Station groups that should exist but don't

[Bletchleyite]

This thread:

Break of journey with different routes possible

We all know that break of journey is generally permitted, as is short stopping. On a route A-B-C-D-E I can therefore travel A-B, and then D-E on one ticket (within the validity of course). But what happens if a ticket allows for different routes? For example, Cambridge-London: can I travel...

www.railforums.co.uk

...identifies some cases where it really would make sense to treat some adjacent or nearby stations as one for fares and routeing purposes, but this is presently not the case.

So which ones are there we can think of?

The thread suggests Settle and Giggleswick (the latter basically being Settle West in a de-facto sense).

A few more suggestions:

Walton and Rice Lane (probably should just be one station, not just a group!)
The two Burscoughs
Edinburgh Waverley and Haymarket (accepted locally as as de-facto group, but not *actually* one)
Should Manchester Stations possibly now include Salford Central?
It's not built yet, but Liverpool Stations should probably include Baltic, though I don't know if that's already planned?

What others can people think of and why?

 

[Farigiraf]

Cambridge, Cambridge North & Cambridge South when it opens (I think you can get Cambridge or Cambridge North tickets but no group exists AFAIK
St Albans City and Abbey
Prittlewell and Airport (and Southend East if not already in) added to Southend group
Stevenage and Hitchin

 

[FlyingPotato]

Reading and tilehurst for advance tickets only

 

[Starmill]

The one I would do is Burnley Manchester Road / Central.

It's not built yet, but Liverpool Stations should probably include Baltic, though I don't know if that's already planned?

According to the new Merseyrail route diagrams, it will be a member of Liverpool Stations.

The thread suggests Settle and Giggleswick (the latter basically being Settle West in a de-facto sense).

A few more suggestions:

Walton and Rice Lane (probably should just be one station, not just a group!)

I'm fairly sure those are already inter-available formally.

 

[Watershed]

Blackpool North and South for one.

 

[Gaelan]

Edinburgh Waverley and Haymarket (accepted locally as as de-facto group, but not *actually* one)

hm, what would the implications be here? EDB and HYM are on the same line, so you can already get any non-advance* ticket valid to both by booking to the further station. For advance tickets, things get quite strange as CCSTs (in my experience) don’t actually show the end point of a reservation.

*or any no break of journey tickets - off hand I’m only aware of Belfast RailSail

Also relevant is the Scottish Local Routeing Guide, which fulfills a similar role for various routes, discussed here:

Scottish Easements

The Scotrail Local Routeing Guide is now available as an attachment to this post in the RailUK Fares & Ticketing Guide. A ticket that is valid between Glasgow/Edinburgh and Kyle of Lochalsh may be used for a round trip via Mallaig. Obviously, you'd need to make your own way between Kyle &...

www.railforums.co.uk

Despite there being no public documentation of these rules (the closest being my FOI request), locals do seem to know about them in at least one case.

 

[Haywain]

The one I would do is Burnley Manchester Road / Central.

That is probably the best suggestion so far, although I would add Barracks just to simplify what 'Burnley Stations' would mean.

Stevenage and Hitchin

Why? They are separate towns and there is no obvious benefit.

 

[D6130]

Until about twenty years ago, Giggleswick/Settle, Clapham/Horton-in-Ribblesdale and Bentham/Ribblehead were grouped together....so walkers from West Yorkshire could book a Day Return and do a linear walk over the fells from one station and return from the other. IIRC, this facility was withdrawn by Arriva soon after rescuing the franchise from Northern Spirit....but it could do with being reinstated IMHO.

 

[MTR380A]

Bristol Temple Meads / Parkway

 

[owidoe]

Bristol Temple Meads / Parkway

Bristol Temple Meads, Parkway, Filton Abbey Wood and Stapleton Road, to facilitate non-BTM changes and solve congestion. Stapleton Road could be a great interchange station from the West Country to Wales, if only the Filton trains continued one more stop to Parkway.

 

[JonathanH]

Reading and tilehurst for advance tickets only

Even where station groups exist, the advance ticket booking is still to a single station (although I note that few reservable trains call at Tilehurst).

 

[YorksLad12]

The thread suggests Settle and Giggleswick (the latter basically being Settle West in a de-facto sense).

Giggleswick opened as Settle, and is as close to Settle as Giggleswick. Makes sense to me, you could use the 'other' station if the route through your first choice is closed for some reason...

Until about twenty years ago, Giggleswick/Settle, Clapham/Horton-in-Ribblesdale and Bentham/Ribblehead were grouped together....so walkers from West Yorkshire could book a Day Return and do a linear walk over the fells from one station and return from the other. IIRC, this facility was withdrawn by Arriva soon after rescuing the franchise from Northern Spirit....but it could do with being reinstated IMHO.

Agreed. Or, create a new ticket type. It's the 21st century, the railway shouldn't be so... linear it its thinking.

 

[Haywain]

It's the 21st century, the railway shouldn't be so... linear it its thinking.

