NRG (National Routeing Guide) Changes

[All Line Rover]

***A list of changes to the NRG is kept here***​

26 Sep 2014: Bye-bye maps?

According to an update posted today, ATOC have made "the first part of a a series of changes to reduce the use of the maps, prior to their deletion from the guide". Is anyone able to assess the changes that were made yesterday?

 

[tractakid]

Surely they must have DfT approval for such a change?

 

[greatkingrat]

I think you have misread it. They are not proposing to get rid of all of the maps, just to reduce the number of maps. So at the moment they are going through routes using maps RB and WM and replacing them with alternative maps. Once they have completed that they can delete maps RB/WM completely.

 

[All Line Rover]

I think you have misread it. They are not proposing to get rid of all of the maps, just to reduce the number of maps. So at the moment they are going through routes using maps RB and WM and replacing them with alternative maps. Once they have completed that they can delete maps RB/WM completely.

That is a logical interpretation of the statement. I think you're right. Although that is not what they actually wrote. The statement in full:

"A review of Maps RB and WM (part of a programme to reduce the number of maps), has seen the deployment of the following changes. This is the first part of a a series of changes to reduce the use of the maps, prior to their deletion from the guide. This will be in stages to reduce the chance of any unforseen consequences."​

If your interpretation is correct, ATOC should really have wrote "maps RB and WM" in place of "the maps" (the words I underlined).

It would be odd if ATOC wish to reduce the number of maps, given their desire to more accurately define routes which led to the addition of a plethora of new maps just a few months ago.

 

[kieron]

I read it as only referring to RB and WM as well, particularly as ATOC expressed a desire to reduce the number of maps in the same paragraph. They've reduced the number of routes each map is used on by about 4%, but almost every change they have made has been to reduce ticket validity.

There are a few exceptions. The following have added some mapped routes and deleted others:

Bath Spa (BTH) and Coventry (COV) - added sequence 'PC+SM'
Bath Spa (BTH) and Coventry (COV) - removed sequence 'RB'

Add via Trowbridge. Remove via Nuneaton and via Warwick.

Bath Spa (BTH) and STRATFORD U GROUP (G72) - added sequence 'PC+SM'
Bath Spa (BTH) and STRATFORD U GROUP (G72) - removed sequence 'RB'

Add via Trowbridge. Remove via Birmingham and via Coventry.

Bath Spa (BTH) and WARWICK GROUP (G73) - added sequence 'PC+SM'
Bath Spa (BTH) and WARWICK GROUP (G73) - removed sequence 'RB'

Add via Trowbridge. Remove via Birmingham and via Coventry.

Chippenham (CPM) and Leamington Spa (LMS) - added sequence 'BL+WM+BB'
Chippenham (CPM) and Leamington Spa (LMS) - added sequence 'BW+GC'
Chippenham (CPM) and Leamington Spa (LMS) - added sequence 'PC+SM'
Chippenham (CPM) and Leamington Spa (LMS) - removed sequence 'BL+RB'
Chippenham (CPM) and Leamington Spa (LMS) - removed sequence 'BW+RB'
Chippenham (CPM) and Leamington Spa (LMS) - removed sequence 'RB'

Add via Rugby. Remove via Reading and via Westbury, as well as a few other more complex routes (for instance, you can still go via Swindon and Nuneaton, but can't go via Bath and Nuneaton).

Eastleigh (ESL) and Nuneaton (NUN) - added sequence 'XR+SM'
Eastleigh (ESL) and Nuneaton (NUN) - added sequence 'XR+SM+BG'
Eastleigh (ESL) and Nuneaton (NUN) - added sequence 'XR+SM+TV'
Eastleigh (ESL) and Nuneaton (NUN) - removed sequence 'BW+BM'
Eastleigh (ESL) and Nuneaton (NUN) - removed sequence 'RB+BP'
Eastleigh (ESL) and Nuneaton (NUN) - removed sequence 'RB+WM'

Add the shortest route between the routeing points.
Remove via Tamworth, and also via Bramley and Birmingham. Also removes routes via Romsey, although I don't know if there are any tickets you could have used to take advantage of those routes as the tickets between Eastleigh and Nuneaton themselves are all "via London" or "via Oxford".

