Issues & potential conflicts regarding CrossCountry's short-notice reservation system

[Tetchytyke]

If I sit in a seat that hasn't been reserved, there is no way to know whether someone will reserve it in the future and no way to assess that risk of being unseated.

"This seat may be reserved" is pretty unequivocal, is it not? The great big red sticker next to the display panel explains it for those who still don't understand.

I don't understand why treating a TMR seat the same as any other reserved seat is so difficult. Don't want to be turfed out of it? Don't bloomin' sit there.

I once sat in a seat in a XC Voyager that was definitely displaying "Unreserved", not "This seat may be reserved" at Bristol, only to be turfed out at New Street by someone with a TMR (which was now shown on the display).

I've seen the reservation system fail, or partially fail, plenty of times, only to reboot whilst en route. But the shoddiness of the electronic reservation systems is a whole different debate.

These days the seats have a red sticker on the display explaining what "this may be reserved" means.

 

[yorksrob]

"This seat may be reserved" is pretty unequivocal, is it not? The great big red sticker next to the display panel explains it for those who still don't understand.

I don't understand why treating a TMR seat the same as any other reserved seat is so difficult. Don't want to be turfed out of it? Don't bloomin' sit there.
.

The word "may" in this context, relates to the possibility, not the certainty that the seat is, or will be reserved. It is therefore by definition an equivocation.

Passengers on the train should be faced with one of three possibilities when confronted with a seat:

1, The seat is not reserved, in which case they are free to use it for the entirety of their journey without hindrance.

2, The seat is a priority seat, in which case they can use it unless a priority passenger requires it.

3, It is reserved and clearly marked between which stations it is reserved, where passengers will know from the outset where and when they may have to vacate.

There is no justification for a situation of "this seat isn't reserved at the moment so sit down, but someone may reserve it part way, in which case sling your hook".

It's a waste of capacity because people may be understandably put off from sitting there when it might not even be reserved and serves nothing more than a pointless infatuation with technology.

 

[Bletchleyite]

It's a waste of capacity because people may be understandably put off from sitting there when it might not even be reserved and serves nothing more than a pointless infatuation with technology.

But it's not a pointless infatuation with technology. It can enhance the journey experience.

Imagine if when you bought a walk-up ticket you could get a reservation, even with seat selection, as you did so. Or the TVM would warn you that you were going (or very likely) to be standing. Perhaps you'd reconsider your choice of train? Or if you couldn't you'd at least know.

Coupled with the idea of having reserved coaches/areas and unreserved coaches/areas with permanent marking, and lots of ways to obtain reservations including for existing tickets (TVM, text, ticket office, online, app etc), this could abolish the Euston scrum and the likes, as well as solve the problem of malfunctioning reservation systems and unplaced reservations, without having any of the disadvantages of true compulsory reservations. And that would be a very, very good thing indeed.

OK, you can't stand on a plane - but how much less stressful is flying low-cost now the seating scrum has gone? And how much more civilised is the cinema now you can select your seat online and wander up once you've had time to get your overpriced popcorn rather than having to rush when the screen opens for a good seat/to sit together?

 

[Tetchytyke]

It's a waste of capacity because people may be understandably put off from sitting there when it might not even be reserved and serves nothing more than a pointless infatuation with technology.

If a train is quiet, they can sit somewhere else.

If a train is busy, they will sit there rather than stand, knowing the risk that they may get turfed out.

Where, exactly, is the waste of capacity?

"I don't like TMR because I don't want to use it" is not an answer.

As I say, if you don't like the TMR rules, don't sit in a TMR seat. Don't sit in a seat, knowing the risks, and then bleat about it afterwards when someone gets you to move. Treat it as reserved, and sit somewhere else, if getting turfed out will be so distressing to your day.

I genuinely don't understand why people have difficulties with the concept. I really don't. It smacks of sour grapes that you took a chance in sitting in a reserved seat and it backfired.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Imagine if when you bought a walk-up ticket you could get a reservation, even with seat selection, as you did so. Or the TVM would warn you that you were going (or very likely) to be standing. Perhaps you'd reconsider your choice of train? Or if you couldn't you'd at least know.

Would that be viable on TL once all TL services have gone over to the 700s? The loadings data could update at every station and other suitable point for uploading the data. The TVMs could look at the last data and give an idea if you'll likely be standing

 

[HowardGWR]

OK, you can't stand on a plane - but how much less stressful is flying low-cost now the seating scrum has gone? And how much more civilised is the cinema now you can select your seat online and wander up once you've had time to get your overpriced popcorn rather than having to rush when the screen opens for a good seat/to sit together?

All during the time when you could not reserve on the low-cost planes, my wife and I would never endure the scrum. We always got seats together, always wandering out to the plane after everyone else. Only once were we condemned to be 'across the aisle' from one another, even. We were still adjacent. That's because intelligence tells you that single travellers will always make it possible for a couple to sit next to each other, if need be.

