-
We're pleased to advise that our booking engine at tickets.railforums.co.uk, which helps support the running of the forum with every ticket purchase, has had some recent improvements, including PlusBus support. Find out more and ask any questions/give us feedback in this thread!
Would RER-style Mission Codes have helped Thameslink passengers?
- Thread starter GordonT
- Start date
- Status
Sponsor Post - registered members do not see these adverts; click here to register, or click here to log in
R
RailUK Forums
Minstral25
Established Member
All the Thameslink and Southern routes were allocated route numbers when the timetable consultation was happening in 2017/8 but never carried over to the public face of the operational timetables in 2018. I've always felt this was a shame when it would be useful to passengers to quickly know when disruption or engineering affects their services. Like buses Passengers quickly learn their route.
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
The only point I can see why they didn't do it is because of a change to the information above, eg TL1 is classed as fast from St Albans however in reality that route is a semi fast as it stops at West Hampstead Thameslink so shouldn't be classed as fast.
It would be good to move towards this kind of route branding though.
It would be good to move towards this kind of route branding though.
Fincra5
Established Member
- Joined
- 6 Jun 2009
- Messages
- 2,428
I actually think it would have been a great idea to have those displayed! Like the RER or S-Bahn or even Continental Regional Trains. Could be done at stations PIS Screens, and inside the Train. Shame the screen on the end of a 700 is so small.
CarrotPie
Member
What you want is a full-colour LED screen on the ned of the train like the BVG Class IK, to display the destination and a coloured "line" name.
Mostly the destination is enough, but a code would be useful to differentiate where you have different stopping patterns but the same destination.
If I'm going to Bedford from the Core, I don't need to know where my train has come from, but I do need to know if it stops at (say) Flitwick. Ditto towards Brighton.
It wouldn't cope with random peak hour variations to the stops though.
The SR did this for the Portsmouth and later Bournemouth routes.
If I'm going to Bedford from the Core, I don't need to know where my train has come from, but I do need to know if it stops at (say) Flitwick. Ditto towards Brighton.
It wouldn't cope with random peak hour variations to the stops though.
The SR did this for the Portsmouth and later Bournemouth routes.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Yes, obviously I think it's a good idea as it's German 
But yes, it's easier to remember that you need a TL2, 4 or 5 than read destination boards.
Was Virgin Trains the only TOC to actually publicise using this approach?
But yes, it's easier to remember that you need a TL2, 4 or 5 than read destination boards.
Was Virgin Trains the only TOC to actually publicise using this approach?
CarrotPie
Member
And VTEC.
bussikuski179
Member
If they do do that, they should at least make them make sense so you don’t end up with a system like here, where Helsinki has the metro style commuter lines of A, E, I, K, L, P, U and Y, along with the outer suburban R, Z, D, T, Tampere’s commuter line M and the G which is pure regional and IMO doesn’t really deserve a letter.
CarrotPie
Member
Can relate to that. Plus they had S too. Y and R sometimes run the same patterns as InterCity trains and... my head hurts! At least the metro here is simpler with only 5 lines!
bussikuski179
Member
H and N at one point too. It’s gotten simpler but I think the best choice would be to just make them numbered, less confusion since who would guess that the Kirkkonummi train is the U? It’s a system that only locals can memorise.
CarrotPie
Member
Yup it is!
It was considered, and “some people” tried very hard to something akin to the RER Mission codes adopted, but unfortunately it didn’t happen. It did get complicated because of varying stopping patterns north and south of the river, eg st some times of day a stopper from Sutton turns into a Bedford Fast. I think when you added it up, there were well over a hundred different stopping patterns for the Thameslink services, and that’s would just be too complicated.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
Dare I suggest that if there are genuinely over 100 combinations that may be part of the issue?
Dare I suggest that if there are genuinely over 100 combinations that may be part of the issue?
Taking the Cambridge-Brighton service as an example, the GN end has two "standard hour" variations in itself - Ashwell & Morden being served 2tph peak but only 1tph off-peak.
Then multiply that by similar combinations south of the river and it's easy to see how variations multiply up, even for a highly standardised pattern. For starters, multiply for via London Bridge / not via London Bridge for engineering access requirements (which doubles all the stopping pattern variations for most via London Bridge services)
Dare I suggest that if there are genuinely over 100 combinations that may be part of the issue?
Agreed. Arguments that everything on the MML should be fast between St Pancras and St Albans* were not as popular as I hoped.