Chippenham (CPM) and Nuneaton (NUN) - added sequence'RB'
Chippenham (CPM) and Nuneaton (NUN) - removed sequence 'RB+BP'

Add via Birmingham International and via Bedworth.
This is the only route which has had mapped routes added but none removed. As the sequence they've added uses one of the maps they want to remove, this may not last.

The following haven't gained or lost any mapped routes:

Brockenhurst (BCU) and Leamington Spa (LMS) added sequence 'XR+SM'
Denmark Hill (DMK) and Gatwick Airport (GTW) added sequence 'FN+BU+VB'
Havant (HAV) and Leamington Spa (LMS) - removed sequence 'RB'
SOUTHAMPTON GROUP (G26) and Leamington Spa (LMS) added sequence 'XR+SM'

All of the other map changes which were published on Friday reduce ticket validity.

In addition to the changes they mention in the summary, they've also removed associated routeing points from a couple of stations.

Sherburn In Elmet is associated with Leeds, Pontefract and York.
It was also associated with Selby.
South Milford is associated with Leeds and Selby.
It was also associated with Pontefract and York.

This means that an "any permitted" tickets from Sherburn in Elmet to Selby is now valid on something other than the most direct route, but I don't know what its wider effects are.

On a final note, I would have thought that, if the intention is to reduce the number of maps in use, the maps which are hardly used now seem like a better place to start. For instance, TH is only used for routes between London and Tottenham Hale. It provides two routes, one via Stratford (which is also on EA and on CO) and one via Hackney Downs (also included on LI). The map could be removed very easily without affecting ticket validity at all.

 

[higthomas]

All of the other map changes which were published on Friday reduce ticket validity.

What a surprise.
I wonder whether they checked with Passenger Focus?

 

[Greeby]

Apologies if I'm late to the party, but I noticed these on the list

Bletchley (BLY) and Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) - added sequence 'TV+AB'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Milton Keynes Central (MKC) - added sequence 'AB+TV'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Milton Keynes Central (MKC) - added sequence 'EM+EN'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Northampton (NMP) - added sequence 'AB+TL'
Bletchley (BLY) and Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) - removed sequence 'TV+BG'
Bletchley (BLY) and Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) - removed sequence 'TV+BP'
Bletchley (BLY) and Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) - removed sequence 'TV+CE+EM'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Milton Keynes Central (MKC) - removed sequence 'BG+TV'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Milton Keynes Central (MKC) - removed sequence 'BP+TV'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Milton Keynes Central (MKC) - removed sequence 'EM+CE+TV'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Northampton (NMP) - removed sequence 'BG+TV'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Northampton (NMP) - removed sequence 'BP+TV'
Loughborough (Leics) (LBO) and Northampton (NMP) - removed sequence 'EM+CE+TV'

These act to remove the circular route to Loughborough via Tamworth and Derby, which is currently permitted by fare check (hopefully will be sorted in January).

Bletchley (BLY) and Melton Mowbray (MMO) - added sequence 'TV+BP'
Melton Mowbray (MMO) and Northampton (NMP) - added sequence 'BP+TL'
Milton Keynes Central (MKC) and Melton Mowbray (MMO) - added sequence 'EN+EM'
Milton Keynes Central (MKC) and Melton Mowbray (MMO) - added sequence 'TV+BP'
Bletchley (BLY) and Melton Mowbray (MMO) - removed sequence 'EB+BP'
Melton Mowbray (MMO) and Northampton (NMP) - removed sequence 'BP+EB'
Milton Keynes Central (MKC) and Melton Mowbray (MMO) - removed sequence 'EB+BP'

These do likewise for Melton Mowbray via Birmingham.

 

[kieron]

These act to remove the circular route to Loughborough via Tamworth and Derby, which is currently permitted by fare check (hopefully will be sorted in January).

To me, "fare check" is something involved with finding appropriate routeing points for a station. Could you tell me a bit more about what you expect to happen in January to improve things?

And those changes do do the thing you mention, but they also do other things, like deny travel via Coventry on a ticket, or allow it via Bedford or via Bedworth. It's sometimes hard to tell how much of this is deliberate.

Anyway, there have been some more changes on Friday. They have mostly increased ticket validity this time, but the summary suggests that these are temporary measures.

To allow First TPE Club 55 tickets to travel from Newcastle to South Yorkshire and South Humberside via Manchester, the following map sequences have been added. These sequences are only for use with TPE Only tickets - Fare Route 00085, and Easement 700535 text has been amended. The Easement restrictions the use of these map permissions to the Club 55 promotion.

