Routing restrictions forbidding quickest routes

[All Line Rover]

NRE permitted the doubleback for Bletchley and, in any case, it benefitted passengers on the Marston Vale line.

 

[Flying_Turtle]

For a long time, the quickest route for many journeys is via London but you get cheaper fares on the slower cross country routes.

I believe the Timetables advertised that fact quite clearly

 

[Bletchleyite]

NRE permitted the doubleback for Bletchley and, in any case, it benefitted passengers on the Marston Vale line.

Didn't realise that, when I've seen it it was always shown as an option but with the "buy two tickets" thing. I do wish they had a flag for "don't show me journeys that do that".

TBH they could get away with an easement allowing the double back but barring break of journey at MKC. As it's barriered much of the time the chance of getting away with paying the lower fare for a journey to MKC is pretty low except in the evening when just about any journey on LM is effectively free[1] anyway.

[1] What I mean by that is that a fare dodger will just pay *no* fare, they won't be concerned with saving themselves about a quid by short-faring using an obscure get-out.

 

[kieron]

Glasgow (Queen Street, ordinarily…) to Leuchars, where given a good connection the quickest route is via Dundee—though this is forbidden by an easement which disallows travel via Dundee from/to Glasgow to/from Leuchars or Cupar as a circulous route

According to clause 13 of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, "You may travel between the stations shown on the ticket you hold in ... trains which take the shortest route which can be used by scheduled passenger services". According to the instructions given in the National Routeing Guide, "the shortest route is calculated by reference to the mileages shown in the National Rail Timetable, available at www.networkrail.co.uk/timetable".

Based on the mileages in the National Rail Timetable, there is a 92 mile route from Leuchars to Glasgow Queen Street (which is show in table 229) which goes via Lenzie, Perth and Dundee. Travelling in the reverse direction is also 92 miles.

Table 229 also shows a 92 mile route via Lenzie, Perth and Ladybank. It lists Leuchars-Ladybank as being half a mile longer than Ladybank-Leuchars, so this isn't the shortest route in that direction.

A web site such as railmiles may suggest that the shortest route is via Linlithgow, Winchburgh Jn, Dalmeny Jn and Dalmeny*, but there are two difficulties with treating that as the shortest route.

1. Table 228 shows the route from Glasgow to Linlithgow, and table 242 shows the route from Dalmeny to Kirkcaldy and Markinch, but no table shows the route from Linlithgow to Dalmeny. As such, it is not possible to calculate how long a route this is.

2. No passenger trains are scheduled to use this route until August.

I have not been able to find any shorter routes between Leuchars and Glasgow Central based on the mileages in the National Rail Timetable.

In conclusion, an "any permitted" Glasgow Queen Street - Leuchars ticket is valid to travel via Lenzie, Perth and Dundee

How common is it for the routing table to forbid what would be the quickest route, and are there any really common examples?

There are quite a few places where this happens. Changes to permitted routes are carried out on an ad hoc basis, so there's always going to be routes which don't fit in with any specific criteria for deciding what is reasonable.

* This is absolutely fine, so long as you know what the page is doing.

 

[MedwayValiant]

Bickley is a member of the Bromley Routeing group. The Routeing Guide instructions explicitly allow double backs for interchange purposes only within an intermediate Routeing Group when travelling on a mapped route.

So you are always allowed to double back within a Routeing Group, unless one of the stations in that Routeing Group is either the origin or the destination of the journey. Therefore this rule does not allow a double back via Bromley South on a journey from Rochester to Bickley. That bit I now understand.

Moving on to the published list of easements, there is not one to cover this particular journey. However, there is one which states that:

"Journeys from Rochester [and lots of other places snipped] to Sevenoaks, Bat & Ball, Shoreham Kent and Otford may double back between Bromley South and Swanley. This easement applies both ways." (Easement 000077)

So. A ticket from Rochester to Bickley is not valid for double back via Bromley South. However, a ticket from Rochester to Sevenoaks is so valid. This involves a considerably longer double back which passes through three stations (Swanley, St Mary Cray, and Bickley) twice.

