What swings the balance for you between a direct service and one where you change?

[EllieAquitrain]

When reading discussions on the forum, I often see someone making a point along the lines of "this direct service is essential because it's too inconvenient to go via [place] with a change." I've never been able to get any sense of where the consensus actually lies on this though, nor am I aware of any relevant data, so I wanted to see what people think.

I do understand there are many variables involved in such an evaluation so I propose a discussion along these lines:

If all of the following factors bar one were equal for a given journey, at what 'value' of that one variable would you switch from favouring a rail journey with changes to one without?

Price, overall journey time, reliability, proximity of stations to origin/destination, comfort, crowding/ease of getting a seat, reservations.

Suggestions of other factors are of course welcome!

 

[EllieAquitrain]

For example, for me personally as a student based in Edinburgh who frequently returns home to London, I'm very satisfied with the LNER services between the two cities, currently taking around 4h30. It would probably take a journey time offering of around 3h30 (whether or not that's even possible pre-HS2!) to tempt me onto a journey involving any changes. The few times I've been on an Azuma I've found it much less comfortable so if they were the usual train on the direct service, 3h45 might tempt me.

On the other hand, when I'm making a journey within London, I know most services are 'turn up and go' so a journey time difference on the order of 5-10 minutes can, and does easily sway me. Indeed, I plan to favour using the Northern City Line and then Crossrail from Moorgate/Liverpool Street to reach Heathrow rather than sitting on the Piccadilly Line for 90 minutes even though the latter's station is far more convenient for my home.

 

[O L Leigh]

It's hard to say. I've gone direct Stansted Airport to Brum on the XC service rather than via London because the total journey time is broadly comparable and I save myself the aggravation of a cross-London transfer. If I was in a rush I probably would have taken the London option because I'm sure I could have completed the transfer faster than the National Rail journey planner allows, but it doesn't necessarily guarantee catching an earlier train. So I took the option of picking my seat and passing a leisurely time watching the countryside roll by on a train that was going to take me straight there.

 

[AlbertBeale]

When reading discussions on the forum, I often see someone making a point along the lines of "this direct service is essential because it's too inconvenient to go via [place] with a change." I've never been able to get any sense of where the consensus actually lies on this though, nor am I aware of any relevant data, so I wanted to see what people think.

I do understand there are many variables involved in such an evaluation so I propose a discussion along these lines:

If all of the following factors bar one were equal for a given journey, at what 'value' of that one variable would you switch from favouring a rail journey with changes to one without?

Price, overall journey time, reliability, proximity of stations to origin/destination, comfort, crowding/ease of getting a seat, reservations.

Suggestions of other factors are of course welcome!

My preference as between direct services and one with a change (or whether I don't care at all) varies according to the length of the journey, why I'm travelling (and whether I have a lot of stuff with me to carry), whether I'm travelling with anyone else, and whether the interchange itself adds any interest to the journey. So I don't agree with what seems to be your assumption, namely that a non-direct service is always a negative factor. For me it's sometimes positive.

 

[DynamicSpirit]

When reading discussions on the forum, I often see someone making a point along the lines of "this direct service is essential because it's too inconvenient to go via [place] with a change." I've never been able to get any sense of where the consensus actually lies on this though, nor am I aware of any relevant data, so I wanted to see what people think.

I do understand there are many variables involved in such an evaluation so I propose a discussion along these lines:

If all of the following factors bar one were equal for a given journey, at what 'value' of that one variable would you switch from favouring a rail journey with changes to one without?

Price, overall journey time, reliability, proximity of stations to origin/destination, comfort, crowding/ease of getting a seat, reservations.

Suggestions of other factors are of course welcome!

Most of my journeys are between Abbey Wood and central London (about 35-40 minutes). There are seriously quite a few different route combinations for that journey, so I've had quite a few opportunities to observe and think about my decisions here.

For me, comfort and crowding/ease of getting a seat are the crucial factors. If I know I can get a more comfortable seat by changing, then I almost invariably will do, even if it adds 10 minutes or so to my journey. Overall journey time usually doesn't matter - I'll plan ahead to have time for the most comfortable train. But If something goes wrong and I'm in a hurry, then obviously speed suddenly takes preference over everything else, along with reliability. A couple of other factors that sometimes come into it are how nice the view is along the route (low importance on a route I regularly use, more important if it's a journey I rarely make), and any walking within stations - for example I would tend to slightly avoid national-rail-to-underground connections at London Bridge because of the long walk, and more strongly prioritise avoiding almost any change at Bank. (But if I'm in a hurry, avoiding Bank often takes second place to, favouring the DLR because it's more reliable than SouthEastern)

 

[Diplodicus]

When considering my reply, I realised that factors I consider vary considerably on the specific journey I am planning. When travelling between Hampshire and North Yorkshire, then cost becomes more significant with more offers available on LNER/Grand Central than direct via Cross County (plus the latter's unappealing overcrowded chaotic Voyager experience).

Pre-Covid-19 I advanced booked from Winchester to Llandudno Junction and again went via London taking advantage of a very reasonable first-class travel offer (for me and Mem Sahib).