Amended 700535 Text - Customers travelling from Newcastle and stations south of Newcastle to stations North West of Manchester or Newcastle to stations in the South Pennines or South Humberside may travel via Manchester on 'Club 55' promotion tickets routed 00085 'TPE ONLY'. This easement applies in both directions.

Added

Barnetby (BTB) and Newcastle (NCL) - added sequence 'DW+MN'

Chinley (CLY) and Newcastle (NCL) - added sequence 'DW+MN'

Habrough (HAB) and Newcastle (NCL) - added sequence 'DW+MN'

Newcastle (NCL) and Sheffield (SHF) - added sequence 'MN+DW'

Is there an official definition of the South Pennines? I suppose looking at where TPE Club 55 tickets are available might help, but it seems a bit obscure to me.

Anyway, these add lots of new routes via Manchester, as well as a few which allow use of the Northern train from Guide Bridge to Stalybridge. The following easements go some way to achieve the restriction described in the summary:

700408 Customers travelling from Cleethorpes, Grimsby Town, Habrough, Barnetby or Scunthorpe to Newcastle, Chester Le Street, Durham, Darlington, Middlesbrough,Thornaby, Yarm, Northallerton, Thirsk, York, Malton, Seamer and Scarborough in possession of tickets routed "Any Permitted" may not travel via Manchester Stations. This easement applies in both directions.
700410 Customers travelling from Sheffield, Meadowhall or Dore to Newcastle, Chester Le Street, Durham, Darlington, Middlesbrough, Thornaby, Yarm, Northallerton, Thirsk, York, Malton, Seamer or Scarborough in possession of tickets routed "Any Permitted" may not travel via Manchester Stations. This easement applies in both directions.

A review of map permissions as seen the following changes to align permissions via Birmingham

Added

WORCESTER GROUP (G35) and Swindon (Wilts) (SWI) -added sequence 'LG'

Removed

WORCESTER GROUP (G35) and Swindon (Wilts) (SWI) - removed sequence 'PW+WR'

Removes validity via Taunton.

Bromsgrove (BMV) and Chippenham (CPM) - removed sequence 'BW'

Removes validity via Birmingham

To allow Journey Planners to show journeys during the Christmas WCML Blockade at Watford, from North Wales and Merseyside to London Via Leicester. Map sequences have been added. They are only applicable on the 27 and 28 December and a controlling easement 700543 has been added to restrict the map permissions to these dates.

Added

Crewe (CRE) and LONDON GROUP (G01) - added sequence 'LC+BG+MM'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and EARLESTOWN GROUP (G78) - added sequence 'MM+BG+LC'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Hooton (HOO) - added sequence 'MM+BG+EJ'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and HUNTS CROSS GROUP (G70) added sequence 'MM+BG+BV'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Huyton (HUY) - added sequence 'MM+BG+BV'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and LIVERPOOL GROUP (G18) - added sequence 'MM+BG+BV'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Llandudno Junction (LLJ) - added sequence 'MM+BG+EJ'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Runcorn (RUN) - added sequence 'MM+BG+BJ'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and Shotton (SHT) - added sequence 'MM+BG+EJ'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and STAFFORD GROUP (G65) - added sequence 'MM+BG+SF'

LONDON GROUP (G01) and WREXHAM GROUP (G49) - added sequence 'MM+BG+BJ'



EASEMENTS

Added

700543: Travel to, from and via Stafford to London St Pancras is prohibited via Nuneaton and Leicester; except during engineering blockades of the West Coast Mainline. This easement applies in both directions on the 27 and 28 December 2014 and allows journey planners to use the route into St Pancras. It prevents the use of the temporary map permissions on dates other than the 27 and 28 December .

As per the summary, these add lots of routes into St. Pancras (or Kings Cross St. Pancras tube, I suppose), switching from the WCML to the MML between Nuneaton and Leicester. The routes added from Hunts Cross, Huyton, Liverpool, Runcorn and Wrexham all go through Stafford. Other routes allow you to catch a Manchester train which stops somewhere between Nuneaton and Rugeley.

They forgot to mention that they've also added MM+BG+EJ to the options between London Group and Chester (CTR), though.

