. Especially if there was a note below saying that passengers for the main destinations should take an express if they want to get there quickly. (For foreign tourists, etc.)

 

[duffield]

Leeds-harrogate-york trains show Poppleton on the station PIS (have done for years) But show york on the front/back of the train. Why not 'York via harrogate'

Because that means you need to know that 'via Harrogate' means a much slower journey, and most people don't have that level of knowledge of the rail network? OK for regular travellers between Leeds and York who will soon realize, but no good for occasional travellers.

 

[JonathanH]

At one time there was an announcer at Reading who announced the stoppers as trains to Ealing Broadway and then used the words 'and then on to London Paddington' at the end of his listing of intermediate stations.

Giving false destinations is useful for people who are less familiar with the rail network.

It is quite common to find people on one of the 'Reigate and Gatwick Airport' trains at Redhill worried about making their flight given the journey time in excess of an hour from Victoria rather than something closer to 30 minutes.

 

[cactustwirly]

Given that the ATOS PIS (which I think GWR use) can show arrival times at a given destination, this is to me a better choice than false destinations. I often don't take the fastest train out of Euston in order that I might get a seat, for example; take the 1805 to Northampton as an example, you're quicker taking one of the fasts, but if you take the 1705 you'll only be standing as far as Harrow rather than most of the way. Or maybe you like Class 319s, or whatever. And then you have cases of disruption when a train in the platform, even a slow one, is worth 10 on the departure board.

Add to that, putting something like "Local stopping service" as a "please note" can further emphasize that it isn't the best choice for a through journey, such as they do at Manc Picc for the Hope Valley stopper. Those aren't shown as "Dore and Totley", which would just confuse people.

At Paddington and Reading you've then got a further reason not to do this - peak evening restrictions don't apply to the stoppers (unless that's changed), so why hide them?

Because arrival times make the display cluttered and confusing!
I don't, and I suspect most people don't pay much attention to them.
I just quickly scan the departure screen, and I look for 'Oxford and then I know that's the fastest train, without having to faff around looking for arrival times, or local stopping service messages etc.
The same applies Reading, for London Paddington the fastest trains are always displayed as London Paddington, and slow trains are displayed as 'Ealing Broadway' for the very good reason, that they will get overtaken multiple times by faster services.
It's actually faster to wait half an hour, and take a fast service, than immediately take a slow service!

 

[coppercapped]

Agreed. Especially if there was a note below saying that passengers for the main destinations should take an express if they want to get there quickly. (For foreign tourists, etc.)

This topic comes up regularly. The reason the last stop before the train's actual destination is shown as the destination on the display boards is because people don't read notices or signs completely - they filter out stuff which to them is irrelevant especially if in a hurry or otherwise stressed. The system works - it helps to steer people away from unsuitable trains.

A traveller who travels infrequently or doesn't know the details of railway geography (is Pangbourne before or after Didcot?) or operations (what is meant by 'Express'?) looks for a train for, say, Reading on the departure boards. He/she sees 'Reading' in big letters and underneath a platform number. It is clear that the train stops many times on its journey as the stops are listed underneath, but this part is ignored - it's information overload. So they get on a slow train and are then annoyed.

The so-called 'false destination' is only shown on the departure screens of the train's originating station, in the case of the Western this essentially means Paddington, Oxford (at the moment this is Didcot ) and Reading. From Paddington the Reading terminators will be labelled 'Twyford' and the Oxford terminators 'Radley'. From Oxford (currently Didcot) and Reading the stoppers will be labelled 'Ealing Broadway'. It should be noted that the platform displays from the first station call onwards will always show the actual destination.

In the case of the Western there is no confusion about possible alternative routes and the fast (Express?) services are more frequent than the stoppers - at least between London, Reading and Didcot so it's not too difficult to chose a faster train if one's destination is Paddington, Reading, Didcot or Oxford. Off-peak ticket availability from Paddington in the evening peak is also not an issue - most of those in use have been issued earlier in the day from outside London and the restrictions on the use of the return half are published and people are more aware of the issue.

I agree that in the case where the station at which the last call before the terminus is normally made is out of action then the displays at the train's originating station ought to show the name of the station where the last call is actually made.

It really is not an issue - the bigger problem was people getting on the wrong train and then complaining.

 

[jimm]

1. At Reading there are a lot of trains with false destinations, eg the slow train to Paddington is listed as for Ealing Broadway. But in the past week a lot of the slow trains have been skipping Ealing, which shows up some of the limitations of this system. Slow trains have been announced as for Paddington, even if they stop at every station (except Ealing) along the way.

Are you sure about this? On Monday evening while I was waiting to head in the other direction out of Reading there was a service on the departures summary screens which was shown as running to Acton Main Line - just as well given the series of eastbound IETs leaving shortly before and after its departure time either non-stop or with just a Slough call on the way into Paddington.

 

[Aictos]

For years, the London to Cambridge stoppers have been advertised as terminating at Foxton northbound and Finsbury Park southbound with no problems, me thinks the OP is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

 

[gallafent]

For years, the London to Cambridge stoppers have been advertised as terminating at Foxton northbound and Finsbury Park southbound with no problems, me thinks the OP is making a mountain out of a mole hill.