AIUI, you are always allowed to stop short unless:
i) the restriction codes state that you can't, which they don't in this instance; or
ii) the shorter journey has a higher fare. It doesn't in this instance; the CDS and CDR fares for Rochester - Bromley South, Rochester - Bickley, and Rochester - Sevenoaks are identical.

Therefore, if I buy a ticket Rochester - Sevenoaks, stopping/starting short at Bickley in both directions, I may double back via Bromley South. If I buy, for precisely the same price, a ticket Rochester - Bickley, I may not double back via Bromley South. Therefore, I shall in future be buying a ticket to Sevenoaks even though I have no intention of going there.

Will you excuse me if I think this silly?

 

[Bletchleyite]

No, seems sensible, though I haven't looked at the maps to confirm it's definitely OK.

Personally I think it should be simplified to "doubling back within a routeing group is always OK, however when doing so Break of Journey or starting/ending short is not permitted in the event this could be used to avoid a higher fare". And where such groups aren't present they need to be created, e.g. to allow a double back between MKC and Bletchley but not, obviously, exit at MKC.

You might get the odd bit of casual evasion, but you could always set up traps for it from time to time, e.g. leaving the barriers open but having RPIs standing by the doors looking for those exiting the station with a Bletchley ticket.

 

[kkong]

It's very common for a double-back to represent the quickest route and those aren't allowed.

Glasgow to Leuchars via Dundee doesn't involve a double-back.

 

[gsnedders]

According to clause 13 of the National Rail Conditions of Carriage, "You may travel between the stations shown on the ticket you hold in ... trains which take the shortest route which can be used by scheduled passenger services". According to the instructions given in the National Routeing Guide, "the shortest route is calculated by reference to the mileages shown in the National Rail Timetable, available at www.networkrail.co.uk/timetable".

Based on the mileages in the National Rail Timetable, there is a 92 mile route from Leuchars to Glasgow Queen Street (which is show in table 229) which goes via Lenzie, Perth and Dundee. Travelling in the reverse direction is also 92 miles.

Table 229 also shows a 92 mile route via Lenzie, Perth and Ladybank. It lists Leuchars-Ladybank as being half a mile longer than Ladybank-Leuchars, so this isn't the shortest route in that direction.

A web site such as railmiles may suggest that the shortest route is via Linlithgow, Winchburgh Jn, Dalmeny Jn and Dalmeny*, but there are two difficulties with treating that as the shortest route.

1. Table 228 shows the route from Glasgow to Linlithgow, and table 242 shows the route from Dalmeny to Kirkcaldy and Markinch, but no table shows the route from Linlithgow to Dalmeny. As such, it is not possible to calculate how long a route this is.

2. No passenger trains are scheduled to use this route until August.

I have not been able to find any shorter routes between Leuchars and Glasgow Central based on the mileages in the National Rail Timetable.

In conclusion, an "any permitted" Glasgow Queen Street - Leuchars ticket is valid to travel via Lenzie, Perth and Dundee

* This is absolutely fine, so long as you know what the page is doing.

To check I'm understanding this correctly:

• Via Dundee isn't an acceptable route outbound because it isn't the shortest route (which is via Perth and Ladybank) and the easement prohibits it in the routing guide.
• Via Dundee is an acceptable route inbound because it is the shortest route, despite the easement otherwise prohibiting this (because the routing guide is irrelevant).
• Via Dundee will cease being an acceptable route inbound once trains start running via Dalmeny and Linlithgow again, because it will no longer be the shortest route, despite the very limited service between Dalmeny and Linlithgow.

 

[yorkie]

How common is it for the routing table to forbid what would be the quickest route, and are there any really common examples?

Surprisingly common.

ATOC claim people wish to take the "shortest route" (e.g. York to Sheffield via Pontefract on a Pacer) rather than the quickest route, which doesn't get a mention!

Most customers wish to make journeys by through trains or by the shortest route...

But, before I give any examples, do you mean "the quickest route" at a particular moment in time, or the "quickest route" ever?

 

[Paul Kelly]

A journey which I make fairly frequently is from Rochester to Bickley. At most times, the quickest way to make that journey is to travel via Bromley South - but that means passing through Bickley station twice and therefore is possibly not allowed.

I've never asked Southeastern for an official opinion on the matter in case I don't like the answer, but I've had four different unofficial answers from train conductors.

