National Routeing Guide

Discussion in 'Fares Advice & Policy' started by OwlMan, 27 Aug 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. OwlMan

    OwlMan Established Member

    Messages:
    3,207
    Joined:
    25 Jun 2008
    Location:
    Bedworth, Warwickshire
    New rules have come into place restricting fare checks to the fares in NFM64.
     
  2. Registered users do not see these banners - join or log in today!

    Rail Forums

     
  3. Indigo2

    Indigo2 Established Member

    Messages:
    3,589
    Joined:
    16 Apr 2010
    Location:
    Reading
    And a routeing point calculator too, I see: http://data.atoc.org/rp_calc
    Are we not allowed to see the NFM64 fares for ourselves?!
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    I really like the routeing point calculator actually. Very impressed with the amount of detail.
     
  4. FenMan

    FenMan Member

    Messages:
    902
    Joined:
    13 Oct 2011
    It doesn't work on a Mac. I've tried Safari, Chrome and Firefox.

    The reCAPTACHA keeps resetting each time I try to enter an Origin or Destination and the Show Routeing Points button remains greyed out.
     
  5. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    46,977
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    Funny, as I just tried it on a Mac with Chrome and it works fine.
     
  6. mikeg

    mikeg Member

    Messages:
    1,020
    Joined:
    20 Apr 2010
    I'm on a Linux PC with Firefox and it just says 'Access Denied: You are not authorized to view this page'

    Edit: Tried it in Chrome, I get it but can't do anything with it. All the crosses towards the right stay as crosses. Not impressed. The Routeing Guide should be open and accessible to all and NFM64 made publicly available so we can do the fare check ourselves.

    Further edit: After recaptcha asked me to reconfirm I'm a human it now works, it's also working in Firefox now for some strange reason.
     
    Last edited: 27 Aug 2015
  7. bb21

    bb21 Forum Staff Staff Member Global Moderator

    Messages:
    23,720
    Joined:
    4 Feb 2010
    About bloody time.
     
  8. FenMan

    FenMan Member

    Messages:
    902
    Joined:
    13 Oct 2011
    Still not working for me. :(
     
  9. Merseysider

    Merseysider Established Member Fares Advisor

    Messages:
    4,413
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2014
    Location:
    Birmingham
    What benefits for the passenger are we looking at here?
    It's not working for me either (iPhone 5, Safari, v7.0.3). I got asked to confirm I was a human no less than nine times whilst I was in the middle of typing station names. I then had to 'Select all images of drinks' followed by 'Select all images of borritos' and then 'Type the text'. It still didn't work.
     
  10. bb21

    bb21 Forum Staff Staff Member Global Moderator

    Messages:
    23,720
    Joined:
    4 Feb 2010
    Valid routes not suddenly becoming invalid due to fares rising by different proportions at a fares round.
     
  11. Indigo2

    Indigo2 Established Member

    Messages:
    3,589
    Joined:
    16 Apr 2010
    Location:
    Reading
    Quite a few, I think. A quick example: Oxford to Tilehurst via Reading. Current fares are:
    Oxford - Tilehurst CDS £8.50, SDS £13.20
    Oxford - Reading CDS £9.00, SDS £13.80
    so Reading fails the fares check as a destination routeing point and you can't go via Reading on a through Oxford to Tilehurst ticket.

    Under NFM64 the fares from Oxford to both Tilehurst and Reading were the same, so Reading passes the fares check and the journey is permitted. I'd expect there are lots of other similar examples around the country where fares to a major station have been whacked up since privatisation but fares to a nearby smaller station have been left cheaper, resulting in the fares check failing. I think this is quite good news for passengers.
     
  12. Merseysider

    Merseysider Established Member Fares Advisor

    Messages:
    4,413
    Joined:
    22 Jan 2014
    Location:
    Birmingham
    I follow now. A lot of route removals have been due to price anomalies, despite the route being reasonable. So if you go back to comparing when the fares were equal, there's no reason for a route to be invalid.

    Edit: Thanks Indigo2.
     
  13. furlong

    furlong Established Member

    Messages:
    2,159
    Joined:
    28 Mar 2013
    Location:
    Reading
    Has the Secretary of State approved this change WITHOUT the publication of the complete NFM64 data? If ATOC does not publish this data immediately now, MPs should be asked if they would raise questions in Parliament...
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    The URL doesn't work for me either.