Journeys within London are much more about ease of interchange. I try to avoid Bank (esp. if transferring to/from the DLR) like the plague and feel much the same about the marathon walk from tube line level to St Pancras International (where I get to street level a.s.a.p. and just use the "old steps' up to platform level.

If I have to change and there is a choice of venue (say Wolverhampton, New St. or Brum Int'l) then I would go for the one with the greater choice of facilities. Not Wolverhampton then!

In summary: it all depends!!

 

[yorksrob]

I will often go a slower route with changes if it's substantially cheaper.

Also, if there's a good pub at the change point.

 

[Bletchleyite]

My preference as between direct services and one with a change (or whether I don't care at all) varies according to the length of the journey, why I'm travelling (and whether I have a lot of stuff with me to carry), whether I'm travelling with anyone else, and whether the interchange itself adds any interest to the journey. So I don't agree with what seems to be your assumption, namely that a non-direct service is always a negative factor. For me it's sometimes positive.

Indeed. I will often plan a stop-off half way on a long journey for a break and a decent choice of food etc. Most usually at either Manc Picc or New St, but the rather decent Indian just up from Crewe isn't unknown either.

 

[alxndr]

Depends on the purpose of the journey but in general I'd say my priorities are:

1. Price
2. Journey time
3. Whether changing takes me anywhere new
4. Duration of wait at the interchange station

In the winter I'm far less inclined to want to wait for half an hour or so on a cold platform. In cases like those I'd rather be on a slower train as it's more comfortable and feels as though you're making progress.

 

[rf_ioliver]

Surprised that no one has said "boredom". When I was in university there were a couple of Brighton-Cardiff options. The direct service was 4+ hours which was convenient but a bit boring. So I had the choice of cross London to Paddington (HSTs - exciting!), or the XC to Reading and then to Cardiff from there (slow, but interesting).

Broadly, it came down to convenience, all journeys were about the same time regardless of route. Price wasn't so much of an issue with a rail card.

 

[AM9]

Depends on the purpose of the journey but in general I'd say my priorities are:

1. Price
2. Journey time
3. Whether changing takes me anywhere new
4. Duration of wait at the interchange station

In the winter I'm far less inclined to want to wait for half an hour or so on a cold platform. In cases like those I'd rather be on a slower train as it's more comfortable and feels as though you're making progress.

Apart from trips to/via London, going northwards on the WCML I usually choose LM to Brum because it can be ridiculously cheap unless I'm in a hurry. It's not always possible to get a direct from Watford Junction anyway. It's a toss-up on the MML going northwards as to whether to shoot into StP to get a fast or whether to cascade upwards via Luton, Bedford and maybe Leicester to get to Notts/South Yorkshire, especially in the winter.
I wouldn't change trains just to get a seat that aligns with a window though.

 

[Islineclear3_1]

If a change of train doesn't cause me inconvenience and there are amenities or interesting things to do at an interchange point, then I don't mind. Also, if a change of train is planned or in the timetable, then that's acceptable to me.

What can annoy me is sitting on a train only for it to be stopped short, for whatever reason and having to get off and change to another service - unless that service is already waiting in the adjacent platform

Pre-Thameslink, cross-London interchange was just part of the journey and I accepted it. Sometimes, a break of journey breaks up the monotony

 

[TXMISTA]

I travel between Bristol and Surrey fairly frequently. The obvious option would be Temple Meads - Paddington then Tube to Waterloo. However, this usually costs over £25 one way even booked in a month or two in advance.

Instead I opt for the slower direct SWR service via Salisbury and change at Woking for a stopper. I’ve booked a first class ticket on this service for as low as £9 with a railcard. When you factor in the time it takes to travel from Paddington to Waterloo the SWR service doesn’t appear that much slower. Besides, I find 158/9s far superior in terms of comfort to an IET!

 

[py_megapixel]

Usually the #1 factor for me is price. If I can get a cheaper ticket by adding more changes or a longer journey time then I will, within reason

After I've got my ticket, I will quite happily take more changes within the permitted routes of the ticket for the following reasons:

• Gives me time on an interesting station
• Gives me time on a class of train which I particularly like, or which is new
• Reduces time on Voyagers, Pendolinos, Sprinters or various other types of unit I don't really like
• Is much less crowded
• It's a meal time (I would prefer to buy food on a station rather than on the train)

However the above usually doesn't apply if I am tired. Then I want to minimise changes and just get where I'm going quickly.
Additionally if I have heavy luggage I am more likely to take a change if I know it will be a short walking distance (i.e. on the same "island")

 

[DarloRich]

price and how heavy my bag is decide my choices!

 

[nlogax]

• How much time I have available
• How much faffing is involved (eg when lugging around heavy bags)
• What the potential load is on the connecting service where I may not have a reservation

Not really worried about price. It's more about wanting to be sure my route is valid with the ticket I hold or I at least understand the excess if I decide to make a late decision to go via Z or Y.

Cross-London is usually a case of 'quickest route between terminii', in my case that's nearly always Northern or Bakerloo / Victoria lines.

 

[DarloRich]

May I also add circumstances to my two points above?

