Journey planner allowing user to specify a maximum leg time

AnkleBoots

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2017
Messages
496
Is there a journey planner that allows the user to specify a maximum leg time?

eg. passenger wants to spend less than one hour at a time on a train, so a journey query for Manchester to Birmingham would return a change at Stoke, for example.

The reason could be toilet breaks, anxiety, or COVID fears.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

SickyNicky

Verified Rep - TrainSplit.com
Joined
8 Sep 2010
Messages
2,474
Location
Ledbury
I don't believe so. It sounds very niche, to be honest.

You may be better working out in advance what stops to use (so you know you have the facilities you need at each station) and then using a planner that allows you to put in multiple via points - like ours :)
 

AnkleBoots

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2017
Messages
496
Thank you.

Dr Shengjie Lai of University of Southampton was studying transmission of COVID on trains and found that:

"a safe social distance of more than one metre is required for one hour spent travelling together. After two hours of contact...less than 2.5 metres may be insufficient to prevent transmission.
 

Adam Williams

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2018
Messages
187
Location
Warks
It's an open access paper: https://academic.oup.com/cid/article/doi/10.1093/cid/ciaa1057/5877944

Looks like it's using historical data:

using data from 2,334 index patients and 72,093 close contacts who had co-travel times of 0–8 hours from 19 December 2019 through 6 March 2020 in China
It's unclear to me how widespread face coverings would have been at that time in China.

Edit:
As most index patients and close contacts (97.3%) travelled before 25 January when interventions had not been widely implemented across China, the attack rate estimated is more likely to reflect the setting of no/limited face covering and temperature screening at stations.
 

alistairlees

Established Member
Joined
29 Dec 2016
Messages
1,789
Do you think that 2 hours train travel, divided into two 1-hour journeys, with a break (30 mins?) in between will be significantly safer than a 2-hour train journey with no breaks?
 

Adam Williams

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2018
Messages
187
Location
Warks
Do you think that 2 hours train travel, divided into two 1-hour journeys, with a break (30 mins?) in between will be significantly safer than a 2-hour train journey with no breaks?
I suppose that depends on your definition of "significantly" (and I suspect the risk would be dampened by the now-enforced use of face coverings - it's clear we need to do more research here) but my reading of the study suggests you're looking at an increase from a 3.5% attack rate to 6.1% after 2 hours of travel if you're unlucky enough to sit next to someone who is infectious (and from 0.32% to 0.62% after 2 hours if you're in the same carriage but not the same row as the infectious patient). That's a doubling of the risk, so yeah - I'd consider breaking up the journey if I had to travel.

The other benefit is that you get another roll of the dice - it's less likely you'll end up sitting next to someone infectious on both legs just due to how conditional probability works!

I guess it depends on how busy the interchange station is
Mmm, this also needs to be a consideration - but even so, it's probably going to be possible to wait outside on the platform and that's likely better than being stuck in a carriage with recirculated air.
 

mmh

Established Member
Joined
13 Aug 2016
Messages
2,429
Thank you.

Dr Shengjie Lai of University of Southampton was studying transmission of COVID on trains and found that:

"a safe social distance of more than one metre is required for one hour spent travelling together. After two hours of contact...less than 2.5 metres may be insufficient to prevent transmission.
Why are people so willing to give credence to nonsense like this?
 

Adam Williams

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2018
Messages
187
Location
Warks
Why are people so willing to give credence to nonsense like this?
Uhhh... it's been published in a peer-reviewed journal with an impact factor of 9.117. That's a decent indication to me that the study isn't fundamentally flawed.

You'll need to do a bit more than call it "nonsense" if you want to dispute its findings.
 

martino

Member
Joined
11 Jul 2011
Messages
16
I think an important point is being missed - the discussion is only considering what happens when you sit next to one infectious person for either 1 hour or 2 hours. By changing trains and sitting next to 2 people, you double the chance that one of them is infectious.

If we take the probability that a random person in the UK is infectious as 1 in 1000 (not far off the ONS estimates), and you sit next to 1 unknown person for 2 hours, then using this paper's figures your chance of infection is 1/1000 x 6.1% = 0.0061% (if I got the right number of zeroes). If you sit next to 2 unknown people for 1 hour each, then your chance of infection is 2/1000 x 7% = 0.007%, that is, slightly higher.

Regardless of whether this paper's exact figures apply in this situation or not, this is roughly the outcome I would expect. If you sit next to someone for 1 hour, and don't get infected, then the reason why you didn't get infected - they are not infectious, or they are breathing out of the other side of their face, or they have an effective face covering or whatever, has a good chance of continuing so your chance of being infected in a second hour with the same person is slightly less. On the other hand, if you do get infected in the first hour, then you can't get infected again in the second hour.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
48,835
Location
Yorkshire
Is there a journey planner that allows the user to specify a maximum leg time?

eg. passenger wants to spend less than one hour at a time on a train, so a journey query for Manchester to Birmingham would return a change at Stoke, for example.
What you need to do is use a journey planner that allows a 'changing at' feature; you can then specify where you want to change and how much extra time you want to spend there.
 

Ianno87

Established Member
Joined
3 May 2015
Messages
7,746
Do you think that 2 hours train travel, divided into two 1-hour journeys, with a break (30 mins?) in between will be significantly safer than a 2-hour train journey with no breaks?
Presumably getting on two seperate trains puts you in close contact with more people overall during the course of the journey?
 

Haywain

Established Member
Joined
3 Feb 2013
Messages
4,517
I suppose that depends on your definition of "significantly" (and I suspect the risk would be dampened by the now-enforced use of face coverings - it's clear we need to do more research here) but my reading of the study suggests you're looking at an increase from a 3.5% attack rate to 6.1% after 2 hours of travel if you're unlucky enough to sit next to someone who is infectious (and from 0.32% to 0.62% after 2 hours if you're in the same carriage but not the same row as the infectious patient). That's a doubling of the risk, so yeah - I'd consider breaking up the journey if I had to travel.

The other benefit is that you get another roll of the dice - it's less likely you'll end up sitting next to someone infectious on both legs just due to how conditional probability works!



Mmm, this also needs to be a consideration - but even so, it's probably going to be possible to wait outside on the platform and that's likely better than being stuck in a carriage with recirculated air.
With current social distancing measures, why would you be sitting next to an infected person? Unless they are part of your household or ‘bubble’ in which case changing trains isn’t likely to help much.
 

Adam Williams

Member
Joined
2 Jan 2018
Messages
187
Location
Warks
With current social distancing measures, why would you be sitting next to an infected person? Unless they are part of your household or ‘bubble’ in which case changing trains isn’t likely to help much.
You're right, you should be avoiding sitting next to anyone. Whether that will remain possible as time goes on and services get busier remains to be seen, I guess.

The paper also discusses the risk of sitting in an adjacent row which does seem a bit more conceivable to me (and again, the risk increases a reasonable amount with time) - even with folks trying their best to spread out within the carriage.
 

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
48,835
Location
Yorkshire
@AnkleBoots do you require further information regarding forcing changes? It's possible to request changes at up to 3 stations, with additional wait times of up to 99 minutes; it's also possible to specify to avoid changing at up to three stations too.

If you require advice regarding a specific journey e.g. which trains may be less busy, please do create a thread in the Trip Planning section :)
 

AnkleBoots

Member
Joined
8 Jan 2017
Messages
496
@AnkleBoots do you require further information regarding forcing changes? It's possible to request changes at up to 3 stations, with additional wait times of up to 99 minutes; it's also possible to specify to avoid changing at up to three stations too.
Thank you, not yet but I might do in future.
 

Top