Trains advertised short of final destination e.g. to 'Ealing Broadway'

[cholsey-choose]

I wonder what you think about this. Along the route between Oxford and Paddington, at major stations the stopping train to Paddington is advertised as being to Ealing Broadway, which is misleading because it continues to Paddington.

I think this is a bad policy for a number of reasons:

- if you don't know the area and you get on an 'ealing broadway' train at say Oxford, the voice announcement that this is a train to Paddington is quite jarring.

- the same train is listed as having Paddington as its destination at some stops (such as Cholsey).

- Reading has a 'next trains to London' board. I was in a rush once and was worried about accidentally getting on the slow train to London. I asked the information desk and they somewhat condescendingly told me that the slow trains are not listed as being to London.

What I don't understand is why the trains aren't listed as 'Paddington (local stopping service)', as they are in the direction towards Oxford. Would there be any major downsides to this. The current policy of (almost) lying about the final destination of the train is quite irksome to me, when I think about it.

 

[greaterwest]

It's not uncommon, F/GWR have been doing this for years, and SWT do it too.

At Waterloo, a Weybridge via Hounslow train will be shown as going to Addlestone
At Weybridge, a Waterloo via Hounslow train will be shown as going to Barnes.

The same train will be listed as a Paddington train at intermediate stops because it's the fastest service to Paddington.

At a station like Reading or Oxford, there's no need as there are frequent fast trains.

 

[cholsey-choose]

It's not uncommon, F/GWR have been doing this for years, and SWT do it too.

At Waterloo, a Weybridge via Hounslow train will be shown as going to Addlestone
At Weybridge, a Waterloo via Hounslow train will be shown as going to Barnes.

The same train will be listed as a Paddington train at intermediate stops because it's the fastest service to Paddington.

At a station like Reading or Oxford, there's no need as there are frequent fast trains.

Really? I didn't know it was done elsewhere too. I just find it infuriating. Is there any downside to the (local stopping service) marker instead, other than perhaps taking up space on the boards?

 

[James H]

I travelled on the Poole to London slow train this week.

At Bournemouth this is advertised as the Farnborough train.

At Southampton Central it is announced as the "stopping service to London Waterloo" which seems a sensible approach.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[cholsey-choose]

The only other railway system I have real experience with is Japan, and they seem to take a much more sensible approach there I think -- they have names for the different stopping patterns, from 'kaisoku' (I think, it's been awhile) regular trains that stop everywhere, to 'super-express' (shinkansen services).

 

[Dr_Paul]

On the Waterloo services, I think it's to deter people from taking a longer route, as this would be inconvenient for them. Few people would wish to go to Waterloo to Weybridge via Staines, especially as it's an all-stations service.

The Waterloo to Waterloo loop services via Richmond and Kingston are shown at Waterloo as going to Teddington; the ones going via Kingston and Richmond are shown as going to Strawberry Hill. Further down the line, they're shown as going further round; for example, at Wimbledon, the ones going via Kingston are shown as going to Richmond; at Richmond, the ones via Kingston are shown as going to Wimbledon. At Kingston, however, all loop services are shown as going to Waterloo whether they're going via Richmond or Wimbledon.

 

[cholsey-choose]

On the Waterloo services, I think it's to deter people from taking a longer route, as this would be inconvenient for them. Few people would wish to go to Waterloo to Weybridge via Staines, especially as it's an all-stations service.

The Waterloo to Waterloo loop services via Richmond and Kingston are shown at Waterloo as going to Teddington; the ones going via Kingston and Richmond are shown as going to Strawberry Hill. Further down the line, they're shown as going further round; for example, at Wimbledon, the ones going via Kingston are shown as going to Richmond; at Richmond, the ones via Kingston are shown as going to Wimbledon. At Kingston, however, all loop services are shown as going to Waterloo whether they're going via Richmond or Wimbledon.

That's interesting, so they don't follow the same tracks? The Paddington-Oxford distinction is just about stopping patterns along the same route.

 

[yorkie]

Really? I didn't know it was done elsewhere too.

Yes.

Loads of examples. Notably on circular routes, such as Waterloo to Waterloo (via Kingston / Hounslow loops) and St. Pancras to St. Pancras (via Coast), and also Manchester Piccadilly back to Piccadilly via Glossop and Hadfield.

Also on York to Leeds via Harrogate and many more slower routes

By the way, i will edit your thread title to comply with our forum rules.

 

[cholsey-choose]

Yes.

