Which journey planner was that?
The forum site does a good job of this; there is the option to exclude the metrolink in advanced options, while anyone who is given such an itinerary and whose ticket doesn't include it, is informed very clearly of this.
The problem with that idea is that the vast majority of journey planning sites (trainsplit excepted) don't offer any way to say "no I don't want this bloody transfer, give me a proper rail route".
Well, 33 minutes really. 5 minutes interchange at Canary Wharf (EL), and 10 minutes at London Bridge, must be included too. Though I do agree that it still seems a bit tight.
The problem is that in many cases, there is no alternative route that's permitted (at least, for a through ticket). In some cases, avoiding the transfer also takes much longer.
They suggest a "transfer", not explicitly a walk. That transfer could involve walking (and for those able to walk quickly, that is probably the fastest and certainly the most reliable option) but it could equally well involve taking the free bus (route 2), the Metrolink, or a taxi. Or even a train via Salford Crescent or the Ordsall Chord, though these options would tend to be suggested if they were faster.
The existence of a fixed link isn't purely dependent on the distance between stations, as the Yeovil link demonstrates. The most significant factor is likely to have been whether the fixed link is necessary for the fastest journeys - or sensible ones, at least - to be offered.
Probably a covid thing, TfL did all sort of strange things with the journey planner to discourage people from using the tube. Adding transfer time at the start and end of each journey is another covid 'trick' they've left in place to make jpurneys appear longer than they actually are.
I thought the shortest route purely by rail was always permitted.
That route may be excluded by virtue of the route of the available fares.
The only other obvious rail option would be I assume to Salisbury then back to westbury and then castle Cary, or salisbury - Southampton then back to Weymouth.I'm not quite sure how impressed a guard on a train between Exeter and Taunton would have been at being presented with an Axminster to Weymouth ticket
nre.co.uk doesn't rely wholly on the rail data files, as it can sometimes tell you which Underground line to use between two stations. It may have found the tram link in the same data.
It is according to the page here (which I can't find on the live web site), which says that you should allow 60 minutes whether you walk or use the bus. The bus doesn't take that long, but it only runs once an hour.
So what mode of transport did they have in mind when setting the transfer time? After all different modes of transport will take different amounts of time so they must have had something in mind or how would they know how long to allow?
I saw the same 'transfer' word when looking a different journey planner. That is really bad. In what way did the person writing that think that for most people it would mean anything than some method of them being transferred between the two stations, such as a bus?
Surely it would not be expensive, except in a few days of staff time, for someone to edit each of those 'transfer, references amd set out in each case what they actually mean e.g. 'walk', 'bus'. etc?
'Fixed link ' is a fantasy made up term by the rail system. It has zero additional benefits for passengers over and above saying 'walk'.
Most, if not all, where a walk is envisaged are already coded as 'walk'. Changing others to 'bus' would only work if ticket acceptance were agreed with the relevant bus operator, or alternatively if all relevant tickets were re-routed to state that the use of the bus was excluded.
It is, but no public reference is made to this term.
Except that most 'transfer' fixed links aren't envisaged as walks. Some are for journeys where there are multiple feasible options, such as crossing Manchester or London.
Fixed link is an industry data term meaning that, for a journey between two points, there is no schedule train (or bus or ship).
For all fixed-links you need to add in the minimum interchange time for the stations at each end of the link.
I recognise what fixed link is meant to mean. However, the definition would not be obvious to most passengers. Even a line which said 'Walk (unless alternative transport is available)' would be of more assistanc..
For a timetabled fixed link to appear correctly in journey planners it would also need to be entered (and maintained) in rail industry systems.
A protocol with local bus companies who operate the relevant services proving the links for them to advise of any changes would, whilst not foolproof, would be a good starting point.
Is there a distance/time limit for a WALK fixed link? And is the assumed walking speed the same in all cases?
I presume though, as with many other areas of life, it would be possible to add a disclaimer along the lines of 'Train operating companies cannot accept any responsibility for delays arising from bus services that are not operated or commissioned by them'.
The time limit for any fixed link is 99 minutes. There's no distance limit.
That definition does sound very driven by London though. There is a big difference between a 99 minute fixed link on a tube vs 99 minutes walking.
In terms of distance, no, not really. There are longer walks out there, for example 30 minutes between Hertford North and East - although Google Maps reckons it takes 20 minutes, and I've managed it in about 15 minutes.
It would seem not. It's difficult to say where the assumed timings come from, but they won't all necessarily have been added at the same time or by the same person/company.
I don't think so, although it's possible. 'Transfer' is generally used where another mode of transport other than walking is envisaged.