 

[4F89]

Price vs total time from door to door.

I would take 3 times as long to do a journey for a 25% saving

 

[urbophile]

Factors:
Type of journey (local journeys without much luggage vs. long-distance with heavy cases): much more reluctant to change in the latter situation.
Frequency of service: changing between Tube lines in London or similar elsewhere vs.fretting about whether a delay will mean missing a connection with an hour or more's wait.
Ticket interchangeability: the flexibility of an Oyster card or local pass, vs specific operator's fares and worrying about whether a ticket will be valid.
For leisure journeys, the total journey time is less of a factor for me.

 

[Dave W]

Weather, quality of interchange station (pub helps), amount of luggage I've got, quality of train (would take 2x comfortable trains over 1x Pacer, e.g.)

All bets are off in London - one finds a comfortable pattern even if it feels absurd. In a previous life working in Monument I used to get the 29/141/341 to Manor House, cross platform at Finsbury for the Victoria, cross platform at Highbury for Great Northern, down the escalator at Moorgate to the Northern Line and thence to Bank for a brisk walk up to the Monument. All that comes from a desire not to be out in the rain, and strategic avoidance of intensely busy interchanges (except Finsbury Park, which can be avoided by getting down the back). The quickest direct route between home and that office was by bicycle (28 minutes average). Timed right, the above could be done in 35. Not cutting the corner and changing at Euston averaged around the same but was fraught with danger of missing a train or two because of the crowds. In good traffic the 141 all the way down was about 40 minutes, but you don't get "good traffic" at rush hour.

 

[SteelWeelApeal]

Unless I’m carrying a lot I quite like changing to break the journey up a bit and make it more interesting. When I frequently travelled from Reading to Brighton, if I’d just missed the direct train to Gatwick, it was sometimes quickest to change at Basingstoke, Woking, Clapham Junction and East Croydon, so I’d do that. If there’s a train going half way to where I want to go, and I can change at the half way point (eg getting a Bristol train to Swindon from Reading, then changing onto the Cardiff train following it), then I often do that (especially when it was HSTs, as it meant more door operation )

 

[Dr Hoo]

Of course everyone's situation is different. From a personal perspective:

I am retired and rarely in a hurry;
I live in a rural area and tend to travel from small, un-staffed stations with no facilities;
Ditto, there are very few shops nearby so any trip through a major city is a chance to look at comparison goods;
I do a large amount of walking and don't really like sitting down (even in the most comfortable vehicle) for hours on end;
I rarely need to travel with much luggage.

So I welcome a break at York, Birmingham New Street, Nottingham or wherever for an hour's refreshment or shopping, often picking up what is actually the next 'through' train from Sheffield, Stockport or Manchester Piccadilly towards my final destination.

 

[CaptainHaddock]

For leisure purposes, quality of seating and overcrowding levels are big factors for me. I've been making a number of leisure journeys from Sheffield up to Scotland (pre-Covid) via the ECML and would always choose a change at Doncaster onto an LNER service over the direct but overcrowded and uncomfortable Cross Country Voyagers!

 

[Devonian]

That question really got me thinking about how I make that decision, and it's not simple...

 

[nlogax]

That question really got me thinking about how I make that decision, and it's not simple...

That's a fine piece of work Onboard catering never figures in my decision-making (that's what sandwiches are for) but I like that it's at the heart of your process.

 

[route101]

An example of mine was Manchester to Glasgow , direct but overcrowded 350 or change at Preston or Wigan onto a bigger pendo. Usually changed .

 

[py_megapixel]

An example of mine was Manchester to Glasgow , direct but overcrowded 350 or change at Preston or Wigan onto a bigger pendo. Usually changed .

In contrast I'd probably go for the 350, as I far prefer Desiros to Pendolinos, especially if it was an 8-car. Probably more likely to go for the pendo if the 350 is a 4 car

 

[route101]

In contrast I'd probably go for the 350, as I far prefer Desiros to Pendolinos, especially if it was an 8-car. Probably more likely to go for the pendo if the 350 is a 4 car

Nearly always a 4 car on the Glasgow service. Packed at peak fro Picc P14.

 

[route101]

In contrast I'd probably go for the 350, as I far prefer Desiros to Pendolinos, especially if it was an 8-car. Probably more likely to go for the pendo if the 350 is a 4 car

Nearly always a 4 car on the Glasgow service. Packed at peak fro Picc P14.

 

[Dave W]

Another personal example which highlights a few reasons:

A couple of summers ago a group of myself and 4 colleagues were in Blackpool for work - we had to be in Newcastle next day. A rush-hour departure was essential - knowing how grim TPE can be around Manchester I ruled out the National Rail route with one change, and instead took us on an "adventure" into Preston, up to Carlisle then down the Tyne Valley.

In this case, the following factors applied: cost (it was for work after all), ease of change (two changes at Preston and Carlisle far nicer than squeezing through the rush in Manchester), guarantee of a seat throughout (we were on a fairly well loaded Pendolino on the middle leg, but the two local trains were empty) and... well, a trip down a slightly more unusual railway. That might have been factored in... A bit.

Timewise the two journeys aren't that different.