• Our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk (powered by TrainSplit) helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase! Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!

National Routeing Guide update

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
Where there is obviously something quite shifty going on or the passengers are being unnecessarily hard done by then yes, I can see it being important. But in many cases in the past 21 years since the 1996 fares were set in stone, service patterns have changed, new routes and services opened. Some routes have better services, some have worse.

I would agree with you if there were actually a body responsible (and would probably need to be politically accountable) for coming up with conclusions on this. If the service has changed and that needs fares to change then of course it should be looked at. However, this is absolutely not what is actually happening. What is happening is inconsistent and completly subjective - one person or group of people just look at something and go 'let's just do that' without actually considering the things that you suggest. They are good ideas, but the current setup is generally reactive rather than proactive, and completely myopic. As you say, perhaps not just keeping every thing the same as it was in 1996 is a good idea. If that's going to be superseded, then great, but it needs to be by a fully formed policy with clear boundaries and relationships rather than ad-hoc and short term as now. "Reasoned analysis" as you put it, is a good idea. But this is not that. We really should not allow the current rules to be replaced with this kind of 'whatever we say' though - and it is in everyone's interest to have changes done procedurally. On current form, permitted routes are liable to change wildly between someone buying their ticket and using it to travel. How is anyone supposed to be able to check tickets with integrity when that's possible?

It is in the TOC's interest to sort that, too, as it would make their control over details far greater. It could be achieved politically too if there were an accountable process. But I do not sense that this is likely.
 
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R

RailUK Forums

yorkie

Forum Staff
Staff Member
Administrator
Joined
6 Jun 2005
Messages
67,438
Location
Yorkshire
As a general point I do often wonder how relevant this argument or principle is nowadays, to be honest.
It has to remain fundamental to routeing. If we let TOCs increase unregulated SOS fares to whatever level they want, it will result in the wholesale loss of permitted routes.
Where there is obviously something quite shifty going on or the passengers are being unnecessarily hard done by then yes, I can see it being important. But in many cases in the past 21 years since the 1996 fares were set in stone, service patterns have changed, new routes and services opened. Some routes have better services, some have worse. In a number of cases completely new journey opportunities have become available that weren't necessarily available then. Passenger flows have changed which makes the TOCs (whether you agree or not) increase some fares more than others ( directly or indirectly and often at the request of the DfT), or in some cases keep some fares low compared to others. New types of fares have become available for many flows, some cheaper than in 1996 - some undoubtedly significantly more expensive though.
I completely disagree. Again it is a fundamental point here. At one time Virgin increased Manchester to London to be a much higher price than Edinburgh to London (which they could not control). By the above logic, Edinburgh to London could be invalidated via Manchester. If we allowed what you propose, what's to stop any company increasing its fare to ludicrous proportions in order to prevent flows priced by other companies being valid?
Bearing all this in mind I do think that the one size fits all approach of "if it was valid in 1996 it must be valid now" argument is dying away 21 years down the line, and a more reasoned analysis in each case would be more beneficial to all parties. Quite who would be responsible for that in reality is a different matter though.
I see no reason to justify removal of permitted routes just because holders of franchises such as InterCity East Coast have decided that the flows they price should have eye-wateringly high SOS fares.

They call us the "routeing guide watchers" and they find us to be a huge irritation because they know we are putting their plans to reduce passenger rights at risk. We must keep thwarting them and we must keep fighting for what is right. I will never give up that fight.

And the enemies of sensible permitted routes are enemies of customers. The rail industry depends on its customers. They are doing the rail industry as a whole a lot more damage than they realise. I know they are reading this right now. My message to them is: desist immediately.
 

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,557
As a general point I do often wonder how relevant this argument or principle is nowadays, to be honest.

Where there is obviously something quite shifty going on or the passengers are being unnecessarily hard done by then yes, I can see it being important. But in many cases in the past 21 years since the 1996 fares were set in stone, service patterns have changed, new routes and services opened. Some routes have better services, some have worse. In a number of cases completely new journey opportunities have become available that weren't necessarily available then. Passenger flows have changed which makes the TOCs (whether you agree or not) increase some fares more than others ( directly or indirectly and often at the request of the DfT), or in some cases keep some fares low compared to others. New types of fares have become available for many flows, some cheaper than in 1996 - some undoubtedly significantly more expensive though.

Bearing all this in mind I do think that the one size fits all approach of "if it was valid in 1996 it must be valid now" argument is dying away 21 years down the line, and a more reasoned analysis in each case would be more beneficial to all parties. Quite who would be responsible for that in reality is a different matter though.
It doesn't surely matter whether things have moved on or been added. What matters is the legal points and if legally it states they must do x then until the laws are amended, x applies. It's surely simple.
 

lyndhurst25

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2010
Messages
1,406
Over the past few years there has been systematic gaming of the Routeing Guide by the various TOCs to maximise revenue per passenger carried. It's either done directly by requesting that routeing permissions are changed with RDG all too happy to oblige, or by introducing route restrictions on the fares that they set - effectively introducing de facto changes to the Routeing Guide without the hassle of actually changing it. There are many examples and, short of a few FOI requests and complaints by forum members, nobody seems to have any power to stop the passenger from being disadvantaged.

I agree that 1996 fares are ancient history now, but using them to protect previously permitted, reasonable routes being invalidated by TOC price-gouging remains as important as ever. I once suggested that both current and 1996 fares should be used for the fares-check, and if either pass then the route would be allowed. This would protect historical routes and also take into account new train service patterns and fares introduced since privatisation. One forum member accused me of wanting to "have my cake and eat it" but I still think that it would be a sensible option.