*Except when there is cricket on at Lord’s, when a West Hampstead stop would be permissible.
Chris Butler
Member
- Joined
- 23 May 2010
- Messages
- 272
Yes, I can imagine.
The RER codes do attempt to accommodate this complexity, which is why the lists of all 'codes missions' are lengthy. If you understand the encoded meaning of each of the four characters (e.g. the middle two characters, as far as I know, give the stopping pattern) then you can probably make sense of even a long list, but I'm not sure they are always as 'user friendly' as people imagine.
As an example the (pre-2013) list for Line D are as follows:
- AOLO : de Goussainville à Paris-Nord.
- BIPE : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Malesherbes via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Paris - Gare de Lyon et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges, ne dessert pas Viry-Châtillon.
- BIPO : de Stade-de-France – Saint-Denis à Malesherbes via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Paris - Gare de Lyon et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges.
- BOPO : de Villiers-Le-Bel à Malesherbes via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- BOSO : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Malesherbes.
- DECA : de Melun à Paris - Gare de Lyon via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Montgeron - Crosne et Paris-Lyon.
- DIPA : de Melun à Paris - Gare de Lyon via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Paris - Gare de Lyon.
- DIPE : de Malesherbes à Paris - Gare de Lyon via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Paris - Gare de Lyon, ne dessert pas Viry-Châtillon.
- DOCA : de Melun à Paris - Gare de Lyon via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy.
- DOLO : de Villiers-Le-Bel à Paris - Gare de Lyon.
- DOPA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Paris - Gare de Lyon via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- DOVA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Paris - Gare de Lyon via Ris-Orangis.
- DUCA : de Melun à Paris - Gare de Lyon via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Maisons-Alfort - Alfortville.
- FOLA : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Goussainville.
- FOPA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Goussainville via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- FOVA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Goussainville via Ris-Orangis.
- FUCA : de Melun à Goussainville via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Maisons-Alfort - Alfortville.
- JOPA : de Melun à Juvisy via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- JOVA : de Melun à Juvisy via Ris-Orangis.
- LOLA : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Orry-La-Ville - Coye-La-Forêt.
- LOPA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Orry-La-Ville - Coye-La-Forêt via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- LOVA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Orry-La-Ville - Coye-La-Forêt via Ris-Orangis.
- LUCA : de Melun à Orry-La-Ville - Coye-La-Forêt via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Maisons-Alfort - Alfortville.
- MIPA : de Melun à Châtelet-Les-Halles via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Paris - Gare de Lyon.
- MIPE : de Malesherbes ou de Melun à Châtelet-Les-Halles via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Paris - Gare de Lyon, ne dessert pas Viry-Châtillon.
- MOLO : de Creil à Châtelet-Les-Halles.
- MOPA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Châtelet-Les-Halles via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- NOCO : de Paris-Lyon à Combs-La-Ville - Quincy.
- NUCO : de Orry-La-Ville - Coye-La-Forêt à Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Maisons-Alfort - Alfortville et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges.
- RIPE : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Corbeil-Essonnes via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Paris - Gare de Lyon et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges, ne dessert pas Viry-Châtillon.
- RIPO : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Corbeil-Essonnes via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Paris - Gare de Lyon et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges.
- ROPO : de Goussainville à Corbeil-Essonnes via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- ROSA : de Malesherbes à Corbeil-Essonnes.
- ROVO : de Creil à Corbeil-Essonnes via Ris-Orangis.
- SOLA : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Creil.
- SOPA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Creil via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- SOVA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Creil via Ris-Orangis.
- SUCA : de Melun à Creil via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Maisons-Alfort - Alfortville.
- TIPE : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à La Ferté–Alais via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Paris - Gare de Lyon et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges, ne dessert pas Viry-Châtillon.
- UOVA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Stade-de-France – Saint-Denis via Ris-Orangis.
- UUCA : de Melun à Stade-de-France – Saint-Denis via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Maisons-Alfort - Alfortville.
- VIPE : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Villiers-Le-Bel via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Paris - Gare de Lyon, ne dessert as Viry-Châtillon.
- VOLA : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Villiers-Le-Bel - Gonnesse - Arnouville.
- VOPA : de Melun à Villiers-Le-Bel - Gonnesse - Arnouville via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- VOVA : de Corbeil-Essonnes à Villiers-Le-Bel - Gonnesse - Arnouville via Ris-Orangis.
