Introducing RailUK Tickets - support the forum when booking your rail tickets!

[Egg Centric]

Random crazy idea - forum integration. Add a "Railforums username" option and:

1. We get pretty badges or something against our avatars depending on either or both of our spend and mileage
2. A "Complain about/Praise this journey online" option that starts a thread
3. Optional notification of Railforums users on the same train
4. Some other thing...

 

[sheff1]

What solution do you propose?

Do not issue reservations for counted place trains when the travel ticket is a flexible one. Reservations for such trains should only ever be issued in conjunction with a train specific (Advance) ticket in my view.
This is not just a Rail UK/Trainsplit problem - I have ended up with a fistful /screen full of pointless reservations from other retailers too.

 

[Adam Williams]

Do not issue reservations for counted place trains when the travel ticket is a flexible one. Reservations for such trains should only ever be issued in conjunction with a train specific (Advance) ticket in my view.

I'm not sure a retailer electing to do this would pass accreditation.
Ultimately, counted place reservations have been made, supplements have been written to Lennon and therefore I can't see how you could argue it's okay not to write that Passenger-Leg when fulfilling to ToD. The type of ticket the passenger holds and the fact that the reservation is a no-place reservation is immaterial.

You'd be better off complaining to RDG about this

 

[MotCO]

I've recently used this website to buy what I thought would be bog-standard peak hour fares from the Surrey/London borders, and you identified s series of splits that saved me £1.62. Not a great amount but a pleasant surprise, and presumably helping Railforums as well. Wins all round!

 

[Haywain]

I'm not sure a retailer electing to do this would pass accreditation.
Ultimately, counted place reservations have been made, supplements have been written to Lennon and therefore I can't see how you could argue it's okay not to write that Passenger-Leg when fulfilling to ToD. The type of ticket the passenger holds and the fact that the reservation is a no-place reservation is immaterial.

You'd be better off complaining to RDG about this

This really needs better use of quotas so that reservations are not offered for flexible tickets on non-reservable trains. But that's for the TOCs rather than the retailers.

 

[sheff1]

I'm not sure a retailer electing to do this would pass accreditation.
Ultimately, counted place reservations have been made, supplements have been written to Lennon and therefore I can't see how you could argue it's okay not to write that Passenger-Leg when fulfilling to ToD. The type of ticket the passenger holds and the fact that the reservation is a no-place reservation is immaterial.

You'd be better off complaining to RDG about this

Backend workings are immaterial to most passengers, they just do not want a handful of unnecessary and potentially misleading tickets or similary misleading and unnecessary clutter on their eticket. The tickets are issued ty retailers and if recipients wish to complain it would be to the issuer. Of course the vast majority will not bother and a number will be misled into thinking they must travel on the 'specified' train.

My comments were made in answer to a query. It does not surprise me that the buck is being passed in response.

 

[Egg Centric]

It does not surprise me that the buck is being passed in response.

You want trainsplit to hold the buck even though it is quite clearly the responsibility of the crazy morons who manage our current ticketing system?

Ultimately trainsplit only even exists because said ticketing system - on a small island and mostly centralised mind you - is so crazily moronic that determining the best combination(s) of tickets is NP complete. And the regulation is inpenetrable.

They're perfectly in the right to pass the buck onto the crazy morons.

 

[Gaelan]

determining the best combination(s) of tickets is NP complete

Incidentally, is there a proof of this somewhere? Sounds like a fun read.

 

[Egg Centric]

Incidentally, is there a proof of this somewhere? Sounds like a fun read.

TBH I meant it more in the sense of "I'm a lazy programmer and this is a difficult problem involving graphs so probably NP complete" rather than offering a formal proof.

I suspect it is though (if not even NP hard) in the case of a multi leg return journey with all possible ticket types at least.

For a rigourous answer, ask me 17 years ago. I can barely count to 10 these days.

 

[Gaelan]

TBH I meant it more in the sense of "I'm a lazy programmer and this is a difficult problem involving graphs so probably NP complete" rather than offering a formal proof.

I suspect it is though (if not even NP hard) in the case of a multi leg return journey with all possible ticket types at least.

For a rigourous answer, ask me 17 years ago. I can barely count to 10 these days.

Fair enough!

 

[mjc]

Really pleased to see that the seat selector tool has recently been improved (for my regular commute journey at least). I’m on XC Voyagers (what joy!) and previously at least half of the seats were absent from the tool but they’re all there and it seems much more stable, well done and thank you to whoever did this magic!

 

[Miken]

I've been using the site for over a month and it is superb. Its quick, efficient and I'm fairly sure has saved me a basket load of cash. Will not be going anywhere else to buy tickets... Thank-you.

 

[andythebrave]

Are there any plans to allow the use of multiple railcards?

The lack of this facility means that when I'm out and about with my family we cannot easily use the site.

For example, I'm planning a day trip from either Bedford or Peterborough to Leeds this Saturday and would, currently, need to make 3 separate enquiries for the four of us.

 

[Adam Williams]

Are there any plans to allow the use of multiple railcards?

It's been talked about for a while, yes.

Outside of Raileasy's control, though - work needs to be done on the journey planning side (who only support it without splits enabled).

