Using headcodes in posts

[30907]

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=144775

Not sure this really warrants a new thread but....picking up on thie above thread about headcodes, should we ask forum members to avoid using headcodes on their own without explanation, as we do with Three Letter Codes?

Not only are they not instantly accessible to many of us, they may well refer to more than one train even on the same route.

 

[cf111]

I think it would be acceptable to refer to a train by its time & route and headcode the first time in a thread and thereafter, if mentioned again, by headcode alone, i.e. Opening post:" The 1447 Inverness-Glasgow Queen Street (1T99) was four hours late today, any ideas why?"

2nd post "I was on board 1T99 today and it was because they had filled the fuel tank with Tizer instead of diesel"

Otherwise it will certainly confuse some new members and may make them reluctant to post.

 

[tsr]

If it's about a train running on the same day on which you read the post, you can always type the headcode into the search box on www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Doing this will either bring up the schedule of the train (if there is only one train that day which is running under that headcode) or a list of the different schedules (if there is more than one under that headcode).

 

[GW43125]

I think it would be acceptable to refer to a train by its time & route and headcode the first time in a thread and thereafter, if mentioned again, by headcode alone, i.e. Opening post:" The 1447 Inverness-Glasgow Queen Street (1T99) was four hours late today, any ideas why?"

2nd post "I was on board 1T99 today and it was because they had filled the fuel tank with Tizer instead of diesel"

Otherwise it will certainly confuse some new members and may make them reluctant to post.

I second this, though I think a realtimetrains link could suffice as it contains service details. Certainly be interesting to have Tizer vice diesel!

 

[MidnightFlyer]

I concur, if anything they are worse than three letter codes as they aren't as logical to decipher (1S47 v. OXF for example), and even when you do, there's no guarantee that it's a unique identifier!

 

[GW43125]

I concur, if anything they are worse than three letter codes as they aren't as logical to decipher (1S47 v. OXF for example), and even when you do, there's no guarantee that it's a unique identifier!

Solution: UIDs
EG: Y60083/1S16/ https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w_24sDvzzrw

 

[Blindtraveler]

I would be quite happy with 1xxx 13:42 Plymouth London or similar first time then headcode only after. Certain ones e.g sleapers or the Wag X are quite well known anyway

Deezol replaced by Tizer? Given the train joking refered to is a 170 its always possible the bluddy thing might work better!

 

[Shaw S Hunter]

Back in the days when loco-haulage was a big thing there was a proportion of regular bashers who thought they were somehow cool because they tried to refer to particular services solely by their headcode (which strictly speaking should actually be called Train Reporting Number). Worse still they also tended to drop the service class number at the beginning. In practice nobody on the railway would communicate in such a short-handed way so it always baffled me why these bashers did so. And for those who don't know there are many TRNs which are duplicated not just in different parts of the country but on the same route several times during an individual day. It's one area where I believe it really would be better if we imported European practice.

 

[cf111]

Back in the days when loco-haulage was a big thing there was a proportion of regular bashers who thought they were somehow cool because they tried to refer to particular services solely by their headcode (which strictly speaking should actually be called Train Reporting Number). Worse still they also tended to drop the service class number at the beginning. In practice nobody on the railway would communicate in such a short-handed way so it always baffled me why these bashers did so. And for those who don't know there are many TRNs which are duplicated not just in different parts of the country but on the same route several times during an individual day. It's one area where I believe it really would be better if we imported European practice.

What is the European practice, out of interest?

 

[bb21]

http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=144775

Not sure this really warrants a new thread but....picking up on thie above thread about headcodes, should we ask forum members to avoid using headcodes on their own without explanation, as we do with Three Letter Codes?

Not only are they not instantly accessible to many of us, they may well refer to more than one train even on the same route.

This should be covered under the Accessible part of the forum rules. As with most things, common sense is needed.

 

[bb21]

What is the European practice, out of interest?

Each service is given a unique "train number" which is advertised to the general public.

 

[cf111]

Each service is given a unique "train number" which is advertised to the general public.

Thanks, so like the "VTXXXX" numbers that are on the doors displays on Pendolinos?

 

[DarloRich]

I think it would be acceptable to refer to a train by its time & route and headcode the first time in a thread and thereafter, if mentioned again, by headcode alone, i.e. Opening post:" The 1447 Inverness-Glasgow Queen Street (1T99) was four hours late today, any ideas why?"

2nd post "I was on board 1T99 today and it was because they had filled the fuel tank with Tizer instead of diesel"

Otherwise it will certainly confuse some new members and may make them reluctant to post.

A sensible suggestion

 

[30907]

If it's about a train running on the same day on which you read the post, you can always type the headcode into the search box on www.realtimetrains.co.uk

Thanks for this. I rather enjoy looking stuff up actually, but GW43125's suggestion of a RTT link is even better, and cf111's suggestion seems ideal.

@bb21 - yes, of course, I hadn't made the link to the "Accessible" section.

 

[Joe Paxton]

I remember there being something like a unique 'retail identifier' or somesuch, but neither RTT nor OTT shows that now.

Is the TRUST ID unique?

 

[221129]

I remember there being something like a unique 'retail identifier' or somesuch, but neither RTT nor OTT shows that now

RTT certainly does.

 

[Joe Paxton]

RTT certainly does.

I can't see that on RTT. There's a "service code" but it's not unique (see these trains, for example).

 

[Muzer]

I can't see that on RTT. There's a "service code" but it's not unique (see these trains, for example).

Look on the right hand side, "Retail Service ID". They're all unique for the ones you just posted.

 

[causton]

Virgin internally seem to call the retail service IDs as "Mission numbers" in some places.

 

[GW43125]

Virgin internally seem to call the retail service IDs as "Mission numbers" in some places.

So called because getting from Rugby to London without getting held up somewhere is a mission in itself?

 

[Joe Paxton]

Look on the right hand side, "Retail Service ID". They're all unique for the ones you just posted.

Thanks. A visit to the optometrist beckons I think!

 

[A Challenge]

What do you this of for this as my signature then:

My last rail journey was on Monday 3rd April on 871L63MY03, travelling WAT to WOK

 

[bb21]

You can put whatever you want in your signature, within reason.

 

[A Challenge]

You can put whatever you want in your signature, within reason.

I know, but it isn't as easy to read as it is currently, though if anybody reads it I don't know!

(its also easier to find the service somewhere line RTT!

 

[IanXC]

Please remember many members do not understand rail “jargon” (including acronyms, station codes and specialist terms). Such terms should be correctly defined the first time they are used; codes and abbreviations must not be made up

As the forum states such details as headcodes need to be explained the first time they are used.

As per the others we don't need to explain what a headcode is, and some context may give the reader the understanding of what the service is.

In essence the idea posted upthread is already the situation described in the rules.