Ideally, any proposed changes to routeing should be advertised well in advance, be open to objections and decided on by an independent regulator. There have been so many changes in the past few years that I cannot believe that they were all "mistakes" that needed correction, or that the changes were made "legally" with the required prior consultations and DfT approval.
 
Last edited:

Andrew1395

Member
Joined
30 Sep 2014
Messages
587
Location
Bushey
Under BR's rules, Manchester to Newark was valid via Leeds. The route is therefore a regulated/protected route as it was permitted at privatisation.

What British Rail rules were they then? - Manchester to Newark was never valid via Leeds as far as I was aware in 1986 when I worked in that area. But of course things may have changed after I left. But I would be interested to know what the rule was, as it may be relevant to other queries I have.
 

Starmill

Veteran Member
Fares Advisor
Joined
18 May 2012
Messages
23,224
Location
Bolton
What British Rail rules were they then? - Manchester to Newark was never valid via Leeds as far as I was aware in 1986 when I worked in that area. But of course things may have changed after I left. But I would be interested to know what the rule was, as it may be relevant to other queries I have.
That the intermediate fares were not higher.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Some more changes were published on Tuesday.
New data set 491 published 12/12/17

Comparing RJRG0491 to RJRG0490

To provide routeings that do not require travel via London. the following additional map permission has been made to replace a previous permission

ADDED - Crystal Palace (CYP) and PORTSMOUTH GROUP (G23) - added sequence 'VB+LP'
REMOVED - Crystal Palace (CYP) and PORTSMOUTH GROUP (G23) - removed sequence 'VH+SW'
This journey now has mapped routes which go via Barnham but not London.
It also has mapped routes which go:
via Brixton and London; and
via London and Reading.

To accomodate engineering works diversions the following additional map permissions have been created

Dover Priory (DVP) and LONDON GROUP (G01) - added sequence 'AR+SV+FV'
This journey now has mapped routes:
via Tonbridge and Bromley North; and
via Tonbridge, Lewisham and Nunhead.

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Sevenoaks (SEV) - added sequence 'FV+SV'
This journey now has mapped routes:
via Denmark Hill and Bromley North; and
via Nunhead, Lewisham and Knockholt.

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Tonbridge (TON) - added sequence 'FV+HC'
This journey now has mapped routes via Nunhead, Lewisham and Knockholt.

I don't know which diversions these changes are intended for, so I can't say how effective they are.

To ensure there are routeings via Leeds the following additions to map permissions have been made
Kirkham And Wesham (KKM) and Peterborough. (PBO) - added sequence 'NP+AD'
This adds mapped routes via Accrington.

Peterborough. (PBO) and Preston (Lancs) (PRE) - added sequence 'AD+NP'
No effect. This already had routes that way.

To provide permissions into London Paddington the following additional map permission has been made
LONDON GROUP (G01) and PORTSMOUTH GROUP (G23) - added sequence 'BL+BB'
This adds mapped routes via Reading.

For Engineering Works a dated easement has been published

Added 700754: During engineering works between the 23 December 2017 and 01 January 2018, customers travelling from Diss and Stowmarket to or via central London on tickets routed (00000) ANY PERMITTED may travel via Bury St Edmunds and Cambridge to both London kings Cross and London Liverpool Street. This map easement applies in both directions
These are normally only valid via Shenfield, which is affected by Crossrail works then.

A change to easement to remove reference to a location where journeys on (00000) ANY PERMITTED tickets include the cross London marker and are valid via London Liverpool Street and London Fenchurch Street. Location Purfleet removed from easement.

700747: Customers from Manningtree or travelling via Manningtree to Barking, Dagenham Dock, Rainham (Essex) (or Purfleet) on tickets routed (00000) ANY PERMITTED may not travel via Stratford (London), London Liverpool Street or London Fenchurch Street. This circuitous route easement applies in both directions.
The reference to Purfleet has been removed, so it now reads "... Dagenham Dock, or Rainham (Essex) ...".
 

RJ

Established Member
Joined
25 Jun 2005
Messages
8,383
Location
Back office
Some more changes were published on Wednesday.
New data set 489 published 22 November 2017

Comparing revision RJRG0489 to RJG0488

Review of maps used between Loughborough and Norwich, to include via Nottingham map permissions. In addition rationalisation of maps used for permissions between locations in Leicestershire and Cambridgeshire/Norfolk has led to changes to maps used. Including removing permissions from Leicester via Loughborough toward Peterborough.
I suspect this is largely intended for journey planners, as Peterborough-Loughborough-Leicester either means going through Nottingham or doubling back through Barrow-upon-Soar. Anyway, the sequence changes are:

Sequences added

Cambridge (CBG) and Leicester (LEI) - added sequence 'AA+BP'
Ely (ELY) and Leicester (LEI) - added sequence 'AA+BP'
Ely (ELY) and Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) - added sequence 'AB'
Ely (ELY) and Peterborough. (PBO) - added sequence 'AB'
Leicester (LEI) and Norwich (NRW) - added sequence 'BP+AA'
Norwich (NRW) and Peterborough. (PBO) - added sequence 'AB'

Sequences removed

Cambridge (CBG) and Leicester (LEI) - removed sequence 'AB'
Ely (ELY) and Leicester (LEI) - removed sequence 'AB'
Ely (ELY) and Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) - removed sequence 'AC'
Ely (ELY) and Peterborough. (PBO) - removed sequence 'AP'
Leicester (LEI) and Norwich (NRW) - removed sequence 'AB'
Norwich (NRW) and Peterborough. (PBO) - removed sequence 'AP'
No effect.

Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Norwich (NRW) - added sequence 'PN+AM'
This now has mapped routes via Nottingham.

I wrote an email to EMT and ATOC on the 14th January 2015, a genuine request as the route NRE offered is the kind of thing that puts people off travelling by railway.

I am writing to you to request a consideration of reinstating a permitted route.

I am a student living in Loughborough and have due cause to travel to Norwich regularly. The only permitted route involves travelling via Melton Mowbray. The default route shown on National Rail Enquiries involves two changes - at Leicester and Peterborough. Typical weekday journey time is 3h 31m.

A more convenient and slightly quicker route is available, involving one change at Nottingham. Typical weekday journey time is 3h 15m. This was a permitted route before Loughborough became a routing point in its own right. Travel via Nottingham is only marginally longer distance wise than via Leicester, about a mile or so. I understand the shortest route involves use of a curve that avoids Leicester, which is only used by a handful of trains over the course of the day.

This appears to be the case for journeys between Loughborough and stations beyond Peterborough inclusive. Whilst the hourly service from Leicester to Peterborough provides a useful link, it is not the pinnacle of timeliness or comfort, often being crowded. There is less risk of disruption involved for passengers if they have the opportunity to travel via Nottingham with only one change.

Taking into account the time and convenience factors, please could you consider designating Nottingham as a permitted route between Loughborough and Norwich?

And got a response from ATOC on the 21st January 2015.

Thank you for your email and your feedback regarding the permitted routes between Loughborough and Norwich. Your feedback has been noted and passed to East Midlands Train to review and you may be pleased to know that they are considering reinstating this as a valid route in the near future.

So I'm glad to report that feedback is taken on so that positive changes are made - and am grateful it was done :)

As an aside, I'm amused at the lead time in comparison to the time it took for a number of tickets which significantly undercut the Loughborough - London fare to be shut down. Positive change - just shy of 3 years. Closure of loophole once discovered - a few days to a few weeks :lol:
 

lyndhurst25

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2010
Messages
1,406
29/11/2017
Kirkham And Wesham (KKM) and Peterborough. (PBO) - removed sequence 'NP+EC'
This journey no longer has mapped routes:
via Accrington....

12/12/2017
To ensure there are routeings via Leeds the following additions to map permissions have been made
Kirkham And Wesham (KKM) and Peterborough. (PBO) - added sequence 'NP+AD'
This adds mapped routes via Accrington.


Blackpool to Peterborough via Accrington and Leeds, a perfectly sensible route, is now allowed again, two weeks after they felt the need to ban it. Travel via York is still barred however.


Not sure to be grateful that RDG have backed down, no doubt after reading about this daft change on this forum, or be annoyed that they felt the need to tinker unnecessarily in the first place.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

ashworth

Established Member
Joined
10 Sep 2008
Messages
1,285
Location
Notts
Hopefully they will also have read the recent thread concerning another very sensible route of Worksop to York via Sheffield.

Also in connection to this also to allow journeys from stations such as Mansfield and Hucknall on the Robin Hood Line to destinations in the North East (eg York and Newcastle), via Worksop and Sheffield, without having to pay a much higher price than the any permitted ticket. The any permitted fare allows travel via Worksop and Retford and also the longer route via Nottingham and Sheffield, but not via Worksop and Sheffield.
 
Last edited:

infobleep

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Feb 2011
Messages
12,557
I wrote an email to EMT and ATOC on the 14th January 2015, a genuine request as the route NRE offered is the kind of thing that puts people off travelling by railway.



And got a response from ATOC on the 21st January 2015.



So I'm glad to report that feedback is taken on so that positive changes are made - and am grateful it was done :)

As an aside, I'm amused at the lead time in comparison to the time it took for a number of tickets which significantly undercut the Loughborough - London fare to be shut down. Positive change - just shy of 3 years. Closure of loophole once discovered - a few days to a few weeks :lol:
Perhaps someone who works on getting changes into the routing guide could explain why loopholes get closed far more quickly than sensible positive changes get approved? Or is it a murky underworld that they wouldn't want to be discuss publicly? Perhaps I'm being too cynical.
 

MikeWh

Established Member
Associate Staff
Senior Fares Advisor
Joined
15 Jun 2010
Messages
7,865
Location
Crayford
Some more changes were published on Tuesday.
New data set 491 published 12/12/17

Comparing RJRG0491 to RJRG0490

To accomodate engineering works diversions the following additional map permissions have been created

Dover Priory (DVP) and LONDON GROUP (G01) - added sequence 'AR+SV+FV'
This journey now has mapped routes:
via Tonbridge and Bromley North; and
via Tonbridge, Lewisham and Nunhead.

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Sevenoaks (SEV) - added sequence 'FV+SV'
This journey now has mapped routes:
via Denmark Hill and Bromley North; and
via Nunhead, Lewisham and Knockholt.

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Tonbridge (TON) - added sequence 'FV+HC'
This journey now has mapped routes via Nunhead, Lewisham and Knockholt.

I don't know which diversions these changes are intended for, so I can't say how effective they are.

I'll guess it's to accomodate the diversions to Waterloo (Main) over the Christmas period.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Some more changes have been published this week.