Loads of examples. Notably on circular routes, such as Waterloo to Waterloo (via Kingston / Hounslow loops) and St. Pancras to St. Pancras (via Coast), and also Manchester Piccadilly back to Piccadilly via Glossop and Hadfield.

Also on York to Leeds via Harrogate and many more slower routes

I don't think circular routes quite count, because any choice of destination is going to be arbitrary.

 

[MidnightFlyer]

Kings Cross to Cambridge slow services are displayed as Foxton on the boards at the former I believe; I'm presuming southbound it is shown as Finsbury Park or similar.

I would say there's probably good reason to do it in areas where there are significant amounts of foreign visitors (like Oxford, Cambridge and York), as they would simply see 'Cambridge' and get on the train, regardless of what anything in parentheses said. People who need the intermediate stations (like Cholsey, Hammerton or Meldreth) will generally know what to do, or can be guided accordingly, but I suspect the current set up has saved people quite a lot of wasted time!

 

[Alteran Ancient]

Yes.

Loads of examples. Notably on circular routes, such as Waterloo to Waterloo (via Kingston / Hounslow loops) and St. Pancras to St. Pancras (via Coast), and also Manchester Piccadilly back to Piccadilly via Glossop and Hadfield.

Also on York to Leeds via Harrogate and many more slower routes

You can add the Cannon Street loop services to this list, too. They'll do a 180 via Slade Green.

 

[causton]

Southbound, trains from Watford Junction to London Euston on the Overground show as South Hampstead, to avoid people taking them all the way. However, northbound trains from Euston still show Watford Junction so people do get confused on the way north. I guess it is very hard to tell people "This train goes here, but if you want to go here, you should probably get another train".

 

[thejuggler]

Leeds to Brighouse via Bradford is circular and goes to Huddersfield, Wakefield and back to Leeds after Brighouse. Destination changes as you go through the journey.

As mentioned York to Burley Park via Harrogate is actually a Leeds service. Its so anyone arriving in York doesn't see Leeds and ends up on this very long (but interesting!) service rather than the more frequent fast services.

Similarly from Leeds this service gives Poppleton as the last stop yet it continues to York.

 

[bb21]

Whichever way you do it, you will find people moaning, and I have experience of both sides so there is no perfect solution.

 

[satisnek]

At Birmingham New Street, back in the days of the flappy display on the concourse and big orange boxes housing monochrome CRTs for the individual platforms, the Euston via Northampton stopping service used to have 'Watford Junction' or occasionally 'Harrow & Wealdstone' shown as its ultimate destination.

Then privatisation happened.

 

[BestWestern]

At stations where there are faster alternatives, the fact that the train goes all the way to Paddington is redundant. Anyone going to Paddington doesn't require that train, and anybody who does require that train (from that particular boarding point) is not going to Paddington. Therefore, advertising it as something other than a Paddington service merely helps to 'filter out' some needless information for the many people who do want a Paddington! It makes sense.

 

[Skimpot flyer]

<snip> northbound trains from Euston still show Watford Junction so people do get confused on the way north <snip>

Indeed. Often, when I'm sat on an xx57 London Overground train at Euston, I'll overhear tourists who are going to the Harry Potter Experience at Watford chattering away, and I feel compelled to tell them that if they get the train departing 7 minutes later (to Tring), they'll arrive some 18 minutes before the train they're currently sitting on.

welcome to the Skimpot Flyer Experience !

 

[bb21]

At stations where there are faster alternatives, the fact that the train goes all the way to Paddington is redundant. Anyone going to Paddington doesn't require that train, and anybody who does require that train (from that particular boarding point) is not going to Paddington. Therefore, advertising it as something other than a Paddington service merely helps to 'filter out' some needless information for the many people who do want a Paddington! It makes sense.

I think the point about potential inconsistency in information provision between the CIS boards at stations and onboard is a fair one, since we are talking about mostly inexperienced travellers here, and those are who are most likely to be affected.

Unfortunately I don't know what the answer is, as I alluded to earlier, whatever is advertised will disadvantage some people.

 

[BestWestern]

I think the point about potential inconsistency in information provision between the CIS boards at stations and onboard is a fair one, since we are talking about mostly inexperienced travellers here, and those are who are most likely to be affected.

Unfortunately I don't know what the answer is, as I alluded to earlier, whatever is advertised will disadvantage some people.

That's a fair point, but arguably so long as both systems make clear that it goes to whichever intermediate station you're after, surely it doesn't really matter?! The idea, certainly with the Paddington example, is intended to help exactly that sort of traveller by ensuring that they don't just read "London Paddington" and jump on the wrong train. How many foreign visitors know what "(Stopping service)" means? "Ealing Broadway" etc is probably far more useful - they certainly won't be getting on that!