Here is a fifth answer for you: the distance between Bickley and Bromley South is only just over 1 mile, so doubling back adds less than 3 miles to your journey thus it's allowed under the 3-mile rule.
--- old post above --- --- new post below ---

Stations at the north end of the Heart of Wales to London Terminals - the only fares that exist are into Paddington via Craven Arms and Hereford. The quickest route to London is usually to Euston via Crewe.

Not true. As long as Craven Arms is an appropriate origin routeing point for the station, there is a mapped route to Euston via Crewe on maps MC+LC. Even Leominster to London is permitted via Crewe (but not Hereford to London).

 

[gsnedders]

But, before I give any examples, do you mean "the quickest route" at a particular moment in time, or the "quickest route" ever?

Let's say the quickest route on a given day.

 

[hairyhandedfool]

Surprisingly common.

ATOC claim people wish to take the "shortest route" (e.g. York to Sheffield via Pontefract on a Pacer) rather than the quickest route, which doesn't get a mention! ....

Whilst I would accept that the quickest route is asked for more often than the shortest route, I find that direct trains is usually the killer criteria, with some people choosing to take a longer (time) journey by bus to a railway station with a direct service, rather than making a shorter, quicker journey by train to that very same railway station, in order to avoid changing trains.

I have even seen situations where people, who are "in a hurry", are prepared to wait anything up to 59 minutes for a direct train, even if getting a train in 5 minutes and changing along the way would get them there before the direct train has even departed!

I have heard people say they would prefer a longer (time/distance), or more expensive, journey to one that requires a change at a particular station, even braving the London Underground in preference!

So I think it would be fair to say that whilst most people claim to want the quickest journey, what many of them actually want is the simplest, and I don't think changing the shortest route to the quickest route is actually beneficial to that.

 

[kieron]

To check I'm understanding this correctly:

• Via Dundee isn't an acceptable route outbound because it isn't the shortest route (which is via Perth and Ladybank) and the easement prohibits it in the routing guide.
• Via Dundee is an acceptable route inbound because it is the shortest route, despite the easement otherwise prohibiting this (because the routing guide is irrelevant).
• Via Dundee will cease being an acceptable route inbound once trains start running via Dalmeny and Linlithgow again, because it will no longer be the shortest route, despite the very limited service between Dalmeny and Linlithgow.

It's the second one.

I mentioned the route via Perth and Ladybank because that's exactly the same length in the eastbound direction (so could also be used on the basis that it is the shortest route), but not westbound.

I mentioned the route via Dalmeny and Linlithgow because it could lead to a journey planner mis-identifying the shortest route (and so not showing the real shortest route as being a valid route).

Not true. As long as Craven Arms is an appropriate origin routeing point for the station, there is a mapped route to Euston via Crewe on maps MC+LC. Even Leominster to London is permitted via Crewe (but not Hereford to London).

What craigybagel may have been thinking about is easement 700365. This says:

Customers travelling from London Euston to Broome and stations on the Central Wales line to Llangadog (inclusive) in possession of tickets routed "via Craven Arms" may not travel via Shrewsbury. This easement applies in both directions.

To take Knighton-London as an example:

There are no direct Knighton-London routes. I haven't checked the shortest route myself, but bukitlawang.com lists it as being via Shrewsbury and Wolverhampton.

Knighton is associated with Craven Arms and Swansea group, both of which are valid routeing points.

There are no mapped Swansea-London routes via Craven Arms.
The only mapped Craven Arms-London routes which go to Euston go there via Shrewsbury (and on to either Crewe or Wolverhampton).

This means that there are no routes from Knighton to London Euston at all which are valid using a "via Craven Arms" ticket into London Euston. There are a number of routes into Marylebone or Paddington, however, which are not affected by this easement.

The (dearer) "any permitted" tickets can be used on routes into Euston, and on routes via Swansea.

So I think it would be fair to say that whilst most people claim to want the quickest journey, what many of them actually want is the simplest, and I don't think changing the shortest route to the quickest route is actually beneficial to that.

The NRCoC already caters for this preference by allowing any direct train between origin and destination to be used with an "any permitted" ticket.