These were published on Monday.
New data set 492 published 18 December 2017

Comparing revision RJRG0492 to original RJRG0491

To facilitate journeys from or via London Victoria through Brixton (without travelling through Clapham Junction) the following new sequences have been published

Blackheath (BKH) and LONDON GROUP (G01) - added sequence 'VL+VR'
Denmark Hill (DMK) and LONDON GROUP (G01) - added sequence 'VR'
LONDON GROUP (G01) and Lewisham (LEW) - added sequence 'VR+VL'
LONDON GROUP (G01) and Nunhead (NHD) - added sequence 'VR'
LONDON GROUP (G01) and Peckham Rye (PMR) - added sequence 'VR'
No effect.

VR includes a Denmark Hill-Brixton-London route.

VL was already a valid map sequence for each of these journeys. VL includes a Denmark Hill-London route, and doesn't feature Brixton. As Brixton is not a routeing point, any route which goes between Denmark Hill and London via Brixton without passing through a routeing point (such as Herne Hill) on the way can be traced on the map. As such, these routes were already included on maps.

For engineering works

Added 700756: During engineering works between 27 and 29 December 2017 tickets priced on (00130) NOT HIGHSPEED may travel via Ebbsfleet International and Stratford International. This fare route easement applies in both directions.
This is, I suppose, to spread the load at a time when no trains are going through Deptford.

To overcome fares checking which were not permitting tickets priced with the cross London marker to travel via central London, a new Routeing point easement has been published

Added 700757: Journeys to Purfleet on tickets priced (00000) ANY PERMITTED from Lowestoft, Oulton Broad South, Oulton Broad North, Buckenham, Cantley, Reedham. Haddiscoe and Somerleyton may travel via London Liverpool Street and London Fenchurch Street. This routeing point easement cancels out fares checking and applies in both directions.
This is, as mentioned, a routeing point easement (which allows a routeing point to be used where the fare check would otherwise prohibit it). The London routeing point is not associated with any of the stations listed, so I don't know what the intended effect is here.

In addition to the above, the following easement was created:
700755 (Fare route) During Engineering works that affect London bridge station between 27 December 2017 and 29 December 2017. tickets normally not permitted to travel on HS1 services and routes mnay travel via Ebbsfleet and Stratford International. This fare route easement applies in both directions​
This is a more general version of 700756 above, as it affects other routes (such as Dartford Not HS1), but is otherwise identical.

Some easements were deleted on Tuesday.
New data set 493 published 19 December 2017

Comparing revision RJRG0493 to RJRG0492

11 easement(s) removed as they have now expired or been superceeded

Removed 700697: From 02 to 15 September, and the weekends of the 04/5 and 11/
12 November 2017 during engineering diversions via Newport South Wales (with
journeys travelling through Severn Tunnel Junction twice). This doubleback
easement will apply in both directions.

Removed 700708: During engineering works from 21 May 2017 to 07 September
2017, the line between Croy and Larbet will be closed on Sunday evenings to
Thursday evenings. This map easement will permit travel between Glasgow Queen
Street and Dundee on the following connecting services, Glasgow Queen Street
departing at 22.30 to Polmont. Polmont departing 23.01 to Stirling. Stirling
to Dundee departing 23.33.

Removed 700711: During engineering works on Sundays 7, 14 and 21 May 2017 and
the weekend of the 18 and 19 November 2017 Cross Country services between
Cheltenham and Bristol will be diverted via Stroud, Kemble, Swindon,
Chippenham and Bath Spa. this map easement will create temporary permitted
routes between Cheltenham Spa and Bristol Temple Meads that will apply in both
directions

Removed 700717: Due to engineering works, Cross Country services via Bristol
Parkway will be diverted via Newport (South Wales) between 02 and 15 September
and the weekends of the 04/05 and 11/12 November 2017. This map easement will
create temporary permitted routes via Newport (South Wales) that will operate
in both directions.

Removed 700719: Customers travelling to Edinburgh and beyond, whose normal
route is via Newcastle and Berwick, may travel via Carlisle during engineering
works on Saturdays 16, 23, 30 September and 07 October 2017; Sunday 17
September 2017 . This map easement applies in both directions

Removed 700725: Due to electrification works Great Western services to and
from London Paddington will be diverted via Didcot, Oxford and High Wycombe on
the 16 & 17 September 2017. this map easement will apply in both directions

Removed 700740: Due to engineering works between 15 and 19 November 2017,
Cross Country services to and via Cheltenham Spa and Bristol are diverted via
Swindon and Bath Spa. This map easement will create temporary mapped routes
that will apply in both directions.

Removed 700741: Due to engineering works on the weekends of 11/12 and 18/19
November 2017, Virgin Trains East Coast services are diverted via Spalding and
Lincoln. This map easement will create temporary mapped routes that will apply
in both directions.

Removed 700743: Due to a very late notice engineering possession. Services
will not operate into London Paddington on the 14 and 15 October 2017. For
those services diverted and terminating at Oxford for onward travel by
Chiltern Trains services to London Marylebone, this map easement will create
temporary permitted routes via High Wycombe, and will operate in both
directions

Removed 700745: Due to engineering works on the Great Western mainline over
the weekends of the 25/26 November and 02/03 December 2017. tickets priced on
route (00810) NOT VIA READING may travel via Reading. This Fare Route easement
applies in both directions
The dates for these have all passed now.