Amended

Returning the amendment to its original following the completion of engineering work (Bristol Parkway blocks in September) 700465: Customers travelling from Gloucester to Bristol TM may not travel via Severn Tunnel Junction. This easement applies in both directions.

I notice that this easement was also mentioned in the changes on 13/09. The text has not changed since it was introduced in December.

 

[Sacro]

South Humberside!?

You'd need to go back 18 years to go there. Probably on a Regional Railways DMU.

South Pennines - Settlements within the South Pennines include Addingham, Ilkley and Otley in the north, Bingley, Keighley, Haworth and Oxenhope, Halifax, Sowerby Bridge, Hebden Bridge and Todmorden in the Calder Valley, Marsden in the south-east, Darwen, Haslingden and Rawtenstall in Lancashire, and Horwich, Ramsbottom and Littleborough in Greater Manchester.

From Wikipedia / Natural England

 

[Greeby]

To me, "fare check" is something involved with finding appropriate routeing points for a station. Could you tell me a bit more about what you expect to happen in January to improve things?

And those changes do do the thing you mention, but they also do other things, like deny travel via Coventry on a ticket, or allow it via Bedford or via Bedworth. It's sometimes hard to tell how much of this is deliberate.

Based on journey time and service frequency, I can't see anyone taking those routes outside of disruption or engineering. Going via Birmingham adds about 30 minutes to the journey time and using the Marston Vale adds more changes, which puts a lot of people off.

As for the fares. To make the now-prohibited routeings work, both Anytime and Off-Peak singles had to cost more than both the Birmingham fare and the Derby fare respectively. The difference being that the off-peak fares on these flows are essentially unrestricted. The easy fix would be to lower the Anytime Single to the price that the Off-Peak Single is scheduled to rise to, then eliminate the Off-Peak Single.

 

[bb21]

Looks like XC are getting more and more desperate. :roll:

 

[WelshBluebird]

Out of curiosity, how long does it normally take for the journey planners (specifically NRE) to take into account routeing guide changes? Also, am I able to PM someone about one of the changes recently made?

 

[bb21]

It varies, if implemented at all.

You do realize the online journey planners use a separate set of routing data don't you?

 

[WelshBluebird]

It varies, if implemented at all.

You do realize the online journey planners use a separate set of routing data don't you?

I do, but would have assumed any changes in one would be applied to the other. Not always the case then?

 

[kieron]

South Humberside!?

You'd need to go back 18 years to go there. Probably on a Regional Railways DMU.

Thanks to Royal Mail, South Humberside will never die.

South Pennines - Settlements within the South Pennines include Addingham, Ilkley and Otley in the north, Bingley, Keighley, Haworth and Oxenhope, Halifax, Sowerby Bridge, Hebden Bridge and Todmorden in the Calder Valley, Marsden in the south-east, Darwen, Haslingden and Rawtenstall in Lancashire, and Horwich, Ramsbottom and Littleborough in Greater Manchester.

From Wikipedia / Natural England

Is that what they mean by the term, though? The easement only involves TPE Only tickets, and I don't think TPE serve any of the stations on that map. The promotional map here includes Huddersfield, but nowhere else they serve. And why would you wish to travel from Newcastle to Huddersfield via Manchester anyway?

Based on journey time and service frequency, I can't see anyone taking those routes outside of disruption or engineering. Going via Birmingham adds about 30 minutes to the journey time and using the Marston Vale adds more changes, which puts a lot of people off.

Milton Keynes-Loughborough (for one) is usually two changes either way - one train on the WMCL, one on the MML and one connecting the two. Journey times are about the same via Bedford or Rugby, with 1-2 trains an hour on either route.

If you go to www.northernrail.org and select the "view Timetables" option, it shows how rare it is for a route via Hinckley to be the next fast route. NRE, by contrast, doesn't show Bletchley routes at all unless you include a via point. This isn't what I expected.

In this instance, the route via Bletchley was valid until Bletchley routeing group was abolished last year, was reinstated when the routes via Derby were removed a month ago, and removed again the following week.

My point was just that it's not always clear what the objective of a change is, even with the summary page.

As for the fares. To make the now-prohibited routeings work, both Anytime and Off-Peak singles had to cost more than both the Birmingham fare and the Derby fare respectively.

What effect does this have?