 

[JamesRowden]

That's a fair point, but arguably so long as both systems make clear that it goes to whichever intermediate station you're after, surely it doesn't really matter?! The idea, certainly with the Paddington example, is intended to help exactly that sort of traveller by ensuring that they don't just read "London Paddington" and jump on the wrong train. How many foreign visitors know what "(Stopping service)" means? "Ealing Broadway" etc is probably far more useful - they certainly won't be getting on that!

At 11:48 a stopper and an express depart Reading for Paddington simultaneously. On a journey planner the stopper will be advertised as going to London Paddington. Can you see the potential confusion?

 

[Bletchleyite]

At stations where there are faster alternatives, the fact that the train goes all the way to Paddington is redundant. Anyone going to Paddington doesn't require that train, and anybody who does require that train (from that particular boarding point) is not going to Paddington. Therefore, advertising it as something other than a Paddington service merely helps to 'filter out' some needless information for the many people who do want a Paddington! It makes sense.

I disagree, because it is false information and thus confusing. There are reasons people may wish to choose that train. Perhaps it's quieter. Perhaps they prefer the rolling stock being used. Perhaps they (in Paddington's case) have an off peak ticket in the evening peak. Perhaps their friend is using it and getting off at a local station and they'd like to travel with them. Perhaps they just looked at the timetable and found the xx:xx to Oxford and are now confused about it being for Radley.

Far better to include a note like "local stopping service" like they do at Manc Picc than confuse people further with false information.

 

[Bletchleyite]

Unfortunately I don't know what the answer is, as I alluded to earlier, whatever is advertised will disadvantage some people.

Train categorisation also helps, as if you see an ICE to your destination you know it's going to be faster than the RB next to it.

 

[bb21]

Train categorisation also helps, as if you see an ICE to your destination you know it's going to be faster than the RB next to it.

I thought we had that discussion in the other thread last week. Unfortunately classification in this country is not as straight-forward.

Advertising Train ID is the only way I can see to eliminate most of these issues, but they bring their own problems.

 

[Master29]

I can understand the OP`s frustration but when seen from the POV of one who regularly uses the express services through the dreaded Reading commuter belt it makes sense.

 

[BluePenguin]

I agree with the OP, it is very confusing of the TOCs to do this.

I have noticed this at the departures boards at St Pancras as well. Trains going to Ramgate via Medway are listed as going to Faversham. Trains going to Ramsgate via Ashford and Dover are listed as going to Sandwich via Dover Priory which further along the route are advertised as Whitstable via Ramsgate.

The only trains that are listed as actually going to Ramsgate, are those that going to Margate which go via Canterbury West - it is absurd!

 

[Daz28]

The Cannon Street loop services (they are not circular as they begin and end at the same destination) are particularly annoying. There is no consistency as to how they are advertised online,at the station or on the train.

I did Maze Hill to Sidcup recently, a perfectly sensible journey on a direct train. At Maze Hill station it was listed as the service to Slade Green. At Plumstead station it was a service to Crayford. Only at Slade Green did it become a Cannon Street service. However on the train it was a service to Slade Green throughout , until it changed at Slade Green to be Cannon Street. Online was the only place where it was correctly advertised as a loop service.

 

[SpacePhoenix]

Would it be down to glitches with the PIS/CIS systems or incorrect data having been entered?

 

[A Challenge]

The Woking stoppers take twice the length of journey of the fast non-stop or only Clapham, but they are advertised as Woking, and the same vice versa. I shan't mention the semi-fasts to Waterloo as there is a point each hour (if you miss the XX:28 ex Portsmouth but can still get the XX:29 ex Basingstoke, but not for the other three) where it is quicker to get it as it is so long to the next fast (XX:41 ex Portsmouth)

I do think however, that people do look at terminusus if they are going to, for example the 'next fastest train to' board, but there isn't one at Woking, although Platform 3 is right out on the end!

 

[mm333]

Curiously, Northern don't do this on the Hope Valley Line. At Sheffield and Manchester Piccadilly, it's advertised on the information screens as a "local stopping service" with the correct terminus, rather than as a train to Reddish North or Dore.

 

[CyrusWuff]

The use of "False Destinations" is recommended in ATOC's "Best practice for Customer Information" (and the British Rail equivalent before it I believe).

However, it generally requires manual intervention to setup as CIS systems will naturally default to show the actual destination.