    We now have the curious situation where, I presume, all associated routeing points are valid for all journeys to or from stations that opened since the publication of NFM64.
     
  14. Camden

    Camden Established Member

    Messages:
    1,717
    Joined:
    30 Dec 2014
    That captcha has to be the worst thing like it I have ever seen.

    Why should they be preventing automated access to this data anyway? Surely if creative people want to put their resources into developing tools to help people travel easier and cheaper that should be encouraged?
     
  15. FenMan

    FenMan Member

    Messages:
    902
    Joined:
    13 Oct 2011
    Right, I'm now on a Windows PC and it's working.

    Memo to ATOC - a little testing on anything other than Windows might be a good idea.

    It's good to know that this tool is confirming my reading of the Routeing Guide that certain routes I take are valid despite NRE refusing them. It appears the logic in NRE is different to that used in this tool. Ho hum.

    Example: I think Blackwater to Wembley Stadium is valid via Reading. The tool confirms this, but NRE says no.
     
  16. causton

    causton Established Member

    Messages:
    5,422
    Joined:
    4 Aug 2010
    Location:
    Somewhere between WY372 and MV7
    Works fine for me, Chrome on Mac version Version 43.

    A lot of websites have these sort of Captchas and they are supposed to be "smart", for example I just had to click it and it was fine, however when I was using an odd browser on an old Windows XP computer I remember having to do additional things. All works fine for me though on this!
     
  17. Bletchleyite

    Bletchleyite Veteran Member

    Messages:
    46,977
    Joined:
    20 Oct 2014
    Location:
    Up and down the south WCML (mostly)
    This tool does not list all Permitted Routes. It simply determines which routeing points can be used for working them out. Other rules such as not doubling back as well as the easements still need to be applied.
     
  18. OwlMan

    OwlMan Established Member

    Messages:
    3,207
    Joined:
    25 Jun 2008
    Location:
    Bedworth, Warwickshire
    For those of you that have been complaining about the lack of NFM 64 data this is now available from the ATOC NRG site.
    The format is as below.

     
    Last edited: 27 Aug 2015
  19. FenMan

    FenMan Member

    Messages:
    902
    Joined:
    13 Oct 2011
    Correct. I stand by what I've said.

    The tool reports that from Wokingham routeing point the permitted mapped routes are LONDON. One of the LONDON routes is Wokingham - Reading - Paddington, therefore an Any Permitted ticket from Blackwater to Wembley Stadium (which is valid via Wokingham as Wokingham passes the fares check) can be used to go Blackwater - Wokingham - Reading - Paddington / Marylebone - Wembley Stadium.

    But NRE does not agree, hence my comment about different logic or base data being used.
     
  20. bb21

    bb21 Forum Staff Staff Member Global Moderator

    Messages:
    23,720
    Joined:
    4 Feb 2010
    Very good. Glad ATOC are listening.
     
  21. greatkingrat

    greatkingrat Established Member

    Messages:
    2,171
    Joined:
    20 Jan 2011
    But presumably there must also be examples of routes that are valid with current fares data, that were invalid under NFM 64 data.
     
  22. Andrew1395

    Andrew1395 Member

    Messages:
    393
    Joined:
    30 Sep 2014
    Location:
    Bushey
    The tool says Marylebone is not a valid destination routeing point and the only valid one is South Ruislip. It says Wokingham is a valid origin routeing point. But the fares check requires you to have both a valid origin and destination routeing point. I think that's why the journey planner is disagreeing with you.
    --- old post above --- --- new post below ---
    Yes that's why there are routeing point easements to override the fares check when a route would not be permitted. There is quite a list of them in Section E
     
  23. John @ home

    John @ home Established Member Fares Advisor

    Messages:
    5,145
    Joined:
    1 Mar 2008
    I think this is a technical difficulty caused by there being no intermediate stations between London Marylebone and South Ruislip at the time of NFM 64. Wembley Stadium station opened later.
     
  24. Andrew1395

    Andrew1395 Member

    Messages:
    393
    Joined:
    30 Sep 2014
    Location:
    Bushey
    I thought Wembley stadium was renamed well before 1996. Certainly the actual station was there in the 1970s
     
  25. furlong

    furlong Established Member

    Messages:
    2,159
    Joined:
    28 Mar 2013
    Location:
    Reading
    Are you really saying you thought that that ticket might not have been valid through London Group?