I can see that someone travelling from Milton Keynes to Loughborough off-peak should shun the expensive Virgin fares in favour of the cheaper, more flexible Crosscountry ones to Derby, but in what sense don't the routeings work at the moment?

By my understanding, the only time you'd need to compare prices with that specific fare is when travelling to or from a station associated with Milton Keynes or Loughborough. The only one with a cheaper single than the Milton Keynes-Loughborough one is Syston, and Loughborough isn't an appropriate routeing point for there anyway (now that you can't go from Loughborough to Milton Keynes via Derby) as choosing it would cause doubling back.

The difference being that the off-peak fares on these flows are essentially unrestricted. The easy fix would be to lower the Anytime Single to the price that the Off-Peak Single is scheduled to rise to, then eliminate the Off-Peak Single.

If off peak priv fares become permanent, that change would only affect what happens with people without valid tickets. This is less of an issue here, as London Midland and East Midlands Trains both have penalty fare schemes anyway, so can charge them a more without this sort of penalty.

On another subject, there has been one more change this week.
The summary says

EASEMENTS
Added
700544: Aucnashellach to Dunbar via Aberdeen.

The easement says

700544 To facilitate Club 55 promotion ticket journeys from Achnashellach to Dunbar to travel via Aberdeen, this Routeing Point easement to the Fare checking rules is required. Where currently travel via Edinburgh is denied because the NFM64 check reveals that the fare Achnashellach to Edinburgh is higher than the Achnashellach fare to Dunbar. as a result Journey planners are not allowing the journey beyond Edinburgh. This easement applies in both directions.

This sounds a bit like a statement that Club 55 tickets can be used for travel from Aschnaschellach to Dunbar via Aberdeen, but it's hard to tell without something more explicit. NRE only gives routes via Aviemore and Kirkcaldy, but it doesn't promote Club 55 tickets anyway.

 

[tsr]

To be honest, I'm a tad curious about why anyone even noticed and singled out that route to/from Achnashellach in particular. I can't imagine tickets from there to Dunbar via Aberdeen are ever used very much. It's not exactly a massive metropolis with countless journeys per year...

 

[kieron]

To be honest, I'm a tad curious about why anyone even noticed and singled out that route to/from Achnashellach in particular. I can't imagine tickets from there to Dunbar via Aberdeen are ever used very much. It's not exactly a massive metropolis with countless journeys per year...

They've made changes based on a single customer request before now, so this is probably just another one.

There's nothing special about Achnashellach here. Every ticket from Dunbar to somewhere beyond Inverness is routed "via Aviemore" or "AP Scotrail Only", and the latter are only valid via Aviemore and Kirkcaldy as Dunbar doesn't have a valid routeing point for any of them.

 

[Sacro]

Thanks to Royal Mail, South Humberside will never die.

Actually after almost 8 and a half years

Is that what they mean by the term, though? The easement only involves TPE Only tickets, and I don't think TPE serve any of the stations on that map. The promotional map here includes Huddersfield, but nowhere else they serve. And why would you wish to travel from Newcastle to Huddersfield via Manchester anyway?

I guess if they leave it ambiguous then it's the version that benefits the customer that prevails.

 

[greatkingrat]

I think ATOC are being unfairly maligned here! The way they have described the change isn't particularly clear but this is actually adding routes, not removing them.

The route via Birmingham is still valid:
map ES Milton Keynes - Rugby - Coventry
map BY Coventry - Birmingham - Tamworth - York

The change is that you can now go Rugby - Tamworth direct, instead of having to go via Birmingham (which technically wasn't valid before).

 

[RJ]

NRE still shows via Birmingham as valid with the Not Via London ticket - http://ojp.nationalrail.co.uk/servi...K/tomorrow/1200/dep?via=Birmingham_New_Street

To removed routes via central London for journeys between Ebbsfleet and Gravesend
Map sequences deleted
Ebbsfleet International (EBD) and Gracvesend (GRV) - removed sequence LO

The DfT finally got around to approving this then! This was a useful ticket to get cheap travel on HS1 and worked the barriers at St Pancras and Stratford International. It was also good for use as a cheap CDR between stations in South East London, or a Freedom of South East London rover in season ticket form. Such a ticket was also the centre of one particularly daft drama where Southeastern decided to tell the police it had no validity via Stratford International, prompting a failed attempt at a prosecution.

Ah well - all good things must come to an end!