A non-linear railway? One for Speculative Discussion!

 

[MTR380A]

Bristol Temple Meads, Parkway, Filton Abbey Wood and Stapleton Road, to facilitate non-BTM changes and solve congestion. Stapleton Road could be a great interchange station from the West Country to Wales, if only the Filton trains continued one more stop to Parkway.

Thinking more deeply, perhaps all the stations on Severn Beach Line as well as the future Henbury Spur should be grouped together.

 

[FlyingPotato]

Really I'm convinced I once bought an advance to reading which said I could go to reading west as well

 

[billio]

Reading this thread reminded me that the SR used have tickets to various destinations, so looking through some old tickets I have, an example :

Wimbledon Park to Kingston, Norbiton, Stoneleigh, Tolworth and West Sutton via Wimbledon and back. (7/3/72, 32p)

 

[wilbers]

Blackpool North and South for one.

Could probably add Layton, Blackpool Pleasure Beach, and Squire's Gate as well for a group of 5 stations.

 

[Farigiraf]

Why? They are separate towns and there is no obvious benefit.

While they aren't as close as I initially thought, it would help with fares. Great Northern (who I assume set the fares there) have established themselves as the 'premium' service at least around Cambridge. This has led to expensive fares elsewhere on the line (outside of TfL territory), meaning short journeys can cost quite a lot - Peterborough to Letchworth for example, journey planners will often put you on an LNER service to Stevenage and go from there, but since Hitchin is the interchange point between the ECML and the Cambridge line, you get charged an extra stop to Stevenage*. Calling LNER at Hitchin isn't feasible so a station group is the next best thing.

*Some tickets from LNER stations to Great Northern ECML stations include the price of doubling back, as long as the train stops at Stevenage.

 

[52290]

Blackpool North and South for one.

Last year when I bought a day return from Leyland to Blackpool I arrived at North and returned from South. I had enquired in the booking office if this was possible before travelling.

 

[A0wen]

Stevenage and Hitchin

For what possible reason ? They are miles apart.

Hitchin is almost 6 miles away from Stevenage station, Letchworth's less than 3 from Hitchin station.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Totally forgot one I've been calling for for years - Bletchley, MKC and Wolverton (plus possibly Fenny Stratford and maybe even Woburn Sands for a full set of the stations in MK Borough).

Ideally with a double back easement allowing Bletchley passengers to double back via MKC going to London, and the same for Wolverton going north, in return for the fare being the same as MKC (rather than slightly cheaper as it is at present), as that's quicker at some times of day.

The slightly odd* decision to end Project Oval (contactless) at Bletchley rather than MKC or Wolverton would probably break this, though. (I wonder if it will increase traffic at Bletchley? Most people get to the stations by car or taxi, so going to a different one for much of south west MK isn't going to be a major hardship).

* Perhaps because it avoids involving Avanti?

 

[greatkingrat]

While they aren't as close as I initially thought, it would help with fares. Great Northern (who I assume set the fares there) have established themselves as the 'premium' service at least around Cambridge. This has led to expensive fares elsewhere on the line (outside of TfL territory), meaning short journeys can cost quite a lot - Peterborough to Letchworth for example, journey planners will often put you on an LNER service to Stevenage and go from there, but since Hitchin is the interchange point between the ECML and the Cambridge line, you get charged an extra stop to Stevenage*. Calling LNER at Hitchin isn't feasible so a station group is the next best thing.

*Some tickets from LNER stations to Great Northern ECML stations include the price of doubling back, as long as the train stops at Stevenage.

I think you are confusing Routeing Point Groups with Station Groups. Putting Stevenage and Hitchin in the same Station Group would have no effect on anyone travelling to stations outside the group such as Letchworth.

 

[Royston Vasey]

While they aren't as close as I initially thought, it would help with fares. Great Northern (who I assume set the fares there) have established themselves as the 'premium' service at least around Cambridge. This has led to expensive fares elsewhere on the line (outside of TfL territory), meaning short journeys can cost quite a lot - Peterborough to Letchworth for example, journey planners will often put you on an LNER service to Stevenage and go from there, but since Hitchin is the interchange point between the ECML and the Cambridge line, you get charged an extra stop to Stevenage*. Calling LNER at Hitchin isn't feasible so a station group is the next best thing.

*Some tickets from LNER stations to Great Northern ECML stations include the price of doubling back, as long as the train stops at Stevenage.

This is handled by a doubling back easement between Stevenage and Hitchin for stations up to Cambridge which has existed for donkey’s years (almost continuously although it was briefly withdrawn at one point IIRC). Various easements apply to different journeys but 700070 700378 and 700514 all apply. 700070 covers everywhere from Cheshunt up to Cambridge and back down to Hitchin.

Special treatment is only really needed for journeys from south of Cambridge, changing to head north up the ECML, or vice versa as per your example. The easement achieves that already. Other than that I can’t really see any need for a grouping. There’s a lot of passenger flow between the two in their own right and they are separate towns several miles apart.