- VUCA : de Melun à Villiers-Le-Bel - Gonnesse - Arnouville via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Villeneuve-Saint-Georges et Maisons-Alfort - Alfortville.
- ZECO : de Paris - Gare de Lyon à Melun via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Paris - Gare de Lyon et Montgeron - Crosne.
- ZIPE : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Melun via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Paris - Gare de Lyon et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges, ne dessert pas Viry-Châtillon.
- ZIPO : de Châtelet-Les-Halles à Melun via Evry-Courcouronnes, sans arrêt entre Paris - Gare de Lyon et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges.
- ZOPO : de Goussainville à Melun via Evry-Courcouronnes.
- ZOVO : de Juvisy à Melun via Ris-Orangis.
- ZUCO : de Creil à Melun via Combs-La-Ville - Quincy, sans arrêt entre Maisons-Alfort - Alfortville et Villeneuve-Saint-Georges.
I, for one, find that list totally impenetrable - it's only regular users who would find them in any way intuitive.
While I might be late to this discussion, the starting point should be with the purpose of such information: to tell passengers (and staff!) where the train is going, where it is stopping, and so whether they should (or should not) board it. When there are 100+ stopping patterns, on 10+ routes, you are bound to have a complex system...
RER style 4 letter 'mission codes' - with each stopping pattern having a short 'name' - give you a useful shorthand - and - consistently used for the long term, and with plenty of information as to the meaning of the codes (and their elements), so that people can learn at least the common ones they need - would be useful.
But used inconsistently, and without information as to what they mean, they are just meaningless set of letters to be ignored. And that seems to be what happens to too many such systems...
You would have to be in the situation where every Thameslink train, every reference to a Thameslink train, comes with its mission code
As it is, the only way I can know it is 'my' train is by seeing or hearing 'my' destination in the - perhaps long - list of stops on the inidicator, or in the announcement: that may be the lowest common denominator, and have to be retained, but is it any better?
Is there a better system?
RER style 4 letter 'mission codes' - with each stopping pattern having a short 'name' - give you a useful shorthand - and - consistently used for the long term, and with plenty of information as to the meaning of the codes (and their elements), so that people can learn at least the common ones they need - would be useful.
But used inconsistently, and without information as to what they mean, they are just meaningless set of letters to be ignored. And that seems to be what happens to too many such systems...
You would have to be in the situation where every Thameslink train, every reference to a Thameslink train, comes with its mission code
As it is, the only way I can know it is 'my' train is by seeing or hearing 'my' destination in the - perhaps long - list of stops on the inidicator, or in the announcement: that may be the lowest common denominator, and have to be retained, but is it any better?
Is there a better system?
This really does look like a solution looking for a problem.
People can just look at departure boards and generally know that it is the right train by matching the destination of the train. The calling patterns aren't that complex. Different calling points for trains going to the same ultimate destination really only applies for Bedford (and to a lesser extent Brighton) and that has been the case for many, many years.
People can just look at departure boards and generally know that it is the right train by matching the destination of the train. The calling patterns aren't that complex. Different calling points for trains going to the same ultimate destination really only applies for Bedford (and to a lesser extent Brighton) and that has been the case for many, many years.
Aictos
Established Member
- Joined
- 28 Apr 2009
- Messages
- 10,403
Exactly, it's not difficult to look up at the departure boards and seeing your destination listed to know that is the train you need to get. This proposal is just a solution for a non existent problem.
Interesting that opinions are divided on whether mission codes or something of the sort would be a good thing. My own opinion is that the very complexity of variations between ultimate destinations, intermediate routes and calling patterns on Thameslink is at least as deserving as a bus network of a basic two-digit headcode or route number. Sure "only" regular passengers would see the benefit but that in itself doesn't negate the worth of the principle. I suspect that part of the reason the desirability of such a provision is glossed over in the UK is down to the fragmentation of control and organisation of the system. Another factor may be that in recent times there's a greater perceived need in the UK to implement ad hoc changes to journeys "on the hoof" to restore normality to a disrupted service whereas in parts of continental Europe there tends to be a tradition of greater funding in public transport enabling a higher level of spare resource (which in the UK would probably be termed "wasteful") enabling disruption to be recovered in a less disruptive way.
A couple of further thoughts.
Firstly, this shouldn't be confined to Thameslink - certainly south of the river, it needs to integrated with Southern and South Eastern, and so on round the network.