 

[button_boxer]

I think ATOC are being unfairly maligned here! The way they have described the change isn't particularly clear but this is actually adding routes, not removing them.

The way they describe the change is

To ensure journeys from Milton Keynes to York via Tamworth are additionally permitted along the Trent Valley route between Rugby, and Nuneaton to Tamworth (removing the need to travel via Birmingham)

my bold - they've removed the need to travel via Birmingham but not the option.

 

[All Line Rover]

I think ATOC are being unfairly maligned here! The way they have described the change isn't particularly clear but this is actually adding routes, not removing them.

The route via Birmingham is still valid:
map ES Milton Keynes - Rugby - Coventry
map BY Coventry - Birmingham - Tamworth - York

The change is that you can now go Rugby - Tamworth direct, instead of having to go via Birmingham (which technically wasn't valid before).

Right you are, though the new map combination is not as clear as the old.

 

[Greeby]

New dataset arrived today

New Dataset RJRG0326 published 06/11/2014

To allow journeys between Crewe and Hellifield via Lancaster new permissions have been added
Map sequence added
Crewe (CRE) and HELLIFIELD GROUP (G53) - added sequence 'LC+XW'
Easements
Added
700547: Customers travelling to Leyton Midland Road from or via London St Pancras may travel via London Underground without passing through the Routeing Points of Leyton Midland Road.
700548: To allow Skipton to Inverness & beyond via East Coast using fare route EC &Connections (00430) or XC & Connections (00439) this positive Routeing Point easement has been deployed to over rule fares checking in Journey planning systems. This easement applies in both directions
700549: To prevent Gatwick to Elephant and Castle tickets, route not underground being valid via London Victoria. This negative Routeing Point easement has been deployed. This easement applies in both directions.
700550: To override Fare Checking in Journey Planners that restricts journeys from Bognor Regis when no fare exists (for example Bognor Regis to Amersham); this positive Routeing Point easement will allow journeys to/from Bognor Regis via Horsham to use Ford as an Origin Routeing Point. This easement applies in both directions.

Easement total
652 (previously: 648)
Circuitous Route: 265 (previously 265)
Doubleback: 89 (previously 89)
Fare route: 18 (previously 18)
Local: 57 (previously 56)
Manual: 15 (previously 15)
Map: 1 (previously 1)
Routeing Point: 207 (previously 204)

Not commenting on the changes made. But if 4 easements are to be added, how about getting rid of the 14 easements related to specifc dates and specific engineering work that have long since passed?

 

[crehld]

New dataset arrived today



Not commenting on the changes made. But if 4 easements are to be added, how about getting rid of the 14 easements related to specifc dates and specific engineering work that have long since passed?

Ha... I raised the question about Crewe to Hellifield via Lancaster only last week (see http://www.railforums.co.uk/showthread.php?t=107791). This new map sequence seems to officially map travel via Lancaster (which is the shortest route) - a coincidence??

 

[greatkingrat]

That doesn't really solve the wider issue though which applies to lots of other routeing points as well as Crewe. Even Preston - Hellifield is not valid via Lancaster on NRE. So if ATOC are reading this, you still have a bit of work to do

I would say anywhere on or around the WCML to Hellifield should be valid via Lancaster.

 

[kieron]

As mentioned, this week's easements are:

700547 Customers travelling to Leyton Midland Road from or via London St Pancras may travel via London Underground without passing through the Routeing Points of Leyton Midland Road.​

There are no paper tickets between St. Pancras and Leyton Midland Road, so remember to touch in when you get there.

700548 To allow Skipton to Inverness & beyond via East Coast using fare route EC &Connections (00430) or XC & Connections (00439) this positive Routeing Point easement has been deployed to over rule fares checking in Journey planning systems. This easement applies in both directions​

I don't know what they've done here, as the options between Skipton and the Highlands seem to be exactly the same as those from Cononley. NRE* has no trouble displaying Crosscountry and East Coast advance tickets between Cononley and Ardgay, which don't appear to be affected by this easement. Neither appears to have any advance tickets to stations north of Argday, or on the Kyle branch.

700549 To prevent Gatwick to Elephant and Castle tickets, route not underground being valid via London Victoria. This negative Routeing Point easement has been deployed. This easement applies in both directions.​

This ticket undercuts every ticket between Gatwick and Victoria which Southern offers, so that's not why it was being offered before. I suppose "not Underground" tickets which undercut the "not London" ones (much less anything intented to be valid on Gatwick Express) are one of those things which will go with the Southern franchise, anyway.