Removed 700755: During Engineering works that affect London bridge station
between 27 December 2017 and 29 December 2017. tickets normally not permitted
to travel on HS1 services and routes mnay travel via Ebbsfleet and Stratford
International. This fare route easement applies in both directions THIS
EASEMENT IS A DUPLICATE OF 700756 published in RJRG0492 (18/12/17)
This is an easement which was added the day before. Removing it means that the benefits of this easement are only for tickets with the "not valid on HS1" route, and not (say) an "Early bird not HS1" season from Gravesend to London.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Some easements were deleted from the routeing guide this afternoon:

New dataset 0494 published 04/01/2018

Impact Assessment RJRG0494 to RJRG0493

Easements for engineering diversions now time expired and deleted

Removed 700744: Due to engineering works between 27 December 2017 and 02 January 2018, there will be no direct services between London Euston and Wolverhampton. This map easement will create temporary permitted routes via Stafford, and will operate in both directions.

Removed 700749: During engineering works between 24 - 30 December 2017 affecting journeys into London Paddington. Tickets from Worcester, Evesham and stations on the route to Oxford may travel to London Marylebone via Oxford and Princes Risborough. This map easement applies in both directions.

Removed 700750: During engineering works affecting journeys into London Paddington between 24 - 30 December 2017. Journeys on tickets routed (00000) ANY PERMITTED; (00799) LONDON EVESHAM; (00803) EVESHAM STROUD; (00805) VIA EVESHAM; (00807) VIA STROUD will be permitted to travel via Birmingham New Street to London Euston and London Marylebone. This positive Fare Route easement applies in both directions.

Removed 700751: During engineering works that will effect journeys to London Paddington 24 - 30 December 2017. Tickets routed (00000) ANY PERMITTED; (00799 LONDON EVESHAM; (00803) EVESHAM STROUD; (00805) VIA EVESHAM; (00807) VIA STROUD) will be valid for travel via Birmingham New Street to London Euston and London Marylebone. This positive map easement will apply in both directions.

Removed 700754: During engineering works between the 23 December 2017 and 01 January 2018, customers travelling from Diss and Stowmarket to or via central London on tickets routed (00000) ANY PERMITTED may travel via Bury St Edmunds and Cambridge to both London kings Cross and London liverpool street. This map easement applies in both directions

Removed 700756: During engineering works between 27 and 29 December 2017 tickets priced on (00130) NOT HIGHSPEED may travel via Ebbsfleet International and Stratford International. This fare route easement applies in both directions.
None of them would have had any effect now anyway.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Some more changes were published yesterday.
New data set 0495 published 12/01/18

Comparing RJRG0495 to RJRG0494

To provide alternatives to journeys via central London an additional sequence has been added

Herne Hill (HNH) and Sevenoaks (SEV) - added sequence 'FH+FS'
This journey had previously only had mapped routes via London (there are both "London not Underground" and "not via London" tickets).
Adding this map combination means that the shortest route between the routeing points (with a change at Orpington) is now mapped.

Changes to the RA map mean that there are also now mapped routes via central London which double back through Herne Hill.

To provide alternative routeings for travel to and via central London; new map links added from Bromley South and Brixton via Catford or Herne Hill to (G01) London Group. New links added Herne Hill to Elephant & Castle so that travel can be made either route, via Catford or Herne Hill to (G01) London Group

Map RA - LONDON TO RAMSGATE VIA ASHFORD changed (4 added/ 0 removed links)
This gives RA the following extra links:
Brixton-Herne Hill
Elephant & Castle-Herne Hill
Herne Hill-Beckenham Junction
Beckenham Junction-Shortlands

This means that this map now has routes between London and Sevenoaks via Herne Hill. It has included routes between them via New Cross and via Peckham Rye since it was created in 2013.

RA is used for journeys between 151 pairs of routeing points, most to or from Ashford International, Dover Priory, Hastings, Ramsgate, Sevenoaks or Tonbridge. For some examples:

Journeys from London Group (G01) to Ashford International (AFK) now have mapped routes:
via Battersea Park and Elephant & Castle;
via South Bermondsey and Herne Hill;
via Clapham Junction and Elephant & Castle; and
via Elephant & Castle, Herne Hill and Sevenoaks.

Journeys from London Group (G01) to Dover Priory (DVP) now have mapped routes: via Herne Hill and Sevenoaks.

Journeys from London Group (G01) to Hastings Group (G15) now have mapped routes: via Brixton; and
via West Dulwich.

Journeys from London Group (G01) to Ramsgate Group (G68) now have mapped routes: via Herne Hill and Sevenoaks.

Journeys from London Group (G01) to Sevenoaks (SEV) now have mapped routes:
via Herne Hill (as mentioned above).

Journeys from London Group (G01) to Tonbridge (TON) now have mapped routes:
via Denmark Hill and Herne Hill; and
via Elephant & Castle and West Dulwich.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
A negative easement was added for Easter Sunday on Monday.
New data set 0496 published 22/01/18
Impact Assessment - comparing revision 'IBRG0496' to original 'IBRG0495'
(generated on 22/01/2018)

To provide routeing links between (BCU) Brockenhurst and the (ROM) Romsey Interchange
Map BW - BIRMINGHAM TO WEYMOUTH VIA BRISTOL changed (1 added/ 0 removed links)
This could be useful if your journey happens to involve one of the few trains towards Weymouth which stop at Redbridge (there are a couple of westbound ones in the morning, but there aren't normally any eastbound ones at all).

For Engineering works a temporary negative easement

Added 700758: On Sunday 01 April 2018, customers travelling to or via London Marylebone may not travel on Cross Country services from the North West to interchange at Leamington Spa or Banbury for onward travel to London. Instead they should change at Birmingham New Street and use Chiltern services from Birmingham Moor Street. This circuitous route easement has been introduced during the engineering works closure of London Euston, and is to prevent overcrowding on Cross Country services south of Birmingham.
I'll just say that this doesn't seem to have been implemented on NRE yet (not sure about other sites as I haven't looked).
 