To what extent should someone going to 'their destination' be expected to know how that fits with everywhere (or anywhere) else? (If I want the T1 from C to E, do I need to know anything about the T2 from A to Z? Or any other train?)
It's all about understanding a complex system - making it simple itf you prefer. As it is we muddle through....
(Aside: Trivia question for those who like such things: where can you go, get on the platform, and know that the next train is yours? And where are you going to?)
Firstly, this shouldn't be confined to Thameslink - certainly south of the river, it needs to integrated with Southern and South Eastern, and so on round the network.
To what extent should someone going to 'their destination' be expected to know how that fits with everywhere (or anywhere) else? (If I want the T1 from C to E, do I need to know anything about the T2 from A to Z? Or any other train?)
It's all about understanding a complex system - making it simple itf you prefer. As it is we muddle through....
(Aside: Trivia question for those who like such things: where can you go, get on the platform, and know that the next train is yours? And where are you going to?)
The 319s carried alphanumeric codes in the second destination display in the 1990s. The system didn't last long. NSE introduced route numbers on new-build stock - eg 321s, 165s, 166s, 465s. Again, the use of these numbers fell away.
Part of the desire from enthusiasts for route numbers seems to come from some sense that they used to be on historic stock.
Part of the desire from enthusiasts for route numbers seems to come from some sense that they used to be on historic stock.
If I arrive at St Pancras heading for a Thameslink train, the first thing I do is look at the departure screens above the barriers, the next thing is to look at the departure screen at the top of the escalator, the next is to check the departure board on the platform. If the destination on the front or side of the train matches the departure board, I get on. No Thameslink trains terminate at my destination. No need for route numbers.
I don't think we do. People plan train journeys by looking at a website or application, typically on a phone. They generally match trains to times, not destinations and they look at departure boards at stations.
The first time I visited New York City, me and a friend needed to get back to our hotel near Times Square - 42nd Street (IIRC). Neither of had a map and neither of us had used the NYC subway before either. We entered the station and in front of us was a list of stations with route numbers/letters next to them. Immediately we could see that we needed an Uptown 1, 2, 3 or 9 train (ideally a 2 or 3 as they were marked as express). We followed the signs straight to the 2/3 platform and jumped on the first #2. Neither of us knew, cared or needed to know what the train's ultimate destination was but it got us home without a problem - the clear onboard automated announcements also helped.
So yes, I would like to see route numbers/letters (as well as the final destination) used on British trains as if implemented properly, it could work well.
Incidentally, when I worked for LT a common problem for visitors was the lack of simple, clear information regarding stopping patterns, especially on the Metropolitan, Piccadilly and District lines. I lost count of how many times passengers didn't realize that none of the Amersham and half of the Watford trains didn't call at Wembley Park or that the Piccadilly line runs fast from Hammersmith to Acton Town to name but two examples
So yes, I would like to see route numbers/letters (as well as the final destination) used on British trains as if implemented properly, it could work well.
Incidentally, when I worked for LT a common problem for visitors was the lack of simple, clear information regarding stopping patterns, especially on the Metropolitan, Piccadilly and District lines. I lost count of how many times passengers didn't realize that none of the Amersham and half of the Watford trains didn't call at Wembley Park or that the Piccadilly line runs fast from Hammersmith to Acton Town to name but two examples
In which case, should the train's destination show 16.59 to Bedford, and at the next station, it should show 17.06 to Bedford etc. based on the timetabled times. The PIS should enable this to happen, then prospective passengers will know if they are on the right train, irrespective whether or not the train is on time.
I never understood these codes when I was in Paris many years ago. I just thought that it spelt a word whose initial letter was the first letter of the destination - e.g. VIGO was bound for Versailes.
Bletchleyite
Veteran Member
The majority of users of Thameslink are regulars, though. Provided this is there in addition to a regular scrolly display of calling points, why not?
How do these "regulars" get home today without use of these elaborate codes? Is there some sort of hostel in Bedford that mops up all the lost city workers who got on the wrong train home, never to be seen again?
It's information for information's sake, and adds nothing. Less is more, in my view.
I do the same. Unfortunately experience shows that a great many passengers do not, with many seemingly incapable of trusting either (or both) the platform screens or the displays on and in the train.
I personally truggle to see how advertising "this is the LOPV / ZXRT / SPQR stopping pattern" will help, rather than hinder, this, to the less-informed traveller.
- Status