 

[andythebrave]

Thank you.

 

[Egg Centric]

It's been talked about for a while, yes.

Outside of Raileasy's control, though - work needs to be done on the journey planning side (who only support it without splits enabled).

What is the "journey planning side" - I thought you guys did the split planning yourselves?

 

[Adam Williams]

What is the "journey planning side" - I thought you guys did the split planning yourselves?

TrainSplit was built by two forum members who wrote the split ticketing functionality from the ground up (still in use today) and launched their own journey planning service spin-off company. Raileasy held the RDG retail license and acted as the retail partner for fulfilling tickets, building an API that pulled everything together and managed aftersales. Later on, the TrainSplit frontend websites, apps, branding and some internal tools were acquired by Raileasy itself.

I've done work for all 3 of these entities in various different capacities over the past few years, but at present I (try) and focus on the side of things that Raileasy is responsible for, with a particular interest in the frontends, and working with the rest of the rail industry.

 

[cav1975]

If I buy a "Not valid on HS1" ticket on line is there any way to buy a HS1 upgrade on line? Bought one at the station yesterday but it would be easier to get it in advance.

 

[_toommm_]

If I buy a "Not valid on HS1" ticket on line is there any way to buy a HS1 upgrade on line? Bought one at the station yesterday but it would be easier to get it in advance.

It has to be via a ticket office or TVM, according to their website. I don’t want to comment whether SE allow it on board as I’m not very familiar with their network and revenue policies.

 

[yorkie]

Are there any plans to allow the use of multiple railcards?

We can't give a date but it is coming!

What is the "journey planning side" - I thought you guys did the split planning yourselves?

The journey planner, including fares, is provided by FastJP. If you go to www.fastjp.com that's the journey planner without fares.

 

[D6130]

A friend of ours wishes to travel from Hebden Bridge to Fareham on Tuesday 11th July, using her Senior Railcard. Looking on the RailUK Tickets site, I see that there are some extemely good value fares available via Leeds, Kings Cross and Victoria. As she is elderly and will be travelling with quite a lot of luggage, she has asked me whether the 'via Victoria' fares would also be valid on Thameslink services from St Pancras to East Croydon for an easier connection. I think I know the answer to this, but I would appreciate confirmation or otherwise from the experts on here. Thanks in anticipation.

 

[MrJeeves]

A friend of ours wishes to travel from Hebden Bridge to Fareham on Tuesday 11th July, using her Senior Railcard. Looking on the RailUK Tickets site, I see that there are some extemely good value fares available via Leeds, Kings Cross and Victoria. As she is elderly and will be travelling with quite a lot of luggage, she has asked me whether the 'via Victoria' fares would also be valid on Thameslink services from St Pancras to East Croydon for an easier connection. I think I know the answer to this, but I would appreciate confirmation or otherwise from the experts on here. Thanks in anticipation.

The easiest option would be to add a "via" point of St Pancras and let the journey planner find an appropriate combination of tickets valid via there.

 

[yorkie]

A friend of ours wishes to travel from Hebden Bridge to Fareham on Tuesday 11th July, using her Senior Railcard. Looking on the RailUK Tickets site, I see that there are some extemely good value fares available via Leeds, Kings Cross and Victoria. As she is elderly and will be travelling with quite a lot of luggage, she has asked me whether the 'via Victoria' fares would also be valid on Thameslink services from St Pancras to East Croydon for an easier connection. I think I know the answer to this, but I would appreciate confirmation or otherwise from the experts on here. Thanks in anticipation.

The easiest option would be to add a "via" point of St Pancras and let the journey planner find an appropriate combination of tickets valid via there.

Agreed; in the case of someone having a specific request regarding connections, it's important to get the itinerary they require and the system will work out the best tickets for the given itinerary.

 

[sheff1]

I always use City Thameslink as the via station for such journeys. Using St Pancras can still route you onto the undergound from there.

 

[yorkie]

You can exclude London Underground as a mode.

 

[sheff1]

Yes, but that adds a step unnecessarily.

 

[Hadders]

Changing at Stevenage is probably worth specifying as it's cross platform from LNER to Thameslink and is probably less faff than LNER to Kings Cross and crossing the road to St Pancras.

 

[D6130]

Thanks all for your responses.

 

[BRX]

I have been experimenting with the "extra mins" box that appears when you use "travel via" and "change at" in the "more options" section.

This is useful for giving an itinerary that includes extended stops, to minimise the possibility of arguments about journey breaks.

Sometimes using this seems to break the journey planner. For one journey or example, it will let me choose a number of minutes up to 360 and still give me an itinerary and fare - but more than that and it refuses to play, saying "we couldn't find any journeys that match your search" (and sometimes telling me "sorry these journeys aren't yet open for booking" even when I'm only looking at a few days ahead).

Is there a predictable way in which it fails? For example, is 360 minutes the maximum it can deal with or is there more to it?

 

[Adam Williams]

I have a hunch it's filtering stuff out that's considered outside the search window. This effectively means you can't force an "extra mins" change that would push the itinerary outside of the four hour window that we use for searches.

I'd have to check to know for sure, though.