We still fly low cost. We don't care where we sit on the plane (why would one?) and the automatic reservation system always puts a couple together.

It seems to me to be a question of attitude to life.

 

[Bletchleyite]

We don't care where we sit on the plane (why would one?)

Legroom.

And will single travellers move for a couple? I'm not sure I would. The only time I have ever moved is to allow children to sit with their parents, and I think once more for someone who asked *very* nicely. I would never move into a middle seat under any circumstances unless forced to do so by cabin crew (not just for my comfort but for that of the people either side, as I am quite big - not unduly fat, or not to the extent that makes any difference to airline seating, just scaled up somewhat).

 

[Bletchleyite]

Would that be viable on TL once all TL services have gone over to the 700s? The loadings data could update at every station and other suitable point for uploading the data. The TVMs could look at the last data and give an idea if you'll likely be standing

Not a bad idea, it could also go on the PIS like the "reservation level" at Euston. With the 700s it could indicate the best place to stand on the platform too.

Anything that sets expectations is useful. At the moment all commuter passengers have to go on is 12-car = not full, 8-car = busy, 4-car = avoid, which is a very blunt instrument indeed.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

What would be involved in retrofitting passenger loading sensors to XC's Voyagers to enable them to display on TVMs the loadings, then people could decide if it's worth making a seat reservation. If the train is very full then chances are that they'd struggle to reach their reserved seat

 

[Bletchleyite]

What would be involved in retrofitting passenger loading sensors to XC's Voyagers to enable them to display on TVMs the loadings, then people could decide if it's worth making a seat reservation. If the train is very full then chances are that they'd struggle to reach their reserved seat

If TMRs became the norm, it would be enough just to know the reservation level. If 100%, it would be unlikely for there not to be standees.

 

[yorksrob]

If a train is quiet, they can sit somewhere else.

If a train is busy, they will sit there rather than stand, knowing the risk that they may get turfed out.

Where, exactly, is the waste of capacity?

"I don't like TMR because I don't want to use it" is not an answer.

As I say, if you don't like the TMR rules, don't sit in a TMR seat. Don't sit in a seat, knowing the risks, and then bleat about it afterwards when someone gets you to move. Treat it as reserved, and sit somewhere else, if getting turfed out will be so distressing to your day.

I genuinely don't understand why people have difficulties with the concept. I really don't. It smacks of sour grapes that you took a chance in sitting in a reserved seat and it backfired.

"It smacks of sour grapes that you took a chance in sitting in a reserved seat and it backfired"

As I have repeated several times, I have no problem with seats reserved in the traditional way because it is possible to tell where and when they are reserved for when you sit down. The problem is with seats that are not reserved when you sit in them but which may be reserved part way through, so your assertion bears absolutely no relevance to he discussion whatsoever. Surely the difference between these scenarios isn't that difficult to appreciate.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Surely the difference between these scenarios isn't that difficult to appreciate.

There isn't a difference.

Treat a TMR seat as reserved, because effectively it is, and you won't get booted out of it.

Easy peasy.

 

[bramling]

Not a bad idea, it could also go on the PIS like the "reservation level" at Euston. With the 700s it could indicate the best place to stand on the platform too.

Anything that sets expectations is useful. At the moment all commuter passengers have to go on is 12-car = not full, 8-car = busy, 4-car = avoid, which is a very blunt instrument indeed.

Regular commuters soon get to know which services load to greater or lesser extent. I could reel off the weekday timetable at my local station and probably guess the loadings of each service to within a few percentage points.

Weekends are much harder to predict due to events, seasonal and weather variations, and this can make travelling at weekends a total nuisance nowadays.

I can't really see what tinkering with things will achieve. If you advertise that a train has more room towards the rear, or whatever, surely all that will achieve is a glut of people will then try to board at that end, so now that end is more overloaded.

 

[Tetchytyke]

If you advertise that a train has more room towards the rear, or whatever, surely all that will achieve is a glut of people will then try to board at that end, so now that end is more overloaded.

You'd think so, but commuting in London shows otherwise. People will cheerfully stand all the way from Hemel to London just so they can be first off the train at Euston, even though the rear couple of carriages in a 12-car are barely half full.

 

[CentralTrainer]

What would be involved in retrofitting passenger loading sensors to XC's Voyagers to enable them to display on TVMs the loadings, then people could decide if it's worth making a seat reservation. If the train is very full then chances are that they'd struggle to reach their reserved seat

But what if the seats had bags and/or people's feet on them - wouldn't this trigger sensors thereby sending duff info to the loadings sector on the TVMs?

 

[Bletchleyite]

You'd think so, but commuting in London shows otherwise. People will cheerfully stand all the way from Hemel to London just so they can be first off the train at Euston, even though the rear couple of carriages in a 12-car are barely half full.

Same in the other direction too - I think people are lazy and just prefer to whine rather than walk up and get two seats to themselves at the front.