I suppose what you said does go some way to explain why the Welsh Government's rail consultation made "direct services between main residential areas and economic centres" one of its high level outcomes, but didn't place any emphasis on how quickly someone would be able to go from A to B if this could involve changing trains.

I do feel the "shortest route" rule is a problem, however. It is hard to calculate, and it leads to perverse outcomes (such as Coseley-Birmingham New Street being shorter if you go via Wolverhampton). I don't think gsnedders' solutions would solve these particular problems. I don't know if it would make them more or less significant.

 

[IanXC]

Given some earlier posts I think Hull to York might represent what would seem a good implementation of what is suggested. There are tickets Any Permitted and Route: Via Selby. With a suitable price differential. Timewise it really depends what time you are departing which is quicker, as Doncaster typically takes longer, but has more frequent journey opportunities.

On the other hand, stations on the Yorkshire Coast Line, for instance, Cottingham, have Any Permitted (allowing via Doncaster, Selby or Scarborough), and Via Hull (ie not via Scarborough) which are then restricted by a negative easement... probably then representing a poor resolution of the problem!

 

[MedwayValiant]

Here is a fifth answer for you: the distance between Bickley and Bromley South is only just over 1 mile, so doubling back adds less than 3 miles to your journey thus it's allowed under the 3-mile rule.

Hasn't the 3 mile rule been abolished? And did/does it apply to double backs in any case?

If it did/does, then Euston to Watford High Street via Watford Junction would be allowed - and I'm fairly sure that it isn't.

 

[Bletchleyite]

As that isn't a double back and they don't share a common routeing point I would expect that to be mapped. Is it not?


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

[yorkie]

Hasn't the 3 mile rule been abolished? And did/does it apply to double backs in any case?

There is no sign that any material change in this regard has taken place; such a change would require DfT approval. And no-one has told the booking engines. It's not practicable to abolish it anyway for many reasons (please start a new thread if you wish to discuss that further).

If it did/does, then Euston to Watford High Street via Watford Junction would be allowed - and I'm fairly sure that it isn't.

It is allowed, especially now most people are using Oyster! Why do you think it isn't? It's by far the quickest route, but it is also a permitted route.

 

[MedwayValiant]

It is allowed, especially now most people are using Oyster! Why do you think it isn't? It's by far the quickest route, but it is also a permitted route.

It was just a memory of having read someone complain about it not being allowed and/or having been given a penalty fare for seeking to do it, but I'll be the first to admit that my memory is far from perfect! But also, if we look strictly at National Rail fares and ignore Oyster, the SDS from Euston to Watford High Street is £1.30 less than to Watford Junction. So I can't imagine the operators being keen on it being allowed, especially at times when the barriers at the Junction are not in use.

There is no sign that any material change in this regard has taken place; such a change would require DfT approval. And no-one has told the booking engines. It's not practicable to abolish it anyway for many reasons (please start a new thread if you wish to discuss that further).

Until just now I wasn't aware that the continued existence or not of the 3 mile rule had been a contentious question on these forums before. Having now read a couple of earlier discussions, I see that your position is that it still exists, and was mistakenly removed from the text of the routing guide.

I'm quite happy if you're right on that, so I'll run with it and with the knowledge that Rochester to Bickley is valid via Bromley!

 

[Bletchleyite]

But also, if we look strictly at National Rail fares and ignore Oyster, the SDS from Euston to Watford High Street is £1.30 less than to Watford Junction. So I can't imagine the operators being keen on it being allowed, especially at times when the barriers at the Junction are not in use.

That would indeed make it non-Permitted, because the fare rule would block the use of Watford Jn as a routeing point.

That is yet another case where there really should be a Watford Stns and it should be the same fare as Watford Jn. I actually assumed incorrectly that there would be. Though I suppose you could instead take LM to Bushey and change there.

 

[Hadders]

That would indeed make it non-Permitted, because the fare rule would block the use of Watford Jn as a routeing point.

That is yet another case where there really should be a Watford Stns and it should be the same fare as Watford Jn. I actually assumed incorrectly that there would be. Though I suppose you could instead take LM to Bushey and change there.

But what were the fares at privatisation? There's a good chance they were the same which would allow WFJ as a routeing point.