No problems for you. Likewise the Ealing Broadway / Radley misinformation has caused no problems for me.

I am aware of others, heading for London from Oxford on an “Ealing Broadway” train (must be a decade ago now), that got off the train at Ealing Broadway (since that was the marked destination) and then took the tube in from there, causing their journey to be far slower than it needed to be. They were deeply unimpressed when I told them their train actually carried on to Paddington. Advertising the actual destination of the train, instead of lying about it, would have prevented that problem. On these routes, some subset the words and phrases “express”, “limited stop”, “all stations”, “fast”, “semi-fast”, “local”, “direct”, (… and doubtless others) should be used, rather than deliberately misleading passengers about the train's actual destination.

 

[cactustwirly]

No problems for you. Likewise the Ealing Broadway / Radley misinformation has caused no problems for me.

I am aware of others, heading for London from Oxford on an “Ealing Broadway” train (must be a decade ago now), that got off the train at Ealing Broadway (since that was the marked destination) and then took the tube in from there, causing their journey to be far slower than it needed to be. They were deeply unimpressed when I told them their train actually carried on to Paddington. Advertising the actual destination of the train, instead of lying about it, would have prevented that problem. On these routes, some subset the words and phrases “express”, “limited stop”, “all stations”, “fast”, “semi-fast”, “local”, “direct”, (… and doubtless others) should be used, rather than deliberately misleading passengers about the train's actual destination.

But people traveling from London to Oxford shouldn't be on that train anyway!

 

[gallafent]

But people traveling from London to Oxford shouldn't be on that train anyway!

(or indeed from Oxford to London, but yes

Absolutely, you and I (and most people here!) would work that out pretty readily, and I do understand the rationale behind the strategy. These people didn't, though, and for whatever reason, had an extended journey home as a result! … and yes, I don't know the status of the internal displays nor the presence (or absence) of audible announcements on the train (a 165/6 no doubt, some time between 2005-2009).

I definitely agree that there should be a way to indicate to passengers which train they should take to get to their destination soonest. (There's a “next fastest train to” board at Oxford I think, which clearly helps with that! …) but I still think that the way to do this is to use clear concise expressive words that are present and well understood in the english language, rather than to lie about the destination of trains.

Even when there's no disruption it will confuse some people (though I completely get the point that it's quite possible that more people take the “right” train as a result of skimming final destinations for “London Paddington”, so the balance between the option of “lie” with that of “do nothing” is in favour of “lie”, … it's just that “provide more true information” (i.e. use words such as “all stations” and “fast” or whatever) would be better still in my view), … and as soon as trains start getting delayed or cancelled, all bets are off and the misinformation may actually cause people to be delayed in reaching their final destination. As well as (or as an alternative to) “fast” etc., adding the arrival time at each destination station (or even just the final destination) would unambiguously and clearly show which was the right train to get for those willing and able to do the extra reading … whereas the single short word/phrase “fast”, “all stations” (etc.) should guide most that aren't doing such a detailed analysis.

I was a bit puzzled by the old “Bicester Village … [wait for display to change] … & London Marylebone” signs too … but that's tourism for you, … now if only we had high-enough resolution matrix displays to hold Chinese characters (or indeed display Arabic with any degree of legibility!), we could fit far more information on the screens

 

[43096]

No problems for you. Likewise the Ealing Broadway / Radley misinformation has caused no problems for me.

I am aware of others, heading for London from Oxford on an “Ealing Broadway” train (must be a decade ago now), that got off the train at Ealing Broadway (since that was the marked destination) and then took the tube in from there, causing their journey to be far slower than it needed to be. They were deeply unimpressed when I told them their train actually carried on to Paddington. Advertising the actual destination of the train, instead of lying about it, would have prevented that problem. On these routes, some subset the words and phrases “express”, “limited stop”, “all stations”, “fast”, “semi-fast”, “local”, “direct”, (… and doubtless others) should be used, rather than deliberately misleading passengers about the train's actual destination.

Whatever they do, there will always be someone who doesn’t understand and will get the slow train when they wanted the fast.

It’s basically the age old problem of “normals are stupid” and there’s only so much that can be done to save themselves from their own stupidity.

 

[cactustwirly]

But if you labelled the Stoppers as 'London Paddington - local stopping service' it's sort of ambiguous how slow it really is.
For example the stopper used to depart Oxford just after the fast service, people could be misled into taking the stopper, because they would be under the false impression that taking the stopper would be faster than waiting for the next fast - it definitely isn't, even the fast service an hour later will get into London ahead of the stopper!

 

[cholsey-choose]

But if you labelled the Stoppers as 'London Paddington - local stopping service' it's sort of ambiguous how slow it really is.
For example the stopper used to depart Oxford just after the fast service, people could be misled into taking the stopper, because they would be under the false impression that taking the stopper would be faster than waiting for the next fast - it definitely isn't, even the fast service an hour later will get into London ahead of the stopper!

I see the problem there, but that problem should be mitigated by the presence of 'next fastest' boards these days.