(Several LM 12 car peak trains that load to full and standing to the point of declassification to the rear have spare *bays* at the front regularly, let alone single seats)

 

[yorksrob]

There isn't a difference.

Treat a TMR seat as reserved, because effectively it is, and you won't get booted out of it.

Easy peasy.

Why should passengers be expected to treat a seat as reserved if it's not.

Either a seat is reserved or not.

 

[edwin_m]

Why should passengers be expected to treat a seat as reserved if it's not.

Either a seat is reserved or not.

I don't see a problem as long as a reasonable proportion of seats are designated as "unreserved" (rather than "may be reserved") and under no circumstances does an "unreserved" seat get reserved during the journey. This may involve not allowing someone to reverse a seat on the train while it is en route, with the alternative potentially leading to a United Airlines situation.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Why should passengers be expected to treat a seat as reserved if it's not.

Because it is reserved. It is reserved for users of the TMR system.

There are other seats on Voyagers which are entirely unreservable- on the 221s there's an entire carriage- so I really don't see what the problem is.

 

[Sleeper]

I don't see a problem as long as a reasonable proportion of seats are designated as "unreserved" (rather than "may be reserved") and under no circumstances does an "unreserved" seat get reserved during the journey. This may involve not allowing someone to reserve a seat on the train while it is en route, with the alternative potentially leading to a United Airlines situation.

I think Edwin_M puts his finger on two key points, identified by my bold in the quote.

The further point I'd make is that it should be reasonably easy for the passenger without a reservation to find the unreserved seats, bearing in mind s/he may be travelling with luggage and or children so that it isn't easy to trawl through the whole length of the train seeking them out. This may mean concourse and on-board announcements, such as "the main unreserved section is in coach B towards the rear of the train".

I have noticed that the concourse display at Kings Cross now shows an indication of how "full" each carriage is loaded, presumably informed by what proportion of the seats are reserved. Whether that would be "reserved at any time" or "reserved from Kings Cross" I don't know. But I imagine this display could be very helpful.

 

[Senex]

There are other seats on Voyagers which are entirely unreservable- on the 221s there's an entire carriage- so I really don't see what the problem is.

How many seats in First in a 220/221 are entirely unreservable - and how does one know which ones they are (without having to check every single label)?

Edited on 28 April. I've since found the train-layout diagrams on the XC web-site. It appears from these that there are no unreservable seats in First on any of the three XC train-types and none in Standard in the HSTs and Turbostars. In Voyagers there are 8 unreservable seats (inc. 2 priority) in Coach D and another 4 (inc. 2 priority) in Coach C.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

But what if the seats had bags and/or people's feet on them - wouldn't this trigger sensors thereby sending duff info to the loadings sector on the TVMs?

People's feet on the seats isn't allowed, there was a case in the news over the last few years where someone got fined for doing that. Seats with bags on probably won't make too much difference, if the luggage racks and overhead shelfs are full, that luggage has to go somewhere.

I think the sensors would be linked into the suspension (think that's where they are on a 700, not going to trawl through a 150 page 700 thread to check)

 

[edwin_m]

Passenger load weighing was first tried on a 319 in about 1994, using the pressure in the air suspension to estimate the load in each coach. I believe some newer systems use an infra-red sensor/camera above each door to count passengers boarding and alighting.

 

[Doctor Fegg]

There are other seats on Voyagers which are entirely unreservable- on the 221s there's an entire carriage- so I really don't see what the problem is.

There's an entire carriage of unreserved seats? Whoopdedoo. CrossCountry, the intercity train operator bringing you as much travel flexibility as a Class 153.

 

[Bletchleyite]

There's an entire carriage of unreserved seats? Whoopdedoo. CrossCountry, the intercity train operator bringing you as much travel flexibility as a Class 153.

There are only two in Standard on an 11-car Pendolino, and that's more than twice the length.

 

[Tetchytyke]

There's an entire carriage of unreserved seats? Whoopdedoo.

That's a carriage more than you get on VTEC.

 

[duffield]

How many seats in First in a 220/221 are entirely unreservable - and how does one know which ones they are (without having to check every single label)?

Edited on 28 April. I've since found the train-layout diagrams on the XC web-site. It appears from these that there are no unreservable seats in First on any of the three XC train-types and none in Standard in the HSTs and Turbostars. In Voyagers there are 8 unreservable seats (inc. 2 priority) in Coach D and another 4 (inc. 2 priority) in Coach C.

My experience on XC voyagers is that the first bay of four seats (at the wheelchair space end of the coach), plus the facing pair across the aisle at the very least not reservable en route. They normally show as 'available' (as opposed to 'may be reserved en route').

 

[Bletchleyite]

Is there no unreserved coach on VTEC? Really? Always used to be.

 

[Tetchytyke]

Is there no unreserved coach on VTEC? Really? Always used to be.

There isn't on the HST, and there's just the buffet half-carriage (ETA: as well as the old smoking section) on the MkIVs.

 

[PeterC]

To hell with it, I'll just drive.