700550 To override Fare Checking in Journey Planners that restricts journeys from Bognor Regis when no fare exists (for example Bognor Regis to Amersham); this positive Routeing Point easement will allow journeys to/from Bognor Regis via Horsham to use Ford as an Origin Routeing Point. This easement applies in both directions.​

Again, I don't know what this has done. Bognor-Amersham passes the fare check to go via Ford and London anyway, whether you go via Horsham or Brighton en route.

One of last week's easements also seemed a bit odd. This was:

700546 To allow travel from Frodsham to Winsford via Chester and Crewe, this easement overrides the fares checking rules. This easement applies in both directions​

Easement 700415 (from last year) says:

Customers travelling from Runcorn East or Frodsham via Crewe or Shrewsbury may travel via Chester. This easement applies in both directions.​

which seems to me to cover the same situation. I wonder where the motivation came for the new version.

* As ever with NRE, delete their cookies before following a link there to avoid contaminating your results with previous selections. If you wish to buy a ticket, TL-based ticket providers such as Greater Anglia and South West Trains are better at recognising the tickets NRE recommends than other sites.

 

[greatkingrat]

As mentioned, this week's easements are:

700547 Customers travelling to Leyton Midland Road from or via London St Pancras may travel via London Underground without passing through the Routeing Points of Leyton Midland Road.​

There are no paper tickets between St. Pancras and Leyton Midland Road, so remember to touch in when you get there.

I assume the intention is to allow travel via Blackhorse Road, but at the moment a journey East Croydon - Leyton Midland Road via Farringdon is still showing as requiring two tickets. If you go via Barking it will show the 8.00 SDS as valid.

 

[RJ]

700549 To prevent Gatwick to Elephant and Castle tickets, route not underground being valid via London Victoria. This negative Routeing Point easement has been deployed. This easement applies in both directions.​

This ticket undercuts every ticket between Gatwick and Victoria which Southern offers, so that's not why it was being offered before. I suppose "not Underground" tickets which undercut the "not London" ones (much less anything intented to be valid on Gatwick Express) are one of those things which will go with the Southern franchise, anyway.

One of many fares that undercut the Victoria to Gatwick flow.

A friend just off a flight at Gatwick rang me a few weeks ago asking how to get a cheaper fare to London - I gave him some advice and he cracked up with incredulity over some the fares I suggested. Overhearing the conversation he had with a bemused ticket office clerk, it ended with them saying "You know what, I don't get it but I'm just going to sell you what you asked for."

It'll be interesting to see what happens with fares in the area.

 

[hassaanhc]

One of many fares that undercut the Victoria to Gatwick flow.

A friend just off a flight at Gatwick rang me a few weeks ago asking how to get a cheaper fare to London - I gave him some advice and he cracked up with incredulity over some the fares I suggested. Overhearing the conversation he had with a bemused ticket office clerk, it ended with them saying "You know what, I don't get it but I'm just going to sell you what you asked for."

It'll be interesting to see what happens with fares in the area.

There's a few instances like that with SOR Anytime Returns from Gatwick Airport :?

 

[All Line Rover]

A most interesting change was made to the NRG yesterday.

The heading of Section E, the easements list, used to read:

"Easements are relaxations of Routeing Guide rules to allow journeys that strict adherence to the rules would forbid. Some previously published easements are no longer exceptions to Routeing Guide rules and have therefore been deleted as unnecessary."​

Yesterday, the easements list was split in two (the first half now comprising 'positive easements', and the second half comprising 'negative easements') and the heading was changed to read:

"An easement which extends permission is a positive easement. An easement which narrows permission is a negative easement. Map, double-back and fare route easements are always positive. Circuitous route easements are always negative. Other kinds of easements can be positive or negative. A journey which follows a route otherwise permitted by the Routeing Guide may be forbidden by a negative easement."​

The explanation of easements in Section F (the 'more information' instructions, which has been frequently amended over the years with no oversight by the DfT), has also been reworded, although there is no change of substance. Section A (the main instructions) has not changed, and still doesn't refer to negative easements.

The ATOC website describes this change as "Changes have been made to Section E - The list of Easements".