Last edited:

IanD

Established Member
Joined
18 Sep 2011
Messages
2,718
Location
Newport Pagnell
Added 700758: On Sunday 01 April 2018, customers travelling to or via London Marylebone may not travel on Cross Country services from the North West to interchange at Leamington Spa or Banbury for onward travel to London. Instead they should change at Birmingham New Street and use Chiltern services from Birmingham Moor Street. This circuitous route easement has been introduced during the engineering works closure of London Euston, and is to prevent overcrowding on Cross Country services south of Birmingham.

Interesting redefinition of circuitous.
 

lyndhurst25

Established Member
Joined
26 Nov 2010
Messages
1,406
I'd say circuitous was forcing people to trek across Birmingham city centre from New Street to Moor Street, when they could have had a same-station change at Leamington Spa or Banbury!
 

CyrusWuff

Established Member
Joined
20 May 2013
Messages
3,944
Location
London
So instead of allowing people to change at Birmingham, Leamington/Banbury or Oxford onto trains towards London, they're going to force then all to change in Birmingham so Chiltern services are overcrowded throughout.

Makes perfect sense!
 

Kite159

Veteran Member
Joined
27 Jan 2014
Messages
19,157
Location
West of Andover
I guess Chiltern might have crowd control measures in place at Birmingham Moor Street, but seems silly forcing those passengers to walk from New Street to Moor Street when they can remain on board for a same platform change at Leamington/Banbury.

"From the North West", so I guess it only counts for the services from Manchester rather than the direct services from Derby.
 

Bletchleyite

Veteran Member
Joined
20 Oct 2014
Messages
97,540
Location
"Marston Vale mafia"
So instead of allowing people to change at Birmingham, Leamington/Banbury or Oxford onto trains towards London, they're going to force then all to change in Birmingham so Chiltern services are overcrowded throughout.

Makes perfect sense!

Chiltern can strengthen their service to weekday peak levels. XC can't.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Some more changes were made to easements on Wednesday.
New Data set RJRG0501 published 07 February 2018

Written on 07 February 2018.

New dataset 501 published 07/02/18

Comparing revision RJRG0501 to RJRG0496 (datasets RJRG 0497, 0498, 0499 and 0500 were issued to journey planning systems and did not include changes to the public routeing guide)
And so, I haven't tried to work out what effect these had.

Added 700759: During engineering works affecting the route through Newbury on 12 March to 15 March 2018; 23 April to 26 April 2018 and 14 May to 18 May 2018, tickets priced on route (00063) VIA NEWBURY will be valid for journeys via Swindon and Didcot Parkway. This positive fare route easement will apply in both directions
There are no trains due between Theale and Westbury then, and someone hoping to travel the whole way by rail replacement bus would have to change twice.

Added 700760: During engineering works affecting Great Western services on 17 to 18 March and 25 to 28 May 2018, tickets priced on fare route (00810) NOT VIA READING will be valid via Reading.
There are very few trains due through Swindon then (and I wouldn't like to rely on those ones actually running), so this means that (say) someone with a Westbury-Oxford ticket could go through Newbury instead.

1 easement(s) changed to add doubleback location Cambuslang to existing easement

700244: Customers travelling via Carstairs to Uddingston, Bellshill, Blantyre, Hamilton West, Hamilton Central, Airbles, Chatelherault, Merryton and Larkhall may double back between Glasgow Central, Cambuslangand Newton Lanark. This easement applies in both directions.
The problem this easement addresses, as I see it, is that very few trains which go between Glasgow and Lancaster (and beyond) actually call anywhere between Glasgow and Lockerbie.

Any train which goes somewhere vaguely near Carstairs is treated by ticket sites as if it goes through the station, but Newton's not like that. Trains which stop there are treated by ticket sites as going through the station, as are a few others which go through Mount Florida. Trains which stay on the main line aren't, however. You could treat this as being a weakness of ticket sites (in the same way that it treats non-stop trains through Cambuslang as if they never went there at all), but I don't know of any reason to suggest that you should do this.

Cambuslang doesn't have any lines like that near the station, but trains which go through Mount Florida avoid it altogether.

I could interpret this easement as saying that people with suitable tickets can double back through Cambuslang and Newton if both trains happen to go through both stations. Equally, I could interpret it as saying they can double back through any station between Glasgow Central and Cambuslang or Newton inclusive on a valid route. The latter would be more useful for someone hoping to simply catch the next train from Glasgow to England.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Some more changes were published today, although there isn't a summary on the RDG web site for them yet.

Changes from 07/02/2018 to 14/02/2018.

Map changes:

EA: Gain Stratford London Gp to/from Witham​
A link was added to this map last year between London and Witham for when engineering works closed the line between Ingatestone and London. This adds a second route betwen Witham and Stratford. I assume this is also for engineering works, but I don't know when off-hand.
Station Association changes:

Coatbridge Central (CBC) has gained an association with Springburn (SPR).
Whifflet (WFF) has gained an association with Springburn (SPR).​
In other words, Springburn is an associated routeing point for some more of the stations you can get to from there without passing another routeing point on the way.

Kenilworth (KNW) has gained an association with Coventry (COV).
Kenilworth (KNW) has gained an association with Leamington Spa (LMS).​
This is in preparation for when Kenilworth station opens.
 