700070 used to read:

Easement 700070
Customers travelling from Cambridge, Foxton, Shepreth, Meldreth, Royston, Ashwell & Morden, Baldock and Letchworth to Arlesey, Biggleswade, Sandy and beyond may double back between Hitchin and Stevenage. This easement applies in both directions.

But it now refers to

…stations North of Cheshunt via Cambridge and Hitchin to stations north of Hitchin may double back…

which is clear as mud but hasn’t changed the previous validity.

 

[Haywain]

I think you are confusing Routeing Point Groups with Station Groups.

Unfortunately, the thread title doesn't make clear which is under discussion, but I believe @Bletchleyite intended it to be station groups.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unfortunately, the thread title doesn't make clear which is under discussion, but I believe @Bletchleyite intended it to be station groups.

I had kind of aimed it at both. I realise they are different things, but could see a case for making them the same because that makes things more transparent to passengers.

 

[AlfDickens]

Talking of Hitchin and Stevenage, Easement 030130 states "Journey (sic) from Harringay, Hornsey, Alexandra Palace, New Southgate, Oakleigh park, New barnet, Hadley Wood, Potters Bar, Brookmonds (sic) park, Welham Green, Hatfield, Welwyn Garden City, Welwyn North and Knebworth to Hitchin and beyond may travel via Stevenage. This easement applies in both directions." Why is that easement required, given that a journey as described above would pass through SVG anyway.

Similarly, Easement 030207 states that "Customers travelling from Stamford via Leicester may travel via Oakham. This easement applies in both directions." But how else would you get from Stamford to Leicester? Or should "...may travel..." be shown as "...must travel..."?

 

[Dai Corner]

Although tickets are issued to Bristol Temple Meads or Bristol Parkway rather than 'Bristol Stations' I've had no problem arriving at one and departing from the other on a return ticket or going from Newport - Temple Meads or vice versa via Parkway.

What benefits would making a station group bring me?

 

[Bletchleyite]

Although tickets are issued to Bristol Temple Meads or Bristol Parkway rather than 'Bristol Stations' I've had no problem arriving at one and departing from the other on a return ticket or going from Newport - Temple Meads or vice versa via Parkway.

What benefits would making a station group bring me?

Consistency, and avoiding people wondering if they're allowed to do that or not in the context of a railway that increasingly doesn't do discretion?

In my view, if something is only apparent to enthusiasts or expert users and could be made apparent to all, then it's bad by definition.

Thus, in all cases where tickets are interavailable, a fares group should exist. A "Bristol Stations" would certainly make sense.

 

[Dai Corner]

Consistency, and avoiding people wondering if they're allowed to do that or not in the context of a railway that increasingly doesn't do discretion?

In my view, if something is only apparent to enthusiasts or expert users and could be made apparent to all, then it's bad by definition.

Thus, in all cases where tickets are interavailable, a fares group should exist. A "Bristol Stations" would certainly make sense.

As long as 'Bristol Stations' was clearly and prominently defined.

For example, Bristol Parkway, Filton Abbey Wood and Patchway are in the Bristol urban area but outside the City of Bristol. Stations as far as Avonmouth on the Severn Beach branch are in the City of Bristol but the terminus isn't.

Something like 'all stations bounded by Bristol Parkway, Patchway, Stapleton Road, Parson Street and Bristol Temple Meads'? Replace Stapleton Road with Severn Beach or Avonmouth and/or delete Parson Street if desired.

 

[Bletchleyite]

For example, Bristol Parkway, Filton Abbey Wood and Patchway are in the Bristol urban area but outside the City of Bristol.

I don't think this is a particular concern. Boundaries of ceremonial cities are a bit arbitrary. We wouldn't after all be saying "London Terminals tickets should not be valid to London Euston because it's in Camden", similarly for Salford Central which is one of the five stations basically along the Manchester city centre ring road and it makes no sense for it not to be included in Manchester Stations. That it's technically in another ceremonial city is a bit of a non-issue.

One could I suppose argue that Liverpool South Parkway is in a similar position, so then do you bring in Mossley Hill, West Allerton, Brunswick, St Michael's, Aigburth and Cressington, which feels a bit odd?

Maybe what we should actually do is reform long distance walk up** ticketing so it's all zone to zone, so you would be buying a ticket from anywhere in greater London to anywhere on the Merseyrail map, say. That isn't as silly as it sounds, as most long distance ticketing is already zoned like that in terms of the fares, but the tickets are issued much more granularly. Which never used to matter before zero-tolerance approaches started to pervade ticketing enforcement*, but now it does very much matter.

* e.g. almost all fares from Aughton Park and Ormskirk other than very local ones are the same, as things were it wouldn't matter if you went to the other one even if that involved a slight overtravel, but now you'd get a PF or worse for doing that.

** For Advances, you could do it as an add-on - book the Advance between the termini, and at check-out be asked if you want to add on a "Liverpool Zone" or "London Zone" to the start or end, a bit like Plusbus?