    The fares check only applies "if you are unsure" - or in other words, where it's obvious that a particular routeing point is heading in the right direction for the journey, the fares check is not applied. Yes, the original authors of the guide left some convenient wriggle room to avoid problems such as this:)
     
  26. Andrew1395

    Andrew1395 Member

    Messages:
    393
    Joined:
    30 Sep 2014
    Location:
    Bushey
    I think the journey planners abide by this. I would suggest that anything else is invalid, but maybe this wording is wrong!

    The Routeing Guide contains many maps showing mapped routes between stations.

    Because of the vast number of stations in the network, it is not possible to provide an individual map for every possible origin & destination. Instead, each individual station is either designated as Routeing Point (RP) in its own right, or is associated with one or more RPs.

    Some RPs consist of two or more stations. These RPs are known as Routeing Point Groups.

    Certain tickets are issued to a station group, for example Canterbury Stations, which consists of Canterbury East and Canterbury West. Station groups should not be confused with Routeing Point Groups; while in many cases Station groups have matching Routeing Point Groups, such as Falkirk Stations and Falkirk Group, in others, station group members may have different routeing points associated with each.

    Determining the appropriate Routeing Points (RPs) for a given ticket is a two step process.

    The first step is to determine the appropriate RPs for your origin. You do this by using the Routeing Point Identifier (Section B) to find the RPs relating to the origin station. If your origin is a RP itself, you do not need to take any further steps.

    The second step is to repeat the process above with your destination.

    If both origin & destination have any RP in common, then there are no mapped routes valid using this ticket - see 3.4.3 Where the origin and destination have a common Routeing Point for more details.

    If there is no common RP, then if either the origin or destination of the ticket are not Routeing Points, you must complete a fares check, see 3.4.4 Fare-check rule.

    If both the origin and destination are routeing points, then you can skip the fares check, and proceed to 3.4.5 Identifying map combinations.
     
  27. lyndhurst25

    lyndhurst25 Member

    Messages:
    994
    Joined:
    26 Nov 2010
    I imagine that there are plenty and this change makes a mockery of the whole Fares Check rule. I can think of a couple of routes that are now invalid off the top of my head. Previously it was OK to use a Routing Point if it passed the Fares Check in either NFM64 or the current NFM. That was a good idea as it protected routes from becoming invalid because of unequal fare increases. Now ATOC are insisting that only NFM64 fares are used. So a big part of determining the routes that I can now take by train depend on what the fares were 19 years ago, with current fares being irrelevant? Madness.
     
  28. Solent&Wessex

    Solent&Wessex Established Member

    Messages:
    2,299
    Joined:
    9 Jul 2009
    But that is exactly what many members of this forum have been arguing for some time, especially when using the current fares would deny a route, where the historical fares would allow it. Only one set of data should be used, for consistency. Personally I think it should be current fares, as those are easier for everyone to check and are more transparent, but if people insist on using the historical fares, then so be it. You can't just use whichever fare you fancy, it is either one or the other. You can't have your cake and eat it.
     
  29. MikeWh

    MikeWh Established Member Senior Fares Advisor

    Messages:
    5,931
    Joined:
    15 Jun 2010
    Location:
    Crayford
    I can see what you mean, but how does this work where routes have been added to the network in the intervening 19 years. Does this mean that you can't now use those new routes as part of longer journeys?
     
  30. Andrew1395

    Andrew1395 Member

    Messages:
    393
    Joined:
    30 Sep 2014
    Location:
    Bushey
    The whole point if the Routeing Guide was to preserve what existed in 1996. - not the routes of 1986, 2006 or 2016. Current fares would be best and I am sure TOCS and providers of Journey Planners would agree. All you need do is persuade DfT and Transport Focus who insist on the historic NFM64 checks. These were imposed by OPRAF before the DfT assumed its role.
     
  31. lyndhurst25

    lyndhurst25 Member

    Messages:
    994
    Joined:
    26 Nov 2010
    I'm not sure that only one set of data should be used as the fares available have changed drastically over the 19 years since NFM64 was published. New stations and lines have opened, certain TOCs have "gouged" prices, many tickets that were "any Permitted" now have specific routes, etc. I think that the only fair way for passengers to do a fare check is to actually allow them to have their cake and eat it, as you put it i.e. if it passes the check in either NFM64 or with current fares then it's OK.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page