John @ home

Established Member
Joined
1 Mar 2008
Messages
5,148
Station Association changes:

Coatbridge Central (CBC) has gained an association with Springburn (SPR).
Whifflet (WFF) has gained an association with Springburn (SPR).​
In other words, Springburn is an associated routeing point for some more of the stations you can get to from there without passing another routeing point on the way.
That's interesting. Permitted routes between Springburn and Coatbridge Central are currently being discussed in this thread.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Some more changes were published yesterday. There isn't as yet a summary on the RDG web site for them yet (although they are adding them, with the one for last week's changes here).
Changes from 14/02/2018 to 21/02/2018.

Station Association changes:

Yarmouth Iow (YMH) has lost an association with Southampton Group (G26).
Yarmouth Iow (YMH) has lost an association with Weymouth Group (G33).​
This removes Yarmouth from the station association file altogether. You can still get rail tickets there.

Permitted Route changes:

Ashford International (AFK) to Liverpool Group (G18) gain DE+EJ+NC+NO DE+EJ+NC+NR RA+EJ+NC+NO RA+EJ+NC+NR VH+EJ+NC+NO VH+EJ+NC+NR lose DE+LC+NO DE+LC+NR RA+LC+NO RA+LC+NR VH+LC+NO VH+LC+NR​
This journey no longer has mapped routes via Manchester.

Barnsley (BNY) to Leeds Group (G16) lose NB​
No effect.

Barnsley (BNY) to York (YRK) gain MY+YT lose MY​
This journey now has mapped routes:
via Outwood and Pontefract Group; and
ones via Pontefract, avoiding Leeds.

Leeds Group (G16) to Meadowhall (MHS) gain GY+NB​
This journey now has mapped routes via Pontefract Group.
These include the Leeds-Castleford-Barnsley-Meadowhall route some direct trains take.

Leeds Group (G16) to Wakefield Group (G30) gain GY​
This journey now has mapped routes via Pontefract Group.

Wakefield Group (G30) to York (YRK) gain DO WY+YN lose KY​
This journey now has mapped routes via Pontefract Group which don't go via Outwood.

Map changes:

CO: Gain London Group to/from Witham
CO: Gain Stratford London Gp to/from Witham​
CO and EA are the two maps which cover the line between London and Witham. Neither of these routes is something you could follow by train (as trains between Witham and London are all timed at Shenfield), but may be useful if the line is closed. In any case, these routes were already on EA. This adds them to CO.

GO: Gain Glasgow Group to/from Springburn
GO: Gain Glasgow Group to/from Westerton​
This map already had routes between Glasgow and Springburn via Bellgrove, and between Glasgow and Westerton via Partick. This adds a more direct route for each.
 
Last edited:

ForTheLoveOf

Established Member
Joined
7 Oct 2017
Messages
6,416
Some more changes were published yesterday. There isn't as yet a summary on the RDG web site for them yet (although they are adding them, with the one for last week's changes here).
Changes from 14/02/2018 to 21/02/2018.

Station Association changes:

Yarmouth Iow (YMH) has lost an association with Southampton Group (G26).
Yarmouth Iow (YMH) has lost an association with Weymouth Group (G33).​
This removes Yarmouth from the station association file altogether. You can still get rail tickets there.

Permitted Route changes:

Ashford International (AFK) to Liverpool Group (G18) gain DE+EJ+NC+NO DE+EJ+NC+NR RA+EJ+NC+NO RA+EJ+NC+NR VH+EJ+NC+NO VH+EJ+NC+NR lose DE+LC+NO DE+LC+NR RA+LC+NO RA+LC+NR VH+LC+NO VH+LC+NR​
This journey no longer has mapped routes via Manchester.

Barnsley (BNY) to Leeds Group (G16) lose NB​
No effect.

Barnsley (BNY) to York (YRK) gain MY+YT lose MY​
This journey now has mapped routes:
via Outwood and Pontefract Group; and
ones via Pontefract, avoiding Leeds.

Leeds Group (G16) to Meadowhall (MHS) gain GY+NB​
This journey now has mapped routes via Pontefract Group.
These include the Leeds-Castleford-Barnsley-Meadowhall route some direct trains take.

Leeds Group (G16) to Wakefield Group (G30) gain GY​
This journey now has mapped routes via Pontefract Group.

Wakefield Group (G30) to York (YRK) gain DO WY+YN lose KY​
This journey now has mapped routes via Pontefract Group which don't go via Outwood.

Map changes:

CO: Gain London Group to/from Witham
CO: Gain Stratford London Gp to/from Witham​
CO and EA are the two maps which cover the line between London and Witham. Neither of these routes is something you could follow by train (as trains between Witham and London are all timed at Shenfield), but may be useful if the line is closed. In any ase, these routes were already on EA. This adds them to CO.

GO: Gain Glasgow Group to/from Springburn
GO: Gain Glasgow Group to/from Westerton​
This map already had routes between Glasgow and Springburn via Bellgrove, and between Glasgow and Westerton via Partick. This adds some other routes to many of the large number of journeys for which the GO map can be used.
I wonder how many of these they had DfT approval for...
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
An easement was deleted today.
Changes from 21/02/2018 to 07/03/2018.

Easement changes:

Removed:
700060 (Circuitous Route) Customers in possession of tickets routed LONDON may not travel via Ebbsfleet International.
Before this, the only ticket between (for example) Pangbourne and Gravesend which was valid on HS1 was a travelcard season.

This change doesn't seem to have been implemented on nationalrail.co.uk yet.

When looking at this, I noticed that easements 700018 and 700436 don't seem to affect anything now. There are no "any permitted" tickets left on the routes they covered, but there are "not valid on HS1" ones.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Some more changes were published this afternoon, as follows:
New data set 505 published 15/03/18
Comparing revision RJRG0505 to RJRG0504
RJRG0504 published 07/03/18

Easement 700060 removed as fares no longer priced on the restricted route.
This is the easement which was removed last week (which is now reflected in the tickets suggested by nationalrail.co.uk). I don't know which fares are no longer priced on that route, though.

RJRG505

Changes to map RB has led to these amended sequeces being published and removed

Ascot (Berks) (ACT) and Nuneaton (NUN) - added sequence 'WV+RB'

removed

Ascot (Berks) (ACT) and Nuneaton (NUN) - removed sequence 'WV+RB+BP'
This now has mapped routes which go via both Oxford and Bedworth.

PORTSMOUTH GROUP (G23) and READING GROUP (G24) - added sequence 'RB'
PORTSMOUTH GROUP (G23) and READING GROUP (G24) - removed sequence 'XR'
This journey now has mapped routes via Swanwick station.

Map RB amended to add link between Southampton Group and Portsmouth Group
Map RB - ROUTES VIA READING TO BIRMINGHAM changed (1 added/ 0 removed links)
This map now includes a link between Eastleigh and Romsey, giving the route via Chandler's Ford.

This is now an option for routes such as Portsmouth-Southampton.

For engineering works

Added 700761: Due to engineering works affecting journeys via Bristol Parkway.
Cross Country services will be diverted via Kemble, Swindon and Bath Spa on
the 12 and 13 May 2018. This map easement will create temporary permitted
routes and will apply in both directions.
I'm not exactly sure where the engineering works are then, but Cross Country trains are scheduled to divert via Swindon.

Added 700762: Due to engineering works on the 17 and 18 March 2018, journeys
to London from Cheltenham Spa to London Terminals may travel via Birmingham
New Street and Milton Keynes. This map easement applies in both directions
There are no trains through Swindon. I don't know how far this easement (and 700760 for "not via Reading" fares) will go to address this.

Added 700763: On Sunday 1st April 2018, during the engineering works closure
of London Euston. Journeys using the outward pportion of tickets from
Liverpool Lime Street to London Terminals, may travel to London St Pancras via
a rail replacement bus service between Rugby and Kettering. This map easement
applies in both directions

Added 700764: On Sunday 1 April 2018 during closure of London Euston, journeys
from Manchester Piccadilly to London Terminals may travel on First Trans
Pennine Express services to Leeds for onward connections to London Kings
Cross. This map easement applies in both directions
All that's scheduled to run from London Euston on Easter Sunday is the Watford DC service. No trains are going between Watford Junction and Hemel Hemstead at all.

Virgin are running trains between Liverpool and Milton Keynes (and also between Manchester and Milton Keynes) which are supposed to connect with the buses in RUgby.

The route involving the buses is supposed to be the fastest route between Liverpool and London (at least, no slower than catching trains via Nuneaton and Leicester with their slower connections), with the one via Doncaster faster for Manchester. Denying the "Liverpool" route to people on the second half of a return ticket seems odd, though.
 

kieron

Established Member
Joined
22 Mar 2012
Messages
3,048
Location
Connah's Quay
Two more easements were published today.
New Dataset RJRG0506 published 16 March 2018

Written on 16 March 2018.
New data set 506 published 16/03/18
Comparing RJRG0506 to RJRG0505

To override Local journey rules when the only journey involves a Local journey and a leg via a second routeing point (Newport). this Local easement intends to allow journey planners to show journeys and prices for return tickets

Added 700765: To allow journeys from Severn Beach, St Andrews Road, Avonmouth, Shirehampton, Sea Mills, Clifton Down, Redland, Stapleton Road, Montpelier, Lawrence Hill, Filton Abbey Wood and Bristol Parkway to Pilning via Newport (South Wales), this local easement will apply on Saturdays.
This applies to the Severn Beach line, and everything in the Bristol routeing point group except Bristol Temple Meads (which easement 700695 already covered). My understanding is that 700695 only affects journey planners because 700696 is a similar easement in another category. There isn't an equivalent for 700765, and nationalrail.co.uk* (for one) hasn't implemented this easement yet.

This may not be all that significant, as it doesn't show Filton-Pilning via Severn Tunnel Junction* either, and that's the shortest route by train.

To enable journeys to be shown when debnied by fares checking a new routeing
point easement has been added

Added 700766: Journeys from Fleet to Bristol Temple Meads on tickets priced (00700) NOT VIA LONDON, may travel via Basingstoke. This routeing point easement overrides NFM64 fares checking, and applies in both directions.
Easement 700505 already covered journeys via Reading West (which is between Basingstoke and Reading, of course), and ticket sites should normally offer "via Warminster-Salisbury" tickets for journeys via Warminster, so I suspect this easement may only make a difference to the choice they offer if you wish to go out on one route and back on the other.

* You may need to delete any nationalrail.co.uk cookies you have for these links to open correctly.
 

Paul Kelly

Verified Rep - BR Fares
Joined
16 Apr 2010
Messages
4,130
Location
Reading
Easement 700505 already covered journeys via Reading West (which is between Basingstoke and Reading, of course)
The problem with easement 700505 is that the electronic version only applies to journeys on the Berks & Hants line. Rather than adding the new easement 700766, the same effect could be achieved more easily simply by removing Didcot Parkway as an "avoid" location from the electronic version(s) of 700505.
 

Top